[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58210-58211]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23100]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2012-36]

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 and must be received on or before October 9, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2012-
0707 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: Mark Forseth, ANM-113,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Federal Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057-3356, or: Frances Shaver, ARM-207,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 800 Independence Ave.
SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 7, 2012.
Lirio Liu,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2012-0707.
    Petitioner: L-3 Communications Integrated Systems, L.P. Sections of
14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  25.785(h)(2), 25.785(j), 25.791(a), 25.795,
25.813(e), 25.815, and 25.853(d)
    Description of Relief Sought: Relief from the requirements of
flight-attendant direct view, firm handholds in the passenger
compartment, no-smoking placards, security considerations, interior
doors between passenger compartments (some electrically powered), aisle
width, and maximum heat-release and smoke-emissions flammability
requirements for large interior panels, for executive interiors on
Boeing Model 747-8 airplanes designated for private use.

[FR Doc. 2012-23100 Filed 9-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


August 2, 2006

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	DIETARY RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CHLORINE DIOXIDE AND SODIUM
CHLORITE INDOOR USES AS DISINFECTANTS/SANTIZERS

From:		A. Najm Shamim, Ph.D, Chemist

		Regulatory Management Branch II

		Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

To:		ShaRon Carlisle,  CRM for Chlorine Dioxide/Sodium Chlorite RED

		Regulatory Management Branch II

		Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

				And

Melba Morrow, D.V.M,  Risk Assessor for Chlorine Dioxide/Sodium Chlorite
RED

Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

Thru:		Diane Isbell, Team Leader RMBII

		Regulatory Management Branch II

		Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

				And

Mark Hartman, Chief

		Regulatory Management Branch II

		Antimicrobials Division (7510C)

Executive Summary

Antimicrobials Division has determined   dietary exposures from chlorine
dioxide /sodium chlorite uses on food contact surfaces, indirect food
contact surfaces, disinfectant use in drinking water,  slimicide use  in
paper/pulp, fruits  and vegetable washes, post-harvest potato treatment.
AD has determined that there are  chronic risks concerns for  less than
one year old infants (cPAD: 145.1%) and non-nursing infants (cPAD:
179.8%) from chlorine dioxide-treated drinking water.

Background:

In this document Antimicrobials Division has assessed the dietary
exposure and risks due to  the uses of chlorine dioxide and sodium
chlorite in the residential scenarios, sanitizer/disinfectant use on
hard surfaces  resulting in  direct or indirect exposure and risks,
paper/pulp slimicide use which may result in exposure and risks, and
chlorine dioxide use as disinfectant for  drinking water  and resulting
exposure and risks.

Table 1 summarizes the use/site/application rates for chlorine dioxide
and sodium chlorite.

				Table 1

Use Sites and Application Rates for Chlorine Dioxide and Sodium Chlorite

Use Site	EPA Reg #	Method of Application	 Application Rates

Mushroom Facilities (food contact)	74602-2, 9150-2, 9150-3, 9804-1	Flush
equipment with sanitizing solution	100-200 ppm total available chlorine
dioxide

Potato Storage: Potato rinse and humidification	9804-5, 5335-20, 21164
Fogger	200-400 ppm

Poultry house disinfection: poultry chiller water/carcass spray	74602-2,
74602-3, 9150-2,  9150-3,  9150-7,  9150-8	Dip carcass	For chiller
water: 50-150 ppm;

For carcass spray: 500-1200 ppm

Egg room/hatching area, incubator room, tray washing room and loading
platform	9150-2, 9150-3, 74602-2	 High pressure spray	20 ppm for pre
wash with sprayer

Chick room, chick grading box and sex room	9150-2, 9150-3, 74602-2,
Fogger, mop	1000 ppm with fogger

Food processing plants (poultry, meat, fish)

Food contact surfaces	9150-2, 9150-3, 9150-7, 9804-1, 9804-9

53345-14, 53345-19	1 minute contact time	200-1000 ppm total available
chlorine dioxide

Dairies, breweries, and bottling plants

Food contact surface sanitizer	9150-2, 9150-3, 9150-7, 9150-8,
53345-14,19, 20, 21, 21164-6,8,9, 9804-9, 74602-2, 5382-46, 74517-1,	1
minute contact time	200-1000 ppm total available chlorine dioxide

Fruits, vegetables	9150-8	Spray or dip	500-1200 ppm

Fruits and vegetable rinses	9150-2, 9150-3, 9804-1, 9150-7, 9150-8,
45631-22, 45631-19, 53345-20, 	Immersion, spray	5 ppm

Pulp/paper mills	9150-2, 9150-3, 9804-1, 9804-9,  53345-22, 69151-3, 4,
21164, 6,8, 9, 21	None stated	4.5 gallons product per 100 tons of paper:
1.25-5 ppm (3.2 12.8 fluid ounces per 1000 gallons of water)

Potable drinking water

69151-3,5, 21164-6,8,9,21

None stated

5 ppm

Mushroom House Treatment

Mushrooms: A number of AD use labels  (74602-2, 9150-2, 9150-3, 9804-1)
indicate  the application of chlorine dioxide as a sanitizer  in
mushroom facilities is applied to the equipment used in the processing
of Mushroom rooms (application rate varies between 100-200 ppm), and
method of application is flush equipment); however, any transfer of
residue levels on mushrooms is not indicated.. The Agency at this is not
requiring any tolerances of chlorine dioxide on mushroom uses and or
does not have any exemption  from the requirement  of tolerance it its
regulatory database.  The Agency has not, at this time conducted any
dietary risk assessment for mushroom use of chlorine dioxide as no
dietary risks are indicated.

Fruits and Vegetable Washes

These uses are covered under FDA 21 CFR 173.300(b)(2) for chlorine
dioxide under 21CFR 173.325 for  similar uses of acidified sodium
chlorite. However, the Agency still conducted dietary exposure
assessment  as the label language was not clear enough. Table II
indicates that the Agency has no  dietary concerns for %cPAD for all
ages.

Label changes similar to the following wording might help reduce the
exposure concerns for fruits and vegetable washes: “Water containing
up to 3 ppm residual chlorine dioxide may be used for washing fruits and
vegetables that are not raw agricultural commodities in accordance  with
the 21 CFR 173.300 Treatment of the fruits and vegetables with chlorine
dioxide must be followed by blanching, cooking or canning.”

AD conducted  chronic  risk assessment for the  fruits and vegetable
washes (post –harvest) with chlorine dioxide and sodium chlorite and
chronic risk risks appear to be below the levels of concerns ( adults:
7.5% cPAD and child between the ages of one and two  years the% cPAD is
42.4%). This includes apple and orange juices..

If the suggested label changes as stipulated above are made by industry,
it is likely the levels of concerns  (% cPAD) for all populations,
including one to two years old children would reduce drastically.

