[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 17 (Monday, January 27, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4267-4269]
[FR Doc No: 2014-00837]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 17 / Monday, January 27, 2014 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0634; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-023-AD;
Amendment 39-17725; AD 2014-01-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (Eurocopter) Model EC135P2+ and EC135T2+
helicopters. This AD requires inspecting the mechanical air
conditioning system compressor bearing block upper bearing (upper
bearing) for corrosion, leaking grease, condensation, or water. This AD
was prompted by metallic debris from an upper bearing found in the air
inlet areas of both engines in a Model EC135P2+ helicopter. The actions
of this AD are intended to prevent metallic debris from damaging the
engine, causing loss of engine power, and subsequent loss of helicopter
control.

DATES: This AD is effective March 3, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain document listed in this AD as of March 3, 2014.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub. You may review the referenced
service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas
76137.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the foreign authority's AD,
any incorporated-by-reference service information, the economic
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations Office, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Wilbanks, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On July 23, 2013, at 78 FR 44050, the Federal Register published
our notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Eurocopter Model
EC135P2+ and EC135T2+ helicopters, serial numbers 870, 872, 873, 879,
883, 884, 888, 893, 900, 905, 911, 914, 916, 917, 923, and 926, with an
upper bearing, part number (P/N) L210M1872105, installed.
    The NPRM proposed to require inspecting the upper bearing for
corrosion, leaking grease, condensation, or water. The proposed
requirements were intended to prevent metallic debris from damaging the
engine, causing loss of engine power, and subsequent loss of helicopter
control.
    The NPRM was prompted by AD No. 2011-0111R1, dated September 22,
2011, issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is
the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union. EASA
AD No. 2011-0111R1 revises EASA AD No. 2011-0111, dated June 10, 2011,
to correct an unsafe condition for certain Model EC135P2+ and EC135T2+
helicopters. EASA advises that metallic debris was found within the air
inlet area of both engines during a pre-flight check of an EC135 P2+
helicopter. A subsequent investigation showed that the debris came from
the bearing cage of a ball bearing in the air conditioning compressor
bearing block, and that it damaged the compressor stage of one of the
engines to such an extent that the engine had to be overhauled,
according to EASA.
    EASA notes that as this mechanical air conditioning system was
introduced recently on the production line, only a limited number of
helicopters are affected. But if not detected and corrected, this
unsafe condition ``could lead to further cases of bearing case failure,
possibly resulting in loss of engine power and reduced control of the
helicopter,'' EASA reports. EASA AD No. 2011-0111R1 requires repetitive
inspections of the affected ball bearing for indications that the upper
bearing is failing and, depending on the findings, deactivating the air
conditioning system.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD, but we received no comments on the NPRM (78 FR 44050, July 23,
2013).

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Germany and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with Germany, EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the EASA AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same
type designs and that air safety and the public interest require
adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter issued Emergency Alert Service Bulletin (EASB) EC135-
21A-013, Revision 0, dated June 6, 2011, to provide instructions for
inspections after debris from the bearing cage of a ball bearing was
found in the air inlet area of both engines of an EC135P2+ helicopter.
Eurocopter followed the EASB with Service Bulletin EC135-21-

015, Revision 0, dated July 12, 2011, to introduce the replacement of
the affected compressor bearing block with a ``new, improved''
compressor bearing block.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 1 helicopter of U.S. Registry and
that labor costs average $85 per work-hour. Based on these estimates,
we expect the following costs:
     Inspecting the upper bearing for corrosion, leaking
grease, condensation or water requires 4 work-hours for a labor cost of
$340. No parts are needed.
     Deactivating the air conditioning system requires 6 work-
hours for a labor cost of $510. No parts are needed.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on helicopters identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (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);
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2014-01-02 Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH Helicopters: Amendment 39-
17725; Docket No. FAA-2013-0634; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-023-
AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (Eurocopter)
Model EC135P2+ and EC135T2+ helicopters, serial numbers 870, 872,
873, 879, 883, 884, 888, 893, 900, 905, 911, 914, 916, 917, 923, and
926, with a mechanical air conditioning system compressor bearing
block upper bearing (upper bearing) part number L210M1872105
installed, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as metallic debris in the
engine inlet areas.
    This condition could result in failure of an engine, loss of
engine power, and subsequent loss of helicopter control.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective March 3, 2014.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions.

