[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 37 (Monday, February 25, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12646-12648]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04223]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0145; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-059-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Agusta S.p.A. and Bell Helicopter
Textron Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Agusta S.p.A. (Agusta) Model AB412 and AB412 EP, and Bell Helicopter
Textron (Bell) Model 412, 412CF, and 412EP helicopters with certain
DART Aerospace Ltd. (Dart) high gear aft crosstubes (crosstube)
installed. This proposed AD would require adding a life limit of 10,000
landings to the crosstube and removing from service any crosstubes with
more than 10,000 accumulated landings. This proposed AD is prompted by
five separate reports of crosstube failures. The actions in this
proposed AD are intended to prevent failure of the crosstube and
subsequent collapse of the landing gear.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 26, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments 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 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

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 proposed AD, the economic
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Dart Aerospace LTD., 1270 Aberdeen St, Hawkesbury, ON, K6A 1K7, Canada;
telephone: 1<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax: 1<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at www.dartaero.com.
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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Zimmer, Airframe Engineer, New
York Aircraft Certification Office, Engine and Propeller Directorate,
FAA, 1600 Stewart Ave., Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone
(516) 228-7306; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the

economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    Transport Canada (TC), which is the aviation authority for Canada,
has issued TC AD No. CF-2012-14R1, dated May 9, 2012 (CF-2012-14R1), to
correct an unsafe condition for the Dart high gear aft crosstube
assembly, part number (P/N) D412-664-203, approved under TC
Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) SH01-9, FAA STC SR01298NY, and
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) STC IM.R.S.01304, and installed
on Agusta Model AB412 and AB412 EP and Bell Model 412, 412EP, and 412CF
helicopters. TC advises that they have received five reports of these
crosstubes failing. According to TC, based on these reports, the
affected crosstube requires a life limitation of 10,000 landings. As a
result, TC issued CF-2012-14R1, which requires amending the
instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA) to establish the new
life limitation, and removing from service all crosstubes with more
than 10,000 landings.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Canada and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with Canada, TC, its technical representative,
has notified us of the unsafe condition described in its AD. We are
proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant information
and determined that an unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop
on other products of the same type design.

Related Service Information

    We reviewed Dart ICA No. ICA-D212-664, Revision 8, dated October
20, 2011, which contains the airworthiness limitations, inspection
requirements, proper placards and markings, and maintenance procedures
for crosstube P/N D212-664 and D412-664. Revision 8 establishes a life
limit of 10,000 landings for crosstube P/N D412-664-203.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require establishing a component history
card for each crosstube, P/N D412-664-203; revising the airworthiness
limitations of the maintenance manual to establish a life limit of
10,000 landings for each crosstube; and removing from service any
crosstube with more than 10,000 landings.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 76 helicopters of
U.S. Registry. Based on an average labor cost of $85 per hour, we
estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to
comply with this AD. Creating a component history card and amending the
ICA would require about 1 work-hour, for a cost per helicopter of $85
and a total cost to U.S. operators of $6,460. Replacing a crosstube
that has exceeded its life-limit would require about 6 work-hours and
required parts would cost about $10,351, for a total cost per
helicopter of $10,861.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska 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 proposed 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.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Agusta S.P.A. and Bell Helicopter Textron Helicopters: Docket No.
FAA-2012-*****; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-059-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Agusta S.p.A. Model AB412 and AB412 EP
helicopters and Bell Helicopter Textron Model 412, 412CF, and 412EP
helicopters with a DART Aerospace Ltd. high gear aft crosstube
(crosstube), part-number (P/N) D412-664-203 installed under
Supplemental Type Certificate SR01298NY, certificated in any
category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as failure of a crosstube,
which could result in collapse of the landing gear.

(c) Reserved

(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 30 days:
    (1) Create a component history card or equivalent record for
each crosstube. Determine the number of landings on each crosstube
and enter it on the component history card or equivalent record. If
the number of landings is unknown, calculate 10 landings per flight
hour.
    (2) Revise the Airworthiness Limitations section of the
maintenance manual to reflect that crosstube, P/N D412-664-203, has
a retirement life of 10,000 landings.
    (3) Remove from service any crosstube with a number of landings
equal to or greater than 10,000.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: ATTN: Program
Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600
Stewart Ave., suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516)
228-7300; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (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) The subject of this AD is addressed in Transport Canada AD
No. CF-2012-14R1, dated May 9, 2012.

