[Federal Register: October 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 210)]
[Notices]
[Page 64338-64340]
[DOCID:fr29oc08-74]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0543]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Waiver of In Vivo Demonstration of Bioequivalence of
Animal Drugs in Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A
Medicated Articles

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on the waiver requirement
procedures that are recommended by the agency for in vivo demonstration
of bioequivalence for generic soluble powder oral dosage form products
and Type A medicated articles.

DATES: Submit written or electronic comments on the collection of
information by December 29, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments on the collection of information
to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the
collection of information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-
305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.1061,
Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denver Presley, Jr., Office of
Information Management (HFA-710), Food and Drug

Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Waiver of In Vivo Demonstration of Bioequivalence of Animal Drugs in
Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated
Articles--21 CFR Part 514 (OMB Control Number 0910-0575)--Extension

    The Center for Veterinary Medicine has written this guidance to
address a perceived need for agency guidance in its work with the
animal health industry. This guidance describes the procedures that the
agency recommends for the review of requests for waiver of in vivo
demonstration of bioequivalence for generic soluble powder oral dosage
form products and Type A medicated articles.
    The Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Registration Act of 1988
permitted the generic drug manufacturers to copy those pioneer drug
products that were no longer subject to patent or other marketing
exclusivity protection. The approval for marketing these generic
products is based, in part, upon a demonstration of bioequivalence
between the generic product and the pioneer product. This guidance
clarifies circumstances under which FDA believes the demonstration of
bioequivalence required by the statute does not need to be established
on the basis of in vivo studies for soluble powder oral dosage form
products and Type A medicated articles. The data submitted in support
of the waiver request are necessary to validate the waiver decision.
    The requirement to establish bioequivalence through in vivo studies
(blood level bioequivalence or clinical endpoint bioequivalence) may be
waived for soluble powder oral dosage form products or Type A medicated
articles in either of two alternative ways. A biowaiver may be granted
if it can be shown that the generic soluble powder oral dosage form
product or Type A medicated article contains the same active and
inactive ingredient(s) and is produced using the same manufacturing
processes as the approved comparator product or article. Alternatively,
a biowaiver may be granted without direct comparison to the pioneer
product's formulation and manufacturing process if it can be shown that
the active pharmaceutical ingredient(s) (API) is the same as the
pioneer product, is soluble, and that there are no ingredients in the
formulation likely to cause adverse pharmacologic effects. For the
purpose of evaluating soluble powder oral dosage form products and Type
A medicated articles, solubility can be demonstrated in one of two
ways: (1) ``USP definition'' approach, or (2) ``Dosage adjusted''
approach.
    The respondents for this collection of information are
pharmaceutical companies manufacturing animal drugs.
    FDA estimates the burden for this collection of information as
follows:

                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Water Soluble Powders\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      No. of         Annual Frequency       Total Annual        Hours per
                   Respondents         per Response          Responses           Response         Total Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Same                            1                     1                  1                  5                  5
 formulation/
 manufacturing
 process
 approach
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Same API/                       5                     5                  5                 10                 50
 solubility
 approach
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total burden hours                                                                                55
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

                   Table 2--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Type A Medicated Articles\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      No. of       Annual Frequency  of     Total Annual        Hours per
                   Respondents           Responses           Responses           Response         Total Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Same                            2                     2                  2                  5                 10
 formulation/
 manufacturing
 process
 approach
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Same API/                      10                    10                 10                 20                200
 solubility
 approach
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total burden hours                                                                                210
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    The sources of the previous data are records of generic drug
applications over the past 10 years.
    Please note that on January 15, 2008, the FDA Division of Dockets
Management Web site transitioned to the Federal Dockets Management
System (FDMS). FDMS is a Government-wide, electronic docket management
system. Electronic comments or submissions will be accepted by FDA only
through FDMS at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: October 22, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E8-25741 Filed 10-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 185 (Monday, September 24, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58794-58796]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23457]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1016; Directorate Identifier 2010-SW-009-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell), Model 412 and 412EP helicopters.
This proposed AD is prompted by reports of cracking in the swashplate
outer ring assemblies (outer ring). This AD would establish a lower
life limit on certain outer rings, requiring a revision of the
retirement life on the components' history card or equivalent record,
and a revision of the maintenance manual or Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness (ICA). This proposal also would prohibit installing these
outer rings on any helicopter. The proposed actions are intended to
prevent failure of an outer ring because of cracking, which could lead
to the loss of main rotor (M/R) blade pitch control and subsequent loss
of helicopter control.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 23,
2012.

