[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 102 (Friday, May 25, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24236-24240]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11142]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0416; Product Identifier 2017-NM-164-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Defense and Space S.A. (Formerly
Known as Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Defense and Space S.A. Model CN-235, CN-235-100, CN-235-200, and
CN-235-300 airplanes; and certain Model C-295 airplanes. This proposed
AD was prompted by a report that cracks were found on the stabilizer-
to-fuselage rear attachment fitting. This proposed AD would require a
detailed inspection of the upper and lower lugs of each horizontal
stabilizer-to-fuselage rear attachment fitting, repair if necessary,
and a report of findings. We are proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 9, 2018.

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 http://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 service information identified in this NPRM, contact Airbus
Defense and Space Services/Engineering Support, Avenida de
Arag[oacute]n 404, 28022 Madrid, Spain; telephone +34 91 585 55 84; fax
+34 91 585 31 27; email [email protected]. You may view
this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0416; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations
office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments
will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace
Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0416;
Product Identifier 2017-NM-164-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM based on
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2017-0218, dated November 8, 2017 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Defense and Space S.A. Model
CN-235, CN-235-100, CN-235-200, and CN-235-300 airplanes; and

certain Model C-295 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Cracks were reportedly found on the stabilizer-to-fuselage rear
attachment fitting of a CN-235 aeroplane. Subsequent investigation
determined that the affected horizontal attachment fitting was a
reworked part.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
reduced structural integrity of lugs of the stabilizer-to-fuselage
rear attachment fittings and consequent lug or fitting failure,
possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.
    To address this potentially unsafe condition, Airbus Defence and
Space (D&S) issued Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) AOT-C295-55-
0005 and AOT-CN235-55-0004 to provide inspection instructions.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-
time detailed inspection (DET) of the upper and lower lugs of the
horizontal stabilizer-to-fuselage rear attachment fittings on the
left hand (LH) and right hand (RH) sides and, depending on findings,
accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s) [repairs]. This
[EASA] AD also requires reporting of all findings, including none.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0416.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus Defense and Space S.A. has issued Alert Operators
Transmission (AOT) AOT-CN235-55-0004, Revision 1, dated October 24,
2016; and AOT AOT-C295-55-0005, Revision 1, dated October 24, 2016.
This service information describes a detailed inspection of the upper
and lower lugs of each horizontal stabilizer-to-fuselage rear
attachment fitting (left- and right-hand sides), repair if necessary,
and sending inspection results to the manufacturer. These documents are
distinct since they apply to different airplane models. This service
information 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 and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these
same type designs.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 14 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection............................  8 work-hours x $85 per                $0            $680          $9,520
                                         hour = $680.
Reporting.............................  1 work-hour x $85 per                  0              85           1,190
                                         hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repair that
would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection. We
have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this
repair:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair.....................................  15 work-hours x $85 per hour =                   $0          $1,275
                                              $1,275.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this NPRM is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this NPRM has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this NPRM is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA
at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight
Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We 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. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will 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 (AD):

Airbus Defense and Space S.A. (Formerly Known as Construcciones
Aeronauticas, S.A.): Docket No. FAA-2018-0416; Product Identifier
2017-NM-164-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by July 9, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Defense and Space S.A. Model
airplanes, certificated in any category, specified in paragraphs
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Model CN-235, CN-235-100, CN-235-200, and CN-235-300
airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers (MSN).
    (2) Model C-295 airplanes, MSN 001 through 148 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55, Horizontal
stabilizer.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report that cracks were found on the
stabilizer-to-fuselage rear attachment fitting. We are issuing this
AD to address such cracking, which could lead to reduced structural
integrity of the lugs on the stabilizer-to-fuselage rear attachment
fittings and consequent lug or fitting failure, and could result in
reduced controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection

    Within the compliance times specified in figure 1 or figure 2 to
paragraph (g) of this AD, as applicable, accomplish a detailed
inspection for cracks or rework of the upper and lower lugs of each
horizontal stabilizer-to-fuselage rear attachment fitting (left- and
right-hand sides), in accordance with the instructions of Airbus
Defence and Space Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) AOT-CN235-55-
0004, Revision 1, dated October 24, 2016; or Airbus Defence and
Space AOT AOT-C295-55-0005, Revision 1, dated October 24, 2016; as
applicable.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP25MY18.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP25MY18.002

(h) Corrective Action

    If, during the detailed inspection required by paragraph (g) of
this AD, any discrepancy (i.e., cracking or rework) is detected, as
specified in Airbus Defence and Space AOT AOT-CN235-55-0004,
Revision 1, dated October 24, 2016; or Airbus Defence and Space AOT
AOT-C295-55-0005, Revision 1, dated October 24, 2016; as applicable:
Before further flight, contact the Manager, International Section,
Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA); or Airbus Defense and Space S.A.'s EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA), for approved repair instructions. If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature. Accomplish the repair accordingly within the compliance
time specified in those instructions, including any repetitive post-
repair inspections, if applicable.