				Table II

Reference dose (RfD, Chronic) = 0.03 mg/kg bw/day

COMMENT 1: All Fresh Fruit and Vegetables, including apple and orange
juices

         Total exposure by population subgroup

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

                                                    Total Exposure

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

          		Population                         mg/kg

 Percent of

           		Subgroup                       body wt/day             Rfd

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

U.S. Population (total)                     0.003292
11.0%

U.S. Population (spring season)             0.003315
11.1%

U.S. Population (summer season)             0.003568
11.9%

U.S. Population (autumn season)             0.003138
10.5%

U.S. Population (winter season)             0.003145
10.5%

Northeast region                            0.004045
13.5%

Midwest region                              0.003062
10.2%

Southern region                             0.002774
9.2%

Western region                              0.003686
12.3%

Hispanics                                   0.004079
13.6%

Non-hispanic whites                         0.003120
10.4%

Non-hispanic blacks                         0.003100
10.3%

Non-hisp/non-white/non-black                0.004787
16.0%

All infants (< 1 year)                      0.003493
11.6%

Nursing infants                             0.001821
6.1%

Non-nursing infants                         0.004128

42.6%

3.		DRINKING WATER EXPOSURE ASSESSEMNT

Chlorine dioxide is used as a disinfectant in water treatment plants in
the USA. Chlorite ion (ClO2-) is present in drinking water and there are
two possible ways it ends up in the drinking water: First, chlorine
dioxide is produced via sodium chlorite used as a starting material and
incomplete conversion of sodium chlorite into chlorine dioxide leaves
residual chlorite ion in water and second, a major breakdown product of
chlorine dioxide in water is chlorite ion. Because of the health
concerns of the presence of chlorite ion and its subsequent  conversion
to chlorate ion, Agency  wanted to make sure that the presence of
chlorite ion did not exceed  certain limits. In 1996  USEPA instituted
Information Collection rule (ICR) and most extensive monitoring data on
the occurrence of chlorite ion in drinking water was collected between
July 1997 to December  1998.

Public Water Systems (PWSs) serving a population of at least 100,000 to
report, under ICR , treatment plant design and operational data and
conduct monitoring for specific microbial contaminants and disinfection
byproducts like chlorite ion .Chlorine dioxide treating plants conducted
monthly monitoring for chlorite ion concentration in samples of finished
water leaving the plant as well as three sample points in the
distribution system: near  the first customer, an average residence time
and a maximum residence time.

Monitoring data were collected  from 22 water systems using chlorine
dioxide treatment (29 treatment plants) The minimum reporting level
(MRL) was established at 20 µg/L . all samples below this value were
considered zero. Data from 418 samples (point of entry to the
distribution) showed chlorite ion concentration ranged from 20 µg/L to
2,029 µg/L. Data from 1,115 samples ( collected from within the
distribution system) showed the concentration of chlorite ion between 20
µg/L to 1,850 µg/L.  The average concentration of chlorite ion from
27/29 treatment plants when averaged from the three distribution system
sample points (first customer, average residence time and maximum
residence time) ranged from 20µg/L to 801 µg/L.

Based on the results from this ICR monitoring data, the Agency in 1998
established a stage  1  Disinfectant/Disinfectant Byproduct Rule (Stage
1 DBPR) which established a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) and
maximum contaminant level (MCL) for chlorite ion: 0.8 mg/L and 1.0 mg/L
respectively.

Based on the ICR Rule for the MCL of chlorite ion, treatment plants
using chlorine dioxide as the disinfectant treatment, are required to:
1) conduct monthly monitoring at three sample points in the distribution
system. Compliance is met if the average chlorite ion concentration does
not exceed 1.0 mg/L. Compliance is determined monthly. 2) Water plants,
in addition to monthly monitoring, must also analyze daily samples of
water entering the distribution system. Chlorite ion concentration must
not exceed 1.0 mg/L If the entry point data shows the exceedence from
1.0 mg/L, the water treatment system must sample at three distribution
system sample points within 24 hours and verify that the chlorite ion
concentration has not exceeded 1.0 mg/L.

g/L) - ICR Data Adjusted for MCL Compliance

	Chlorine Dioxide Water Treatment Plants (WTPs)

	Distribution System Entry Point	Near First Customer	Average Residence
Time	Maximum Residence Time	Distribution System Average2

10th Percentile	60	52	58	30	45

20th Percentile	99	79	87	81	84

50th Percentile	440	380	360	310	390

80th Percentile	590	580	600	510	550

90th Percentile	660	660	640	650	630

Maximum	800	740	680	680	700

# WTPs	29	27	27	27	27

# PWSs	22	21	21	21	21

The Agency conducted a drinking water risk assessment  using 90th
percentile annual average of 0.630 mg/L,  following exposure values are
obtained (Memo by David Herdy (HED) to Jennifer Slotnick (AD):

				Table IV

90th percentile annual avg = 0.630

Reference dose (RfD, Chronic) = .03 mg/kg bw/day

NOEL (Chronic) = .03 mg/kg bw/day

       Total exposure by population subgroup

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

                                                    Total Exposure

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

          Population                         mg/kg       Margin of
Percent

           Subgroup                       body wt/day   Exposure 1/

of RfD

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

U.S. Population (total)                     0.013279            2

		   44.3%

U.S. Population (spring season)             0.013162            2
43.9%

U.S. Population (summer season)             0.014264            2
47.5%

U.S. Population (autumn season)             0.012836            2
42.8%

U.S. Population (winter season)             0.012838            2
42.8%

Northeast region                            0.012113            2
40.4%

Midwest region                              0.013425            2
44.7%

Southern region                             0.012622            2
42.1%

Western region                              0.015214            2
50.7%

Hispanics                                   0.015073            2
50.2%

Non-hispanic whites                         0.012955            2
43.2%

Non-hispanic blacks                         0.012605            2
42.0%

Non-hisp/non-white/non-black                0.016279            2
54.3%

All infants (< 1 year)                      0.043535            1
145.1%

Nursing infants                             0.016146            2
53.8%

Non-nursing infants                         0.053927            1
179.8%

Children 1-6  yrs                           0.018552            2
61.8%

Children 7-12 yrs                           0.012062            2
40.2%

Females 13-19 (not preg or nursing)         0.009344            3
31.1%

Females 20+ (not preg or nursing)           0.013255            2
44.2%

Females 13-50 yrs                           0.012846            2
42.8%

Females 13+ (preg/not nursing)              0.012912            2
43.0%

Females 13+ (nursing)                       0.018397            2
61.3%

Males 13-19 yrs                             0.009770            3
32.6%

Males 20+ yrs                               0.011898            3
39.7%

Seniors 55+                                 0.013036            2	 43.5%

Children 1-2 yrs                            0.019719            2
65.7%

Children 3-5 yrs                            0.018460            2
61.5%

Children 6-12 yrs                           0.012733            2
42.4%

42.4%

Youth 13-19 yrs                             0.009599            3
32.0%

Adults 20-49 yrs                            0.012398            2
41.3%

Adults 50+ yrs                              0.013044            2
43.5%

Females 13-49 yrs                           0.012347            2
41.2%

EPA’s Office of Water also determined (Memo by Pat Fair, OW to
Jennifer Slotnick, AD) that: a) Overall percent of water treatment
plants using ClO2 as a disinfectant is low (~ 6%) and b)Exceedences from
monitoring data can not be generalized to all populations. tc "5.4
Drinking Water Exposures and Risks " \l 2