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 800-647-
5527) 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
Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review a copy of 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: Michael Kohner, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
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

    This proposal is prompted by a report of fatigue cracking in the
outer ring, part number (P/N) 412-010-407-105. The outer ring
previously had a life limit of 10,000 hours TIS, but Bell has
recommended reducing the outer ring retirement life to 2,500 hours TIS.
Cracking in the outer ring can lead to loss of cyclic and collective
pitch control of the main rotor blades and loss of helicopter control.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant
information and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is
likely to exist or develop on other products of these same type
designs.

Related Service Information

    We have reviewed Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin No. 412-08-
131, Revision B, dated October 29, 2009 (ASB), which describes
procedures for establishing a new retirement life for the outer ring
and replacing the outer ring at 2,500 hours TIS.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require the following:
     Within 30 days, establish a new retirement life of 2,500
hours TIS for outer ring P/N 412-010-407-105, and record this on the
component history card or equivalent record. Within the same time
period, make pen-and-ink changes or insert a copy of the AD into the
Airworthiness Limitations section of the applicable maintenance manual
or ICA.
     Within 300 hours TIS, for any affected outer ring that has
2,200 or more hours TIS on the effective date of the proposed AD,
replace the outer ring with an airworthy outer ring.
     Within 12 months, for any affected outer ring, regardless
of the number of hours TIS, replace the outer ring with an airworthy
outer ring. The installation of outer ring, P/N 412-010-407-105, would
be prohibited on any helicopter.

Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service Information

    The ASB sets a calendar date for compliance. This proposed AD does
not.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 143 helicopters. We
estimate that it would take about one work-hour to revise the component
history card or equivalent record, as well as the maintenance manual or
ICA, at an average labor rate of $85 per work hour, for a total cost of
$85 per helicopter and $12,155 for the U.S. operator fleet. Replacing
an outer ring would take 26 work-hours and required parts would cost an
estimated $25,725. Based on these figures, we calculate the total cost
to be $27,935 per helicopter to replace an outer ring.

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

    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
airworthiness directive (AD):

 Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (BELL): Docket No. FAA-2012-1016;
Directorate Identifier 2010-SW-009-AD.

 (a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bell Model 412 and 412EP helicopters, with a
swashplate outer ring assembly (outer ring), part number (P/N) 412-
010-407-105, certificated in any category.

 (b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as cracking in the outer
ring, which could result in the loss of main rotor (M/R) blade pitch
control and subsequent loss of helicopter control.

(c) 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.

(d) Required Actions

    (1) Within 30 days, establish a retirement life of 2,500 hours
time-in-service (TIS) for any affected outer ring on the component
history card or equivalent record. Revise the helicopter
Airworthiness Limitations section of the applicable maintenance
manual or Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) by
establishing the new retirement life by making pen and ink changes
or inserting a copy of this AD into the maintenance manual or the
ICAs.
    (2) For any affected outer ring that, on the effective date of
this AD, has 2,200 or more hours TIS, within 300 hours TIS, replace
the outer ring with an airworthy outer ring.
    (3) Within 12 months, for any affected outer ring, regardless of
the number of hours TIS, replace the outer ring with an airworthy
outer ring.
    (4) Do not install outer ring, P/N 412-010-407-105, on any
helicopter.