(i) Reporting Requirement

    Submit a one-time report of the findings (both positive and
negative) of the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD to
Airbus Defense and Space S.A., in accordance with Airbus Defence and
Space AOT AOT-CN235-55-0004, Revision 1, dated October 24, 2016; or
Airbus Defence and Space AOT AOT-C295-55-0005, Revision 1, dated
October 24, 2016; as applicable; at the applicable time specified in
paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD.
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 60 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 60 days after the effective date of
this AD.

(j) Parts Installation Limitations

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install, on
any airplane, a horizontal stabilizer-to-fuselage rear attachment
fitting, unless the part is new or it has been inspected in
accordance with instructions of Airbus Defence and Space AOT AOT-
CN235-55-0004, Revision 1, dated October 24, 2016; or Airbus Defence
and Space AOT AOT-C295-55-0005, Revision 1, dated October 24, 2016;
as applicable; and no discrepancy was found. Before installation of
the horizontal stabilizer-to-fuselage rear attachment fitting,
contact the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA; or the EASA; or Airbus Defense and Space S.A.'s EASA
DOA, for approved instructions and do those instructions
accordingly. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the
DOA-authorized signature.

(k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Defence
and Space AOT AOT-CN235-55-0004, dated December 22, 2015; or Airbus
Defence and Space AOT AOT-C295-55-0005, December 22, 2015; as
applicable.

(l) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards 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 local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (m)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the EASA; or Airbus
Defense and Space S.A.'s DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement: A federal agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1
hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.
SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.

(m) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0218, dated November 8, 2017, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2018-0416.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Shahram
Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus Defense and Space Services/Engineering Support, Avenida de
Arag[oacute]n 404, 28022 Madrid, Spain; telephone +34 91 585 55 84;
fax +34 91 585 31 27; email [email protected]. You may
view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards
Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on May 11, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-11142 Filed 5-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19347-19349]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8251]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1534-002; ER11-2405-001.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: Southern California Edison Company's Refund Report, in
Compliance with the Commission's February 11, 2011, Issued Letter
Order.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5059.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1991-002.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits tariff filing per 35: 03-30-11 DIR 30-day Compliance to be
effective 3/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5199.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2887-001.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: PacifiCorp submits tariff filing per 35.17(b): BPA AC
Intertie Agreement Amended Filing to be effective 4/17/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5226.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3117-001.
    Applicants: Lively Grove Energy Partners, LLC.
    Description: Lively Grove Energy Partners, LLC submits tariff
filing per 35.17(b): Amendment Filing to MBR Tariff to be effective 5/
31/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5064.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3117-001.
    Applicants: Lively Grove Energy Partners, LLC.
    Description: Supplemental Information of Lively Grove Energy
Partners, LLC under ER11-3117, Only the date of Transmittal Letter
should be changed from March 30, 2010 to March 30, 2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5243.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3223-000.
    Applicants: Central Maine Power Company.
    Description: Central Maine Power Company submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Central Maine Power Company--Sparhawk Mill Assoc. LLC
Interconnection Agreement to be effective 3/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5036.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3224-000.
    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.
    Description: Westar Energy, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Midwest Energy, Inc. Participation Power Agreement to
be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5046.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3225-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits tariff filing per 35: 03-30-11 Attachment C to be effective 4/
1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3226-000.
    Applicants: KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Company.
    Description: KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Company submits
tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Depreciation Update Filing to be
effective 6/4/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5073.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3227-000.
    Applicants: American Transmission Systems, Incorporation, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: American Transmission Systems, Incorporated submits
tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): First Energy Serv Co.
Interconnection Agreements re ATSI Integration into PJM to be effective
6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5083.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3228-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: Southwestern Public Service Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 3-30-11--RS132 SPS-GSEC to be effective 7/
16/2010.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5101.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3229-000.
    Applicants: Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
    Description: Alcoa Power Generating Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): APGI Order No. 676-E OATT Revisions to be effective
4/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5102.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3230-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): 1693R1 Western Trail Wind Project I LLC LGIA to be
effective 2/28/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5103.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3231-000.
    Applicants: Trans Bay Cable LLC.
    Description: Trans Bay Cable LLC submits tariff filing per 35.1:
Schedule Rate to be effective 3/30/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3232-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power Corporation.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Interchange Agreement with
LG&E Energy Marketing by Florida Power Corporation.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5115.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3233-000.
    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.
    Description: Westar Energy, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Cost-Based Rate Schedule to be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5123.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3234-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota.
    Description: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 20110330--
InterchangeAgreement to be effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5152.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3235-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin.
    Description: Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 20110330--
InterchangeAgreement to be effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5155.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3236-000.