(h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 3213: Main Landing
Gear Strut/Axle/Truck.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February 18, 2013.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-04223 Filed 2-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: December 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 239)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 74795-74802]
[DOCID:fr13de06-9]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0902; FRL-8105-5]

Clothianidin; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
clothianidin in or on sorghum (grain, forage, and stover) and cotton
(undelinted and gin byproducts). Bayer CropScience requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as
amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA). In addition,
this establishes time-limited tolerances for residues of clothianidin,
in or on beet, sugar, roots, and beet, sugar, tops. This action is in
response to EPA's granting of an emergency exemption under section 18
of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
authorizing use of the pesticide on sugar beet seeds. This regulation
establishes a maximum permissible level for residues of clothianidin in
these food commodities. The tolerances for sugar beet commodities
expire and are revoked on December 31, 2009. This regulation
establishes tolerances for residues of clothianidin in or on grapes,
potatoes, and potatoes, granules/flakes. Arvesta Corporation requested
these tolerances under the FFDCA, as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).

DATES: This regulation is effective December 13, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 12, 2007,
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: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0902. All documents in the
docket are listed in the index for the docket. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as

copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kable Bo Davis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g., agricultural workers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
     Animal production (NAICS 112), e.g., cattle ranchers and
farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
     Food manufacturing (NAICS 311), e.g., agricultural
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers;
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 32532), e.g., agricultural
workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and
floriculture workers; residential users.
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document?

    In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal
Register document through the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
, you may access this Federal Register document

electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a

frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the
Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR site at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
 To access the OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines

referenced in this document, go directly to the guidelines at http://www.epa.gpo/opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any
person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may
also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural
regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for
hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. 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-2006-0902. in the
subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be
in writing, and must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or
before February 12, 2007.
    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 that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit your copies, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0902., by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of December 8, 2004 (69 FR 71036) (FRL-
7687-4), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
4F6869) by Arvesta Corporation, 15401 Weston PKWY Suite 150, Cary,
North Carolina 27513. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.586 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide
clothianidin, (E)-1-(2-chloro-1,3-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-3-methyl-2-
nitroguanidine, in or on grapes at 0.5 parts per million (ppm), raisins
at 1.0 ppm, and potatoes at 0.1 ppm. That notice included a summary of
the petition prepared by Arvesta Corporation, the registrant. There
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    In the Federal Register of June 16, 2004 (69 FR 33635) (FRL-7350-
6), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
3F6792) by Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.586
be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide
clothianidin, (E)-1-(2-chloro-1,3-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-3-methyl-2-
nitroguanidine, in or on sorghum, grain at 0.01 ppm, sorghum, forage at
0.01 ppm, and sorghum, stover at 0.01 ppm. That notice included a
summary of the petition prepared by Bayer CropScience, the registrant.
There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    In the Federal Register of December 14, 2005 (70 FR 74003) (FRL-
7747-4), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
5F6908) by, Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.586
be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide
clothianidin, (E)-1-(2-chloro-1,3-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-3-methyl-2-
nitroguanidine, in or on cotton, undelinted at 0.01 ppm, and cotton,
gin byproducts at 0.01 ppm. That notice included a summary of the
petition prepared by Bayer CropScience, the registrant. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Upon completing review of the current clothianidin database, the

