[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 23, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53470-53471]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23130]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC19-13-000.
    Applicants: AltaGas Renewable Energy Colorado LLC, Black Hills
Electric Generation, LLC, Black Hills Corporation, AltaGas Power
Holdings (U.S.) Inc.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act, et al. of AltaGas Renewable Energy Colorado
LLC, et. al.
    Filed Date: 10/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181016-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/6/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER16-505-004.
    Applicants: GridLiance High Plains LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: SCMCN Compliance Filing ER16-505-
003 Amendment to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20181017-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-256-006; ER17-242-006; ER17-243-006; ER17-245-
006; ER17-652-006.
    Applicants: Darby Power, LLC, Gavin Power, LLC, Lawrenceburg Power,
LLC, Waterford Power, LLC, Lightstone Marketing LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Darby
Power, LLC, et. al.
    Filed Date: 10/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181016-5177.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-730-001.
    Applicants: Linden VFT, LLC.
    Description: Post-Open Solicitation Compliance Filing, et al. of
Linden VFT, LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181016-5198.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1267-004.
    Applicants: GridLiance High Plains LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: GridLiance High Plains LLC
Compliance Filing ER18-1267 to be effective 3/31/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181016-5160.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1652-002; ER10-1595-011; ER10-1598-011; ER10-
1616-011; ER10-1618-011; ER10-2960-009; ER15-356-010; ER15-357-010;
ER18-1821-003; ER18-2418-001.
    Applicants: AL Mesquite Marketing, LLC, Astoria Generating Company,
L.P., Chief Conemaugh Power, LLC, Chief Keystone Power, LLC, Crete
Energy Venture, LLC, Great River Hydro, LLC, Lincoln Generating
Facility, LLC, New Covert Generating Company, LLC, Rolling Hills
Generating, L.L.C., Walleye Power, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of AL Mesquite
Marketing, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 10/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181016-5178.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-119-000.
    Applicants: Techren Solar I LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for MBR, Waivers,
Blanket Authority, Confidential & Expedited Action to be effective 12/
31/9998.
    Filed Date: 10/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181016-5141.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-120-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: FPL and WM Renewable Energy,
LLC Firm P-to-P TSA to be effective 10/17/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181016-5159.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-121-000.
    Applicants: AltaGas Renewable Energy Colorado LLC, Black Hills
Electric Generation, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Request for Authorization of
Affiliate Transactions of AltaGas and Black Hills to be effective 11/
30/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181016-5165.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-122-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., The Connecticut Light and Power
Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: CL&P Request for Approval of
Updated Depreciation Rates & Revisions to Sch 21-ES to be effective 5/
1/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20181017-5035.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-123-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., NSTAR Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: NSTAR Electric Company
Request for Approval of Updated Depreciation Rates to be effective 7/1/
2018.
    Filed Date: 10/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20181017-5036.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-124-000.
    Applicants: PECO Energy Company, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: PECO Energy submits
revisions to OATT, Att. H-7A re: Stipulation in ER17-1519 to be
effective 12/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 10/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20181017-5037.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-125-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: DEF-US EcoGen Notice of
Termination SA-180 (LGIA) to be effective 12/17/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20181017-5075.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-126-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-10-17_SA 3179 Long
Branch Solar-Cooperative Energy GIA (J709) to be effective 10/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20181017-5105.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings:

    Docket Numbers: RR19-1-000.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation.
    Description: Petition of the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation for Approval of Proposed Revisions to Appendix 4E to the
Rules of Procedure.
    Filed Date: 10/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181016-5192.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/6/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 17, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-23130 Filed 10-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 87-88]
[FR Doc No: 2015-33035]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM15-14-000]

Revised Critical Infrastructure Protection Reliability Standards;
Supplemental Notice of Agenda and Discussion Topics for Staff Technical
Conference