    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): NYISO Filing to Revise BPCG
Calculation and Request for Waiver to be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5184.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3237-000.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.
    Description: Wisconsin Electric Power Company submits tariff filing
per 35.12: Wisconsin Electric Formula Rate Wholesale Sales Tariff
Service Agreement No 2 to be effective 6/1/2011. Filing Type: 20.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5201.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA07-32-011.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Informational report of Entergy Services, Inc.
    Filed Date: 03/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110330-5241.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 20, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    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
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings 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 e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 31, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-8251 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 61 (Wednesday, March 30, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17611-17615]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07085]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0019; FRL-9944-12]

Salicylaldehyde; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of salicylaldehyde (2-hydroxybenzaldehyde,
CAS Reg. No. 90-02-8) when used as an inert ingredient (penetration
aid) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops and raw
agricultural commodities under 40 CFR 180.910 at a concentration not to
exceed 14% by weight of the pesticide formulation. Ag-Chem Consulting
LLC, on behalf of Omex Agrifluids submitted a petition to EPA under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting establishment
of an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation
eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for
residues of salicylaldehyde.

DATES: This regulation is effective March 30, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before May 31, 2016, 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-2015-0019, 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: Susan Lewis, 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_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
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 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-2015-0019 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
May 31, 2016. 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-

2015-0019, 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. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of April 6, 2015 (80 FR 18327) (FRL-9924-
00), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-10777) by
Ag-Chem Consulting LLC, 12208 Quinque Lane, Clifton, VA 20124 on behalf
of Omex Agrifluids, 24730 Avenue 13, Madera, CA 93637. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.910 be amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of salicylaldehyde
(CAS Reg. No. 90-02-8) when used as an inert ingredient (penetration
aid) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops or to raw
agricultural commodities after harvest at a concentration not to exceed
14% by weight of the pesticide formulation. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by Ag-Chem Consulting LLC, on behalf
of Omex Agrifluids, the petitioner, which is available in the docket,
http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response
to the notice of filing.

III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and 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 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 . . . .''
    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 salicylaldehyde including
exposure resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with salicylaldehyde
follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by salicylaldehyde as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in this
unit.
    The acute oral toxicity of salicylaldehyde was examined in male
rats and mice. The general oral lethal amount of salicylaldehyde is
estimated to be 500 mg/kg in mice. The dermal LD50 for
salicylaldehyde was determined to be greater than 23,000 mg/kg. Dermal
irritation studies found salicylaldehyde to be irritating, with eschar
formation and scarring 14 days after administration.
    No adverse effects attributable to a single exposure to
salicylaldehyde were seen in the toxicity databases. In a combined
repeated dose toxicity study with the reproduction/developmental
toxicity screening test, toxicity was not observed in parental animals
nor in reproductive parameters at doses up to 160 mg/kg/day, the
highest dose tested. Fetal susceptibility was observed. Reduced
bodyweight and offspring mortality after 4 days of nursing were
observed at 160 mg/kg/day. The NOAEL was 40 mg/kg/day. There was no
evidence of neurotoxicity or immunotoxicity in the combined repeated
dose toxicity with the reproduction/developmental toxicity screening
test.
    Salicylaldehyde was negative for mutagenicity in the Ames test and
gave a positive response in the chromosome aberrations test using
Chinese hamster cells (in vitro). An in vivo micronucleus assay was
negative. Since the in vivo study is more reliable than the in vitro
assays, the weight of evidence suggests that salicylaldehyde is
unlikely to be mutagenic.
    There are no cancer studies available for salicylaldehyde.
According to a DEREK (Nexus) (structural activity relationship) report,
there are no structural alerts for carcinogenicity.