In addition, the Agency subsequently has reviewed additional study on:
a) Determination of Chlorite in Baby Formula Prepared From Water
Containing Residual Chlorite ( by T.V. Tran, Report #: TR05-01) The
Agency does agree generally with the conclusions of the studies that: 1)
the components of the baby formula, including vitamin C,  do react with
the chlorite in drinking water and may not be available  in drinking
water or baby formula formulated with drinking water;  however, at this
time the Agency has no quantitative tool (a model etc.) to assess the
extent of reduction in  exposure to chlorine dioxide from specific
chemicals  present in baby formula. Due to these uncertainties, the
Agency believes  that  for all infants (< 1 year old) as well as
non-nursing infants (< 1 year old), the % cPAD may likely  be less than
100.

Poultry Hatcheries:

AD label searches  ( EPA Reg#: 9150-2, 9150-3) indicates that chlorine
dioxide  is used   in poultry hatching area, incubator room, tray
washing room and loading platform  as disinfectant. High pressure
sprayer is used to deliver the chemical @  rate of 20 ppm.

In these poultry hatcheries, eggs are produced  for the production of
chicks and not for human consumption and although it is likely some of
sanitizer/disinfectant chemicals may penetrate the egg shells and
bioaccummulate in the developing chicks, at this time the Agency
believes that the amount of the chemical transferred to the developing
chicks is not likely to adversely affect in the development of chicks
and will have even a smaller transfer into humans.

A similar label searches ( EPA Reg#: 74602-2) indicate the same uses for
sodium chlorite at the same application rate.  The Agency has no
concerns for this use.

The use of chlorine dioxide and sodium chlorite  in poultry hatcheries
can be classified as non-food use. Agency has no concerns at this time
for this use.

Food Handling Establishments:

	Hard Surface  Indirect Food Contact Surfaces

Use of chlorine dioxide and sodium chlorite  on  sites where there is a
likelihood of exposure (and migration ) of these chemicals into food. An
example of direct food contact would be antimicrobials  post-harvest
treatment  of fruits and vegetables. Sanitizing and or disinfecting use
of antimicrobials to hard non-porous  surfaces which come into contact
with food are classified as indirect food contact surfaces. Eating
establishments (food tables), kitchen counter tops etc fall in this
category.

Using FDA methodology, EPA has  calculated the Estimated Daily Intake
(EDI) of a chemical by using  the relationship:

EDI (mf/kg/day) = AR  x SA  x F (100% or
10%)/BW…………………..(1)

Where: SA = Surface area of the treated hard surface which comes into
contact with food ( fruits, vegetables, meats) = 2000 cm2

AR =  1 mg/cm2 of dilute  product x a.i. (active ingredient) =
application rate

F = Fraction of the pesticide transferred or migrated from the treated
surface into food.  It could be 10% or 100%.

BW = Body weight: adult man = 70 kg; adult woman = 60 kg;  child = 15
kg.

Maximum application rate ( labels: 9150-2, 9150-3, 53345-14, -19, and
-20) = 1000 ppm of chlorine dioxide or sodium chlorite = 1000 µg/1000
mg (ppm)

Using eq. 1:

1000 µg/1000mg(ppm) x 0.10 mg/cm2 x 2000 cm2/ BW

EDI = 200 µg a.i. /BW

  Food consumption  is 3000 g/day: for an adult------------a

Estimated EDI for an adult = 200µg  /g x 1/3000 g a.i./BW

= 0. 0666 µg food/BW

Estimated Daily Dietary Dose for an adult-7

= 0.0666µg/70kg =  0.00095µg /kg/day
------------------------------------ (1)

Food consumption is 1500  g for a child  ------------------------------b

EDI for a child = 200 µg a.i./1500 g /day BW

=  0.1333 µg /day/BW

Estimated Daily Dietary Dose for a child

= 0.1333 µg/15 kg/day

= 0.0088 µg/kg/day
-----------------------------------------------------(2)

	aPAD and cPAD dietary for chlorine dioxide and sodium chlorite  is the
same: 0.03 mg/kg/day

 1 mg = 1000 µg

Daily Dietary Dose  for an adult= 9.5 x 10-4 µg x 1 mg/1000 µg = 9. 5
x 10-7 mg/kg/day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
- (3)

Daily Dietary Dose for a child = 8.8 x 10-3 µg x 1 mg/1000µ g = 8.8 x
10-6 mg/kg/day  -

--------------(4)

a or cPAD are 0.03 mg/kg/day

% PAD = exposure /a or c PAD x 100
-------------------------------------------------(5)

For an adult., % a or cPADs are:  9.5 x10-7  mg/kg/day / 0.03 mg/kg/day
x 100 =  3.16 x 10-7

For a child , % a or c PAD are: 8.8 x10-6 mg/kg/day/0.03mg/kg/day  x 100
= 2.93 x 10-6

Agency does not  have any concerns from this exposure.

6.	Post –Harvest Potato Treatment:

	The Agency has allowed the use of chlorine dioxide  in the form of
spray, mist and fogger in the limit of 200-400 ppm in the post-harvest
treatment of potatoes  places in the storage area before these are sent
out for retail market.( label: 9804-5)

AD had asked  States of Idaho and Washington  to collect the analytical
data on the residues on the chlorine dioxide treated post-harvest
potatoes ( AD Memo by Tim McMahon, and A. Najm Shamim, March, 1998).

A six month residue monitoring  data from chlorine dioxide treatment on
stored potatoes  (February through July 1999) were submitted in
August/September  , 1999  Analytical Sciences Laboratory, a contracting
lab. 42 samples were (duplicate) were analyzed.

1) 42/42 samples showed  chlorite to be non-detect ( at practical
quantitation limit of 0.1 ppm level)

2) 39/42 samples showed the presence of chlorate below the quantitation
limit of 0.1 ppm and only three samples showed the chlorate level
between 0.97 to 1.1 µg/g. Both chlorate and chlorite are considered the
breakdown products of chlorine dioxide.

The Agency did not see any concerns for the presence of chlorate at
these levels  in a few samples.