    This notice establishes the agenda and topics for discussion at the
technical conference to be held on January 28, 2016, to discuss issues
related to supply chain risk management. The technical conference will
start at 9:30 a.m. and end at approximately 4:30 p.m. (Eastern Time) in
the Commission Meeting Room at the Commission's Headquarters, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC. The technical conference will be led by
Commission staff, and FERC Commissioners may be in attendance. All
interested parties are invited to attend, and registration is not
required.
    The topics and related questions to be discussed during this
conference are provided as an attachment to this Notice. The purpose of
the technical conference is to facilitate a structured dialogue on
supply chain risk management issues identified by the Commission in the
Revised Critical Infrastructure Protection Standards Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NOPR) issued in this proceeding and raised in public
comments to the NOPR. Prepared remarks will be presented by invited
panelists.
    This event will be webcast and transcribed. The free webcast allows
listening only. Anyone with internet access who desires to listen to
this event can do so by navigating to the ``FERC Calendar'' at
www.ferc.gov, and locating the technical conference in the Calendar of
Events. Opening the technical conference in the Calendar of Events will
reveal a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical
support for the webcast and offers the option of listening to the
meeting via phone-bridge for a fee. If you have any questions, visit
www.CapitolConnection.org or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. The webcast will be
available on the Calendar of Events at www.ferc.gov for three months
after the conference. Transcripts of the conference will be immediately
available for a fee from Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc.<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free (866) 208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER>
with the requested accommodations.
    There is no fee for attendance. However, members of the public are
encouraged to preregister online at: https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/01-28-16-form.asp.
    For more information about the technical conference, please
contact: Sarah McKinley, Office of External Affairs,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Critical Infrastructure Protection Supply Chain Risk Management RM15-
14-000

January 28, 2016

Agenda
Welcome and Opening Remarks by Commission Staff
9:30-9:45 a.m.
Introduction
    In a July 16, 2015 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) in the
above-captioned docket, the Commission proposed to direct the North
American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) to develop new or
modified Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) Reliability Standards
to provide security controls relating to supply chain risk management
for industrial control system hardware, software, and services. The
Commission sought and received comments on this proposal, including:
(1) The NOPR proposal to direct that NERC develop a Reliability
Standard to address supply chain risk management; (2) the anticipated
features of, and requirements that should be included in, such a
standard; and (3) a reasonable timeframe for development of a standard.
The purpose of this conference is to clarify issues, share information,
and determine the proper response to address security control and
supply chain risk management concerns.
Staff Presentation: Supply Chain Efforts by Certain Other Federal
Agencies
9:45 a.m.-10:05 a.m.