    Within 25 hours time-in-service (TIS):
    (1) Visually inspect the upper bearing for corrosion, leaking
grease, condensation, or water.
    (2) If there is condensation but no corrosion, leaking grease,
or water, repeat this inspection at intervals not to exceed 25 hours
TIS.
    (3) If there is no corrosion, leaking grease, condensation, or
water, repeat this inspection at intervals not to exceed 100 hours
TIS.
    (4) If there is corrosion, leaking grease, or water, deactivate
the air conditioning system in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions, Section 3.B.3, Paragraphs (a) through (ai) of
Eurocopter Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. EC135-21A-013,
Revision 0, dated June 6, 2011.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Matt Wilbanks, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone (817) 222-
5110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(g) Additional Information

    (1) Eurocopter Service Bulletin EC135-21-015, Revision 0, dated
July 12, 2011, which is not incorporated by reference, contains
additional information about the subject of this AD. You may review
a copy of this service information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2011-0111R1, dated September 22, 2011.
You may view a copy of the EASA AD in the AD Docket on the Internet
at http:/www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2013-0634.

(h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 2100, air
conditioning system.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Eurocopter Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. EC135-21A-
013, Revision 0, dated June 6, 2011.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Eurocopter service information identified in this AD,
contact American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand
Prairie, TX 75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(972) 641-3775; or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 2, 2014.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-00837 Filed 1-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 169 (Tuesday, September 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 52843]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21527]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2015-0028]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a document
dated March 16, 2015, Placerville & Sacramento Valley Railroad, Inc.
(PSVR) has petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a
waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad
safety regulations contained at 49 CFR part 215. FRA assigned the
petition Docket Number FRA-2015-0028.
    PSVR owns a former St. Louis Southwestern Railway (SSW) bay window
caboose, identified as Car Number SSW 48. This car turned 50 years old
from the original date of construction in May 2015 and is therefore
restricted in accordance with 49 CFR 215.203(a) and required to be
stenciled in accordance with 49 CFR 215.303. PSVR is requesting that
the stenciling requirement be waived. In addition, PSVR requests a
special approval to continue to use this caboose in accordance with 49
CFR 215.203(b).
    In support of its petition, PSVR stated that it is a noninsular
tourist railroad. The caboose is used in passenger service for tourist
excursions on the PSVR system. The caboose began operation in this
service in September 2014 (at which time it was not yet 50 years old),
following an inspection and completion of a successful single car air
brake test. This caboose has been examined and deemed safe to operate
under the conditions set forth in PSVR's petition on Class 1 track for
passenger service. The territorial limit of PSVR's operation is on the
former Southern Pacific Placerville Branch in Sacramento and El Dorado
counties owned by the Sacramento-Placerville Joint Powers Authority
from approximately Milepost (MP) 111 to approximately MP 142. The
caboose will operate only on this territory, and will not be used in
interchange service. PSVR proposes to operate the caboose with a speed
limit of 30 mph.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the Department of Transportation's
(DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations Facility is open from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by October 16, 2015 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its processes. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
See also http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the privacy
notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 10, 2015.
Ron Hynes,
Director, Office of Technical Oversight.
[FR Doc. 2015-21527 Filed 8-31-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


<EPA BIOPESTICIDES AND POLLUTION PREVENTION DIVISION COMPANY NOTICE OF
FILING FOR PESTICIDE PETITIONS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER  >

<EPA Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division contact: [Linda
Hollis<PHONE_NUMBER>]>

<INSTRUCTIONS:  Please utilize this outline in preparing the pesticide
petition.  In cases where the outline element does not apply, please
insert “NA-Remove” and maintain the outline. Please do not change
the margins, font, or format in your pesticide petition. Simply replace
the instructions that appear in green, i.e., “[insert company
name],” with the information specific to your action.>

<SUBMISSION: E-mail the completed template to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
<TEMPLATE:>

