[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 7, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14155-14156]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04559]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14552-003]

St. Anthony Hydro, LLC; Notice of Intent To File License
Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, and Approving Use of
the Traditional Licensing Process

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and
Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 14552-003.
    c. Date Filed: January 3, 2023.
    d. Submitted by: St. Anthony Hydro, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: St. Anthony Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Henry's Fork of the Snake River, in Fremont
County, Idaho. No federal lands are occupied by the project works or
located within the project boundary.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Peter Josten, GeoSense, LLC, 2742
Saint Charles Ave., Idaho Falls, ID 83404;<PHONE_NUMBER>; email_
[email protected]
    i. FERC Contact: John Matkowski at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
[email protected].
    j. St. Anthony Hydro, LLC (St. Anthony Hydro) filed its request to
use the Traditional Licensing Process on January 3, 2023. St. Anthony
Hydro provided public notice of its request on January 6, 2023. In a
letter dated February 27, 2023, the Director of the Division of
Hydropower Licensing approved St. Anthony Hydro's request to use the
Traditional Licensing Process.
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries under section 7
of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations
thereunder at 50 CFR part 402; and NOAA Fisheries under section 305(b)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920. We are also initiating
consultation with the Idaho State Historic Preservation Officer, as
required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the
implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. St. Anthony Hydro filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD;
including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the Commission,
pursuant to 18

CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    m. A copy of the PAD may be viewed on the Commission's website
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY).
    n. The licensee states its unequivocal intent to submit an
application for a subsequent license for Project No. P-14552. Pursuant
to 18 CFR 16.20 each application for a subsequent license and any
competing license applications must be filed with the Commission at
least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license. All
applications for license for this project must be filed by December 31,
2025.
    o. Register online at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx
to be notified via email of new filing and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: February 28, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-04559 Filed 3-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 16, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68632-68633]
[FR Doc No: 2022-24748]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2021-0837; FRL-10029-02-R6]

Air Plan Approval; New Mexico; Clean Air Act Requirements for
Nonattainment New Source Review Permitting for the 2015 8-Hour Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving revisions to the New
Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of New
Mexico on August 10, 2021, that update the New Mexico Nonattainment New
Source Review (NNSR) permitting program for the 2015 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

DATES: This rule is effective on December 16, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2021-0837. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adina Wiley, EPA Region 6 Office, Air
Permit Section (ARPE),<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. Out of an
abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA
Region 6 office may be closed to the public to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Please call or email the contact listed above if
you need alternative access to material indexed but not provided in the
docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' means the EPA.

I. Background

    The background for this action is discussed in detail in our August
19, 2022, proposal (87 FR 51041). In that document we proposed to
approve revisions to the New Mexico SIP adopted on July 21, 2021, that
update the New Mexico NNSR permitting requirements to maintain
consistency with the Federal NNSR program requirements. We also
proposed to find that the New Mexico SIP includes the necessary
provisions addressing CAA NNSR requirements for ozone nonattainment
areas classified as Marginal.
    We received two anonymous comments supporting our proposed
approval. Both anonymous comments referenced the reduced overall
emissions and favorable impact of the proposed rule for environmental
justice purposes. The EPA appreciates the support of the commenters. We
are making no changes to our proposed rule because of these comments.

II. Final Action

    Pursuant to section 110 and part D of the Act, we are approving the
submitted revisions to the New Mexico SIP that update the NNSR
permitting requirements to maintain consistency with the Federal NNSR
program requirements and address the 2015 ozone NAAQS requirements for
nonattainment permitting. Specifically, we are approving the following
revisions to the New Mexico SIP adopted on July 21, 2021, effective
August 21, 2021:
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC--Effective Date,
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC--Definitions,
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC--Documents,
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC--Applicability,
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC--Emission Offsets,
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC--Tables, and
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC--Actuals Plantwide
Applicability Limits (PALs).

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference the
revisions to the New Mexico regulations as described in Section II of
this preamble, Final Action. The EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov a
(please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). Therefore,
these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP,
have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully
federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the
effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be
incorporated by reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National

Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with
the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and the EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 17, 2023. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: November 8, 2022.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart GG--New Mexico

0
2. In Sec.  52.1620:
0
a. In paragraph (c), amend the table titled ``EPA Approved New Mexico
Regulations'' by revising the entry for ``Part 79''; and
0
b. In paragraph (e), amend the table titled ``EPA-Approved
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the New
Mexico SIP'' by adding an entry for ``Nonattainment New Source Review
Requirements for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS'' at the end of the table.
    The revision and addition read as follows:

Sec.  52.1620   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                       EPA Approved New Mexico Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   State approval/
       State citation            Title/subject        effective      EPA approval date           Comments
                                                        date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Part 79....................  Permits--Nonattainme       8/21/2021  11/16/2022, [Insert
                              nt Areas.                             Federal Register
                                                                    citation].

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

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

            EPA-Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the New Mexico SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Applicable           State
      Name of SIP provision          geographic or       submittal/     EPA approval date       Explanation
                                   nonattainment area  effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Nonattainment New Source Review   Sunland Park              8/21/2021  11/16/2022,
 Requirements for the 2015 Ozone   portion of                           [Insert Federal
 NAAQS.                            Do[ntilde]a Ana                      Register
                                   County in the El                     citation].
                                   Paso-Las Cruces,
                                   TX-NM Marginal
                                   nonattainment area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-24748 Filed 11-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 22, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 203)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 59506-59507]
[DOCID:fr22oc07-14]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 97

[EPA-R05-OAR-2007-IN-0140; FRL-8481-5]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Indiana:
Clean Air Interstate Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing limited approval of a revision to the Indiana
State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on February 28, 2007, as
amended by letter on September 20, 2007. This revision addresses the
requirements of EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated on
May 12, 2005, and subsequently revised on April 28, 2006, and December
13, 2006. EPA is proposing to determine that the Indiana SIP revision
strengthens the implementation plan for the State because it makes
progress toward

meeting Indiana's emission reduction requirements under the
NOX SIP Call.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 21, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2007-0140, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0140'', John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria
Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria
Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal
hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business
are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays.
Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section
of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to submit
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Paskevicz, Engineer, Criteria
Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a non-
controversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed
rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no
adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further
activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will
withdraw the direct final rule and will address all public comments
received in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in
commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that
if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section
of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are
not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see
the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this
Federal Register.