Agency concluded that the appropriate tolerance levels for clothianidin
residues in or on pending crops should be established as follows:
Sorghum, grain at 0.01 ppm, sorghum, forage at 0.01 ppm, sorghum,
stover at 0.01 ppm, cotton, undelinted seed at 0.01 ppm, cotton, gin
byproducts at 0.01 ppm, grape at 0.60 ppm, potato at 0.05 ppm, and
potato, granules/flakes at 0.08 ppm. In addition, the proposed
tolerance for raisins was withdrawn because based on available
processing data, a tolerance for this commodity is not needed.
    EPA is also establishing time-limited tolerances for combined
residues of the insecticide, clothianidin, in or on beet, sugar, roots,
and beet, sugar, tops at 0.02 ppm. These tolerances expire and are
revoked on December 31, 2009. The beet tolerances are being established
in response to a regional crisis exemption request on behalf of
Colorado, North Dakota, and Wyoming under FIFRA section 18 for the
emergency use of clothianidin as a seed treatment on sugar beet seeds
to control the beet leafhopper, which is a vector of the beet curly top
virus in certain sugar beet growing regions throughout the western
United States.
    As part of its assessment of this emergency exemption request, EPA
assessed the potential risks presented by residues of clothianidin in
or on beet, sugar, roots, and beet, sugar, tops. In doing so, EPA
considered the safety standard in section 408(b)(2) of the FFDCA, and
EPA decided that the necessary tolerances under section 408(l)(6) of
the FFDCA would be consistent with the safety standard and with FIFRA
section 18. Consistent with the need to move quickly on the emergency
exemption in order to address the urgent non-routine situation and to
ensure that the resulting food is safe and lawful, EPA is issuing the
tolerances without notice and opportunity for public comment as
provided in section 408(l)(6) of the FFDCA. Although these tolerances
expire and are revoked on December 31, 2009, under section 408(l)(5) of
the FFDCA, residues of the pesticide not in excess of the amount
specified in the tolerances remaining in or on beet, sugar, roots, and
beet, sugar, tops after that date will not be unlawful, provided the
pesticide is applied in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA, and the
residues do not exceed a level that was authorized by this tolerance at
the time of that application. EPA will take action to revoke these
tolerances earlier if any experience with, scientific data on, or other
relevant information on this pesticide indicate that the residues are
not safe.
    Because the tolerances are being approved under emergency
conditions, EPA has not made any decisions about whether clothianidin
meets EPA's registration requirements for use on beet, sugar, roots,
and beet, sugar, tops or whether permanent tolerances for this use
would be appropriate. Under these circumstances, EPA does not believe
that these tolerances serve as a basis for registration of clothianidin
by a State for special local needs under FIFRA section 24(c). Nor do
these tolerances serve as the basis for any States other than Oregon,
Colorado, North Dakota, and Wyoming to use this pesticide on this crop
under section 18 of FIFRA without following all provisions of EPA's
regulations implementing FIFRA section 18 as identified in 40 CFR part
166. For additional information regarding the emergency exemption for
clothianidin, contact the Agency's Registration Division at the address
provided under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    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. . .
.''
    EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the
regulatory requirements of section 408 of the FFDCA and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm
.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, 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, consistent with section
408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for tolerances for residues of clothianidin (E)-1-
(2-chloro-1,3-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-3-methyl-2-nitroguanidine, in or on
grapes at 0.60 ppm, potatoes at 0.05 ppm, potatoes, granules/flakes at
0.08 ppm, sorghum, grain at 0.01 ppm, sorghum, forage at 0.01 ppm,
sorghum, stover at 0.01 ppm, cotton, undelinted at 0.01 ppm, and
cotton, gin byproducts at 0.01 ppm, and beet, sugar, roots at 0.02 ppm,
and beet, sugar, tops at 0.02 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and
risks associated with establishing the tolerance 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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the toxic effects caused by clothianidin 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.epa.gov/EPA-PEST/2003/May/Day-30/p13564.htm
.

B. Toxicological Endpoints

    For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the dose at which the NOAEL are observed from the
toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment
is used to estimate the toxicological level of concern (LOC). However,
the LOAEL of concern are identified is sometimes used for risk
assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected.
An uncertainty factor (UF) is applied to reflect uncertainties inherent
in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the
variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well
as other unknowns.
    The linear default risk methodology (Q*) is the primary method
currently used by the Agency to quantify non-threshold hazards such as
cancer. The Q* approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead
to some degree of cancer risk, estimates risk in terms of the
probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases. More information
can be found on the general principles EPA uses in risk
characterization at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/human.htm.