Based on predicted rapid metabolism and excretion, lack of specific
target organ toxicity in the repeat dose toxicity study, lack of
mutagenicity concerns, and lack of any structural alerts for
carcinogenicity, salicylaldehyde is not expected to be carcinogenic to
humans at anticipated dietary concentrations.
    The metabolism of salicylaldehyde in rabbits demonstrated that 75%
of single dose of salicylaldehyde was excreted in the urine as
glucuronic acid and sulfate conjugates of vanillic acid.

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/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    No acute toxicological endpoint of concern has been identified for
salicylaldehyde. On the basis of the repeated dose and reproductive/
developmental toxicity screening study, a no observed adverse effect
level (NOAEL) for offspring toxicity for salicylaldehyde was 40 mg/kg
bw/day based on reduced body weight and increased mortality in pups at
160 mg/kg/day. The standard 10X factors for intra- and inter-species
were applied in establishing he chronic reference dose (cRfD) of 0.4
mg/kg/day (40 mg/kg/day/100). Based on the reduced FQPA Safety Factor
for salicylaldehyde of 1X, the chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD)
is equivalent to the chronic reference dose (cRfD) at 0.4 mg/kg//day.
The chronic oral NOAEL is also applicable to the short- and
intermediate-term dermal and inhalation exposure routes.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to salicylaldehyde, EPA considered exposure under the proposed
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from salicylaldehyde in food as follows:
    Acute dietary assessments take into account exposure estimates from
dietary consumption of food and drinking water. Chronic dietary
assessments take into account dietary food and drinking water. The
Agency assessed the dietary exposures to salicylaldehyde as an inert
ingredient used in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops and
livestock.
    No adverse effects attributable to a single exposure to
salicylaldehyde were seen in the toxicity databases; therefore, an
acute dietary risk assessment is not appropriate.
    In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment to
salicylaldehyde an inert ingredient used in pesticide formulations
applied to growing crops, raw agricultural commodities, and livestock,
the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model/Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM-FCID) TM, Version 3.16 was used. EPA used food consumption
information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (USDA/NHANES/
WWEIA). This dietary survey was conducted from 2003 to 2008. As to
residue levels in food, no residue data were submitted for
salicylaldehyde. In the absence of specific residue data, EPA has
developed an approach that uses surrogate information to derive upper
bound exposure estimates for the subject inert ingredient. Upper bound
exposure estimates are based on the highest tolerance for a given
commodity from a list of high-use insecticides, herbicides, and
fungicides. A complete description of the general approach taken to
assess inert ingredient risks in the absence of residue data is
contained in the memorandum entitled ``Alkyl Amines Polyalkoxylates
(Cluster 4): Acute and Chronic Aggregate (Food and Drinking Water)
Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessments for the Inerts.'' (D361707, S.
Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0738.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. For the purpose of the
screening level dietary risk assessment to support this request for an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for salicylaldehyde, a
conservative drinking water concentration value of 100 ppb based on
screening level modeling was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water for the chronic dietary risk assessments for parent
compound. These values were directly entered into the dietary exposure
model.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
    There are no current or proposed residential uses for
salicylaldehyde; however, it is possible that salicylaldehyde may be
used as an inert ingredient in pesticide products. A highly
conservative residential exposure assessment was performed in which it
was assumed that all residential use pesticide products would contain
salicylaldehyde as an inert ingredient. A complete description of the
approach used to assess possible residential exposures from
salicylaldehyde can be found in http://www.regulations.gov in document
``Salicylaldehyde; Human Health Risk Assessment and Ecological Effects
Assessment to Support Proposed Exemption from the Requirement of a
Tolerance When Used as an Inert Ingredient in Pesticide Formulations,''
pp. 15 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0019.
    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 or
exemption from a tolerance, the Agency consider ``available
information'' concerning the cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found salicylaldehyde to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and salicylaldehyde does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
salicylaldehyde does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at