(e) Special flight permit

    No special flight permits will be issued for any helicopter
installed with outer ring, P/N 412-010-407-105, if the outer ring
has 2,500 hours or more TIS.

 (f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Michael Kohner, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate,
FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 222-
5447; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(g) Additional Information

    (1) Removal and installation instructions, as well as M/R
assembly track and balance procedures, are contained in Bell manuals
BHT-412-MM and BHT-412-CR&O. Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin
No. 412-08-131, Revision B, dated October 29, 2009, contains
additional information about the subject of this AD. None of these
documents is incorporated by reference.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bell
Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review a copy of information at
the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

(h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6230, Main Rotor
Mast/Swashplate.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 14, 2012.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-23457 Filed 9-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Policy

Science Advisory Council for Exposure

Policy Number:	9

Regarding:	Standard Values for  Daily Acres Treated in Agriculture

Date:		Original: April 1, 1999;  Revised:  July 5, 2000

Index terms:	acres treated per day; handler exposure input values

Contact:	R. Sandvig

ISSUE:

This policy is a revision of draft policy number 9, Agricultural Default Daily Acres Treated, dated April 1, 1999.  It provides standard values for the number of acres that can be treated in a single day by various types of agricultural equipment.

BACKGROUND:

This is a reference for exposure assessors to use when there are no acceptable data regarding the number of acres that a pesticide handler can treat per day with a specific pesticide.  These values are specifically for occupational pesticide handlers.  Standard values for residential handlers can be found in the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for Residential Exposure Assessments (December 1997).  The generic standard values in the table below are based on the published scientific literature, surveys, knowledge of agricultural practices, and calculated acreage estimates as noted in the tables.

The values presented here are considered to be “typical-to-high-end.”  These values should be modified by pesticide- and crop-specific knowledge that affects the number of acres that can be treated in a day (e.g., high number of gallons required per acre, specific geographic or cultural practice crop restrictions).  These refinements should be made whenever possible by working with appropriate staff from the Biological and Economic Assessment Division (BEAD), grower groups, professional applicators, and extension agents.

When assessing exposure scenarios that include high acre crops, such as cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice and soybeans, the exposure assessor should include a range of acres treated per day, usually typical and high end values, to provide information that will assist the risk manger in decision making.  Further, the use of high end acres treated per day values may not be appropriate for intermediate-term, long-term or cancer exposures, depending on the use pattern of the chemical being assessed.   When there are risks of concern for these exposure durations, chemical specific use information should be obtained.

There are efforts to develop methods for deriving the number of acres that can be treated per day, most notably, one in a final draft stage being developed under a NAFTA project by representatives from EPA/OPP, California Department of Pesticide Regulation, and Health Canada.  When this methodology becomes available it may be used as an adjunct to the default values listed below.

In all cases when more detailed information regarding the geographical/cultural characteristics of the crop is available, the values in the table below should be modified.

POLICY:

Use the following table as a guide for choosing standard values for the number of acres treated per day, when no other supporting data or information are available.

Standard Values for Daily Area Treated Values for Agricultural Applications

Exposure Scenario

Equipment/Usage

Value

Units

Notes/Comments

Mixer/Loader

Mixing/loading liquids

Aerial

350

Acres per day

Typical field crops.  Based on Pesticide Handler Exposure Database (PHED) application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

1200

Upper range for forestry and high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data: Timber Mill Research, Inc.  June 1998.   National Agricultural Aviation Association’s 1998 Industrial Survey for Agricultural Aviation. (values for acres treated per day range from 1,017 to 1,643 for all crops , 1,351 to 2,071 for cotton, 1,101 to 1,953 for rice, and 970 to 1,625 for wheat ); N. Akesson and W. Yates. 1974.  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Agricultural Development Paper No. 94 titled “The Use of Aircraft in Agriculture”;  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (1,380 acres treated per day, average) and cultural use patterns.