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for clothianidin used for
human risk assessment can be found at http://www.regulations.gov (pages 18-20)

in Docket ID EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0902. To locate this information on the
regulations.gov website follow these steps:
    1. Select ``Advanced Search'', then ``Docket Search''
    2. In ``Keyword'' field type the chemical name or insert the
applicable ``Docket ID number.'' (example: EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-9999).
    3. Click the ``Submit'' button.
    Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov website to view the
index for the docket and access available documents.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. Tolerances have been
established (40 CFR 180.586) for the residues of clothianidin, in or on
a variety of raw agricultural commodities. Tolerances have also been
established for residues of clothianidin in milk. Risk assessments were
conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from clothianidin 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 one-day or single exposure.
     In conducting the acute dietary exposure assessment EPA used the
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM-FCID\TM\), which incorporates food consumption
data as reported by respondents in the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of
Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII), and accumulated exposure to the
chemical for each commodity. The following assumptions were made for
the acute exposure assessments: The acute dietary exposure assessment
is based on maximum residues of clothianidin observed in clothianidin
and thiamethoxam field trials and assumed 100 percent crop treated
(%CT).
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the DEEM-FCID\TM\, which incorporates food
consumption data as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994-1996 and
1998 Nationwide CSFII, and accumulated exposure to the chemical for
each commodity. The following assumptions were made for the chronic
exposure assessments: The chronic assessment is based on average
residues from clothianidin field trials and also assumes 100% CT.
    iii. Cancer. Because clothianidin has been classified as a ``not
likely human carcinogen'', a cancer risk assessment is not required.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of the FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data
and information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues
in food and the actual levels of pesticide chemicals that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must pursuant
to section 408(f)(1) require that data be provided 5 years after the
tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating
that the levels in food are not above the levels anticipated. Following
the initial data submission, EPA is authorized to require similar data
on a time frame it deems appropriate. For the present action, EPA will
issue such data call-ins for information relating to anticipated
residues as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized
under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Such data call-ins will be required to
be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of this
tolerance.
    The Agency used PCT information as follows:
    The acute assessment is based on maximum residues of clothianidin
observed in clothianidin field trials and assumes 100% CT. The chronic
assessment is based on average residues from clothianidin field trials
and also assumes 100% CT.
    The Agency believes that the three conditions listed have been met.
With respect to Condition 1, PCT estimates are derived from Federal and
private market survey data, which are reliable and have a valid basis.
The Agency is reasonably certain that the percentage of the food
treated is not likely to be an underestimation. As to Conditions 2 and
3, regional consumption information and consumption information for
significant subpopulations is taken into account through EPA's
computer-based model for evaluating the exposure of significant
subpopulations including several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA's risk assessment process ensures that
EPA's exposure estimate does not understate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency to be reasonably
certain that no regional population is exposed to residue levels higher
than those estimated by the Agency. Other than the data available
through national food consumption surveys, EPA does not have available
information on the regional consumption of food to which clothianidin
may be applied in a particular area.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks
sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a comprehensive dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment for clothianidin in drinking
water. Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data,
drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on
simulation or modeling taking into account data on the physical
characteristics of clothianidin. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.

    Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and
Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models, the
estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) of clothianidin for acute
exposures are 7.29 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 5.84
ppb for ground water. The EECs for chronic exposures are 1.35 ppb for
surface water and 5.84 ppb for ground 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).
     Clothianidin is currently registered for use on the following
residential non-dietary sites: Turfgrass. The risk assessment was
conducted using the following residential exposure assumptions: The
following exposure scenarios were assessed for residential post-
application risks: toddlers playing on treated turf, adults performing
yard work on treated turf, and adults and youths playing golf on
treated turf. Additional information on residential exposure
assumptions can be found at http://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID EPA-HQ-OPP-