    Dated: September 27, 2007.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
 [FR Doc. E7-20250 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 9, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13459-13465]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04786]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0551; FRL-10019-19]

Fluindapyr; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
fluindapyr in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. FMC Corporation requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective March 9, 2021. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before May 10, 2021, 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-2018-0551, 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>.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with
limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marietta Echeverria, 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 EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Publishing 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-2018-0551 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 10, 2021. 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-2018-0551, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of May 9, 2019 (84 FR 20320) (FRL-9992-36),
EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 8F8685)
by FMC Corporation, 2929 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104. The
petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing
tolerances for residues of the fungicide, fluindapyr, 3-
(difluoromethyl)-N-(7-fluoro-2,3-dihydro-1,1,3-trimethyl-1H-inden-4-
yl)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, in or on almond, hulls at 15
parts per million (ppm); aspirated grain fractions at 60 ppm; cattle,
fat at 0.15 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts at 0.6 ppm; field corn, grain
at 0.01 ppm; field corn, oil at 0.03 ppm; fruit, small vine-climbing
except fuzzy kiwifruit, crop subgroup 13-07F at 3 ppm; grain, cereal,
crop group 15, except rice and corn at 0.9 ppm; grain, cereal, forage,
crop group 16, except rice, forage at 15 ppm; grain, cereal, hay, crop
group 16 except rice, hay at 8 ppm; grain, cereal, stover, crop group
16 except rice, stover, and sweet corn stover at 4 ppm; grain, cereal,
straw, crop group 16, except rice, straw at 20 ppm; poultry, meat
byproducts at 0.03 ppm; soybean, forage at 15 ppm; soybean, hay at 30
ppm; soybean, hulls at 0.6 ppm; soybean, seed at 0.2 ppm; sweet corn,
K+CWHR at 0.01 ppm; sweet corn, stover at 20 ppm; swine, meat
byproducts at 0.02 ppm; and tree nuts, crop group 14-12 at 0.04 ppm.
That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by FMC
Corporation, the registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. One comment was received on the notice of filing.
EPA's response to this comment is discussed in Unit IV.C.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition and in
accordance with its authority under FFDCA section 408(d)(4)(A)(i) to
establish tolerances that vary from what was requested, EPA is
establishing several tolerances at different levels than were
requested, including additional livestock commodities as necessary. In
addition, tolerances for fruit, small vine-climbing except fuzzy
kiwifruit crop group 13-07F and soybeans were removed. The reasons for
these changes are explained in Unit IV.D.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable

subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.
    The target organs of fluindapyr are the liver and thyroid. Liver
effects include hepatocellular hypertrophy, increased liver weights,
and bile duct hyperplasia with correlated increases in alkaline
phosphatase (ALP), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and gamma glutamyl
transferase (GGT) at the highest dose tested. Liver effects progress
with time in treated dogs, while similar effects are not seen in rats
and mice at high dose levels. Liver effects are seen in the mouse
carcinogenicity study at a higher dose level than the liver effects
observed in dogs; the effects consisted of increased incidence of
hepatocellular alterations (basophilic, eosinophilic, vacuolated),
necrosis, and pigmented macrophages. Thyroid effects include increased
instances of follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia.
    In the acute neurotoxicity study, potential evidence of
neurotoxicity in the form of decreases in total and ambulatory motor
activities and in rearing were seen in the rat. However, no additional
functional observation (FOB) parameters were affected, and no
neuropathological findings of both central and peripheral nerves were
observed.
    There is no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility in the developmental toxicity studies in rabbits or
rats; or the reproductive toxicity study in rats. With in-utero
exposure in the developmental toxicity studies, fluindapyr did not
produce any adverse effects in either rat or rabbit parental animals or
fetuses at or approaching the limit dose. In the reproduction study, in
parental animals (P and F1 males and females), fluindapyr induced an
increase in thyroid follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia. It also induced
adverse effects on a host of reproductive parameters. It also produced
adverse offspring effects as indicated by decreases in F1 and F2 pup
body weights in both sexes; thymus and spleen weights were also
decreased. The parental, reproductive, and offspring effects all
occurred at the same dose levels. The increased incidence of thyroid
follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia raised concerns for the potential of
thyroid effects on the developing animals. EPA applied a 10X safety
factor to the appropriate exposure scenarios to account for the
uncertainties associated with the life stage susceptibility.
    In the chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice,
there was no evidence of carcinogenicity. The mutagenicity battery was
negative. Fluindapyr is classified as ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic
to Humans''.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by fluindapyr as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document ``Fluindapyr: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Section 3 Registration and Tolerance Requests for a New
Active Ingredient Proposed for Use on Cereal Grains Crop Group 15
except Rice; Forage, Fodder and Straw of Cereal Grains Crop Group 16;
and Soybean'' (hereinafter ``Fluindapyr Human Health Risk Assessment'')
on pages 14-20 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0551.