Break
10:05 p.m.-10:15 p.m.
Panel 1: Need for a New or Modified Reliability Standard
10:15 a.m.-11:45 a.m.
    The Commission staff seeks information about the need for a new or
modified Reliability Standard to manage supply chain risks for
industrial control system hardware, software, and computing and
networking services associated with bulk electric system operations.
Panelists are encouraged to address:
     Identify challenges faced in managing supply chain risk.
     Describe how the current CIP Standards provide supply
chain risk management controls.
     Describe how the current CIP Standards incentivize or
inhibit the introduction of more secure technology.
     Identify possible other approaches that the Commission can
take to mitigate supply chain risks.
Panelists:
    1. Nadya Bartol, Vice President, Industry Affairs and Cybersecurity
Strategist, UTC
    2. Jon Boyens, Project Manager, Information Communication
Technology (ICT) Supply Chain Risk Management, National Institute of
Standards & Technology (NIST)
    3. John Galloway, Director, Cyber Security, ISO New England
    4. John Goode, Chief Information Officer/Senior Vice President,
Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO)
    5. Barry Lawson, Associate Director, Power Delivery & Reliability,
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA)
    6. Helen Nalley, Compliance Director, Southern Company
    7. Jacob Olcott, Vice President of Business Development, Bitsight
Tech
    8. Marcus Sachs, Senior Vice President and Chief Security Officer,
North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)
Lunch
11:45 a.m.-1:00 p.m.
Panel 2: Scope and Implementation of a New or Modified Standard
1:00 p.m.-2:30 p.m.
    The Commission staff seeks information about the scope and
implementation of a new or modified Standard to manage supply chain
risks for industrial control system hardware, software, and computing
and networking services associated with bulk electric system
operations. Panelists are encouraged to address:
     Identify types of assets that could be better protected
with a new or modified Standard.
     Identify supply chain processes that could be better
protected by a Standard.
     Identify controls or modifications that could be included
in the Standard.
     Identify existing mandatory or voluntary standards or
security guidelines that could form the basis of the Standard.
     Address how the verification of supply chain risk
mitigation could be measured, benchmarked and/or audited.
     Present and justify a reasonable timeframe for development
and implementation of a Standard.
     Discuss whether a Standard could be a catalyst for
technical innovation and market competition.
Panelists:
    1. Michael Kuberski, Manager, Grid Protection and Automation, Pepco
Holdings Inc. (PHI)
    2. Jonathan Appelbaum, Director, NERC Compliance, The United
Illuminating Company
    3. Brent Castegnetto, Manager, Cyber Security Audits &
Investigations, WECC
    4. Art Conklin, Ph.D., Associate Professor and Director of the
Center for Information Security Research and Education, University of
Houston
    5. Edna Conway, Chief Security Officer, Value Chain Security, Cisco
    6. Bryan Owen, Principal Cyber Security Manager, OSIsoft
    7. Albert Ruocco, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer,
American Electric Power (AEP)
    8. Doug Thomas, Vice President and Chief Information Officer,
Ontario Independent Electricity System Operation (IESO)
Break
2:30 p.m.-2:45 p.m.
Panel 3: Current Supply Chain Risk Management Practices and
Collaborative Efforts
2:45 p.m.-4:15 p.m.
    The Commission staff seeks information about existing supply chain
risk management efforts for information and communications technology
and industrial control system hardware, software, and services in other
critical infrastructure sectors and the government. Panelists are
encouraged to address:
     Generally describe how registered entities and other
organizations currently manage supply chain issues.
     Identify standards or guidelines that are used to
establish supply chain risk management practices. Specifically, discuss
experience under those standards or guidelines.
     Identify organizational roles involved in the development
and implementation of supply chain risk management practices.
     Generally describe approaches for identifying, evaluating,
mitigating, and monitoring supply chain risk.
     Generally discuss how supply chain risk is addressed in
the contracting process with vendors and suppliers.
     Generally describe the capabilities that registered
entities currently have to inspect third party information security
practices.
     Generally describe the capabilities that registered
entities currently have to negotiate for additional security in their
hardware, software, and service contracts. Describe how this may vary
based on the potential vendor or supplier and the type of service to be
provided.
     Generally describe how vendors and suppliers are managing
risk in their supply chain.
Panelists:
    1. Douglas Bauder, Vice President, Operational Services, and Chief
Procurement Officer, Southern California Edison
    2. Andrew Bochman, Senior Cyber & Energy Security Strategist, INL/
DOE
    3. Dave Whitehead, Vice President of Research and Development,
Schweitzer Engineering
    4. Andrew Ginter, Vice President, Industrial Security, Waterfall
Security Solutions
    5. Steve Griffith, Industry Director, National Electrical
Manufacturers Association (NEMA)
    6. Maria Jenks, Vice President, Supply Chain, Kansas City Power &
Light (KCP&L)
    7. Robert McClanahan, Vice President/Chief Information Officer,
Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation (AECC)
    8. Thomas O'Brien, Chief Information Officer, PJM Interconnection,
LLC
4:15 p.m.-4:30 p.m. Closing Remarks

    Dated: December 28, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-33035 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 58 (Thursday, March 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 16018]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06879]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2015-0006]

Notice To Extend the Comment Period for the Proposed Revised
Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988, Floodplain
Management, as Revised Through the Federal Flood Risk Management
Standard

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice extends the comment period for the proposed
``Revised Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988, Floodplain
Management'' published in the Federal Register on February 5, 2015 (80
FR 6530). The comment period for the proposed revised guidelines, which
would have ended on April 6, 2015, is extended for 30 days.

DATES: The comment period is extended until May 6, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be identified by docket ID FEMA-2015-0006 and
may be submitted by one of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
    Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of
Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 8NE, 500 C Street
SW., Washington, DC 20472-3100.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the docket ID
FEMA-2015-0006. Comments received will be posted without alteration at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov, and search for the Docket ID FEMA-2015-
0006.
    Background Information: Background information about these topics
is available on the FFRMS Web site at https://www.fema.gov/federal-flood-risk-management-standard-ffrms or in the docket for this Notice
at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID FEMA-2015-0006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bradley Garner,<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mailing Address: FFRMS, 1800 South Bell Street,
Room 627, Arlington, VA 20598-3030. The Web site is https://www.fema.gov/federal-flood-risk-management-standard-ffrms.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 30, 2015, the President signed
Executive Order 13690, directing FEMA, on behalf of the Mitigation
Framework Leadership Group, to publish for public comment draft revised
Floodplain Management Guidelines to provide guidance to agencies on the
implementation of Executive Order 11988, as amended, consistent with a
new Federal Flood Risk Management Standard. These draft revised
Guidelines were developed by the Mitigation Framework Leadership Group
in consultation with the Federal Interagency Floodplain Management Task
Force. On February 5, 2015, FEMA published the proposed ``Revised
Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988, Floodplain
Management'' on behalf of the Mitigation Framework Leadership Group to
solicit and consider public input.
    The Mitigation Framework Leadership Group has received several
comments regarding the 60-day time period to submit comments. The
commenters stated that they needed additional time to review and
adequately respond to the proposed revised guidelines because of the
complex nature of the topic. Because of the scope of the proposed
revised guidelines, and because the Mitigation Framework Leadership
Group has specifically requested the public's comments on the proposed
revised guidelines in an attempt to benefit from the experience of all
interested parties, the comment period will be extended for an
additional 30 days. This notice announces the extension of the public
comment period to May 6, 2015.