A Memo by Health Effects Division (Christina Swatrz, 1994)  noted: “
Residue Chemistry data reviews of data submitted in support of existing
tolerance exemptions concluded that there is no likelihood of transfer
of residues (of sodium chlorate) to meat/milk/poultry/eggs). It also
noted that ‘ based on the likelihood of reduction of sodium chlorate
residues through hydrolysis on cooking, and based on a lack of toxicity
concern, and residue levels found on crops during field trials, CBRS (
HED’s Branch), continues to support the existing tolerance exemption.

The Agency has no concerns at this time for use of chlorine dioxide and
sodium chlorite for stored potato treatment and subsequent interstate
commerce of this commodity.

Poultry House Disinfection, Poultry Chiller Water/ Carcass Spray or Dip

Food Contact Surface Sanitizer Use of Chlorine dioxide and Sodium
chlorite: Food Processing Plants (Meat, Fish)

These uses fall under the perview of FDA and not under FIFRA and there
the Agency has decided not to assess these uses.

Dairies, Breweries, Bottling Plants, Food Contact Surfaces (application
rates: 200-1000 ppm)

Labels: 53345-14, 19, 20, 21; 9150-7,8; 21164-6, 8, 9; 74602-2;
5382-46;  74517-1;  73139-1

The use scenario for this application includes sanitizing food contact
surfaces,  processing equipments, utensils in dairies, breweries,
canning operations, meat and vegetable processing plants.

FDA reviewed a similar application and made a few assumptions ( FDA Memo
by Susan Carberry, Ph.D: HFS-247, Chemistry Review Branch, Document
Number 2B4334, 1993).

We have used the FDA assumptions  for residues and also calculated the
EDI, DDDs, and  percent aPADs  and cPADs based on our toxicity  numbers.

FDA Assumptions: 1)  residue exposure : 1 mg/cm2; 2) Major exposure
scenarios and foods from this application are: brewery, beverage,
egg/mayonnaise industries; 3)  at eaters level, following foods will
have the residues: beer, beverages, egg/mayonnaise products, and milk.
Weight of food/ surface area for some foods are as follows:

Milk (dairy): 			6.6

Egg/mayonnaise		64

Beer, beverages		150;

weight/ surface are ratios are in g/cm2

4) FDA used the intake data ( 14 day average from MRCA (1982-87) menu
census survey and USDA/NFCS  survey data (1987-1988) for portion sizes.
Following represents the average eaters only  food category and food
intake averages:

Beverages, alcoholic/beer:			182 g/p/d

Beverages,  non-alcoholic			240 g/p/d

Egg products					9 g/p/d

Salad dressing/mayonnaise			6 g/p/d

Milk						124 g/p/d

5) FDA also assumed that there is no loss of chlorine dioxide as a gas,
and  the treatment is 100% with the product present in the formulation.

Calculations:

Using the maximum application rate of 1000 ppm

1000 ppm = 1000 mg/kg x 1 kg/1000g x 1000 µg/1 mg = 1000 µg/g =
1000µg/1000 mg. Using  the assumptions 1 through 4 and data inputs from
above:

Beverages, alcoholic , beer:

Estimated Daily Intake (EDI) = 1000µ/ 1000mg x 1 mg/cm2  x 182
g/person/day x 1 cm2/150 g = 1.2 µg/person/day
------------------------------1

Beverages, non-alcoholic,

EDI = 1.6 µg/person/day
--------------------------------------------------2

Egg products, salad dressing, mayonnaise

EDI = 0.14 µg/person/day
--------------------------------------------------3

Milk

EDI = 19. µ g/person/day
--------------------------------------------------4

From (1):Adult  Daily Dietary Dose = 1.2 µg/person/day x mg/1000µg =
1.2 x 10-3  mg/person/day x person/70 kg =  1.7 x 10-5 mg/kg/day
------------------1a

Child DDD =  8 x 10-5 mg/kg/day
--------------------------------------------1b

From(2) Adult  Daily Dietary Dose =  1.6 µg/person/day x mg/1000µg =
1.6 x 10-3 mg/person/day x person/70 kg = 2.4 x 10-5 mg/kg/day
-------------------2a

Child DDD =  1.0 x 10-4 mg/kg/day
------------------------------------------2b

From(3) Adult Daily Dietary Dose = 0.14 µg/person/day x mg/1000µg =
1.4 x 10-4 mg/person/day x person/70 kg = 2.0 x 10-6 mg/kg/day
--------------------3a

Child DDD = 9.33 x 10-5 mg/kg/day
-------------------------------------------3b

From (4) Adult Daily Dietary Dose =19.0 µg/person/day x mg/1000µg =
1.9 x 10-2

mg/person/day x person/70 kg =  2.7 x 10-4 mg/kg/day
---------------------4a

Child DDD = 6.6 x 10-4 mg/kg/day
----------------------------------------------4b

For chlorine dioxide and sodium chlorite, acute and chronic ( aPAD and
cPAD) are the same, i.e. = 0.03 mg/kg/day
---------------------------------------------------(5)

% aPAD and cPAD are calculated in Table V

				Table V

Food Type	 Daily Dietary Dose (DDD) mg/kg/day)	% a PAD or cPAD

= Exposure (DDD)/ aPAD (or cPAD) x 100

Beverages, alcoholic, beer	Adult: 1.7x10-5

Child: 8x10-5	Adult: 0.56%

Child: 0.26%

Beverages, non-alcoholic	Adult:2.4x10-5

Child: 1.0x10-4	Adult: 0.08%

Child:0.33%

Egg products, mayonnaise	Adult: 2.6x10-6

Child:9.3x10-5	Adult: 0.0086%

Child: 0.31%

Milk	Adult: 2.7x10-4

Child:6.6x10-4	Adult: 0.66%

Child:2.2%

None of the % PADs exceed 100 and hence Agency does not have any concern
for uses in these sites and at the level of applications.

Chlorine Dioxide and Sodium Chlorite’s antimicrobials uses include:
slimicide  use in paper/pulp. AD has, therefore, assessed the potential
dietary exposure to such uses applying the FDA methodologies.

	 AD’s label searches identified a number of chlorine dioxide and/or
sodium chlorite products use as slimicides in the manufacture of
pulp/paper products. Label of SLEME-TROL RX-33 ( EPA Reg#: 74655-2)
showed highest concentration of sodium chlorite (25%) at use level . The
application rate is 2 lbs/ton of finished paper. Same label shows that
in polymer slurries preservative in paper coatings and as adhesives in
paper products, the maximum amount of chlorine dioxide /sodium chlorite
is 1000 ppm of the active. The Agency has note that at the use sight,
sodium chlorite generates chlorine dioxide. Hence whether  the label is
that of chlorine dioxide or  sodium chlorite, these are treated as one
and the same.

10.	Dietary Exposures and Risks Resulting From Use of Chlorine
Dioxide/Sodium Chlorite as Slimicides in Paper/Pulp Products (Indirect
Food  Additives).