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://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticide.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for fluindapyr used for
human risk assessment can be found in the Fluindapyr Human Health Risk
Assessment.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fluindapyr, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances. EPA assessed dietary exposures from fluindapyr in food
as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified
for fluindapyr. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used 2003-
2008 food consumption information from the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Nationwide Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food,
the acute analysis assumed 100% crop treated (PCT) for all commodities,
highest average field trial (HAFT) residue values, empirical and
default processing factors, and anticipated livestock residues based on
calculated livestock dietary burden and tissue transfer rates from the
livestock feeding studies.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used 2003-2008 food consumption data from the USDA's
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, chronic analysis assumed
100 PCT for all commodities, field trial mean residue values, empirical
and default processing factors, and anticipated livestock residues
based on calculated livestock dietary burden and tissue transfer rates
from the livestock feeding studies and metabolite ratios from the
metabolism studies.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that fluindapyr does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
    iv. Anticipated residue. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes
EPA to use available data and information on the anticipated residue
levels of pesticide residues in food and the actual levels of pesticide
residues that have been measured in food. If EPA relies on such
information, EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that
data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is established, modified,
or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels in food are not above
the levels anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such
data call-ins as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E)

and authorized under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to
be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of these
tolerances.
    EPA did not use information on the percent of food actually treated
in the dietary assessment for fluindapyr; 100 PCT was assumed for all
food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for fluindapyr in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of fluindapyr. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
    Using the Pesticide Water Calculator (PWC, version 1.52), the
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of fluindapyr were
determined to be higher in groundwater than in surface water for both
acute and chronic exposure durations. The following groundwater EDWCs
were used directly in the dietary exposure model to account for the
contribution of fluindapyr and relevant transformation products (3-OH-
F9990 and 1-COOH-F9990) residues in drinking water as follows: 254.1
ppb was used in the acute assessment and 217.8 ppb was used in the
chronic assessment.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
    Fluindapyr is currently registered for the following use that could
result in residential exposures: Golf course turf. The currently
registered use on golf courses will result in short-term (1 to 30 days)
residential post-application dermal exposures to adult, youth 11 to
less than 16 years old, and children 6 to less than 11 years old.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to fluindapyr and any other
substances and fluindapyr does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this action,
therefore, EPA has not assumed that fluindapyr has a common mechanism
of toxicity with other substances.

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. In the developmental
toxicity studies (rat and rabbit), fluindapyr did not produce any
adverse effects in parental animals or fetuses at or approaching the
limit dose (1,000 mg/kg/day). In the reproduction study, in parental
animals (P and F1 males and females), fluindapyr induced an increase in
thyroid follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia. It also induced adverse
effects on a host of reproductive parameters. There is no evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility in the
developmental toxicity studies in rabbits or rats or the reproductive
toxicity study in rats. In the 2-generation reproduction study in rats,
reproductive effects were observed, and offspring toxicity (decreased
pup weights in F1 and F2 generation; thymus and spleen weights were
decreased) was observed in the presence (same dosage) of parental
toxicity (increase in thyroid follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia and
reproductive effects).
    3. Conclusion. Due to the uncertainties concerning the potential
life stage susceptibility related to adverse thyroid effects seen in
parental animals of the reproductive study, EPA is retaining the FQPA
10X SF for exposure scenarios that rely on the reproductive study in
which such effects were seen. For purposes of this safety assessment,
those scenarios are the post-application short-term dermal exposures
and the short-term aggregate risk assessment. For the acute and chronic
dietary assessments, 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 fluindapyr is complete. Fluindapyr
caused an increased in the thyroid follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia
in the 2-generation reproduction study. The results of these findings
raised concerns about the potential impact to the developing brain in
response to changing thyroid levels brought on by thyroid effect in the
parents. A database uncertainty factor of 10X is placed on fluindapyr
to address this concern.
    ii. In the acute neurotoxicity study (ACN), decreases in total and
ambulatory motor activities and in rearing were seen and could be
considered as potential evidence for neurotoxicity. However, concern
with fluindapyr is low because (1) no other effects were observed in
database including in the subchronic neurotoxicity study (SCN); (2) no
neurohistopathology was found in the ACN, SCN or any toxicity study in
the fluindapyr database; and (3) the toxicity endpoints and PoD
selected for risk assessment are protective of the effects seen in the
ACN.
    iii. There is no evidence that fluindapyr results in increased
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility in the developmental
toxicity studies in rabbits or rats or the reproductive toxicity study
in rats. In the 2-generation reproduction study in rats, reproductive
effects were observed, and offspring toxicity (decreased pup weights in
F1 and F2 generation; thymus and spleen weights were decreased) was
observed in the presence (same dosage) of parental toxicity. Based on
the effects in the 2-generation reproduction study, there is some
uncertainty about the potential thyroid-related effects on the
developing fetus or child. While EPA is retaining the 10X FQPA SF for
short-term aggregate risk assessment, there is no concern for this
uncertainty for the acute dietary exposure assessment because
perturbation of thyroid after a single dose is not anticipated to
impact the developing fetus or offspring. Nor is there a concern for
this uncertainty in the chronic dietary assessment because the chronic
dietary endpoint, based on

effects in dogs, is protective of potential thyroid-related effects
observed in developing rats or offspring.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary risk assessments are based on high-end
assumptions such as 100 PCT assumptions, HAFT and field trial mean
residue values, empirical and default processing factors, anticipated
livestock residues based on calculated livestock dietary burden and
tissue transfer rates from the livestock feeding studies and modeled,
high-end estimates of residues in drinking water. All of the exposure
estimates are based on high-end assumptions and are not likely to
underestimate risk. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to
fluindapyr in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
fluindapyr.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to fluindapyr will occupy 8.9% of the aPAD for all infants (<1 year
old), the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
fluindapyr from food and water will utilize 33% of the cPAD for infants
<1 year old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of fluindapyr is not
expected.
    3. Short-term and intermediate-term risk. Short-term 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). Short-term and
intermediate-term endpoints and residential exposure estimates are
identical, and so short-term aggregate exposure is considered
protective of intermediate-term aggregate exposures. The three
population subgroups assessed for residential post-application
exposures are: Adults, youth 11 to <16 years old, and children 6 to <11
years old. Of the three population subgroups, the children 6 to <11
years old represent the highest dermal exposure from post-application
exposures and the highest background dietary exposure. Therefore, this
population subgroup is considered protective of the other two
population subgroups.
    For adults, intermediate-term exposure is not expected for the
residential exposure pathway. Therefore, the intermediate-term
aggregate risk would be equivalent to the chronic dietary exposure
estimate. For children, all intermediate-term aggregate risks are
equivalent to short-term aggregate risks.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term and intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined
short- and intermediate term food, water, and residential exposures
result in aggregate MOEs of 720 for youth (6 to <11 yrs. old) with
dermal exposure from post-application exposure to residue from treated
golf course. Because EPA's level of concern for fluindapyr is a MOE of
100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, fluindapyr is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to fluindapyr residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    The petitioner has proposed a liquid chromatography with tandem
mass spectrometer (LC/MS/MS) for determination of fluindapyr and
metabolites 3-OH-F9990, F9990-DM-glucoside, 1-OH-Me-F9990, 1-OH-Me-DM-
F9990, and 1-COOH-F9990 in plant commodities. For livestock
commodities, adequate enforcement methodology using LC/MS/MS is
available for determination of residues of fluindapyr and its
metabolites.
    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established an MRL for fluindapyr.