    Authority: Executive Order 11988, as amended; Executive Order
13690.

Roy Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2015-06879 Filed 3-25-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-47-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77472-77473]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30190]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[In the matter of: Docket Nos. ER99-1004-008, ER00-2738-007, ER01-1721-
005, ER00-2740-007, ER02-564-005, ER02-862-009, ER06-653-002, ER01-
1570-001, ER02-73-009, ER06-1410-004, ES07-53-000, ES07-53-001, ES07-
55-000, ES07-55-001, Entergy Nuclear Generation Company, Entergy
Nuclear Fitzpatrick, LLC, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC, Entergy
Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC, Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC,
Entergy Power Ventures, LP, Entergy Nuclear Power Marketing, LLC,
Northern Iowa Windpower, LLC, Llano Estacado Wind, LP, Entergy Nuclear
Palisades, LLC]

Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing
Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of Entergy Nuclear Generation Company, Entergy Nuclear Fitzpatrick,
LLC, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point
3, LLC, Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC, Entergy Power Ventures,
LP, Entergy Nuclear Power Marketing, LLC, Northern Iowa Windpower, LLC,
Llano Estacado Wind, LP, and Entergy Nuclear Palisades, LLC's
application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate
schedule, noting that such application includes a request for blanket
authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities
and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211
and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR
385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest
must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is December 23, 2014.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 18, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-30190 Filed 12-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 6, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19815-19818]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07161]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0393; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01249-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Canada Limited Partnership (Type
Certificate Previously Held by C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership
(CSALP); Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Airbus Canada Limited Partnership Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-
500-1A11 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by the discovery that
overwing emergency exit door (OWEED) handle covers were difficult to
open on some airplanes. This proposed AD would require replacing the
existing OWEED handle cover brackets with newly designed OWEED handle
cover brackets and the installation of a placard regarding this
replacement, as specified in Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) AD,
which is proposed for incorporation by reference. The FAA is proposing
this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 23,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact TCCA, Transport Canada National Aircraft Certification, 159
Cleopatra Drive, Nepean, Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada; telephone 888-663-
3639; email [email protected]; internet https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation.
You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety

Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also
available in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0393.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0393; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gabriel Kim, Aerospace Engineer,
Mechanical Systems and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0393; Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-01249-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Gabriel Kim, Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Administrative
Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite
410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected]. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.

Background

    The TCCA, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued
TCCA AD CF-2021-39, dated November 10, 2021 (TCCA AD CF-2021-39) (also
referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for certain
Airbus Canada Limited Partnership Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11
airplanes.
    This proposed AD was prompted by the discovery that overwing
emergency exit door (OWEED) handle covers were difficult to open on
some airplanes. An investigation revealed that brackets of certain
OWEED handle covers are prone to flexure, thus increasing the force
necessary to remove the OWEED handle cover beyond design requirements.
As a result, the OWEED handle covers must be removed in order to access
the emergency exit, which could delay passenger evacuation. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address the increased force necessary to remove
the OWEED handle cover to access the emergency exit, which could hinder
passenger evacuation in emergency. See the MCAI for additional
background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    TCCA AD CF-2021-39 specifies procedures for replacing the existing
OWEED handle cover brackets with newly designed OWEED handle cover
brackets and also instructions for installing a placard regarding this
replacement. This material is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