<[Luxembourg-Pamol Inc.]>

<[Insert petition number]>

<	EPA has received a pesticide petition ([insert petition number]) from
[Luxembourg-Pamol Inc.], [5100 Poplar Ave., Suite 2700, Memphis, TN
38137] proposing, pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part 180.>

<(Options (pick one)>

<	1. by establishing a tolerance for residues of [NA-Remove]>

<	2. to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for
[NA- Remove]>

<	3. to establish an amendment/expansion of an existing tolerance
exemption for the>

<(Options (pick one)>

<	1. microbial pesticide  [NA-Remove]>

<	2. biochemical pesticide [phosphorous acid and its ammonium, sodium,
and potassium salts]>

<	3. plant-pesticide [NA-Remove] in or on [NA-Remove].>

<	Pursuant to section 408(d)(2)(A)(i) of  FFDCA, as amended,
[Luxembourg-Pamol Inc.] has submitted the following summary of
information, data, and arguments in support of their pesticide petition.
This summary was prepared by [Luxembourg-Pamol Inc.] and EPA has not
fully evaluated the merits of the pesticide petition. The summary may
have been edited by EPA if the terminology used was unclear, the summary
contained extraneous material, or the summary unintentionally made the
reader conclude that the findings reflected EPA’s position and not the
position of the petitioner.>

<I. [Luxembourg-Pamol Inc.]  Petition Summary>

<	[Insert petition number]>

<A. Product Name and Proposed Use Practices>

<	[ProPhyt-PHC is proposed as a post-harvest agricultural fungicide
treatment on citrus. Anticipated application of phosphorous acid and it
salts to citrus will be carried out as a post-harvest drench or dip. The
use rate for these types of applications is projected to be as a
4,000-12,000 ppm solution. The phosphorous acid may also be added to the
hot water solution which is applied prior to waxing.]>

<B. Product Identity/Chemistry>

<	1. Identity of the pesticide and corresponding residues. [Phosphorous
acid and its ammonium, sodium, and potassium salts are active
ingredients in numerous products registered by EPA as fungicides.  These
products are used also as fertilizer compounds in significant quantities
in the U.S.]>

<	2. Magnitude of residues at the time of harvest and method used to
determine the residue. [Phosphorous acid is a naturally-occurring
compound, commonly found as a salt.  Phosphorous is a required substance
in the metabolism of all living organisms. It is an integral building
block of both ribonucleic (RNA) and deoxyribonucleic acids (DNA).
Phosphates also play a critical role in energy transfer in metabolic
pathways. The fact that phosphate plays a key role in the metabolism of
all living cells, it completely dissociates in water, and its low acute
toxicity are among the reasons why EPA does not regulate residues of
phosphorous acid arising from the pre-harvest application of fungicides
containing salts of phosphorous acid as active ingredients. As such,
Luxembourg-Pamol Inc. does not have magnitude of residue data, nor is an
analytical method for the determination of residues appropriate.]>

<	3. A statement of why an analytical method of detecting and measuring
the levels of the pesticide residue are not needed. [Luxembourg-Pamol
Inc. is seeking to amend the current tolerance exemption for phosphorous
acid and its salts. As such, an analytical method is not provided.]>

<C. Mammalian Toxicological Profile>

<	[The toxicity profile for phosphorous acid and its ammonium, potassium
and sodium salts has already been assessed for its pesticidal use by the
Agency and published in support of the tolerance exemption for residues
of phosphorous acid in or on all food commodities when used as an
agricultural fungicide. For the purposes of this tolerance exemption
amendment, the Agency has relied on the data and/or information
previously submitted and has reassessed that data in order to evaluate
the request to add post-harvest uses to the tolerance exemption.
Additionally, the Agency has reviewed publicly available data and
information on phosphoric acid, which is chemically and structurally
similar to phosphorous acid. The Agency has stated that it believes that
in combination, the data and other information relied upon for this
tolerance exemption supports its conclusion that there is reasonable
certainty of no harm that will result from the post-harvest treatment of
potatoes with phosphorous acid when used according to the recommended
application rate.>

In the original tolerance exemption publication, the Agency also pointed
to the fact that human toxicity from consumption of crops treated with
phosphorous acid fertilizers would be well known, if it occurred. The
lack of reported dietary toxicity from consumption of crops treated with
phosphorous acid fertilizers is supporting evidence that use of
phosphorous acid applications as a fungicide should not result in
dietary toxicity. EPA does not require residue chemistry data in cases
where the toxicity is so low and the use pattern will result in
exposures much lower than the highest dose tested without an effect.