C. Response to Comments

    One comment was received in response to the notice of filing that
argued against the use fluindapyr on several commodities and the
overall toxicity of pesticides. In addition, the commenter raised three
additional concerns: The lack of tests involving the combination of
fluindapyr and other chemicals; fluindapyr a potential cancer-causing
agent; and fluindapyr is a fluoride compound. Although the Agency
recognizes that some individuals believe that pesticides should be
banned on agricultural crops, the existing legal framework provided by
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
authorized EPA to establish tolerances when it determines that the
tolerance is safe. Upon consideration of the validity, completeness,
and reliability of the available data as well as other factors the
FFDCA requires EPA to consider, EPA has determined that these
fluindapyr tolerances are safe. The commenter has provided no
information supporting a contrary conclusion.
    In its assessment of safety under the FFDCA, EPA considers
combinations of pesticides by evaluating the cumulative effects of
pesticides that have a common mechanism of toxicity. At this time, EPA
has not identified a common

mechanism of toxicity between fluindapyr and other pesticides and thus
there are no combinations of pesticides to consider at this time.
    EPA has evaluated available data concerning carcinogenicity and
determined that fluindapyr is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
This conclusion is based on a lack of treatment-related tumors seen in
male or female rats or mice and no concern for mutagenicity. The
commenter has provided no additional information about potential
carcinogenicity.
    Fluindapyr contains a difluoromethyl group and a fluorine-
substituted phenyl group. The difluoromethyl group remains intact on
the compounds identified in crop (primary and rotational), livestock,
and environmental fate studies, including the compounds identified as
the residues of concern for tolerance enforcement and risk assessment
purposes for crop and livestock commodities. While the metabolism
studies show the phenyl group does degrade, it is extremely unlikely
for the fluorine to form a free fluorine because the stability of the
bond between the fluorine and carbon atom. Therefore, applications of
fluindapyr are not expected to result in dietary exposure to fluoride.

D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    Based on EPA's review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing tolerances that vary from what the petitioner requested
under its authority in FFDCA section 408(d)(4)(A)(i). Some commodity
terms are altered to be consistent with Agency nomenclature. EPA is not
establishing tolerances for corn oil since EPA determined that residues
on this commodity will be adequately covered under corn, field, grain
due to the lack of concentration during processing. EPA is also not
establishing tolerances for fruit, small vine-climbing except fuzzy
kiwifruit, crop subgroup 13-07F and the soybean commodities as
initially requested since they are not necessary at this time, due to
the withdrawal of the proposed uses by the petitioner.
    EPA is establishing tolerance levels lower than what the petitioner
requested for grain, aspirated fractions; grain, cereal, group 15,
except rice and corn from 0.9 ppm; and cattle, fat based on the
submitted field trial data for those commodities using the OEDC MRL
(Maximum Residue Limit) calculator.
    Because of potential increase of fluindapyr (including metabolites
and degradates) in livestock diet, largely due to cereal grain crop
group 15 and 16 use, and based on updated maximum reasonably balanced
diet (MRBD) calculations for livestock, the Agency has determined that
finite residues will be incurred in poultry (egg, fat, meat, and meat
byproducts), ruminants (fat, milk, meat, and meat byproducts), hog
(fat, meat, and meat byproducts), and horse (fat, meat, and meat
byproducts); therefore, under 40 CFR 180.6, EPA is establishing
tolerances for those commodities.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of fluindapyr,
3-(difluoromethyl)-N-(7-fluoro-2,3-dihydro-1,1,3-trimethyl-1H-inden-4-
yl)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, in or on almond, hulls at 15
ppm ; corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with
husks removed at 0.01 ppm; corn, sweet, stover at 20 ppm; grain,
aspirated fractions at 20 ppm; grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and
straw, group 16 forage, except rice at 15 ppm; grain, cereal, forage,
fodder, and straw, group 16, hay, except rice at 8 ppm; grain, cereal,
forage, fodder, and straw, group 16, stover, except rice at 4 ppm;
grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and straw, group 16, straw, except rice
at 20 ppm; grain, cereal, group 15, except rice and corn at 0.8 ppm;
nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.04 ppm; egg at 0.01 ppm; milk at 0.01 ppm;
cattle, fat at 0.03 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.01; goat, fat at 0.03 ppm;
goat, meat at 0.01 ppm; hog, fat at 0.01 ppm; hog, meat at 0.01 ppm;
horse, fat at 0.03 ppm; horse, meat at 0.01 ppm; poultry, fat at 0.01
ppm; poultry, meat at 0.01 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.03 ppm; and sheep, meat
at 0.01 ppm. In addition, tolerances are established for residues of
fluindapyr, 3-(difluoromethyl)-N-(7-fluoro-1,1,3-trimethyl-2,3-dihydro-
1H-inden-4-yl)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, and 3-
(difluoromethyl)-N-(7-fluoro-1-hydroxymethyl-1,3-dimethyl-2,3-dihydro-
lH-inden-4-yl)-1-methyl-lH-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, in or on cattle,
meat byproducts at 0.3 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at 0.3 ppm; horse,
meat byproducts at 0.3 ppm; hog, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; poultry,
meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; and sheep, meat byproducts at 0.3 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

Edward Messina,
Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD

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. Add Sec.  180.716 to subpart C to read as follows:

Sec.  180.716  Fluindapyr; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of the
fungicide fluindapyr, including its metabolites and degradates, in or
on the commodities in Table 1 of this section. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified in Table 1 is to be determined by measuring
only fluindapyr, 3-(difluoromethyl)-N-(7-fluoro-1,1,3-trimethyl-2,3-
dihydro-1H-inden-4-yl)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, in or on the
commodity.

