[Federal Register: August 19, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 159)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 41807-41810]
[DOCID:fr19au09-11]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0716; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-212-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-135 Airplanes; and Empresa Brasileira de
Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER) Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -
145XR, -145MP, and -145EP Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as: It has been found the occurrence of corrosion on the
Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) mounting rods that could cause the APU rod
to break, affecting the APU support structure integrity.
    APU support structure failure could result in undetectable fire in
the tail cone and possible loss of control of the airplane. The
proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 18,
2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Technical
Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170--Putim--
12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos Campos--SP--BRASIL; telephone: +55 12
3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax: +55 12 3927-7546; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.flyembraer.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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 regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1405; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0716;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-212-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The Agencia Nacional De Aviacao Civil--Brazil (ANAC), which is the
airworthiness authority for Brazil, has issued Brazilian Airworthiness
Directive 2008-10-02, dated October 21, 2008 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    It has been found the occurrence of corrosion on the Auxiliary
Power Unit (APU) mounting rods that could cause the APU rod to
break, affecting the APU support structure integrity.

APU support structure failure could result in undetectable fire in the
tail cone and possible loss of control of the airplane. Required
actions include repetitive inspections for corrosion of the APU
auxiliary and center mounting rods and rod ends, and corrective actions
if necessary. Corrective actions include removing corrosion, applying
anticorrosive treatment, and replacing mounting rods. You may obtain
further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Embraer has issued Service Bulletin 145-49-0034, Revision 01, dated
September 8, 2008; and Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-0008, Revision 02,
dated September 8, 2008. The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in
the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a Note within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 761 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 8 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed
AD on U.S. operators to be $487,040, or $640 per product.

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 above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. 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 a regulatory 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

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER): Docket No. FAA-
2009-0716; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-212-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by September 18, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to EMBRAER Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -135KE,
-135KL, and -135LR airplanes; and EMBRAER Model EMB-145, -145ER, -
145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes, certified in
any category; as identified Embraer Service Bulletin 145-49-0034,
Revision 01, dated September 8, 2008; and Embraer Service Bulletin
145LEG-49-0008, Revision 02, dated September 8, 2008.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 49: Airborne
Auxiliary Power.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    It has been found the occurrence of corrosion on the Auxiliary
Power Unit (APU) mounting rods that could cause the APU rod to
break, affecting the APU support structure integrity.

