[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38552-38553]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15910]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

Docket No. FAA-2011-1181; Airspace Docket No. 11-ANM-20

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Boise, ID

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing a SNPRM for the notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) published on February 7, 2012, in order to elicit
comments regarding removing reference to the navigation aid in the
legal description of the Class E airspace area designated as an
extension at Boise Air Terminal (Gowen Field), Boise, ID. The NPRM only
proposed an amendment of Class E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface at the airport, as well as adjusting the
geographic coordinates of the airport. The FAA is proposing this
amendment to enhance safety in the Boise, ID, airspace area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 13, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2011-
1181; Airspace Docket No. 11-ANM-20, at the beginning of your comments.
You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On February 7, 2012, the FAA published a NPRM to amend Class E
airspace, extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface, at
Boise Air Terminal (Gowen Field), Boise, ID, UT (77 FR 6026). The
comment period closed March 23, 2012. No comments were received.
Subsequent to publication, it was discovered by National Aeronautical
Navigation Services (NANS) that the legal description for the Boise,
ID, Class E airspace area designated as an extension needed editing to
better describe the airspace. The FAA seeks comments on this SNPRM.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA 2011-1181 and Airspace Docket No. 11-ANM-20) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA-2011-1181 and Airspace Docket No. 11-ANM-20.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Supplemental Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by amending the Class E airspace area
designated as an extension, at Boise Air Terminal (Gowen Field), Boise,
ID. The legal description would be rewritten to better describe the
airspace area by removing reference to the Boise VHF-Omni-Directional
Radio Range Tactical Air Navigational Aid (VORTAC). Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface would be reconfigured
due to the decommissioning of the Donnelly Tactical Air Navigational
Aid (TACAN). The geographic coordinates of the airport would be
adjusted in accordance with the FAA's aeronautical database. This
action would enhance the safety and management of IFR operations at the
airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6003 and
6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011, and
effective September 15, 2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in this document
will

be published subsequently in this Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation; (1) is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since
this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when
promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority for the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would propose controlled airspace at Boise Air Terminal (Gowen
Field), Boise, ID.
    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    1. The authority citation for 14 CFR Part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1 of the
Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6003 Class E airspace areas designated as an extension.

* * * * *

ANM ID E3 Boise, ID [Amended]

Boise Air Terminal (Gowen Field), ID
    (Lat. 43[deg]33'52'' N., long. 116[deg]13'22'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 3.5 miles
each side of the Boise Air Terminal 300[deg] bearing extending from
the 5-mile radius of the Boise Air Terminal to 9.5 miles northwest
of the airport; and within .5 miles west and 5.6 miles east of the
Boise Air Terminal 179[deg] bearing extending from the 5-mile radius
of the airport to 6.1 miles south of the airport; and that airspace
within 4.3 miles each side of the Boise Air Terminal 114[deg]
bearing extending from the 5-mile radius of the airport to 11.7
miles southeast of the airport.

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ANM ID E5 Boise, ID [Amended]