http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

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 FQPA Safety
Factor (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 evidence of
increased susceptibility of infants and children due to exposure to
salicylaldehyde. In a combined repeated dose toxicity study with the
reproduction/developmental toxicity screening test, offspring toxicity
was manifested as decreased body weights and increased mortality in the
absence of maternal toxicity at doses up to 160 mg/kg/day. The
offspring toxicity NOAEL was 40 mg/kg/day. However, there are no to low
concerns for this susceptibility since there is a clear, well defined
offspring toxicity NOAEL and this study is being used to establish the
cRfD.
    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 salicylaldehyde includes the battery
of acute studies, mutagenicity studies and a combined repeated dose
toxicity study with the reproduction/developmental toxicity screening
test.
    ii. There is no evidence of neurotoxicity in the available studies,
therefore there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study.
    iii. There is no evidence of immunotoxicity in the available
database, therefore there is no need for an immunotoxicity study.
    iv. There are low to no concerns for the increased susceptibility
seen in the combined repeated dose toxicity study with the
reproduction/developmental toxicity screening test.
    v. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 14% by weight in the formulation (the maximum allowable use rate)
and tolerance-level residues.
    EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and
surface water modeling used to assess exposure to salicylaldehyde in
drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess
post application exposure of children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by salicylaldehyde.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
salicylaldehyde is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
salicylaldehyde from food and water will utilize 13% of the cPAD for
the U.S. population and 49% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest exposure.
    3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account short-term residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background
exposure level).
    Salicylaldehyde may be used as inert ingredients in pesticide
products that could result in short-term residential exposure and the
Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic
exposure through food and water with short-term residential exposures
to salicylaldehyde. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit, EPA has concluded the combined short- and intermediate-term food,
water, and residential exposures result in short- and intermediate-term
aggregate MOEs of 430 for adults and 170 for children (1-2 years old).
Because EPA's level of concern for salicylaldehyde is a MOE of 100 or
below, these MOEs are not of concern.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on a DEREK
structural alert analysis and the lack of mutagenicity, salicylaldehyde
not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    5. Determination of safety section. Based on these risk
assessments, EPA concludes that there is reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to salicylaldehyde residues.

V. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation. EPA is establishing a
limitation on the amount of salicylaldehyde that may be used in
pesticide formulations applied to growing crops. That limitation will
be enforced through the pesticide registration process under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (``FIFRA''), 7
U.S.C. 136 et seq. EPA will not register any pesticide formulation for
use on growing crops for sale or distribution that exceed 14% of
salicylaldehyde.

VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established under 40 CFR 180.910 for residues salicylaldehyde (CAS Reg.
No. 90-02-8) when used as an inert ingredient (penetration aid) in
pesticide formulations applied to growing crops and raw agricultural
commodities after harvest at a concentration not to exceed crops at no
more than 14% by weight of the pesticide formulation.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review
under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income

Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the exemption 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).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: March 22, 2016.
Susan Lewis,
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.  180.910, add alphabetically the inert ingredient
``Salicylaldehyde'' to the table to read as follows:

Sec.  180.910  Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Inert ingredients                          Limits                              Uses
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Salicylaldehyde (CAS Reg. No. 90-02-8).  Not to exceed 14% by weight of   Penetration aid.....................
                                          pesticide formulation.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-07085 Filed 3-29-16; 8:45 a.m.]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 32 (Friday, February 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 10267]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03367]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0351; FRL-10020-42-OAR]

Ozone Transport Commission Recommendation That EPA Require Daily
Limits for Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides From Certain Sources in
Pennsylvania: Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: On January 15, 2021, EPA issued a Federal Register notice of
public hearing and supplemental information regarding a recommendation
submitted by the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) to address ongoing
ozone pollution in the northeastern United States. The OTC has
recommended that EPA require Pennsylvania to revise its state
implementation plan (SIP) to include additional control measures that
would establish daily limits on emissions of nitrogen oxides
(NOX) from coal-fired electricity generating units (EGUs)
with already-installed selective catalytic reduction (SCR) or selective
noncatalytic reduction (SNCR) controls. This document extends the
comment period for 30 days, from March 8, 2021 to April 7, 2021.