	FDA  Method makes a number of assumptions for calculating migration of
actives (chlorine dioxide/sodium chlorite) from food contact surfaces
(paper): 1. Food contact surface (paper) can be a one time use/day or a
repeat use material; 2. Consumption factor (CF) or fraction of daily
food which comes in to contact with the packaging surface (paper). CF
represents the actual weight of food that comes into contact with the
paper to the weight of all food packaged with paper; 3. The CF varies
from one type of packaging (type of paper) to the other (type of paper).
FDA methodology of migration of active assumes a 100% migration to the
food commodities (This represents a worst case scenario).

I	Data Input Parameters for Chlorine Dioxide and Sodium Chlorite Used as
Paper Slimicide

		Rate of Application of Active: Maximum of 2 lbs Chlorine
dioxide/sodium chlorite/ton of paper ( = 1.0  kg/1000 kg of paper)

		Paper slurry: Prior to entering paper manufacturing machine: 1% ( 99%
water and 1% pulp). This is  an FDA assumption

		Concentration of Slurries Entering Driers: 33% pulp and 67% water (FDA
Assumption)

		Standard Paper Weight: 50 mg/in2 (FDA Assumption)

		Finished Paper: 8% water and 92% pulp ( RASSB Memo by Bob Quick, based
on FDA Assumption)4

		Mass of Food in Contact with Surface Area of Treated Paper: 10 g/in2
(FDA Assumption)

		Consumption Factor (CF)  for Treated Paper ) 0.10 ( FDA Assumption)

		Daily Average Food Intake (Adult) = 3000 g

		Daily Average Food Intake (Child) = 1500 g

	Calculations:

		As the active is only 25%, from parameters 1 & 2 above, 2 lb/ton paper
= 0.5 lbs/1000 lbs paper or 1 lb active = 2000 lbs paper =  200,000 lb
slurry x 1% paper slurry = 1 lb/2000 lbs of finished paper = 2. 5 ppm of
active in the paper slurry. (This is derived from FDA assumption).

		From in put parameter 3, the concentration of the active (Chlorine
dioxide/sodium chlorite) present in the pulp prior to entering the
driers: Application Rate x % water/ % pulp

= 2.5 ppm active =2. 5 g active/g pulp slurry x 0.67 water/0.33 g
pulp = 5 µg active/g pulp.

	OUTPUT:

Based on input parameters	 1 through 7 and calculations a and b, the
outputs are:

		1a: Concentration of Chlorine dioxide/sodium chlorite in Food:

µg of chlorine dioxide/sodium chlorite/mass of pulp x mass of pulp/mass
of paper x standard mass of paper x mass of food/surface area
---------------------------------------------------------i

5 µg chlorine dioxide/sodium chlorite/mass of pulp x 0.92 g pulp/g of
paper x 0.05 g/in2 x 1 in2 /10 g food

		= 0.023 µg of  chlorine dioxide/sodium chlorite/g food

Taking into account of CF 0f 0.10, the actual dietary concentration of
chlorine dioxide/sodium chlorite in daily diet would be: 0.023 µg
chlorine dioxide/sodium chlorite/g food x 0.10 = 0.0023 µg of active/g
food -----ii

1b.	Estimated Daily Intake (EDI) for an Adult = 0.0023 µg of chlorine
dioxide/sodium chlorite/ g food x 3000 g food = 6.9 µg chlorine
dioxide/sodium chlorite/person/day -----------------------iii

		1c.	Estimated Daily Intake (EDI) for a Child = 0.0023 µg of chlorine
dioxide /sodium chlorite/g food x 1500 g food = 3.45 µg chlorine
dioxide/sodium chlorite/person/day -----------------------------iv

Estimated Daily Dietary Dose:

EDI/Body Weight:

Adult: 6.9µg x mg/1000µg / 70 kg/day =   9.8 x 10-5  mg/kg BW/day

Child:  3.45 µg x mg/1000µg /15 kg /day =	2.3 x 10-4 mg/kg BW/day

According to the Agency’s memo ( Memo by EPA’s  Wanda Henson to
Hercules Incorporated’s Kathryn Ingram, May 9th, 2006) Agency has
accepted the following  label change from the label SLIME-TROL RX 33 (
USA EPA Reg #: 74655-2): “ Deletion of Preservation Section”. The
Preservation Section stated: “This product should be added to the
material to be  preserved prior to manufacturing into finished product
i.e. pul, broke, polymer, defoamer, alum, emulsions, adhesives, paper
mill coatings, pigment slurries and paper products….”

Based on this information, the Agency has decided to exclude the dietary
assessment for:

Polymer Slurries as Filler in Paper, Chlorine Dioxide and Sodium
Chlorite Use as Paper Adhesive Preservative, and Chlorine Dioxide and
Sodium chlorite Use as Paper Coating Preservative

Table VI.  Summary of Dietary Exposure and Risk for Chlorine Dioxide

Use Site	Food Type	Population Subgroup	EDI (mg/person/day)	Chronic
Dietary

Dietary Exposurea (mg/kg/day)	% cPAD b

Indirect Food Use

Food handling establishments/ kitchens	NA	Adult	2.00 x 10-1	9.5E-07
0.00316

Child

8.8E-06	0.0293

Dairies, Breweries, Bottling Plants, Food Contact Surfaces/Food
Processing Plants for Meats and Fishd	Beverages, alcoholic, beer	Adult
1.2 x 10-3	1.70E-05	0.56

	Beverages, non-alcoholic	Adult	1.6 x 10-3	2.40E-05	0.08

Child

1.00E-04	0.33

	Egg Products, Mayonnaise	Adult	1.4 x 10-4	2.00E-06	0.0086

Child

9.33E-06	0.031

	Milk	Adult	1.9 x 10-2	2.70E-04	0.66

Child

1.30E-03	4.2

Pulp/Paper, Polymer Slurries, Paper Adhesive, Paper Coating	NA	Adult	1.1
x 10-1	9.8E-05	0.326

Child

2.3E-04	0.766

Total Indirect Food-Contact Exposure	Adult	3.3 x 10-1	4.12E-04	1.64

	Child

1-2 years	2.7 x 10-1	1.65E-03	5.35

	Infant

<1

	<5.35 f

Direct Food Use

Post Harvest Application 	Fruit and Vegetable Wash	Adult	 	2.24E-03c,
e	7.5

Child	 	1.27E-02 c, e	42.3

Total Direct Food-Contact Exposure	Adult	 	2.24E-03	7.5

	Child

1-2 years 	 	1.27E-02	42.3g

	Infant

<1

3.49E-03	11.6 f

Inorganic Chlorate Use

Highest Exposure from

Agricultural Use	Child

1 – 2 years

	 	8.38E-03c	28

	Infant

<1 year

4.511E-03	15 f

Total Dietary Exposure

Total Direct and Indirect Food-Contact Exposure	Adult	 	2.65E-03	9.1

	Child

1-2 years	 	2.27E-02	75.7

	Infant

<1 year

	<31.95 f

a-- For adults, acute and chronic exposure analysis is based on a body
weight of 70 kg.  For adult females, the body weight is 60 kg.  For
children, exposure is based on a body weight of 15 kg.

b--%PAD = dietary exposure (mg/kg/day) * 100 / cPAD, where cPAD for
adults and children = 0.03 mg/kg/day;

c--children 1-2 years of age, adults 20-49 years of age

d--food processing plants for meats/fish have exposures which are
similar to other food contact surfaces, exposure numbers not included
for this scenario.

e-- includes all fruits and vegetables and apple and orange juices;
assumes 100% of fruit is washed with chlorine dioxide.

f--Infants (<1 year) are included in this table for comparison purposes
and were not added to the total dietary exposure as it was not the most
highly exposed subpopulation.

g--Assuming 50% of fruits/vegetables are treated, the dietary risk for
children (1 – 6) would represent 21% of the cPAD.