2006-0902, pages 27 through 29).
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the 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.''
    Clothianidin is a member of the neonicotinoid class of pesticides
and is a metabolite of another neonicotinoid, thiamethoxam. Structural
similarities or

common effects do not constitute a common mechanism of toxicity.
Evidence is needed to establish that the chemicals operate by the same,
or essentially the same sequence of major biochemical events (EPA,
2002). Although clothianidin and thiamethoxam bind selectively to
insect nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR), the specific binding
site(s)/receptor(s) for clothianidin, thiamethoxam, and the other
neonicotinoids are unknown at this time. Additionally, the commonality
of the binding activity itself is uncertain, as preliminary evidence
suggests that clothianidin operates by direct competitive inhibition,
while thiamethoxam is a non-competitive inhibitor. Furthermore, even if
future research shows that neonicotinoids share a common binding
activity to a specific site on insect nicotinic acetylcholine
receptors, there is not necessarily a relationship between this
pesticidal action and a mechanism of toxicity in mammals. Structural
variations between the insect and mammalian nAChRs produce quantitative
differences in the binding affinity of the neonicotinoids towards these
receptors, which, in turn, confers the notably greater selective
toxicity of this class towards insects, including aphids and
leafhoppers, compared to mammals. While the insecticidal action of the
neonicotinoids is neurotoxic, the most sensitive regulatory endpoint
for clothianidin is based on unrelated effects in mammals, including
changes in body and thymus weights, delays in sexual maturation, and
still births. Additionally, the most sensitive toxicological effect in
mammals differs across the neonicotinoids (e.g., testicular tubular
atrophy with thiamethoxam; mineralized particles in thyroid colloid
with imidaclopid). Thus, there is currently no evidence to indicate
that neonicotinoids share common mechanisms of toxicity, and EPA is not
following a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of
toxicity for the neonicotinoids. 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
the policy statements concerning common mechanism determinations and
procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a
common mechanism released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs on
EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.

     Note that because clothianidin is a major metabolite of
thiamethoxam, EPA has combined exposure to clothianidin resulting both
from thiamethoxam use and from use of clothianidin as an active
ingredient and has compared this aggregate exposure estimate to
relevant endpoints for clothianidin. EPA has taken the further
conservative step of assuming that, in instances where both
thiamethoxam and clothianidin are registered for use on a crop, both
pesticides will, in fact, be used on that crop.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold 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 data base on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of
safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are
incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a
margin of exposure (MOE) analysis or through using uncertainty (safety)
factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to
humans. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X when reliable data do not support the choice of a
different factor, or, if reliable data are available, EPA uses a
different additional safety factor value based on the use of
traditional uncertainty factors and/or special FQPA safety factors, as
appropriate.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. In the developmental
neurotoxicity study, toxicity in the offspring was observed at a lower
dose level than the dose that caused toxicity in the maternal animals.
Maternal effects included decreased body weights, body weight gains,
and food consumption. Effects seen in the offspring included decreased
body weights, body weight gains, motor activity, and acoustic startle
response in the females. However, EPA determined that the degree of
concern for the developmental neurotoxicity study is low and there are
no residual uncertainties for prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity due to
the results of the developmental neurotoxicity study because the
observed effects are well characterized and there are clear NOAELs/
LOAELs.
    In the two-generation reproduction study, offspring toxicity
(decreased body weight gains, delayed sexual maturation in males,
decreased absolute thymus weights in F1 pups of both sexes, and an
increase in stillbirths in both generations) was seen at a lower dose
than the dose that caused parental toxicity. Based on evidence of
decreased absolute and adjusted organ weights of the thymus and spleen
in multiple studies in the clothianidin data base and on evidence of
increased quantitative susceptibility of juvenile rats, compared to
adults, in the two-generation reproduction study to these effects. EPA
has required that testing be conducted to assess immune system function
in adults and in young animals following exposure during the period of
organogenesis. No quantitative or qualitative susceptibility was
observed in either of the developmental rat or rabbit studies. In the
rat, no developmental toxicity was observed at the highest dose tested,
although this dose level induced decreases in body weight gain and food
consumption in the dams. In the rabbit, premature deliveries, decreased
gravid uterine weights, an increase in litter incidence of a missing
lobe of the lung, and a decrease in the litter average for ossified
sternal centra per fetus were noted at a dose level in which maternal
death, a decrease in food consumption, and clinical signs (scant feces
and orange urine) were observed. Since the developmental effects
observed in the rabbit study were seen in the presence of maternal
toxicity, they are not considered to be qualitatively more severe than
the maternal effects.
    3. Conclusion. The exposure data for clothianidin are complete or
are estimated based on data that reasonably accounts for potential
exposures. The acute dietary exposure assessment is based on maximum
residues of clothianidin observed in clothianidin and thiamethoxam
field trials and assumes 100% CT. The chronic assessment is based on
average residues from clothianidin and thiamethoxam field trials and
also assumes 100% CT. For water, the highest acute estimate from
conservative models was used for both the acute and the chronic dietary
exposure analyses. By using these conservative assessments, acute and
chronic exposures/risks will not be underestimated. The residential
exposure assessment utilizes residential standard operation procedures
(SOPs) to assess post-application exposure to children as well as
incidental oral ingestion by toddlers. The residential SOPs are based
on reasonable worst-case assumptions and will not likely underestimate
exposure/risk. These assessments are unlikely to underestimate the
potential exposure to