                       Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                              million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hulls................................................         15
Cattle, fat..................................................       0.03
Cattle, meat.................................................       0.01
Corn, field, grain...........................................       0.01
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed..............       0.01
Corn, sweet, stover..........................................         20
Egg..........................................................       0.01
Goat, fat....................................................       0.03
Goat, meat...................................................       0.01
Grain, aspirated fractions...................................         20
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and straw, group 16, forage,           15
 except rice.................................................
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and straw, group 16, hay,               8
 except rice.................................................
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and straw, group 16, stover,            4
 except rice.................................................
Grain, cereal forage, fodder, and straw, group 16, straw,             20
 except rice.................................................
Grain, cereal group 15, except rice and corn.................        0.8
Hog, fat.....................................................       0.01
Hog, meat....................................................       0.01
Horse, fat...................................................       0.03
Horse, meat..................................................       0.01
Milk.........................................................       0.01
Nut, tree, group 14-12.......................................       0.04
Poultry, fat.................................................       0.01
Poultry, meat................................................       0.01
Sheep, fat...................................................       0.03
Sheep, meat..................................................       0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Tolerances are established for residues of the fungicide
fluindapyr, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in Table 2 of this section. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified in Table 2 is to be determined by measuring the sum of
fluindapyr, 3-(difluoromethyl)-N-(7-fluoro-1,1,3-trimethyl-2,3-dihydro-
1H-inden-4-yl)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, and 3-
(difluoromethyl)-N-(7-fluoro-1-hydroxymethyl-1,3-dimethyl-2,3-dihydro-
lH-inden-4-yl)-1-methyl-lH-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of fluindapyr, in or on the commodity.

                       Table 2 to Paragraph (a)(2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                              million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, meat byproducts......................................        0.3
Goat, meat byproducts........................................        0.3
Horse, meat byproducts.......................................        0.3
Hog, meat byproducts.........................................       0.01
Poultry, meat byproducts.....................................       0.01
Sheep, meat byproducts.......................................        0.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b)-(d) [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 2021-04786 Filed 3-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 51 (Monday, March 16, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15018-15020]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05278]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Orders Limiting Operations at John F. Kennedy International
Airport and New York LaGuardia Airport; High Density Traffic Airports
Rule at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport

AGENCY: Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA).

ACTION: Notice of limited waiver of the minimum slot usage requirement.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a limited waiver of the minimum usage
requirement that applies to Operating Authorizations or ``slots'' at
John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), New York LaGuardia Airport
(LGA) and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA), in light of
the current impacts on air travel demand related to the outbreak of
novel 2019 coronavirus (also known as ``SARS-CoV-2,'' causing the
disease COVID-19) (``Coronavirus''). Through May 31, 2020, the FAA will
waive the minimum usage requirement as to any slot associated with a
scheduled nonstop flight between JFK, LGA, or DCA, respectively, and
other points that is canceled as a direct result of Coronavirus-related
impacts. This action is effective for Coronavirus-related flight
cancelations through May 31, 2020. The duration of the Coronavirus
outbreak and its effect on demand for commercial air travel remains to
be seen. The FAA will continue to monitor the situation and may augment
this waiver as circumstances warrant. The FAA will inform carriers of
any decision to extend the waiver period as soon as possible.
    In addition, this notice announces the policy that the FAA will
prioritize flights canceled at designated International Air Transport
Association (IATA) Level 2 airports in the U.S. due to Coronavirus
through May 31, 2020, including at Chicago O'Hare International Airport
(ORD), Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR), Los Angeles
International Airport (LAX), and San Francisco International Airport
(SFO), for purposes of establishing a carrier's operational baseline in
the next corresponding season.
    The FAA is acting in good faith in granting relief to carriers
worldwide impacted by the Coronavirus. In doing so, the FAA expects
that U.S. carriers will be accommodated with reciprocal relief by
foreign slot coordinators.

DATES: Effective upon publication.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bonnie Dragotto, Office of the Chief
Counsel, Regulations Division, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenues SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
3808; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Coronavirus was detected in China in December 2019 and as of
March 7, 2020 had been detected in almost 90 locations internationally,
including in the United States.
    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a component
of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), has determined
that the virus presents a serious public health threat and continues to
take steps to prevent its spread. On January 27, 2020, the CDC issued a
Level 3 Travel Health Notice recommending that travelers avoid all
nonessential travel to China due to widespread community transmission
of COVID-19. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO)
declared the outbreak a public health emergency of international
concern (PHEIC). On January 31, 2020, HHS declared a public health
emergency for the United States to aid in responding to COVID-19. That
same day, citing the threat of this communicable disease, the President
issued a Proclamation suspending the entry into the United States of
certain

foreign nationals who have been in China within the last 14 days prior
to their entry or attempted entry. On February 2, 2020, the Department
of State raised its China travel advisory to Level 4 (do not travel),
citing the Coronavirus outbreak. Since then, the Department of State
has cited the Coronavirus outbreak in raising its travel advisory level
for Macau, Hong Kong, Japan, Mongolia, Iran, Italy, South Korea,
Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan-including Level 4 advisories for Iran and
for parts of South Korea and Italy. Again citing the threat of this
communicable disease, another Presidential Proclamation issued on
February 29, 2020 suspended the entry into the United States of certain
foreign nationals who have been in Iran within the last 14 days prior
to their entry or attempted entry.
    Demand for travel decreased initially to points in China with
several U.S. and foreign air carriers reducing or suspending service.
The Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) required all carriers
serving China to waive restrictions on changes or refunds for travel to
and from all of mainland China. Other airports in Asia also began to
experience flight cancelations due to health concerns and lower demand.
More recent travel warnings and changes in passenger demand have
impacted flights as Coronavirus spread to other parts of the world,
including the U.S. The FAA continues to receive cancelation notices at
slot-controlled airports in the U.S., which include JFK, LGA, and DCA,
as well as U.S. airports designated as IATA Level 2 for flights to and
from areas with significant Coronavirus outbreaks.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Although DCA and LGA are not designated as IATA Level 3
slot-controlled airports given that these airports primarily serve
domestic destinations, FAA limits operations at these airports via
rules at DCA and an Order at LGA that are equivalent to IATA Level
3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several foreign airlines have petitioned the FAA to grant a waiver
of the 80 percent minimum slot usage requirement at JFK through the
Winter 2019/2020 scheduling season ending on March 28, 2020 and some
petitioners have sought relief for portions, or the entirety, of the
Summer 2020 scheduling season. On March 2, 2020, IATA petitioned on
behalf of airlines for a slot usage waiver at all constrained airports
through the Summer 2020 scheduling season ending on October 24, 2020.
On March 6, 2020, Airlines for America petitioned the FAA on behalf of
domestic member airlines for ``a waiver of the minimum slot usage
requirement at all slot-controlled and schedule facilitated airports
for at least Summer 2020.'' Multiple U.S. carriers have also submitted
individual petitions for slot usage relief with respect to all three
U.S. slot-controlled airports. The petitioners base their requests on
the public health situation, travel restrictions, and the highly
unusual and unpredictable nature of the Coronavirus impacts on demand
for air travel.