Boise Air Terminal (Gowen Field), ID
    (Lat. 43[deg]33'52'' N., long. 116[deg]13'22'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
bounded by a line beginning at lat. 43[deg]56'00'' N., long.
116[deg]33'04'' W.; to lat. 43[deg]51'15'' N., long. 116[deg]25'03''
W., thence via the 19.3-mile radius of the Boise Air Terminal (Gowen
Field), clockwise to long. 116[deg]14'03'' W.; to lat.
43[deg]45'00'' N., long. 116[deg]14'03'' W.; to lat. 43[deg]31'00''
N., long. 115[deg]52'03'' W.; to lat. 43[deg]20'00'' N., long.
115[deg]58'03'' W.; to lat. 43[deg]25'00'' N., long. 116[deg]25'03''
W.; to lat. 43[deg]27'00'' N., long. 116[deg]29'03'' W.; to lat.
43[deg]25'12'' N., long. 116[deg]32'23'' W.; to lat. 43[deg]29'25''
N., long. 116[deg]37'53'' W.; to lat. 43[deg]32'45'' N., long.
116[deg]49'04'' W.; to lat. 43[deg]37'35'' N., long. 116[deg]47'04''
W.; to lat. 43[deg]42'00'' N., long. 116[deg]57'04'' W., thence to
the point of beginning; that airspace extending upward from 1,200
feet above the surface within the 30.5-mile radius of the airport
beginning at the 122[deg] bearing of the airport, thence via a line
to the intersection of the 34.8-mile radius of the airport and the
224[deg] bearing of the airport, thence clockwise along the 34.8-
mile radius of the airport to that airspace 7 miles each side of the
269[deg] bearing of the airport extending from the 34.8-mile radius
to 49.6 miles west of the airport, and within 7 miles northeast and
9.6 miles southwest of the 295[deg] bearing of the airport extending
from the 34.8-mile radius to 65.3 miles northwest of the airport, to
lat. 44[deg]00'27'' N., long. 117[deg]10'58'' W., thence along the
042[deg] bearing to V-253, thence south along V-253, thence along
the 30.5-mile radius of the airport to the point of beginning; that
airspace southeast of the airport extending upward from 9,000 feet
MSL bounded on the north by V-444, on the east by V-293, on the
south by V-330, on the southwest by V-4 and on the west by the 30.5-
mile radius of the airport; that airspace northeast of the airport
extending upward from 11,500 feet MSL, bounded on the northeast by
V-293, on the south by V-444, on the southwest by the 30.5-mile
radius of the airport, and on the west by V-253.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 19, 2012.
Robert Henry
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012-15910 Filed 6-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 21, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12260-12265]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05642]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0639; FRL-9974-63]

Aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate); Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation amends a tolerance for residues of aluminum
tris (O-ethylphosphonate) in or on Fruit, citrus, group 10. Fosetyl-al
is the common name for aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate). Tessenderlo
Kerley, Inc requested the amended tolerance under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective March 21, 2018. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before May 21, 2018, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0639, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0639 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 21, 2018. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0639, 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 July 26, 2017 (82 FR 34664) (FRL-9963-
50), 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
6F8517) by Tessenderlo Kerley, Inc, 2255 N. 44th St., Suite 300,
Phoenix, AZ 85008. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.415 be
modified by amending tolerances for residues of the fungicide aluminum
tris (O-ethylphosphonate), in or on fruit, citrus, group 10 from 5.0
parts per million (ppm) to 9.0 ppm. That document referenced a summary
of the petition prepared by Tessenderlo Kerley, Inc, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. No
comments were received on this notice of filing.
    Because EPA does not issue group tolerances for groups that have
been updated or superseded, the petitioner submitted a revised
petition, clarifying that its request was to establish tolerances for
residues of the fungicide aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) in or on
the updated crop group fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 9.0 ppm. EPA
published notice of this revised petition in the Federal Register on
December 19, 2017 (82 FR 60167) (FRL-9971-11). That document referenced
a summary of this updated petition, which is available in the docket,
http://www.regulations.gov. Comments were received on the notice of
filing. EPA's response to these comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.

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 aluminum tris (O-
ethylphosphonate) including exposure resulting from the tolerances
established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks
associated with aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) 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 major target organs following repeated oral exposure to
fosetyl-Al are the reproductive system in the dog (testicular
degeneration: Spermatocytic and/or spermatidic giant cells in the lumen
of the seminiferous tubules) and the urinary system in the rat
(histopathological changes in the kidney, impairment of calcium/
phosphorus metabolism, calculi and hyperplasia in the urinary tract,
bladder tumors).
    The prenatal developmental studies in rabbits and rats and the 3-
generation reproduction study in rats showed no indication of increased
susceptibility following in utero and/or postnatal exposure to fosetyl-
Al. Developmental toxicity was not observed in the rat at the limit
dose or in the rabbit at the highest dose tested (500 mg/kg/day).
Reproductive toxicity was not observed

at the limit dose, and offspring toxicity (decreased pup body weight at
600 mg/kg/day) was observed at the same dose as maternal toxicity
(decreased body weight gain and urinary tract changes). The toxicology
database for fosetyl-Al does not show any evidence of neurotoxicity.
    Fosetyl-Al is classified as not likely to be carcinogenic to humans
since it was negative for carcinogenicity except at extremely high
doses (>limit dose) in rats and mice, and it did not show any genotoxic
potential. Fosetyl-Al is not acutely toxic via the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes, is not a skin irritant or dermal sensitizer, but is
a severe eye irritant.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) 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 Fosetyl-Aluminum (Fosetyl-AI):
Human Health Risk Assessment in Support of the Amended Registration for
the Proposed 0-day Pre-Harvest Interval (PHI) for Citrus Fruit Group
10-10 at pages 9-14 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0639.