infants and children resulting from the use of clothianidin.
     The toxicology data base for clothianidin, however, is not
complete for FQPA purposes. A complete complement of acceptable
developmental, reproduction, developmental neurotoxicity, mammalian
neurotoxicity and special neurotoxicity studies are available; however,
due to evidence of decreased absolute and adjusted organ weights of the
thymus and spleen in multiple studies in the clothianidin data base,
and because juvenile rats in the two-generation reproduction study
appear to be more susceptible to these effects, EPA has determined that
testing should be conducted to assess immune system function in adults
and in young animals following developmental exposures. Given the
levels at which this testing should be conducted it could result in
selection of a more protective (i.e., lower) regulatory endpoint.
    Due to the uncertainty with regard to potential effects on immune
system function in young animals, EPA cannot conclude that there are
reliable data supporting selection of a children's safety factor
different from the presumptive 10X factor. Therefore, the 10X FQPA
children's safety factor will be retained. This safety factor will be
in the form of a database uncertainty factor to account for the lack of
the testing with regard to immune system function with clothianidin.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food to
clothianidin will occupy 11% of the acute population adjusted dose
(aPAD) for the U.S. population, 8% of the aPAD for females 13-49 years,
31% of the aPAD for all infants (< 1 year old), and 45% of the aPAD for
children 1-2 years old. The acute aggregate risks associated with the
registered and proposed uses of clothianidin do not exceed the Agency's
level of concern for the general U.S. population or any population
subgroup.
    2. Chronic risk. For the chronic exposure assessments the residues
of concern are clothianidin. Using the exposure assumptions described
in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to
clothianidin from food and water will utilize 5% of the chronic
population adjusted dose (cPAD) for the U.S. population, 13% of the
cPAD for all infants (<  1 year old), and 16% of the cPAD for children
1-2 years old. Based on the use pattern, chronic residential exposure
to residues of clothianidin is not expected. The long-term aggregate
risks associated with clothianidin exposure resulting from the
registered and proposed uses of clothianidin and from the registered
uses of thiamethoxam do not exceed the Agency's level of concern for
the general U.S. population or any population subgroup.
    3. Short-term/Intermediate-term risk. Short-term aggregate and
intermediate-term aggregate exposures takes into account residential
exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a
background exposure level).
    Clothianidin is currently registered for use that could result in
short-term and intermediate-term residential exposure and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic food and
water and short-term exposures for clothianidin.
    EPA has determined that, for clothianidin, the toxicological
effects are the same across oral, dermal, and inhalation routes of
exposure and has selected the same endpoint and dose for short-term and
intermediate-term exposure scenarios. Therefore, the exposures are
simply summed (combined/aggregated) for use in risk calculations.
Short-term and intermediate aggregate risk estimates range from an MOE
of 1,100 for toddlers (food + water + treated turf + treated soil +
dermal) to 22,000 for youth golfers (food + water + post-application
treated turf). The short-term and intermediate-term aggregate risks
associated with the registered and proposed uses of clothianidin do not
exceed the Agency's level of concern for the general U.S. population or
any population subgroup.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Clothianidin has been
classified as a ``not likely human carcinogen.'' It is not expected to
pose a cancer risk.
    5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, and to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to clothianidin residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate LC/MS/MS methods are available for both collecting data
and enforcing tolerances for clothianidin residues in plant (Bayer
Methods 00552 and 109240-1) and animal (Bayer Method 00624)
commodities. The validated limit of quantitation (LOQ) for clothianidin
in plant commodities is 0.010 ppm, except for wheat straw (0.020 ppm),
and the validated LOQs are 0.010 ppm in milk and 0.020 ppm in animal
tissues. All three of these methods have been approved for tolerance
enforcement, and forwarded to FDA for inclusion in PAM Volume II.
    In addition, Arvesta has submitted another LC/MS/MS method (Morse
Method Meth-164) for enforcing tolerances and collecting data
on residues of clothianidin and TMG in grape and potato commodities.
This newer method is similar to Method 00552 and involves extraction of
residues with acetonitrile/water, cleanup using solid phase extraction
(SPE) cartridges, and the separate analysis of clothianidin and N-(2-
chloro-5-thiazolymethyl)-N'-methylguanidine (TMG) by LC/MS/MS. The
validated LOQ for each analyte is 0.020 ppm in all grape and potato
matrices, except for potato chips and raisins (with LOQs of 0.040 ppm).
The method was adequately validated in conjunction with the field
trials and processing studies and has undergone a successful
independent laboratory validation (ILV) trial.