Acute toxicity. To support the tolerance established for post-harvest
application to stored potatoes, EPA relied on acute toxicity data that
was developed with a 53.8% end-use product.  Luxembourg proposes to
conduct the risk assessment for the current tolerance exemption petition
based on acute toxicity studies that were conducted with a 54.5%
solution (ProPhyt, EPA Reg. No. 42519-22).  These data were submitted in
support of Luxembourg’s current EPA registrations containing potassium
salt of phosphorous acid. The toxicological profile of the 54.5%
solution of phosphorous acid is briefly summarized as follows:

Acute oral (rat) toxicity: LD50 >5,000 mg/kg body weight (bw). The acute
oral toxicity was found to be greater than the highest tested dose.  No
deaths occurred. Normal gains in body weight were observed and no
abnormalities were noted at necropsy. There were no adverse effects
reported at 5,000 mg/kg bw. The test material is classified as Toxicity
Category IV for acute oral toxicity, which is the lowest category
available, representing low toxicity.

Acute dermal (rat) toxicity: LD50 >4,000 mg/kg bw. No deaths were
recorded. No signs of systemic toxicity or skin irritation were noted.
All animals showed expected weight gain and no abnormalities were noted
at necropsy.  There were no adverse effects reported at 4,000 mg/kg bw.
A similar product with a concentration of 53.8% that was previously
relied upon by the Agency for the post-harvest potato risk assessment
did not show dermal toxicity in rats when a dose of 5,000 mg/kg was
used.  According to these findings (see Federal Register, Vol. 71, No.
163; August, 2006), the test material is classified as Toxicity Category
IV for acute dermal toxicity, which is the lowest category available,
representing low toxicity.

Acute inhalation (rat) toxicity: LC50 >5.05 mg/l.  All rats recovered
from hunched posture, pilo-erection, and red/brown staining around the
eyes and snout. Rats appeared normal one day after the exposure. Normal
body weight gain was noted. With the exception of one male, which showed
dark foci on the lungs, no abnormalities were observed at necropsy.  The
test material is classified as Toxicity Category IV for acute inhalation
toxicity, which is the lowest category available, representing low
toxicity.

Primary eye irritation (rabbit): The product was found to be slightly
irritating to the eyes of rabbits.  All ocular effects cleared within
seven days.  The test material is classified as Toxicity Category III
for eye irritation.

Acute dermal irritation (rabbit): The product did not produce any dermal
irritation in rabbits.  The test material is classified as Toxicity
Category IV for dermal irritation.

Skin sensitization (guinea pigs): The product was not positive in guinea
pigs when tested for skin sensitization [the sensitization rate was 0%
(0/8)] and is classified as a non-sensitizer.

Developmental, reproductive, chronic and carcinogenic effects.  As part
of the original tolerance exemption that was published on October 5,
2000 [65 FR 59348], and again, in the further assessment of the
information presented in the tolerance exemption to allow for
post-harvest application to stored potatoes, EPA accepted the following
rationale regarding the potential for phosphorous acid and its salts to
cause long-term developmental, reproductive, chronic, or carcinogenic
effects: There is adequate information available from literature sources
to characterize the toxicity of phosphorous acid. Phosphorous acid can
affect human health through inhalation of mist, ingestion, and contact
with the skin and eyes. In a concentrated form, it will cause corrosive
effects (burns or irreversible damage) to the eyes, skin, throat,
digestive tract, upper respiratory tract and nose. Signs of overexposure
to this chemical are severe burning of eyes and skin, possible nausea
and vomiting, coughing, burning and tightness of the chest and shortness
of breath. Based on corrosivity and the current use patterns for the
mineral acids, EPA did not require these studies as part of the
Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) on the Mineral Acids (EPA
738-R-029; December 1993).]