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

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in TCCA AD CF-2021-39 described previously, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate TCCA AD CF-2021-39 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore require compliance with
TCCA AD CF-2021-39 in its entirety through that incorporation, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading
of a particular section in TCCA AD CF-2021-39 does not mean that
operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in TCCA AD CF-
2021-39. Service information required by TCCA AD CF-2021-39 for
compliance will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0393 after the FAA final
rule is published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 21 airplanes
of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 work-hours x $85 per hour = $255...........................             $40             $295           $6,195
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA 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 this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

Airbus Canada Limited Partnership (Type Certificate Previously Held
by C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership (CSALP); Bombardier, Inc.):
Docket No. FAA-2022-0393; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01249-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by May 23, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Canada Limited Partnership (Type
Certificate Previously Held by C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership
(CSALP); Bombardier, Inc.) Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Transport
Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) AD CF-2021-39, dated November 10, 2021
(TCCA AD CF-2021-39).

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 52, Doors.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by discovery that overwing emergency exit
door (OWEED) handle covers were difficult to open on some airplanes.
An investigation revealed that brackets of certain OWEED handle
covers are prone to flexure, thus increasing the force necessary to
remove the OWEED handle cover beyond design requirements. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address the increased force necessary to remove
the OWEED handle cover to access the emergency exit, which could
hinder passenger evacuation in an emergency.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, TCCA AD CF-2021-39.

(h) Exception to TCCA AD CF-2021-39

    Where TCCA AD CF-2021-39 refers to its effective date, this AD
requires using the effective date of this AD.

(i) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight
Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or TCCA; or Airbus Canada Limited Partnership's TCCA
Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the
approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For TCCA AD CF-2021-39, contact TCCA, Transport Canada
National Aircraft Certification, 159 Cleopatra Drive, Nepean,
Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]; internet https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation. You may view
this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. This material may be found in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2022-0393.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Gabriel Kim,
Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Administrative Services
Section, FAA, New York ACO

Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

    Issued on March 31, 2022.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-07161 Filed 4-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: March 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 48)]
[Notices]
[Page 13067]
[DOCID:fr11mr08-122]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2008-07]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before March 31, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2007-
0272 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
     Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tyneka Thomas<PHONE_NUMBER> or
Laverne Brunache<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 5, 2008.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

     Docket No.: FAA-2007-0272.
     Petitioner: Centurion Air Cargo.
     Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 61.159.
     Description of Relief Sought: To permit Centurion Air Cargo to
train and check second-in-command applicants, who do not meet the
aeronautical experience requirements of 14 CFR 61.159, in a Level C
Flight Simulation Training Device.

 [FR Doc. E8-4801 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 235 (Friday, December 8, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57867-57872]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26519]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0537; FRL-9970-04]

Sedaxane; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
sedaxane in or on grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16;
grain, cereal, group 15; peanut; and peanut, hay. Syngenta Crop
Protection, LLC requested these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective December 8, 2017. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 6, 2018,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0537, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael L. Goodis, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0537 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
February 6, 2018. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0537, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of November 30, 2016 (81 FR 86312) (FRL-
9954-06), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
6F8458) by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro,
NC 27419. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.665 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide sedaxane, in or
on grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16 at 0.06 parts per
million (ppm); grain, cereal, group 15 at 0.01 ppm; peanut at 0.01 ppm;
and peanut, hay at 0.08 ppm. The petition also requested that
tolerances for residues of sedaxane on the following commodities be
removed upon the establishment of the petitioned-for tolerances:
barley, grain at 0.01 ppm; barley, hay at 0.04 ppm; barley, straw at
0.01 ppm; corn, field, forage at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.01
ppm; corn, field, stover at 0.01 ppm; corn, pop, grain at 0.01 ppm;
corn, pop, stover at 0.01 ppm; corn, sweet, forage at 0.01 ppm; corn,
sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed at 0.01 ppm; corn, sweet,
stover at 0.01 ppm; oat, forage at 0.015 ppm; oat, grain at 0.01 ppm;
oat, hay at 0.06 ppm; oat, straw at 0.01 ppm; rye, forage at 0.015 ppm;
rye, grain at 0.01 ppm; rye, straw at 0.01 ppm; sorghum, grain, forage
at 0.01 ppm; sorghum, grain, grain at 0.01 ppm; sorghum, grain, stover
at 0.01 ppm; wheat, forage at 0.015 ppm; wheat, grain at 0.01 ppm;
wheat, hay at 0.06 ppm; and wheat, straw at 0.01 ppm. That document
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Syngenta Crop
Protection, LLC, the registrant, which is available in the docket,
http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response
to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing tolerances and removing tolerances as requested in the
petition, with one exception. The tolerance for crop group 16 is being
established at 0.10 ppm to harmonize with Codex Alimentarius Commission
maximum residue level (MRL).