APU support structure failure could result in undetectable fire in
the tail cone and possible loss of control of the airplane. Required
actions include repetitive inspections for corrosion of the APU
auxiliary and center mounting rods and rod ends, and corrective
actions if necessary. Corrective actions include removing corrosion,
applying anticorrosive treatment, and replacing mounting rods.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done do the following actions:
    (1) Within 500 flight hours or two months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, do an external detailed
inspection for corrosion of the APU, auxiliary and center mounting
rods, and rod ends. Repeat the inspections thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 1,500 flight hours or 6 months, whichever occurs
first. If any corrosion is found during any inspection, before
further flight, do the actions required by paragraphs (f)(1)(i),
(f)(1)(ii), and (f)(1)(iii) of this AD, as applicable. Do all
actions required by this paragraph in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer Service Bulletin 145-49-0034,
Revision 01, dated September 8, 2008; or Embraer Service Bulletin
145LEG-49-0008, Revision 02, dated September 8, 2008; as applicable.
    (i) If light corrosion (characterized by discoloration or
pitting) is found on a mounting rod, remove the corrosion and apply
an anticorrosive treatment.
    (ii) If moderate corrosion (characterized by surface blistering
or evidence of scaling and flaking), or heavy corrosion
(characterized by severe blistering exfoliation, scaling and
flaking) is found, replace the affected mounting rod with a new
mounting rod having the same part number.
    (iii) If any corrosion is detected on the rod ends, remove the
corrosion and apply an anticorrosive treatment.
    (2) Accomplishing the inspection and corrective actions required
by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD before the effective date of this AD
in accordance with Embraer Service Bulletin 145-49-0034, dated April
18, 2008; Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-0008, dated April 18,
2008; or Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-0008, Revision 01, dated
May 26, 2008; is acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.
    (3) Submit a report of the positive findings (including level of
corrosion such as Light, Moderate, or Heavy as identified in Embraer
Corrosion Prevention Manual (CPM) 51-11-01, on the external surface
of the rods as well as the rod ends) of the inspection required by
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to the ATTN: Mr. Antonio Claret--
Customer Support Group, Embraer Aircraft Holding, Inc, 276 S.W. 34th
Street Fort Lauderdale, FL 33315--USA; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, at
the applicable time specified in paragraph (f)(3)(i) or (f)(3)(ii)
of this AD. The report must include the inspection results, a
description of any discrepancies found, the airplane serial number,
and the number of landings and flight hours on the airplane.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was accomplished prior to the effective
date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the
effective date of this AD.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows:
    (1) Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02, dated October
21, 2008, requires only a one-time inspection with a compliance time
of 1,500 flight hours or 6 months after the effective date of the
Brazilian AD, whichever occurs first. However, we have determined
that, since the exterior surface of the mounting rods is cadmium-
plated and corrosion propagates from inside out, a one-time
inspection may not identify the corroded rods if corrosion did not
become evident through the cadmium plated exterior surface. This
one-time inspection will not reveal the extent of damage to these
rods on the existing fleet and may require subsequent non-
destructive inspections (NDI) to determine the final action. This AD
instead requires an initial inspection within the next 500 flight
hours or 2 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs first; and repetitive inspections at intervals not to exceed
1,500 flight hours or 6 months, whichever occurs first. This
difference has been coordinated with the Agencia Nacional De Aviacao
Civil--Brazil (ANAC).
    (2) Although Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02, dated
October 21, 2008, does not include a reporting requirement, the
service bulletins identified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD do
specify reporting findings to Embraer. This AD requires that
operators report the results of the inspections to Embraer because
the required inspection report will help determine the extent of the
corrosion in the affected fleet, from which we will determine if
further corrective action is warranted. This difference has been
coordinated with ANAC.
    (3) Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02, dated October
21, 2008, allows replacement of the affected APU mounting rods by
``new ones bearing a new P/N [part number] approved by ANAC
[Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil].'' However,
paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this AD requires replacing the affected
mounting rod only with a new mounting rod having the same part
number. Operators may request approval of an alternative method of
compliance in order to install a new part number in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. This
difference has been coordinated with ANAC.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International

Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Sanjay
Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies,
notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight
Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.
    (4) Special Flight Permits: Special flight permits may be issued
in accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the
airplane to a location where the airplane can be modified (if the
operator elects to do so), except if two or more center mounting
rods or rod ends are heavily corroded or broken, a special flight
permit is not permitted.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02,
dated October 21, 2008; Embraer Service Bulletin 145-49-0034,
Revision 01, dated September 8, 2008; and Embraer Service Bulletin
145LEG-49-0008, Revision 02, dated September 8, 2008, for related
information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 7, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-19852 Filed 8-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 10, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 175)]
[Notices]
[Page 55317-55318]
[DOCID:fr10se10-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2662-002; Project No. 12968-001]

FirstLight Hydro Generating Company; City of Norwich Department
of Public Utilities; Notice of Applications Tendered for Filing With
the Commission and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Licensing and
Deadline for Submission of Final Amendments

September 2, 2010.