<D. Aggregate Exposure>

<	1. Dietary exposure. [No dietary exposure is expected. When
phosphorous acid is applied to growing crops in the environment, it
rapidly dissociates to form hydrogen and phosphite ions. The fact that
the phosphorous acid at the time of post-harvest treatment has not been
oxidized to its degradates is clear and it is unknown how much this
oxidation process reduces the potential dietary exposure to phosphorous
acid under the conditions of post-harvest treatment. However, even with
these uncertainties, the Agency has stated that it believes that when
phosphorous acid is used as a post-harvest treatment at the recommended
application rate (on potatoes), the remaining residues of PA on stored
potatoes will not increase toxicity or add any new dietary exposure or
risks and the toxicity of phosphorous acid would still be classified in
category IV (which is low toxicity) and will be safe. This is also the
case with the much lower rates applied post-harvest to citrus.]>

<	i. Food. [The Agency has determined that post-harvest treatment of
phosphorous acid to stored potatoes at the typical application rate
evaluated by the Agency may reduce any new anticipated exposure to
phosphorous acid. However, even if dietary exposure is not reduced, the
Agency has stated that it believes, based on its reassessment of the
data and information, that post-harvest application of phosphorous acid
to potatoes is safe. The proposed application of phosphorous acid and
its ammonium, sodium and potassium salts as a post-harvest fungicide to
citrus, with a use rate of 4,000-12,000 ppm is three to nine-fold below
the established tolerance on potatoes. Moreover, dietary exposure to
phosphorous acid and its salts when applied to citrus is likely to be
significantly lower than dietary exposure from consumption of potatoes
because the rind of citrus fruit is far less commonly consumed than the
pulp and juice portions, while the Agency’s assessment of the
post-harvest use of phosphorous acid and its salts on potatoes assumed
that the entire potato (skin and flesh) would be consumed.]>

<	ii. Drinking water. [No significant drinking water exposure is
expected to result from phosphorous acid when applied as a post-harvest
treatment to citrus because phosphorous acid rapidly degrades, is very
soluble in water and is applied in storage facilities.]>

<	2. Non-dietary exposure. [There are no residential, school or day care
uses proposed for this product. Since the proposed use pattern is for
post-harvest treatment on citrus, the potential for non-occupational,
non-dietary exposures to phosphorous acid by the general population,
including infants and children, is highly unlikely. Further, even if
persons were exposed via the non-occupational route, the low toxicity
from a dilute application such as the one evaluated by the Agency on
potatoes and proposed on citrus is safe and the primary hazards
associated with concentrated phosphorous acid (corrosivity and
irritation) will be significantly reduced because the end use products
are diluted and the residues following application are very low.]>

<E. Cumulative Effects>

<	[In assessing both the pre-harvest tolerance exemption published in
2000 and the post-harvest potato tolerance in 2006, the Agency
considered all available information that related to the cumulative
effect of pesticide residues of  phosphorous acid and residues of other
materials having a common mechanism of toxicity. Especially important in
these assessments is the effect potential residues may have on infants
and children. The Agency concluded the following: BPPD (EPA) has
considered the potential for cumulative effects of phosphorous acid and
other substances in relation to a common mechanism of toxicity.
Phosphorous acid may share a common metabolic mechanism with other salts
of phosphorous acid (such as calcium); however, due to the low order of
toxicity and lack of reported dietary toxicity associated with the use
of phosphorous fertilizers on crops, no cumulative effect from the use
of phosphorous acid is expected. The proposed post-harvest application
rate on citrus is significantly below the tolerance levels allowed on
potatoes; therefore, there should be no risk of cumulative effects with
this material when applied post-harvest to citrus.]>

<F. Safety Determination>

<	1. U.S. population. [With respect to the potential for harmful effects
of phosphorous acid in the U.S. population and, in particular, the
segment of the population that includes infants and children, the Agency
has accepted the following rationale. Aggregate exposure to phosphorous
acid is expected to be minimal. There is very little potential for
exposure to phosphorous acid in drinking water and from non-dietary,
non-occupational exposures. This chemical will be applied post-harvest
to the rind of citrus which is not commonly consumed by any segment of
the population, especially infants or children. Once released into the
environment, the chemical rapidly dissociates to form hydrogen and
phosphite ions. The hydrogen ions affect pH, but this is moderated by
natural means. Many phosphite salts are generally recognized as safe
(GRAS). Therefore, the health risk to humans is negligible based on the
low toxicity of these ions and a low application rate for the active
ingredient, and one can conclude that there is a reasonable certainty
that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to phosphorous acid.]>