DATES: Comments identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2020-0351 must be received on or before April 7, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions provided under ADDRESSES in
the Federal Register document of January 15, 2021 (86 FR 4049).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beth Murray, Clean Air Markets
Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and Radiation,
Environmental Protection Agency,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document extends the public comment
period established in the Federal Register document of January 15, 2021
(86 FR 4049), which opened a public comment period for supplemental
information concerning a recommendation submitted by the OTC to EPA
under CAA section 184(c). In the January 15, 2021 notice, EPA discussed
the relevant statutory provisions, described the steps EPA is following
to facilitate public participation in the Agency's process for reaching
a decision on the recommendation, discussed the OTC recommendation--
including the Delaware, Maryland, and New Jersey rules that OTC
believes should become the standards for EPA's approval of a responsive
SIP revision from Pennsylvania, identified the potentially affected
Pennsylvania EGUs, and summarized the supporting information provided
by the OTC. EPA further provided information on the potentially
affected EGUs' historical emissions and on regulatory context that may
be relevant to EPA's decision on the recommendation.
    EPA is hereby extending the public comment period, which was set to
end on March 8, 2021, to April 7, 2021. After considering a request to
extend the comment period received from a stakeholder, EPA is extending
the comment period for the following reasons: (1) The legal and
technical complexity of the analysis of the recommendation; (2) the
need for stakeholders to consider the interaction of this decision with
other actions the Agency is concurrently considering; (3) the
stakeholders' need for additional time to review and develop
constructive comments and related analyses on the recommendation. To
submit comments, or access the docket, please follow the detailed
instructions provided under ADDRESSES in the Federal Register document
of January 15, 2021. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Hans Christopher Grundler,
Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs.
[FR Doc. 2021-03367 Filed 2-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 143 (Thursday, July 25, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35827-35828]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15789]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0625]

Safety Zones; Recurring Safety Zones in Captain of the Port Sault
Sainte Marie Zone for Events Beginning in Late July 2019

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce established safety zones for
maritime events starting in late July 2019 to provide for the safety of
life on navigable waterways. Our regulation for safety zones within the
Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie Zone identifies the regulated
area for these safety zones. During the enforcement periods, vessels
must stay out of the established safety zone and may only enter with
permission from the designated representative of the Captain of the
Port Sault Sainte Marie.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.918 will be enforced for the
safety zones identified in Table 1 of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document for the dates and times specified.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
publication, call or email LT Sean Murphy, Waterways Management, Coast
Guard Sector Sault Sainte Marie, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 906-635-
3223, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety
zones in 33 CFR 165.918 as per the time, dates, and locations in Table
1.

                                 Table 1
                            [Datum NAD 1983]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Event                     Location            Event date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Charlevoix Venetian         All U.S. navigable      July 26, 2019
 Festival Friday Night           waters of Lake          from 9:30 p.m.
 Fireworks; Charlevoix, MI.      Charlevoix, in the      to 11 p.m.
                                 vicinity of Depot
                                 Beach, within the arc
                                 of a circle with an
                                 approximate 1200-foot
                                 radius from the
                                 fireworks launch site
                                 located on a barge in
                                 position
                                 45[deg]19'08'' N,
                                 085[deg]14'18'' W.
(2) Charlevoix Venetian         All U.S. navigable      July 27, 2019
 Saturday Night Fireworks;       waters of Round Lake    from 9:30 p.m.
 Charlevoix, MI.                 within the arc of a     to 11 p.m.
                                 circle with an
                                 approximate 250-foot
                                 radius from the
                                 fireworks launch site
                                 located on a barge in
                                 position
                                 45[deg]19'03'' N,
                                 085[deg]15'18'' W.
(3) Elk Rapids Harbor Days      All U.S. navigable      August 3, 2019
 Fireworks; Elk Rapids, MI.      waters within the arc   from 9:30 p.m.
                                 of a circle with an     to 10:30 p.m.
                                 approximate 350-foot
                                 radius from the
                                 fireworks launch site
                                 located on a barge in
                                 position
                                 44[deg]54'6.95'' N,
                                 85[deg]25'3.11'' W.
(4) Nautical City Fireworks;    All U.S. navigable      August 4, 2019
 Rogers City.                    waters within the arc   from 9:30 p.m.
                                 of a circle with an     to 10:30 p.m.
                                 approximate 560-foot    Rain date
                                 radius from the         August 11, 2019
                                 fireworks launch site   from 9:30 p.m.
                                 located near Harbor     to 10:30 p.m.
                                 View Road in position
                                 45[deg]25'04.72'' N,
                                 83[deg]47'51.21'' W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This action is being taken to provide for the safety of life on
navigable waterways during the fireworks displays. The regulations for
safety zones within the Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie Zone,
Sec.  165.918, apply for these fireworks displays.
    This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR
165.918 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice of enforcement
in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime
community with advance notification of this enforcement period via
Broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners. If the
Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie determines that the safety zone
need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice of
enforcement he or she may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners to grant
general permission to enter the respective safety zone.

    Dated: July 22, 2019.
P.S. Nelson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie.
[FR Doc. 2019-15789 Filed 7-24-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P