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for sedaxane including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with sedaxane follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    The main target tissue for sedaxane was found to be the liver.
Sedaxane also caused thyroid hypertrophy/hyperplasia in male rats. In
the acute neurotoxicity (ACN) and sub-chronic neurotoxicity (SCN)
studies, sedaxane caused decreased activity, muscle tone, rearing and
grip strength; however, because no specific neurotoxic effects or
adverse histopathology were observed, EPA has concluded that there is
low concern for neurotoxicity.
    In the rat, no adverse effects in fetuses were seen in
developmental toxicity studies at maternally toxic doses. In the
rabbit, fetal toxicity was observed at the same doses as the dams.
Offspring effects in the rat reproduction study occurred at the same
doses causing parental effects.
    The available data show evidence of high dose liver tumors (in male
rats and mice), thyroid tumors (in male rats), and uterine tumors (in
female rats) resulting from exposure to sedaxane. Based on a weight of
evidence of the available data, a constitutive androstane receptor/
pregnane-X receptor (CAR/PXR)-mediated mitogenic mode-of action (MOA)
was established for liver tumors in male mice and rats and a liver-
mediated altered thyroid hormone homeostasis MOA was established for
thyroid tumors in male rats. At this time, a MOA for the uterine tumors
has not been identified.
    To assess the carcinogenic potential for sedaxane, EPA has
concluded that a non-linear approach (i.e., RfD) is appropriate for the
following reasons: (1) There is a clear understanding of the threshold
(non-linear) doses associated with the key events in the established
MOAs leading to liver and thyroid tumors in rodents (the key events
occur only at doses that well exceed the chronic reference dose (0.11
mg/kg/day)); (2) sedaxane is not mutagenic or genotoxic; (3) the dose
at which uterine tumors was observed is at 261 mg/kg/day, which greatly
exceeds the chronic reference dose (0.11 mg/kg/day) being used to
assess chronic exposure to sedaxane. Sedaxane has been reclassified as
``Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenic Potential''.
    Sedaxane has low acute toxicity by the oral, dermal, and inhalation
routes. It is not a dermal sensitizer, causes no skin irritation, and
only slight eye irritation.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by sedaxane as well as the no-observed-adverse-
effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level
(LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document titled ``Sedaxane Human Health Risk
Assessment to Support New Seed Treatment Uses on Cereal Grains Crop
Group 15; Forage, Fodder and Straw of Cereal Grains Crop Group 16;
Peanut; and Cancer Reclassification'', pages 11-19 in docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0537.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for sedaxane used for
human risk assessment is shown in the Table of this unit.