Standard

    At JFK and LGA, each slot must be used at least 80 percent of the
time.\2\ Slots not meeting the minimum usage requirements will be
withdrawn. The FAA may waive the 80 percent usage requirement in the
event of a highly unusual and unpredictable condition that is beyond
the control of the slot-holding air carrier and which affects carrier
operations for a period of five consecutive days or more.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Operating Limitations at John F. Kennedy International
Airport, 83 FR 46865 (Sep. 17, 2018); Operating Limitations at New
York LaGuardia Airport, 83 FR 47065 at 47066 (Sep. 18, 2018).
    \3\ At JFK, historical rights to operating authorizations and
withdrawal of those rights due to insufficient usage will be
determined on a seasonal basis and in accordance with the schedule
approved by the FAA prior to the commencement of the applicable
season. See JFK Order, 83 FR at 46867. At LGA, any operating
authorization not used at least 80 percent of the time over a two-
month period will be withdrawn by the FAA. See LGA Order, 83 FR at
47066.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At DCA, any slot not used at least 80 percent of the time over a
two-month period will also be recalled by the FAA.\4\ The FAA may waive
this minimum usage requirement in the event of a highly unusual and
unpredictable condition that is beyond the control of the slot-holding
carrier and which exists for a period of nine or more days.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 14 CFR Sec.  93.227(a).
    \5\ See 14 CFR Sec.  93.227(j).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When making decisions concerning historical rights to allocated
slots, including whether to grant a waiver of the usage requirement,
the FAA seeks to ensure the efficient use of valuable aviation
infrastructure and maximize the benefits to both airport users and the
traveling public. This minimum usage requirement is expected to
accommodate routine cancelations under all but the most unusual
circumstances. Carriers proceed at risk if they make decisions in
anticipation of the FAA granting a slot usage waiver. Relevant here,
however, the FAA has established precedent for granting a limited
waiver of the minimum slot usage requirement related to an infectious
disease outbreak.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See e.g. Operating Limitations at John F. Kennedy
International Airport and Newark Liberty International Airport;
Notice of Limited Waiver of the Slot Usage Requirement, 74 FR 34393
(July 15, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis

    Slots are a scarce resource. Slot usage waivers accordingly are
reserved for extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has determined that
the exceptional circumstances associated with the Coronavirus meet the
criteria for a limited waiver, as announced here, of the minimum slot
usage requirements for flights scheduled between JFK, LGA, and DCA,
respectively, and other points that are canceled as a direct result of
Coronavirus-related impacts. The FAA also acknowledges that the
timeframe and scope of impacts of Coronavirus on commercial air travel
remain uncertain. The FAA does not intend routinely to grant broad,
generalized relief from the minimum slot usage requirements. The usage
requirement allows for up to 20 percent nonuse to accommodate planned
and unplanned cancelations. This allowance is expected to accommodate
routine weather and other cancelations under all but the most unusual
circumstances. However, the current impacts of Coronavirus on
commercial aviation are dramatic and extraordinary. In light of these
evolving and extraordinary circumstances, the relief announced here
from the minimum slot usage requirement at all slot-controlled airports
in the U.S. is appropriate.
    The FAA will continue to monitor the outbreak and its effects on
commercial aviation and may augment this waiver as circumstances
warrant. The FAA will inform carriers of any extension to the waiver
period as soon as possible.
    In addition, the FAA notes that numerous carriers have inquired
about Coronavirus-related relief at U.S. airports designated as IATA
Level 2 schedule facilitated airports, including ORD, EWR, LAX, and
SFO. It is the policy of the FAA to prioritize flights canceled at IATA
Level 2 airports in the U.S. due to Coronavirus through May 31, 2020,
consistent with the IATA Worldwide Slot Guidelines (WSG), for purposes
of establishing a carrier's baseline in the next corresponding
season.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The FAA notes that a minimum usage requirement does not
apply at designated IATA Level 2 airports in the U.S. Moreover,
established procedures under the IATA WSG allow for the
prioritization of such cancelations in subsequent corresponding
seasons consistent with the FAA's policy statement in this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is acting in good faith in granting the relief announced
here to all carriers impacted by the Coronavirus worldwide. Without
slot usage waivers to accommodate the current reduction in passenger
demand, carriers may have to operate substantially empty flights to
preserve their slots. In granting this

relief from slot usage requirements, the FAA expects that U.S. carriers
will be accommodated with reciprocal relief by foreign coordinators. To
the extent that U.S. carriers fly to a foreign carrier's home
jurisdiction and that home jurisdiction does not offer reciprocal
relief to U.S. carriers, the FAA may determine not to grant a waiver to
that foreign carrier. A foreign carrier seeking a waiver may wish to
ensure that the responsible authority of the foreign carrier's home
jurisdiction submits a statement by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>confirming reciprocal treatment of the slot holdings of U.S. carriers.