Formation of Chlorate From Chlorine Dioxide, Sodium Chlorite, Sodium and
Calcium Hypochlorites and Dietary Risks

The main source of chlorate ion exposure in the environmental media
(soil, water, animal or humans and in food) is through the agricultural
applications of sodium chlorate. However, it is likely that some
chlorate in these media is formed/found through antimicrobial
applications (disinfectant) of chlorine dioxide, sodium chlorite, and
sodium/calcium hypochlorites.

In aqueous media, these oxyanions(chlorite, chlorate, hypochlorite)
exist because of the unique chemistry of chlorine which has a chemical
tendency to change its oxidation states (charges). Thus, in chlorate,
chlorine has a +5 charge, in chlorite it bears a +3 charge, in
hypochlorite a + 1 charge, while in chloride a net -1 charge exists.
These variations in charges  (hence the speciations) are dependent on
many factors including: pH of the medium, temperature,  redox potential
of the medium, presence of oxidizing or reducing species etc.
Similarly, chlorate itself can under go reodix reactions, depending on
the pH of the aqueous medium  to form, chloride,  chlorine,
hypochlorite, chlorous acid, chlorine dioxide.

The Agency lacks definite data which can help in quantifying the amounts
of chorate formed from  chlorine dioxide, sodium chlorite,
sodium/calcium hypochlorite. Simultaneous or concurrent conversions of
these species into chlorate are not likely to occur as these
interconversions depend on factors some of which are mentioned above and
these factors do not work in tandem. Thus at this time, any additional
dietary risks from interconversions in drinking water (non-cancer or
cancer risks), and food (non-cancer risks) can not be estimated. The
Agency has determined no additional risks exist other than the ones
which have estimated in chlorine dioxide/sodium chlorite RA and sodium
chlorate RA.

MRID# 			BIBLIOGRAPHY

1.  AD Memo by Tim McMahon, and A. Najm Shamim to Norm Cook, March,
1998).

FDA Memo: 1994, FAP: 4A4433

 FDA Memo, 1993 by Susan Carberry,  Ph.D: HFS-247, Chemistry Review
Branch, Document Number 2B4334

 David Hrdy, 2006. A Memo  from David Hrdy (HED) to Jennifer
Slotnick(AD) on Fruits and Vegetable Washes for Chlorine Dioxide Use.

David Hrdy, 2006. A Memo from David Hrdy to Jennifer Slotnick (AD) on
Drinking Water Risks from Chlorine Dioxide Treated Water

Pat Fair, 2006.  A Memo from Office of Water  to Jennifer Slotnick, OPP
(AD) on Monitoring Data of Chlorine Dioxide Disinfectant Use by Water
Treatment Plants in the USA.

7.  Tim McMahon et al., 2005ADTC Memo on Hazard Identification (End
Point Selection)  for Chlorine Dioxide and Sodium Chlorite.

8.  A. Najm Shamim: AD Document on: Dietary Risk Assessment for
Dihalogen Dialkyl  and  MethylolHydantoins , 2003. This document lists
the FDA assumptions of pesticide migration form paper to food through
indirect food contact.

9. A. Najm Shamim, 2005,  AD Document on Dietary Risk Assessment for
1,2-Benzisothaizolin-3-one.

10.. Bob Quick, 2001 AD Memo on Review of Lonza Registration Request for
5,5- Dimethylhydantoins as Slimicide and Preservative in Paper
Manufacture. Additional FDA assumptions on pesticide migration into food
from treated paper.

'

*

+

,

¸

¹

*

5

;

<

>

~

“

 h*

h*

 h*

 h*

 h*

 h*

“

Æ

Õ

ì

î

h*

 h*

 h*

 h*

 h*

 h*

h*

@

@

)̀Ĥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ĥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ĥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ȥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ȥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ȥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ȥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ȥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ȥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ȥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

)̀Ȥ␅؁Ĥ옍)

hú

hÄ

hú

hú

 hÛ

hÛ

hÛ

hÛ

 h

h

h

”ÿž

”ÿž

”ÿž

摧ᐔༀ. RASSB Memo by Bob Quick, 2001, with additional comments on
February 2001 Document (Reference 10)

12. Lonza Document op cit reference 4.

13. T.V. Tran, 2005 (?) ERCO Worldwide Research Report by  ERCO Report
#: TR-05-01

14 Wanda Henson to Kathryn Ingram, A Memo for the Acceptance of Label
Change on Hercules Incorporated Label Slime-Trol RX-33, May 2006.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 7, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66858-66859]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27256]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3350-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2012-0002]

Massachusetts; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (FEMA-3350-EM), dated October 28,
2012, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: October 31, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, James N. Russo,
of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for
this emergency.
    This action terminates the appointment of Justo Hern[aacute]ndez as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this emergency.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2012-27256 Filed 11-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: September 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 179)]
[Notices]
[Page 54544-54545]
[DOCID:fr15se06-90]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54418; File No. SR-ISE-2006-51]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change Relating to the Definition of a Directed Order

September 8, 2006.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on September 6, 2006, the International Securities Exchange, Inc.
(``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the ISE. ISE
filed the proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ISE is proposing to expand the definition of a ``Directed Order''
to allow broker-dealer orders to be routed to ISE market makers under
ISE Rule 811. Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed
new language is in italic; proposed deletions are in [brackets].
* * * * *

Rule 811. Directed Orders

    (a) Definitions.
    (1) A ``Directed Order'' is [a Public Customer Order] an order
routed from an Electronic Access Member to an Exchange market maker
through the Exchange's System.
    (2) through (3) no change.
    (b) through (e) no change.
* * * * *

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 ISE 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 ISE 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
    Under ISE Rule 811 (Directed Orders), Electronic Access Members may
route orders to an ISE market maker, which is then required to either
enter them into the Price Improvement Mechanism \5\ or release them to
execute in the regular market. While the Price Improvement