                   Table--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Sedaxane for Use in
                                          Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Point of departure
        Exposure/scenario            and uncertainty/     RfD, PAD, LOC for     Study and toxicological effects
                                      safety factors       risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population  NOAEL = 30 mg/kg/day  Acute RfD = 0.30 mg/ Rat ACN Study NOAEL = 30 mg/kg
 including infants and children    UFA = 10x...........   kg/day.             LOAEL = 250 mg/kg based on reduced
 and Females 13-49 years of age).  UFH = 10x...........  aPAD = 0.30 mg/kg/    activity, decreased rearing,
                                   FQPA SF = 1x........   day..                initial inactivity, piloerection,
                                                                               ruffled fur and recumbency,
                                                                               decreased body weight (BW),
                                                                               decreased body weight gain (BWG)
                                                                               and food consumption (males). In
                                                                               females, weakened condition,
                                                                               swaying gait, decreased activity,
                                                                               reduced muscle tone, and
                                                                               decreased locomotor activity and
                                                                               rearing. The weakened condition,
                                                                               swaying gait and decreased
                                                                               activity were observed on days 2-
                                                                               7, while the other effects were
                                                                               on day 1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations)  NOAEL= 11 mg/kg/day.  Chronic RfD = 0.11   Chronic Rat Study
                                   UFA = 10x...........   mg/kg/day.          NOAEL = 11/14 mg/kg bw/day [male]/
                                   UFH = 10x...........  cPAD = 0.11 mg/kg/    [female]
                                   FQPA SF = 1x........   day..               LOAEL = 67/86 mg/kg bw/day [male]/
                                                                               [female] in males based on
                                                                               decreased hind limb grip
                                                                               strength, increased liver weight,
                                                                               increased incidences of
                                                                               hepatocyte hypertrophy and
                                                                               eosinophilic foci, and thyroid
                                                                               follicular cell hypertrophy,
                                                                               basophilic colloid, epithelial
                                                                               desquamation and increased
                                                                               phosphate levels ([male]). In
                                                                               females, it was based on
                                                                               decreased BW and BWG, increased
                                                                               liver weight and the same thyroid
                                                                               histopathology noted above for
                                                                               males.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)  Classification: ``Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenic Potential''. A non-
                                    linear approach (i.e., RfD) would adequately account for all chronic
                                    toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that could result from exposure to
                                    sedaxane.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
  of concern. mg/kg/day= milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-
  level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
  UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
  members of the human population (intraspecies).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to sedaxane, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned for
tolerances as well as all existing sedaxane tolerances in 40 CFR
180.665. EPA assessed dietary exposures from sedaxane in food as
follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
    Such effects were identified for sedaxane. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) under the Continuing Surveys of
Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII) and the CDC under the National
Health and Nutrition Examination Survey What We Eat in America (NHANES/
WEIA) 2003-2008. EPA assumed tolerance-level residues for all
commodities and 100% crop treated. Default processing factors were used
with the exception of peanut butter.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA NHANES/WEIA
2003-2008. EPA assumed tolerance-level residues for all commodities and
100% crop treated (CT). Default processing factors were used with the
exception of peanut butter.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a nonlinear RfD approach is appropriate for assessing
cancer risk to sedaxane. Cancer risk was assessed using the same
exposure estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for sedaxane. Tolerance-level residues and/or 100%
CT were assumed for all food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for sedaxane in drinking water. These simulation models take
into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of sedaxane. Further information regarding EPA drinking
water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
    Based on the FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and
Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of sedaxane for acute exposures
are estimated to be 4.1 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and
15.1 ppb for ground water and for chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments are estimated to be 1.2 ppb for surface water and 13.0 ppb
for ground water. The surface water estimates include contributions
from all drinking water residues of concern identified for risk
assessment purposes; nevertheless, the ground water EDWCs were higher
than the surface water EDWCs and were selected for use in the dietary
exposure assessments.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 15.1 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 13.0 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-

occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest
control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control
on pets). Sedaxane is not registered for any specific use patterns that
would result in residential exposure.
    4. 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 sedaxane and any other
substances, and sedaxane does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance
action, therefore, EPA has assumed that sedaxane does not have a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding
EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of
toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see
EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence for
increased susceptibility following prenatal or post-natal exposures to
sedaxane based on effects seen in developmental toxicity studies in
rabbits or rats. In range-finding and definitive developmental toxicity
studies in rats, neither quantitative nor qualitative evidence of
increased susceptibility of fetuses to in utero exposure to sedaxane
was observed. In these studies, there were no single-dose effects.
There was no evidence of increased susceptibility in a two-generation
reproduction study in rats following prenatal or post-natal exposure to
sedaxane. There was no evidence of neuropathology or abnormalities in
the development of the fetal nervous system from the available toxicity
studies conducted with sedaxane. Clear NOAELs/LOAELs were established
for the developmental effects seen in rats and rabbits as well as for
the offspring effects seen in the two-generation reproduction study.
The dose-response relationship for the effects of concern is well
characterized.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for sedaxane is complete.
    ii. Given the available information, there is low concern that
sedaxane is a neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or additional uncertainty factors
(UFs) to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. In the rat, no adverse effects in fetuses were seen in
developmental toxicity at maternally toxic doses. In the rabbit, fetal
toxicity was observed at the same doses as the dam (increased
unossified sternebrae and 13th rudimentary ribs and a decrease in fetal
weights of -9% and increased abortions). In the dam, at the same doses,
the effects were decreased body weight, reduced food consumption, and
decreased defecation. In reproduction studies, offspring effects
occurred at the same doses causing parental effects; thus, there was no
quantitative increase in sensitivity in rat pups. The LOAELs and NOAELs
for the developmental and reproduction studies were clearly defined.
The NOAEL used for the acute dietary risk assessment (30 mg/kg/day),
based on effects observed in the ACN study, is protective of the
developmental and offspring effects seen in rabbits and rats with the
NOAELs of 100-200 mg/kg/day. Based on these considerations, there are
no residual uncertainties for pre-and/or post-natal susceptibility.
    iv. There were no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to sedaxane in drinking water. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by sedaxane.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to sedaxane will occupy <1% of the aPAD for all infants (<1-year-old),
the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
sedaxane from food and water will utilize <1% of the cPAD for all
population subgroups. There are no residential uses for sedaxane.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Because there
are no proposed or registered residential uses of sedaxane, a short-
term risk assessment was not performed. The chronic risk assessment is
protective for any short-term exposures from food and drinking water.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). Because there are no proposed or registered residential uses of
sedaxane, an intermediate-term risk assessment was not performed. The
chronic risk assessment is protective for any intermediate-term
exposures from food and drinking water.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As discussed in Unit
III.A., EPA has concluded that using the nonlinear approach based on
the chronic RfD will be protective of potential carcinogenicity.