Decision

    The FAA will waive the minimum slot usage requirements for all
carriers canceling scheduled flights at JFK, LGA, and DCA as a direct
result of the Coronavirus. This action is effective for Coronavirus-
related flight cancelations through May 31, 2020. This decision is
intended to provide limited relief to allow airlines to adjust
schedules to changing demand projections at U.S. slot-controlled
airports directly resulting from Coronavirus. Carriers should advise
the FAA Slot Administration Office of Coronavirus-related cancelations
and return the slots to the FAA by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>to
obtain relief. The information provided must include the dates for
which relief is requested, the flight number, origin/destination
airport, scheduled time of operation, the slot identification number,
as applicable, and supporting information demonstrating that flight
cancelations directly relate to the Coronavirus outbreak.

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 11, 2020.
Lorelei Peter,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2020-05278 Filed 3-13-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 29, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 167)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 51181-51182]
[DOCID:fr29au06-20]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2006-0484; FRL-8213-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Iowa

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the state of Iowa for the purpose of establishing
exemptions for indoor sources of air pollution that are not directly
vented to the outside but have emissions that leave the building
through doors, vents or other means. This revision also clarifies that
the permitting exemptions do not relieve the owner or operator of any
source from any obligation to comply with any other applicable
requirements. The state has demonstrated that air pollution emissions
from this equipment are negligible and these exemptions are likely to
result in no significant impact on human health or the environment. We
have reviewed the state's justification for the revisions and agree
with its conclusions.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
September 28, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2006-0484 by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail: Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City,
Kansas 66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Heather
Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule that is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of the Federal
Register, EPA is approving the state's SIP revision as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial revision amendment and anticipates no relevant adverse
comments to this action. A detailed rationale for the approval is set
forth in the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are
received in response to this action, no further activity is
contemplated in relation to this action. If EPA receives relevant
adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this
action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives
adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those parts of
the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional
information, see the direct final rule that is located in the rules
section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: August 15, 2006.
William Rice,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. E6-14312 Filed 8-28-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 55178-55180]
[DOCID:fr21se06-36]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Sunshine Act Meeting; Notice

September 14, 2006.
    The following notice of meeting is published pursuant to section
3(a) of the government in the Sunshine Act (Pub. L. No. 94-409), 5
U.S.C 552b:

Agency Holding Meeting: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Date and Time: September 21, 2006, 10 a.m.

Place: Room 2C, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

Status: Open.

Matters to be Considered: Agenda.

    Note: Items listed on the agenda may be deleted without further
notice.

Contact person for more Information: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary;
Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. For a recorded listing item stricken from or
added to the meeting, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    This is a list of matters to be considered by the Commission. It
does not include a listing of all papers relevant to the items on the
agenda; however, all public documents may be examined in the Public
Reference Room.

                           908th Meeting--Regular Meeting; September 21, 2006--10 a.m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Item No.                     Docket No.                                   Company
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Administrative Agenda
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A-1......................  AD02-1-000......................  Agency Administrative Matters.
A-2......................  AD02-7-000......................  Customer Matters, Reliability, Security and Market
                                                              Operations.
A-3......................  AD06-3-000......................  Energy Market Update.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Electric
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-1......................  ER06-615-000, ER02-1656-027,      California Independent System Operator,
                            ER02-1656-029, ER02-1656-030,     Corporation.
                            ER02-1656-031.

E-2......................  EC06-129-000....................  Capital Research and Management Company, AMCAP
                                                              Fund, Inc., American Balanced Fund, Inc., American
                                                              High-Income Trust, American Mutual Fund, Inc.,
                                                              Capital Income Builder, Inc., Capital World Bond
                                                              Fund, Inc., Capital World Growth and Income Fund,
                                                              Inc., EuroPacific Growth Fund, Fundamental
                                                              Investors, Inc., New Perspective Fund, Inc., New
                                                              World Fund, Inc., SMALLCAP World Fund, Inc., The
                                                              Bond Fund of America, Inc., The Growth Fund of
                                                              America, Inc., The Income Fund of America, Inc.,
                                                              The Investment Company of America, The New Economy
                                                              Fund, Washington Mutual Investors Fund, Inc.,
                                                              American Funds Insurance Series Endowments,
                                                              Capital International Global Discovery, Capital
                                                              International Global Equity, Capital International
                                                              Funds--European Equity Investors, Capital
                                                              International Funds--U.S. Equity Investors.
E-3......................  EC06-123-000....................  ITC Holdings Corp., International Transmission
                                                              Company, Michigan Transco Holdings, Limited
                                                              Partnership, Michigan Electric Transmission
                                                              Company, LLC., Trans-Elect NTD Path 15, LLC.
E-4......................  ER06-18-000, ER08-18-001, ER06-   Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
                            18-002, ER06-18-003.              Inc.
E-5......................  ER03-765-001....................  Calpine Oneta Power, L.P.
E-6......................  ER04-961-006, ER04-961-007......  Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
                                                              Inc.
E-7......................  ER06-451-001....................  Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
E-8......................  ER91-569-032, ER91-569-033, ER91- Entergy Services, Inc.
                            569-034, ER91-569-035, ER01-666-
                            007, ER01-666-008, ER01-1675-
                            005, ER01-1675-006, ER01-1804-
                            006, ER01-1804-007, ER02-862-
                            007, ER02-862-008, EL04-123-
                            000, EL04-123-006, EL05-105-
                            000, EL05-105-004.
E-9......................  Omitted.........................
E-10.....................  ER05-1065-001...................  Entergy Services, Inc.
E-11.....................  TX06-1-000......................  Louisiana Energy and Power Authority.
E-12.....................  ER03-583-000, ER03-583-001, ER03- Entergy Services, Inc. and EWO Marketing, L.P.
                            583-002, ER03-583-004.
                           ER03-681-000, ER03-681-001, ER03- Entergy Services, Inc. and Entergy Power, Inc.
                            681-003.
                           ER03-682-000, ER03-682-001, ER03- Entergy Services, Inc. and Entergy Power, Inc.
                            682-002, ER03-682-004.
                           ER03-744-000, ER03-744-001, ER03- Entergy Services, Inc. and Entergy Louisiana, Inc.
                            744-002.
E-13.....................  EC06-140-000, EL06-86-000.......  Edison Electric Institute on Behalf of the
                                                              Jurisdictional Signatories to the Spare
                                                              Transformer Sharing Agreement.
E-14.....................  ER06-1112-000...................  Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
                                                              Inc.
E-15.....................  ER04-157-004....................  Bangor Hydro-Electric Company, Central Maine Power
                                                              Company, NSTAR Electric & Gas Corporation, New
                                                              England Power Company, Northeast Utilities Service
                                                              Company, The United Illuminating Company and
                                                              Vermont Electric Power Company.
                           ER04-714-001....................  Florida Power & Light Company--New England
                                                              Division.
E-16.....................  EF06-2011-000...................  United States Department of Energy--Bonneville
                                                              Power Administration.
E-17.....................  EC06-133-000....................  Calpine Fox LLC,Fox Energy Company LLC.
E-18.....................  ER06-1094-005...................  Baconton Power LLC.
                           ER06-1094-006...................  SOWEGA Power LLC.
E-19.....................  ER06-1094-008...................  Unitil Companies.
E-20.....................  ER05-6-044, ER05-6-054, ER05-6-   Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
                            055.                              Inc.
                           EL04-135-046, EL04-135-056, EL04- Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
                            135-057.                          Inc. and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
                           EL02-111-064 , EL02-111-074 ,     Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
                            EL02-111-075.                     Inc. and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
                           EL03-212-060 , EL03-212-070,      Ameren Services Company.
                            EL03-212-071.
E-21.....................  ER02-1656-024...................  California Independent System Operator Corporation.
E-22.....................  ER02-136-007 , ER02-136-008.....  Allegheny Power.
E-23.....................  ER01-2214-007...................  Entergy Services, Inc.
E-24.....................  PH06-48-000.....................  Legg Mason, Inc.
E-25.....................  Omitted.........................
E-26.....................  Omitted.........................
E-27.....................  OA06-5-000......................  Alcoa Power Generating, Inc. (Long Sault Division).
E-28.....................  EL05-50-002.....................  Jersey Central Power & Light Company v. Atlantic
                                                              City Electric Company, Delmarva Power & Light
                                                              Company, PECO Energy Company and Public Service
                                                              Electric and Gas Company.
E-29.....................  RM05-5-002......................  Standards for Business Practices and Communication
                                                              Protocols for Public Utilities.
E-30.....................  EL05-52-001.....................  Entergy Services, Inc.
E-31.....................  Omitted.........................
E-32.....................  Omitted.........................