Mechanism is not limited to Public Customer Orders under ISE Rule 723,
the Exchange initially limited the directed orders program to the
routing of Public Customer Orders only.\6\ The Exchange now believes it
is appropriate to expand the directed orders program to give broker-
dealer orders a greater opportunity for price improvement. The Exchange
therefore proposes to broaden the definition of a Directed Order under
ISE Rule 811, so that broker-dealer orders may be routed to ISE market
makers for potential entry into the Price Improvement Mechanism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ISE Rule 723.
    \6\ Under ISE Rule 100(a), a Public Customer Order is defined as
an order for the account of a Public Customer, and a Public Customer
is defined as a person that is not a broker or dealer in securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the basis under the Act is found in
section 6(b)(5),\7\ in that the proposed rule change is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest. In particular, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change will provide greater opportunity for broker-dealer orders to
receive price improvement through the Price Improvement Mechanism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change does not impose
any burden on competition that is 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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any written comments from members or other interested parties.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (1)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) impose any significant burden on competition; and (3) by
its terms, become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing,
or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule
change has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
\8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \9\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally may
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \10\ permits the Commission to designate
a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. ISE has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, which would make the rule
change effective and operative upon filing. The Commission believes
that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.\11\ Such waiver would
allow the Exchange to implement the proposed rule change immediately.
The Commission notes that the proposal to amend the definition of a
Directed Order in the ISE Rules is substantially similar to the
definition of a Directed Order currently used by the Boston Options
Exchange (``BOX''), a facility of the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. \12\
The Commission does not believe that the proposed rule change raises
new regulatory issues. Accordingly, the Commission designates the
proposed rule change effective and operative upon filing with the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \11\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay for
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \12\ See Chapter I, Section 1(a)(21) of the BOX Rules (defining
the term ``Directed Order'' to mean any Customer Order to buy or
sell which has been directed to a particular Market Maker by an
Order Flow Provider) and Chapter I, Section 1(a)(20) of the BOX
Rules (defining the term ``Customer Order'' to mean an agency order
for the account of either a Public Customer or a broker-dealer). See
also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49068 (January 13, 2004),
69 FR 2775 (January 20, 2004) (SR-BSE-2002-15) (order approving
trading rules for the Boston Options Exchange facility).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.

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 No. SR-ISE-2006-51 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2006-51. 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the ISE. 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 Number SR-ISE-2006-51 and should be submitted on or before October
6, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-15320 Filed 9-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: March 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 54)]
[Notices]
[Page 14194]
[DOCID:fr21mr06-61]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-188-001]

Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.; Notice of Compliance
Filing

March 14, 2006.
    Take notice that on March 8, 2006, Southern Star Central Gas
Pipeline, Inc., (Southern Star) tendered for filing as part of its FERC
Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to
become effective March 1, 2006.

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 270
Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 430
Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 476

    Southern Star states that copies of the filing were served on
parties on the official service list.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Sec.  154.210 of the
Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must
serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is 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 e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-4045 Filed 3-20-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 245 (Wednesday, December 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 93682-93684]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30714]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1196; FRL-9956-89]

Recent Postings of Broadly Applicable Alternative Test Methods

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the broadly applicable alternative test
method approval decisions the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
made under and in support of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) between January 1, 2016, and December 12, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: An electronic copy of each alternative
test method approval document is available at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods. For questions
about this notice, contact Mrs. Lula H. Melton, Air Quality Assessment
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (E143-02),
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For technical questions about individual
alternative test method decisions, refer to the contact person
identified in the individual approval document(s).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this notice apply to me?

    This notice will be of interest to entities regulated under 40 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 60, 61, and 63, state, local, and
tribal agencies, and the EPA Regional offices responsible for
implementation and enforcement of regulations under 40 CFR parts 60,
61, and 63.

B. How can I get copies of this information?

    You may access copies of the broadly applicable alternative test
method approval documents at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods.

II. Background

    Broadly applicable alternative test method approval decisions made
by the EPA in 2016 under the NSPS, 40 CFR part 60 and the NESHAP, 40
CFR parts 61 and 63 are identified in this notice (see Table 1). Source
owners and operators may voluntarily use these broadly applicable
alternative test methods in lieu of otherwise specified reference test
methods. Use of these broadly applicable alternative test methods does
not change the applicable emission standards.
    As explained in a previous Federal Register notice published at 72
FR 4257 (January 30, 2007) and located at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods, the EPA
Administrator has the authority to approve the use of alternative test
methods to comply with requirements under 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63.
This authority is found in sections 60.8(b)(3), 61.13(h)(1)(ii), and
63.7(e)(2)(ii). A similar authority is granted in 40 CFR part 65 under
section 65.158(a)(2). In the past, we have performed thorough technical
reviews of numerous source-specific requests for alternatives and
modifications to test methods and procedures. Based on these reviews,
we have often found that these changes or alternatives would be equally
valid and appropriate to apply to other sources within a particular
class, category, or subcategory. Consequently, we have concluded that,
where a method modification or an alternative method is clearly broadly
applicable to a class, category, or subcategory of sources, it is both
more equitable and efficient to approve its use for all appropriate
sources and situations at the same time.
    It is important to clarify that alternative methods are not
mandatory but permissive. Sources are not required to employ such a
method but may choose to do so in appropriate circumstances. Source
owners or operators should review the specific broadly applicable
alternative method approval decision at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods before electing to
employ the alternative method. As per section 63.7(f)(5), a source
owner or operator electing to use an alternative method for 40 CFR part
63 standards must continue to use the alternative method until
otherwise authorized.
    The criteria for approval and procedures for submission and review
of broadly applicable alternative test methods are outlined at 72 FR
4257 (January 30, 2007). We will continue to announce approvals for
broadly applicable alternative test methods at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods and publish a
notice annually that summarizes approvals for broadly applicable
alternative test methods during the preceding year.
    This notice comprises a summary of seven such approval documents
posted to our Technology Transfer Network between January 1, 2016, and
December 12, 2016. The alternative method decision letter/memo number,
the reference method affected, sources allowed to use this alternative,
and the modification or alternative method allowed are summarized in
Table 1 of this notice. For more detailed information, please refer to
the complete copies of these approval documents available at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods,
as Table 1 serves only as a brief summary of the

broadly applicable alternative test methods.
    If you are aware of reasons why a particular alternative test
method approval that we issued should not be broadly applicable or that
its use should in some way be limited, we request that you make us
aware of the reasons in writing, and we will revisit the broad
approval. Any objection to a broadly applicable alternative test
method, as well as the resolution of that objection, will be announced
at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods and in the subsequent Federal Register notice. If we
decide to retract a broadly applicable test method, we will continue to
grant case-by-case approvals, as appropriate, and will (as states,
local and tribal agencies and the EPA Regional offices should) consider
the need for an appropriate transition period for users either to
request case-by-case approval or to transition to an approved method.