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric applications have been
filed with the Commission and are available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Applications: New Major License.
    b. Project Nos.: 2662-002 and 12968-001.
    c. Date Filed: August 31, 2010 (P-2662) and August 27, 2010 (P-
12968).
    d. Applicants: Existing licensee--FirstLight Hydro Generating
Company (FirstLight); and Competitor--City of Norwich Department of
Public Utilities (Norwich Public Utilities).
    e. Name of Project: Scotland Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Shetucket River, in Windham County,
Connecticut. The project does not occupy federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact:
    For Project No. 2662: John Whitfield, Senior Project Engineer,
FirstLight Hydro Generating Company, 20 Church Street, Hartford, CT
06103.
    For Project No. 12968: John F. Bilda, General Manager, Norwich
Public Utilities, 16 South Golden Street, Norwich, CT 06360.
    i. FERC Contact: John Costello,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. These applications are not ready for environmental analysis at
this time.

    k. The Project Description: The project includes the following
constructed facilities: (1) A 480-foot-long earthen dam with a 12-inch
reinforced concrete corewall consisting of (a) A 183-foot-long, 32.5-
foot-high earthen dike with a top elevation 90.0 feet local datum; (b)
a 119-foot-long, 34-foot-high Taintor gate section with a sill
elevation at 64 feet local datum and a 3-foot-wide transition section,
five 20-foot-wide bays, and four 4-foot-wide gate piers; (c) an 89-
foot-long, 35-foot-high Ambursen-type ungated spillway section with a
crest elevation of 75.38 feet local datum; (d) an 18.83-foot-long
gravity-type ungated spillway section with a crest elevation of 75.38
feet local datum and 30-inch wooden pin-type flashboards; and (e) a 70-
foot-long powerhouse and intake integral with the dam containing a
single 2,000 kW turbine-generator; (2) a 134-acre reservoir at an
elevation of 77.9 feet local datum with a usable storage capacity of
268 acre-feet at a drawdown of 2 feet; and (3) appurtenant facilities.
    The existing Scotland project operates in a run-of-river mode
during high flow periods and a store-and-release mode, with ponding,
during low-flow periods.
    Both applicants propose to increase capacity by installing an
additional turbine and generator in the existing powerhouse. Norwich
Public Utilities' proposal would increase capacity by 3.0 MW.
FirstLight's proposal would increase capacity by 1.026 MW. Both
applicants propose to operate the project in a run-of-river mode.
    l. Locations of the Applications: Copies of the applications are
available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or
may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at 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, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Copies are
also available for inspection and reproduction at the addresses in item
(h) above.
    m. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. Procedural Schedule:
    The applications will be processed according to the following Hydro
Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be made as
appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Acceptance/Notice of Ready  November 11, 2010.
 for Environmental Analysis (when
 FERC approved studies are complete).
Filing of recommendations,            December 29, 2010.
 preliminary terms and conditions,
 and fishway prescriptions.
Commission issues EA................  June 13, 2011.
Comments on EA or EIS...............  July 13, 2011.
Modified terms and conditions.......  September 11, 2011.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    o. Final amendments to the applications must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-22515 Filed 9-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 196 (Friday, October 9, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61122-61125]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25689]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0482; FRL-9934-45]

Cellulose Carboxymethyl Ether, Potassium Salt; Tolerance
Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium
salt; when used as an inert ingredient in a pesticide chemical
formulation. Spring Trading Company on behalf of Lamberti USA,
Incorporated submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a
maximum

permissible level for residues of cellulose carboxymethyl ether,
potassium salt on food or feed commodities.

DATES: This regulation is effective October 9, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before December 8, 2015,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0482, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

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

C. Can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0482 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
December 8, 2015. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0482, by one of
the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of August 26, 2015 (80 FR 51759) (FRL-9931-
74), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the receipt of a pesticide petition (PP IN-10821)
filed by Spring Trading Company (203 Dogwood Trail Magnolia, Texas
77354) on behalf of Lamberti USA, Incorporated, 161 Washington Street
Eight Tower Bridge, Suite 1000 Conshohocken, PA 19428. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.960 be amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of cellulose
carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt; CAS Reg. No. 54848-04-3. That
document included a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner
and solicited comments on the petitioner's request. The Agency did not
receive any comments.
    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and use 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 an exemption from the
requirement of 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. . .'' and
specifies factors EPA is to consider in establishing an exemption.

III. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings

    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be shown that the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably foreseeable
circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human health. In order
to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the inert in
conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert ingredient
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate

exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action and considered its validity, completeness and reliability
and the relationship of this information 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. In the case of certain chemical substances that
are defined as polymers, the Agency has established a set of criteria
to identify categories of polymers expected to present minimal or no
risk. The definition of a polymer is given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and the
exclusion criteria for identifying these low-risk polymers are
described in 40 CFR 723.250(d). cellulose carboxymethyl ether,
potassium salt conforms to the definition of a polymer given in 40 CFR
723.250(b) and meets the following criteria that are used to identify
low-risk polymers.
    1. The polymer is not a cationic polymer nor is it reasonably
anticipated to become a cationic polymer in a natural aquatic
environment.
    2. The polymer does contain as an integral part of its composition
the atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
    3. The polymer does not contain as an integral part of its
composition, except as impurities, any element other than those listed
in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii).
    4. The polymer is neither designed nor can it be reasonably
anticipated to substantially degrade, decompose, or depolymerize.
    5. The polymer is manufactured or imported from monomers and/or
reactants that are already included on the TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory or manufactured under an applicable TSCA section 5 exemption.
    6. The polymer is not a water absorbing polymer with a number
average molecular weight (MW) greater than or equal to 10,000 daltons.
    Additionally, the polymer also meets as required the following
exemption criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).
    7. The polymer's number average MW of 9587 is greater than 1,000
and less than 10,000 daltons. The polymer contains less than 10%
oligomeric material below MW 500 and less than 25% oligomeric material
below MW 1,000, and the polymer does not contain any reactive
functional groups.
    Thus, cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt meets the
criteria for a polymer to be considered low risk under 40 CFR 723.250.
Based on its conformance to the criteria in this unit, no mammalian
toxicity is anticipated from dietary, inhalation, or dermal exposure to
cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    For the purposes of assessing potential exposure under this
exemption, EPA considered that cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium
salt could be present in all raw and processed agricultural commodities
and drinking water, and that non-occupational non-dietary exposure was
possible. The number average MW of cellulose carboxymethyl ether,
potassium salt is 9587 daltons. Generally, a polymer of this size would
be poorly absorbed through the intact gastrointestinal tract or through
intact human skin. Since cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt
conform to the criteria that identify a low-risk polymer, there are no
concerns for risks associated with any potential exposure scenarios
that are reasonably foreseeable. The Agency has determined that a
tolerance is not necessary to protect the public health.

V. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of
Toxicity

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency
consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of
a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt to
share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and
cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt does not have a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding
EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of
toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see
EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

VI. Additional Safety Factor for the Protection of Infants and Children

    Section 408(b)(2)(C) 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 unless EPA concludes
that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children. Due to the expected low toxicity of cellulose carboxymethyl
ether, potassium salt, EPA has not used a safety factor analysis to
assess the risk. For the same reasons the additional tenfold safety
factor is unnecessary.

VII. Determination of Safety

    Based on the conformance to the criteria used to identify a low-
risk polymer, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty of no
harm to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to residues of cellulose carboxymethyl ether,
potassium salt.

VIII. Other Considerations

A. Existing Exemptions From a Tolerance

    There are no existing exemptions from a tolerance for cellulose
carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt polymers.

B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

IX. Conclusion

    Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting residues of cellulose
carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt from the requirement of a tolerance
will be safe.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes a tolerance exemption under FFDCA section
408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB

approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.), nor does it require any special considerations under Executive
Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

XI. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: October 1, 2015.
Susan Lewis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.960, add alphabetically the following polymer to the
table to read as follows:

Sec.  [emsp14]180.960  Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Polymer                              CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt, minimum        54848-04-3
 number average molecular weight 9587 Daltons..............

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

[FR Doc. 2015-25689 Filed 10-8-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P