    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to sedaxane residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An adequate analytical method is available to enforce the proposed
tolerances for sedaxane in plant commodities. A modification of the
Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe (QuEChERS) method was
developed for the determination of residues of sedaxane (as its isomers
SYN508210 and SYN508211) in/on various crops. The sedaxane isomers
(SYN508210 and SYN508211) are quantitatively determined by LC/MS/MS.
The validated limit of quantitation (LOQ) reported in the method is
0.005 ppm for both sedaxane isomers.
    The analytical standard for sedaxane, with an expiration date of
February 28, 2018, is currently available in the EPA National Pesticide
Standards Repository.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international MRL established by the Codex Alimentarius
Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex
is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World
Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an
international food safety standards-setting organization in trade
agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a
tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section
408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the
Codex level.
    Codex has established MRLs for sedaxane in or on grain, cereal,
forage, fodder and straw, group 16 at 0.10 ppm and grain, cereal, group
15 at 0.01 ppm. Codex has not established a MRL for sedaxane in or on
peanut. Tolerances are harmonized with the Codex MRLs for groups 16 and
15.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of sedaxane in
or on grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16 at 0.10 ppm;
grain, cereal, group 15 at 0.01 ppm; peanut at 0.01 ppm; and peanut,
hay at 0.08 ppm. In addition, EPA is removing the following existing
tolerances for residues of sedaxane as they are superseded by the
tolerances established in this rulemaking: Barley, grain at 0.01 ppm;
barley, hay at 0.04 ppm; barley, straw at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, forage
at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, stover at
0.01 ppm; corn, pop, grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, pop, stover at 0.01 ppm;
corn, sweet, forage at 0.01 ppm; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with
husks removed at 0.01 ppm; corn, sweet, stover at 0.01 ppm; oat, forage
at 0.015 ppm; oat, grain at 0.01 ppm; oat, hay at 0.06 ppm; oat, straw
at 0.01 ppm; rye, forage at 0.015 ppm; rye, grain at 0.01 ppm; rye,
straw at 0.01 ppm; sorghum, grain, forage at 0.01 ppm; sorghum, grain,
grain at 0.01 ppm; sorghum, grain, stover at 0.01 ppm; wheat, forage at
0.015 ppm; wheat, grain at 0.01 ppm; wheat, hay at 0.06 ppm; and wheat,
straw at 0.01 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: November 22, 2017.
Michael L. Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.665, revise the table in paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  180.665   Sedaxane; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beet, sugar, roots..........................................        0.01
Canola, seed................................................        0.01
Cotton, gin byproducts......................................        0.01
Cotton, undelinted seed.....................................        0.01
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16...........        0.10
Grain, cereal, group 15.....................................        0.01
Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C....        0.01
Peanut......................................................        0.01
Peanut, hay.................................................        0.08
Potato......................................................        0.02
Potato, wet peel............................................       0.075
Rapeseed, subgroup 20A......................................        0.01
Soybean, forage.............................................        0.05
Soybean, hay................................................        0.04
Soybean, seed...............................................        0.01
Vegetable, foliage of legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A...        0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-26519 Filed 12-7-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P