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-pesticides.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for aluminum tris (O-
ethylphosphonate) used for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of
this unit.

  Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) for Use in Human
                                             Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Point of departure
        Exposure/scenario            and uncertainty/     RfD, PAD, LOC for     Study and toxicological effects
                                      safety factors       risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (All populations)..      No appropriate endpoint was identified. There were no adverse effects
                                     observed in oral toxicity studies that could be attributed to a single-dose
                                                                      exposure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations)  NOAEL = 250mg/kg/day  Chronic RfD = 2.5    Chronic oral toxicity (dog).
                                   UFA = 10x...........   mg/kg/day.          LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based on an
                                   UFH = 10x...........  cPAD = 2.5 mg/kg/     increased incidence of testicular
                                   FQPA SF = 1x........   day.                 degeneration (spermatocytic and/
                                                                               or spermatidic giant cells in the
                                                                               lumen of the seminiferous
                                                                               tubules).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental oral (Short- and        NOAEL = 300 mg/kg/    Residential LOC for  3-generation reproduction (rat).
 intermediate-term).                day.                  MOE <100.           LOAEL = 600 mg/kg/day based on
                                    UFA = 10x..........                        decreased body weight gains in
                                   UFH = 10x...........                        the F2b generation and urinary
                                   FQPA SF = 1x........                        tract changes in adults and
                                                                               decreased pup body weights.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal (All durations)...........  No potential hazard via the dermal route, based on the lack of systemic
                                    effects following repeat dermal exposure of rabbits at dose levels up to
                                    1,500 mg/kg/day, which is greater than the limit dose.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation (Short- and             NOAEL = 300 mg/kg/    Residential and      3-generation reproduction (rat).
 intermediate -term).               day.                  Occupational LOC    LOAEL = 600 mg/kg/day based on
                                   UFA = 10x...........   for MOE <100.        decreased body weight gains in
                                   UFH = 10x...........                        the F2b generation and urinary
                                   FQPA SF = 1x........                        tract changes in adults.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)                     Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
  of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-
  level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
  UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
  members of the human population (intraspecies).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate), EPA considered exposure
under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing aluminum
tris (O-ethylphosphonate) tolerances in 40 CFR 180.415. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) 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. No such effects were identified in the toxicological
studies for aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate); therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA Nationwide
Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America
(NHANES/WWEIA) conducted from 2003-2008. As to residue levels in food,
the chronic dietary analysis was obtained from the Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model using the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID;
version 3.16). The unrefined chronic analysis is based on tolerance-
level residues and 100% crop treated assumptions. Default processing
factors were used for all crops, except for citrus where processing
studies showed no residue concentration; thus, the processing factor
was set to one for processed citrus commodities.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) 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 and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate). Tolerance-
level residues and/or 100% CT were assumed for all food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) in drinking water.
These simulation models take into account data on the physical,
chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of aluminum tris (O-
ethylphosphonate). 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.
    Environmental fate properties suggest that aluminum tris (O-
ethylphosphonate) is not likely to reach ground or surface water under
most conditions, and if it does reach surface water, it is expected to
degrade rapidly. However, if aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) reached
groundwater, it could persist. Based on the Screening Concentration in
Ground Water (SCI-GROW) model, the estimated drinking water
concentration (EDWC) of aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments is estimated to be 0.006 ppb for
ground water.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 0.006 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Aluminum tris (O-
ethylphosphonate) is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Turf and ornamental plants. EPA
assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions:
Inhalation exposure from the hose end sprayer for turf applications,
and incidental oral exposure from post-application exposure to treated
turf. Because no dermal endpoint was identified, non-occupational
dermal exposures were not assessed. Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may
be found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
    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.''
    EPA has not found aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and aluminum
tris (O-ethylphosphonate) does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance
action, therefore, EPA has assumed that aluminum tris (O-
ethylphosphonate) does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no concern for
increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of the young
following in utero (rats and rabbits) and post-natal exposure (rats) to
fosetyl-Al. Also, there is no evidence of developmental toxicity,
reproductive toxicity, neurotoxicity, or immunotoxicity at dose levels
that do not exceed the limit dose.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) is
complete.
    ii. There is no indication that aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate)
is a neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate)
results in increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the
prenatal developmental studies or in young rats in the 3-generation
reproduction study.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues and are not likely to
underestimate risk. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to
aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure
of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.