B. International Residue Limits

    Canadian maximum residue limits (MRLs) have been established for
residues of clothianidin at 0.01 milligram/kilogram (mg/kg) in milk,
corn and canola. As of February 2006, there are no Canadian, Mexican,
or Codex MRLs or tolerances for cotton, sorghum, grapes, or potatoes.

C. Response to Comments

    There were no comments received in response to the notice of
filing.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, the tolerances are established for residues of
clothianidin, (E)-1-(2-chloro-1,3-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-3-methyl-2-
nitroguanidine, in or on grapes at 0.60 ppm, potatoes at 0.05 ppm,
potatoes, granules/flakes at 0.08 ppm, sorghum (grain, forage, and
stover) at 0.01 ppm, and cotton (undelinted and gin byproducts) at 0.01
ppm. Time-limited tolerances are also established for residues of
clothianidin in or on beet, sugar, roots, and beet, sugar, tops at 0.02
ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA 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 rule has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). 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);
or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). 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 of 1995 (NTTAA),
Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a
petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA or are established under section
408(1)(6), such as the tolerances 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. In addition,
the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial
direct effect on 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, as specified
in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects 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.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has
determined that this rule does not have any ``tribal implications'' as
described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6,
2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in
the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.''
``Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive
Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.''
This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this rule.

VII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. 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 this final rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule 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: december 1, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

0
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. Section 180.586 is amended by alphabetically adding commodities to
the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows, and by revising
paragraph (b) as follows:

Sec.  180.586  Clothianidin; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Commodity                        Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
Cotton, gin byproducts.........................                     0.01
Cotton, undelinted seed........................                     0.01
                                * * * * *
Grape..........................................                     0.60
                                * * * * *
Potato.........................................                     0.05
Potato, granules/flakes........................                     0.08
Sorghum, forage, grain, stover.................                     0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. Time-limited tolerances are
established for the residues of the insecticide clothianidin, (E)-1-(2-
chloro-1,3-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-3-methyl-2-nitroguanidine, in connection
with use of the pesticide under section 18 emergency exemptions granted
by EPA. These tolerances will expire and are revoked on the dates
specified in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Commodity                          Parts per million              Expiration/revocation date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beet, sugar, roots......................                                0.02                   December 31, 2009
Beet, sugar, tops.......................                                0.02                   December 31, 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E6-20898 Filed 12-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 63176]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22044]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER16-2541-000]