    Dated: December 14, 2016.
Stephen Page,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

  Table 1--Approved Alternative Test Methods and Modifications To Test
 Methods Referenced in or Published Under Appendices in 40 CFR Parts 60,
        61, and 63 Posted Between January 2016 and December 2016
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            As an
 Alternative  method    alternative or
 decision letter/memo  modification to     For . . .      You may . . .
        number              . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALT-114..............  Performance      Sources subject  Use the
                        Specification    to 40 CFR Part   alternative
                        18-Performance   63, subpart      approach for
                        Specifications   LLL-National     preparation of
                        and Test         Emission         gas standards
                        Procedures for   Standards for    as specified
                        Gaseous          Hazardous Air    in the
                        Hydrogen         Pollutants       agency's
                        Chloride (HCl)   from the         approval
                        Continuous       Portland         letter dated
                        Emission         Cement           February 22,
                        Monitoring       Manufacturing    2016.
                        Systems at       Industry
                        Stationary       Sources; 40
                        Sources and      CFR Part 63,
                        Procedure 6-     subpart UUUUU-
                        Quality          National
                        Assurance        Emission
                        Requirements     Standards for
                        for Gaseous      Hazardous Air
                        Hydrogen         Pollutants:
                        Chloride (HCl)   Coal- and Oil-
                        Emission         Fired Electric
                        Monitoring       Utility Steam
                        Systems Used     Generating
                        for Compliance   Units; 40 CFR
                        Determination    Part 63,
                        at Stationary    subpart DDDDD-
                        Sources.         National
                                         Emission
                                         Standards for
                                         Hazardous Air
                                         Pollutants for
                                         Major Sources:
                                         Industrial,
                                         Commercial,
                                         and
                                         Institutional
                                         Boilers and
                                         Process
                                         Heaters; and
                                         40 CFR Part
                                         60, subparts
                                         CCCC and DDDD-
                                         Standards of
                                         Performance
                                         for Commercial
                                         and Industrial
                                         Solid Waste
                                         Incineration
                                         Units.
ALT-115..............  40 CFR           Sources subject  Use the
                        63.7525(a)(2)(   to 40 CFR Part   alternative
                        vi)..            63, subpart      approach for
                                         DDDDD-National   moisture
                                         Emission         measurement as
                                         Standards for    specified in
                                         Hazardous Air    the agency's
                                         Pollutants for   approval
                                         Major Sources:   letter dated
                                         Industrial,      March 2, 2016
                                         Commercial,      (only when
                                         and              both CO and
                                         Institutional    CO2 are being
                                         Boilers and      measured on a
                                         Process          wet basis).
                                         Heaters..
ALT-116..............  Method 7E-       Sources subject  Use higher
                        Determination    to 40 CFR        concentration
                        of Nitrogen      Parts 60, 61,    NO2 gases in
                        Oxide            and 63.          conjunction
                        Emissions From                    with Method
                        Stationary                        205 for
                        Sources                           converter
                        (Instrumental                     efficiency
                        Analyzer                          testing as
                        Procedure).                       specified in
                                                          the agency's
                                                          approval
                                                          letter dated
                                                          April 27,
                                                          2014.
ALT-117..............  Method 5-        Sources subject  Use single
                        Determination    to 40 CFR        temperature
                        of Particulate   Parts 60, 61,    DGM (dry gas
                        Matter           and 63.          meter) sensor
                        Emissions From                    in lieu of two
                        Stationary                        sensors with
                        Sources.                          the criteria
                                                          specified in
                                                          the agency's
                                                          approval
                                                          letter dated
                                                          March 15,
                                                          2016.
ALT-118..............  Performance      Sources subject  Use a NIST-
                        Specification    to 40 CFR Part   certified
                        12A-             63, subpart      Vendor Prime
                        Specifications   LLL-National     elemental
                        and Test         Emission         mercury gas
                        Procedures for   Standards for    generator for
                        Total Vapor      Hazardous Air    research gas
                        Phase Mercury    Pollutants       mixtures (RGM)
                        Continuous       from the         in the EPA
                        Emission         Portland         Traceability
                        Monitoring       Cement           Protocol for
                        Systems in       Manufacturing    Assay and
                        Stationary       Industry; 40     Certification
                        Sources and      CFR Part 63,     of Gaseous
                        Procedure 5-     subpart UUUUU-   Calibration
                        Quality          National         Standards with
                        Assurance        Emission         the provisions
                        Requirements     Standards for    specified in
                        for Vapor        Hazardous Air    the agency's
                        Phase Mercury    Pollutants:      approval
                        Continuous       Coal- and Oil-   letter dated
                        Emission         Fired Electric   May 24, 2016.
                        Monitoring       Utility Steam
                        Systems and      Generating
                        Sorbent Trap     Units; 40 CFR
                        Monitoring       Part 63,
                        Systems Used     subpart DDDDD-
                        for Compliance   National
                        Determination    Emission
                        at Stationary    Standards for
                        Sources.         Hazardous Air
                                         Pollutants for
                                         Major Sources:
                                         Industrial,
                                         Commercial,
                                         and
                                         Institutional
                                         Boilers and
                                         Process
                                         Heaters; and
                                         40 CFR Part
                                         60, subparts
                                         CCCC and DDDD-
                                         Standards of
                                         Performance
                                         for Commercial
                                         and Industrial
                                         Solid Waste
                                         Incineration
                                         Units.

ALT-119..............  Performance      Sources subject  Use the
                        Specification    to 40 CFR Part   alternative
                        12B-             63, subparts     analytical
                        Specifications   LLL-National     test procedure
                        and Test         Emission         for low level
                        Procedures for   Standards for    measurements
                        Monitoring       Hazardous Air    as specified
                        Total Vapor      Pollutants       in the
                        Phase Mercury    from the         agency's
                        Emissions From   Portland         approval
                        Stationary       Cement           letter dated
                        Sources Using    Manufacturing    May 26, 2016.
                        a Sorbent Trap   Industry and
                        Monitoring       UUUUU-National
                        System.          Emission
                                         Standards for
                                         Hazardous Air
                                         Pollutants:
                                         Coal- and Oil-
                                         Fired Electric
                                         Utility Steam
                                         Generating
                                         Units.
ALT-120..............  40 CFR           Sources subject  Use the
                        63.1350(k)(2)(   to 40 CFR Part   alternative
                        ii) and (iii).   63, subparts     procedure for
                                         LLL-National     above span
                                         Emission         mercury
                                         Standards for    calibrations
                                         Hazardous Air    through
                                         Pollutants       January 1,
                                         from the         2018, only as
                                         Portland         specified in
                                         Cement           the agency's
                                         Manufacturing    approval
                                         Industry.        letter dated
                                                          June 28, 2016.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source owners or operators should review the specific broadly applicable
  alternative method approval letter at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods before electing to employ
  it.

[FR Doc. 2016-30714 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P