These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed
by aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate).

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. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) is not expected to pose an acute
risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) from food and water will utilize 14%
of the cPAD for children 1-2 years 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 aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) is not expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
    Aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) is currently registered for uses
that could result in short-term residential exposure, and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure
through food and water with short-term residential exposures to
aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate).
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 3200 for male
adults, 3300 for female adults and 480 for children 1-2 years old.
Because EPA's level of concern for aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate)
is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) is not registered for any use
patterns that would result in intermediate-term residential exposure.
Intermediate-term risk is assessed based on intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to assess intermediate-term
risk), no further assessment of intermediate-term risk is necessary,
and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating
intermediate-term risk for aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate).
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (Pesticide Analytical Manual (PAM)
II method, which uses diazomethane as the methylating agent and
quantitation of aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) by Gas
Chromatography with Flame Photometric Detector (GC/FPD)) is available
to enforce the tolerance expression.

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 a MRL for aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate) on citrus
fruit.

C. Response to Comments

    EPA received five comments on the second notice of filing. Two
comments pertained to the general concern over addition of more
chemicals to the daily diet and onset of autoimmune diseases but did
not contain any specific information relevant to the potential risks
from aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate). In response, the Agency
explains that it has complied with the requirements of the FFDCA, which
allow the Agency to establish or modify tolerances if the Agency
determines they are safe. When new or amended tolerances are requested
for the presence of the residues of a pesticide and its toxicologically
significant metabolite(s) in food or feed, the EPA, as is required by
section 408 of the FFDCA, estimates the risk of the potential exposure
to these residues by performing an aggregate risk assessment. Such a
risk assessment integrates the individual assessments that are
conducted for food, drinking water, and residential exposures.
Additionally, the Agency, as is further required by section 408 of the
FFDCA, considers available information concerning what are termed the
cumulative toxicological effects of the residues of that pesticide and
of other substances having a common mechanism of toxicity with it. The
Agency has concluded after this assessment that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result from exposure to the residues of
interest. Therefore, the Agency may establish the tolerances requested
in this petition.
    Another citizen was concerned about the risk to pollinators. The
commenter stated this use should be denied due to toxicity to
pollinators and that keeping them healthy should be our top priority.
The comment primarily appears directed to the registration of the
pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) and are not relevant to the underlying safety finding made
under the FFDCA; therefore, the EPA will consider impacts to the
environment and non-target species under the authority of FIFRA. The
remaining two comments were not

germane to this action; therefore, no further response from the Agency
is required.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are amended for residues of aluminum tris (O-
ethylphosphonate), in or on fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 9.0 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: March 7, 2018.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.415,
0
a. Remove the entry for ``Fruit, citrus, group 10'' from the table in
paragraph (a).
0
b. Add alphabetically an entry to the table in paragraph (a) for
``Fruit, citrus, group 10-10''.
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  180.415  Aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate); tolerances for
residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Fruit, citrus, group 10-10...................................        9.0

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-05642 Filed 3-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 210 (Monday, October 31, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67243-67244]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28226]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

In the Matter of Accesspoint Corp., Aero Performance Products,
Inc., Apex Resources Group, Inc., Aradyme Corp., Bancroft Uranium,
Inc., Fightersoft Multimedia Corp., Fortress Financial Group, Inc., and
Global Aircraft Solutions, Inc.; Order of Suspension of Trading

 October 27, 2011.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a

lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Accesspoint Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended September 30, 2005.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Aero Performance Products, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended March 31, 2009.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Apex Resources Group, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended March 31, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Aradyme Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended June 30, 2007.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Bancroft Uranium, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended September 30, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Fightersoft Multimedia Corp. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended August 31, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Fortress Financial Group, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended September 30, 2005.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Global Aircraft Solutions, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended September 30, 2008.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies. Therefore, it is ordered,
pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that
trading in the securities of the above-listed companies is suspended
for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on October 27, 2011, through 11:59
p.m. EST on November 9, 2011.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-28226 Filed 10-27-11; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P