Pioneer Wind Park I, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Pioneer Wind Park I, LLC`s application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is September 27, 2016.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic 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
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 7, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-22044 Filed 9-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 164 (Friday, August 25, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58292-58293]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18282]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2023-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2360]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before November 24, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2360, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be

considered before the FIRM and FIS report become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Nicholas A. Shufro,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Community                Community map repository address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Clay County, Illinois and Incorporated Areas
          Project: 16-05-2969S Preliminary Date: July 21, 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Flora.....................  City Hall, 131 East 2nd Street,
                                     Flora, IL 62839.
Unincorporated Areas of Clay        Clay County Courthouse, 111 East
 County.                             Chestnut Street, Room 106,
                                     Louisville, IL 62858.
Village of Clay City..............  Village Hall, 318 South Walnut
                                     Street, Clay City, IL 62824.
Village of Louisville.............  Village Hall, 177 South Main Street,
                                     Louisville, IL 62858.
Village of Sailor Springs.........  Village Hall, 107 South Washington
                                     Street, Sailor Springs, IL 62824.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           St. Louis County, Minnesota and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 14-05-2193S Preliminary Date: October 28, 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bois Forte Band of Chippewa.......  Bois Forte Band of Chippewa Tribal
                                     Office, 5344 Lakeshore Drive, Nett
                                     Lake, MN 55772.
City of Aurora....................  City Hall, 16 West 2nd Avenue North,
                                     Aurora, MN 55705.
City of Babbitt...................  City Hall, 71 South Drive, Babbitt,
                                     MN 55706.
City of Biwabik...................  City Hall, 321 North Main Street,
                                     Biwabik, MN 55708.
City of Brookston.................  City Hall, 8757 1st Street South,
                                     Brookston, MN 55711.
City of Cook......................  City Hall, 127 South River Street,
                                     Cook, MN 55723.
City of Duluth....................  City Hall, 411 West First Street,
                                     Duluth, MN 55802.
City of Ely.......................  City Hall, 209 East Chapman Street,
                                     Ely, MN 55731.
City of Floodwood.................  City Hall, 111 West 8th Avenue,
                                     Floodwood, MN 55736.
City of Hermantown................  City Hall, 5105 Maple Grove Road,
                                     Hermantown, MN 55811.
City of Hibbing...................  City Hall, 401 East 21st Street,
                                     Hibbing, MN 55746.
City of Hoyt Lakes................  Municipal Building, 206 Kennedy
                                     Memorial Drive, Hoyt Lakes, MN
                                     55750.
City of Iron Junction.............  City Office, 4141 Merritt Avenue,
                                     Iron Junction, MN 55751.
City of Meadowlands...............  Meadowlands Community Center, 7758
                                     Western Avenue, Meadowlands, MN
                                     55765.
City of Mountain Iron.............  City Hall, 8586 Enterprise Drive
                                     South, Mountain Iron, MN 55768.
City of Orr.......................  City Hall, 4429 Highway 53, Orr, MN
                                     55771.
City of Proctor...................  City Hall, 100 Pionk Drive, Proctor,
                                     MN 55810.
City of Rice Lake.................  Rice Lake City Hall, 4107 West Beyer
                                     Road, Duluth, MN 55803.
City of Tower.....................  City Hall, 602 Main Street, Tower,
                                     MN 55790.
City of Virginia..................  City Hall, 327 South First Street,
                                     Virginia, MN 55792.
City of Winton....................  Winton Community Center, 102 North
                                     Main Street, Winton, MN 55796.
Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior   Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior
 Chippewa.                           Chippewa Tribal Center, 1720 Big
                                     Lake Road, Cloquet, MN 55720.
Unincorporated Areas of St. Louis   St. Louis County Courthouse, 100
 County.                             North 5th Avenue West, Duluth, MN
                                     55802.
Township of Gnesen................  Gnesen Community Center, 6356 Howard
                                     Gnesen Road, Duluth, MN 55803.
Township of Lakewood..............  Lakewood Town Hall, 3110 Strand
                                     Road, Duluth, MN 55803.
Township of Midway................  Midway Town Hall, 3230 Midway Road,
                                     Duluth, MN 55810.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Summers County, West Virginia and Incorporated Areas
  Project: 21-03-0008S Preliminary Date: September 30, 2022 and May 01,
                                  2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Hinton....................  City Hall, 322 Summers Street,
                                     Hinton, WV 25951.
Unincorporated Areas of Summers     Summers County Courthouse, 120
 County.                             Ballengee Street, Suite 203,
                                     Hinton, WV 25951.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-18282 Filed 8-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P