<	2. Infants and children. [With respect to infants and children, the
Agency has accepted the following rationale. Aggregate exposure to
phosphorous acid is expected to be minimal. There is very little
potential for exposure to phosphorous acid in drinking water and from
non-dietary, non-occupational exposures. This chemical will be applied
to agricultural food crops. Once released into the environment, the
chemical rapidly dissociates to form hydrogen and phosphite ions. The
hydrogen ions affect pH, but this is moderated by natural means. Many
phosphite salts are ‘GRAS.’ Therefore, the health risk to humans is
negligible based on the low toxicity of (the subject end-use product)
and these ions and a low application rate for the active ingredient. One
can conclude that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to phosphorous
acid residues.]>

<G. Effects on the Immune and Endocrine Systems>

<	[In 2006, the Agency determined that there is no evidence that
phosphorous acid affects the immune system, functions in a manner
similar to any known hormone, or that it acts as an endocrine
disruptor.]>

<H. Existing Tolerances>

<	[As previously referenced, EPA has established a maximum tolerance
level of 35,600 ppm for use of phosphorous acid as a post-harvest
treatment of potatoes at 40 CFR 180.1210. All pre-harvest agricultural
food uses of phosphorous acid and its salts are exempt from the
requirement of a tolerance.]>

<I. International Tolerances>

<	[No maximum residue levels (MRLs) have been established for phophorous
acid by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CODEX).]>

 PAGE

 PAGE   7


[Federal Register: June 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 117)]
[Notices]
[Page 34282-34284]
[DOCID:fr17jn08-39]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2784-003]

Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Intent To File
License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, Commencement
of Licensing Proceeding and Scoping; Request for Comments on the PAD
and Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study
Requests

June 10, 2008.
    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent To File License Application for
a New License and Commencing Licensing Proceeding.
    b. Project No.: 2784-003.
    c. Dated Filed: April 11, 2008.
    d. Submitted By: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E).
    e. Name of Project: Rollins Transmission Line Project.
    f. Location: The Rollins Transmission Line Project is located in
Nevada and Placer counties, California, near the Bear River and the
town of Colfax. The project consists of consists of a single circuit
wood pole line extending from the Rollins Powerhouse switchyard
approximately 3,800 feet to PG&E's Drum-Grass Valley-Weimar
transmission line. The project is within a 40-foot-wide corridor. The
project also includes an access road that is 1,867 feet in length, with
project widths between 20 and 60 feet. The project occupies a total of
5.38 acres, all of which is under private ownership.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR Part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Applicant Contact: Forrest Sullivan, Senior Project Manager,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, 5555 Florin Perkins Road, Rm. 100,
Sacramento, CA 95826,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: John Mudre at<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    j. We are asking federal, state, local, and tribal agencies with
jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental
issues to cooperate with us in the preparation of the environmental
document. Agencies who would like to request cooperating status should
follow the instructions for filing comments described in paragraph o
below. Cooperating agencies should note the Commission's policy that
agencies that cooperate in the preparation of the environmental
document cannot also intervene. See, 94 FERC ] 61,076 (2001).
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency
regulations thereunder at 50 CFR Part 402 and (b) the State Historic
Preservation Officer, as required by section 106, National Historical
Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating Pacific Gas and Electric
Company as the Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out
informal consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
    m. Pacific Gas and Electric Company 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.
    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(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_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, of for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    Register online at http://ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm to be notified
via e-mail of new filing and issuances related to this or other pending
projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.
    o. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and
Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests. All comments on
the PAD and SD1, and study requests should be sent to the address above
in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on the PAD and SD1, study
requests, requests for cooperating agency status, and all
communications to and from Commission staff related to the merits of
the potential application (original and eight copies) must be filed
with the Commission at the following address: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. All filings with the Commission must include on
the first page, the project name (Rollins Transmission Line Project)
and number (P-2784-003), and bear the heading ``Comments on Pre-
Application Document,'' ``Study Requests,'' ``Comments on Scoping
Document 1,'' ``Request for Cooperating Agency Status,'' or
``Communications to and from Commission Staff.'' Any individual or
entity interested in submitting study requests, commenting on the PAD
or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating status must do so by
August 11, 2008.
    Comments on the PAD and SD1, study requests, requests for
cooperating agency status, and other permissible forms of
communications with the Commission may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-
filing'' link.
    p. Our intent is to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for which the planned meetings will satisfy the NEPA scoping
requirements. We anticipate preparing a multi-project EIS that would
also consider the proposed relicensing of Nevada Irrigation District's
Yuba-Bear Project (FERC No. 2266-096) and Pacific Gas & Electric
Company's Drum-Spaulding Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2310-173).
Because these three projects are located in the same watersheds and
have the same license expiration dates, NID and PG&E have decided, to
the extent practical, to cooperate and coordinate on their relicensing
efforts. The scoping meetings and site visits discussed below will
address all three projects.

Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of
the project at the times and places noted below. The daytime meeting
will focus on resource agency, Indian tribes, and non-governmental
organization concerns, while the evening meeting is primarily for
receiving input from the public. We invite all interested individuals,
organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of the meetings, and
to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as well as the
scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the environmental
document. The times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Tuesday, June 24, 2008, 9 a.m.
    Location: Auburn Holiday Inn Hotel, 120 Grass Valley Highway,
Auburn, California.

Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Tuesday, June 24, 2008, 7 p.m.
    Location: Gold Miners Inn Holiday Inn Express Hotel, 121 Bank
Street, Grass Valley, California.
    Scoping Document 1 (SD1), which outlines the subject areas to be
addressed in the environmental document, was mailed to the individuals
and entities on the Commission's mailing list on May 22, 2008. Copies
of SD1 will be available at the scoping meetings, or may be viewed on
the Web at http://www.ferc.gov, using the ``eLibrary'' link. Follow the
directions for accessing information in paragraph n. Based on all oral
and written comments, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may
include a revised process plan and schedule, as well as the list of
issues identified through the scoping process.

Site Visit

    The licensees and Commission staff will visit the project
facilities on Tuesday, June 17, Wednesday, June 18, and Thursday, June
19, 2008, starting at 8 a.m. and ending at or about 5 p.m. Participants
should meet by the start time as follows: (1) On June 17 at the
Discovery Trail in Bear Valley; (2) on June 18 at the Alta Service
Center; and (3) on June 19 at Halsey Forebay. Participants are
responsible for their own transportation; four-wheel-drive vehicles are
recommended. Anyone interested in attending the site visit should
contact Mr. James Lynch at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the
issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource
management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and
identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and
discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that
incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's
regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination

of federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes;
and (5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or
Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an
environmental document.
    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues
and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping
meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1 are
included in item n. of this document.

Meeting Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will become
part of the formal record of the Commission proceeding on the project.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-13531 Filed 6-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 5, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 149)]
[Notices]
[Page 39071]
[DOCID:fr05au09-63]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. NJ09-4-000]

Bonneville Power Administration; Notice of Filing

July 29, 2009.

    Take notice that on July 10, 2009, Bonneville Power Administration
(Bonneville) submitted an errata to correct editorial or typographical
errors in their Precedent Transmission Service Agreement (Agreement).
Bonneville states that the corrections do not change the Agreement in
any substantive way.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 5, 2009.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18633 Filed 8-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 6536]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02375]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL OP-OFA-002]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed January 24, 2022 10 a.m. EST Through January 31, 2022 10 a.m. EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20220011, Draft, USN, HI, Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and
Intermediate Maintenance Facility Dry Dock and Waterfront Production
Facility at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Oahu, Hawaii, Comment
Period Ends: 03/21/2022, Contact: Andrea Von Burg Hall<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220012, Second Draft Supplemental, USACE, FL, Port Everglades
Harbor, Broward County, Florida, Comment Period Ends: 03/21/2022,
Contact: Paul Demarco<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 31, 2022.
Candi Schaedle,
Acting Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal
Activities.
[FR Doc. 2022-02375 Filed 2-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P