E-33.....................  ER05-1065-002...................  Entergy Services, Inc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Miscellaneous
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M-1......................  RM06-23-000.....................  Critical Energy Infrastructure Information.
M-2......................  RM06-24-000.....................  Critical Energy Infrastructure Information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Gas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G-1......................  RP01-503-004 ,RP01-503-002,RP01-  Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
                            503-003.
G-2......................  RP06-391-000....................  USGen New England, Inc.
G-3......................  Omitted.........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Hydro
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H-1......................  PL06-5-000......................  Settlements in Hydroelectric Licensing Proceedings
                                                              under Part I of the Federal Power Act.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Certificates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-1......................  CP06-64-000 ,CP06-64-001........  Central New York Oil & Gas Company, LLC.
C-2......................  CP06-354-000....................  Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
C-3......................  Omitted.........................
C-4......................  CP05-361-000....................  Freeport LNG Development, L.P.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
    A free Webcast of this event is available through http://www.ferc.gov.
 Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this

event can do so by navigating to http://www.ferc.gov's Calendar of Events

and locating this event in the Calendar. The event will contain a
link to its Webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical
support for the free Webcasts. It also offers access to this event
via television in the DC area and via phone bridge for a fee. If you
have any questions, visit http://www.CapitolConnection.org or

contact Danelle Perkowski or David Reininger at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Immediately following the conclusion of the Commission Meeting,
a press briefing will be held in the Commission Meeting Room.
Members of the public may view this briefing in the designated
overflow room. This statement is intended to notify the public that
the press briefings that follow Commission meetings may now be
viewed remotely at Commission headquarters, but will not be telecast
through the Capitol Connection service.

[FR Doc. 06-8061 Filed 9-19-06; 12:20 pm]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


E Mail FROM: " Stolpe, Elizabeth A." < Elizabeth_ A._ Stolpe@ ceq. eop. gov> 06/ 23/ 2004 03: 44 PM To: Stephanie Daigle/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Jeff Holmstead/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Bill Wehrum/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Bill Harnett/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Natalie Gochnour/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Cynthia Bergman/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Prudence Goforth/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA cc: " Perino, Dana M." < Dana_ M._ Perino@ ceq. eop. gov>, " Fraas, Arthur G." < afraas@ OMB. eop. gov>

Subject: RE: Logistics on NSR Update  no new DOE issues on the Stay. Cross that one off the list. E.

 Original Message From: Stolpe, Elizabeth A. Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 1: 27 PM To: ' Stephanie Daigle ( Daigle. Stephanie@ epamail. epa. gov)'; ' Jeff Holmstead ( Holmstead. Jeff@ epamail. epa. gov)'; ' Bill Wehrum ( Wehrum. Bill@ epamail. epa. gov)'; ' Bill Harnett ( Harnett. Bill@ epamail. epa. gov)'; gochnour. natalie@ epamail. epa. gov; Cynthia Bergman ( bergman. cynthia@ epa. gov); Prudence Goforth ( Goforth. Prudence@ epamail. epa. gov) Cc: Perino, Dana M.; Fraas, Arthur G. Subject: RE: Logistics on NSR Stephanie  I'm answering your voicemail w/ an email to everyone just to facilitate keeping us all up to date real time: Your question is can we clear the ERP Petition by tomorrow? I think the prospects are good. DOE's concerns are unknown but at this point I think they are related to the Stay not the Petition. Lee and I are still exchanging voicemails. If there are any problems, I'll report back and do my utmost to resolve them quickly. Our bigger impediment to finishing the ERP tomorrow in my view is getting communication docs over here and giving people time to review.

Thanks, E.