7500

Ultra Low Volume (ULV) and wide area applications such as mosquito control.  Based on data from the following:  N. Akesson and W. Yates. 1974.  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Agricultural Development Paper No. 94 titled “The Use of Aircraft in Agriculture”.

Chemigation

350

Acres per day

No data.  Assumed to have a similar acreage as aerial mixing/loading for typical field crops.  Also based on an average crop circle acreage of approximately 100 to 120 acres per circle, with 3 circles being treated.

Groundboom

40

Acres per day

Golf courses.  Based the following data:  Andersen, J.  November 12, 1992.  “Use Data for Turf Cluster Insecticides.”  Memorandum from J. Anderson, BEAD to L. Dorsey, HED.

80

Typical field crops.  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

200

Upper range for high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data:  Brassard, D.  June 17, 1993.   “Transmittal of Corn Cluster Exposure Parameters.”   Memorandum from D.  Brassard, BEAD, to L.  Dorsey, HED (values range from 112 to 286 acres treated per day); PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (256 acres treated per day), average and cultural use patterns.

ULV Ground Fogger

3000

Acres per day

ULV and wide area applications such as mosquito control.  Calculated based on a speed of 15 miles per hour, a 6 hour day, and a 275 ft wide swath in a residential neighborhood setting.

Airblast

20

Acres per day

Lower range when high number of gallons are needed per acre.  (e.g., 500 to 1000 gallons per acre)

(40 acres per day value based on an average application rate of 150 gallons/acre, so a higher application rate is assumed to have a lower total acreage treated per day)

40

 Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.  (Typical application rate of 150 gallons/acre.  Lower application rates are assumed to have higher total acreage treated per day)

Rights-of-way Sprayer

1000

Gallons per day

Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

High-pressure Handwand

1000

Gallons per day

Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

Mixing/loading wettable powders

Aerial

350

Acres per day

Typical field crops.  Based on  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns

1200

Upper range for forestry and high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data: Timber Mill Research, Inc.  June 1998.   National Agricultural Aviation Association’s 1998 Industrial Survey for Agricultural Aviation. (values for acres treated per day range from 1,017 to 1,643 for all crops , 1,351 to 2,071 for cotton, 1,101 to 1,953 for rice, and 970 to 1,625 for wheat); N. Akesson and W. Yates. 1974.  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Agricultural Development Paper No. 94 titled “The Use of Aircraft in Agriculture”;  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (1,380 acres treated per day, average) and cultural use patterns.

Chemigation

350

Acres per day

No data.  Assumed to have a similar acreage as aerial mixing/loading for typical field crops.  Also based on an average crop circle acreage of approximately 100 to 120 acres per circle, with 3 circles being treated.

Groundboom

40

Acres per day

Golf courses.  Based the following data:  Andersen, J.  November 12, 1992.  “Use Data for Turf Cluster Insecticides.”  Memorandum from J. Anderson, BEAD to L. Dorsey, HED.

80

Typical field crops.  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns

200

Upper range for high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data:  Brassard, D.  June 17, 1993.   “Transmittal of Corn Cluster Exposure Parameters.”   Memorandum from D.  Brassard, BEAD, to L.  Dorsey, HED (values range from 112 to 286 acres treated per day); PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (256 acres treated per day), average and cultural use patterns.

Airblast

20

Acres per day

Lower range when high number of gallons are needed per acre  (e.g., 500 to 1000 gallons per acre).

 (40 acres per day value based on an average application rate of 150 gallons/acre, so a higher application rate is assumed to have a lower total acreage treated)

40

Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.  (Typical application rate of 150 gallons/acre.  Lower application rates are assumed to have higher total acreage treated per day)

Rights-of-way Sprayer

1000

Gallons per day

 Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.  (Typical application rate of 150 gallons/acre.  Lower application rates are assumed to have higher total acreage treated per day)

High-pressure Handwand

1000

Gallons per day

Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

Loading granulars

Aerial

350

Acres per day

Typical field crops.  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

1200

Upper range for forestry and high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data: Timber Mill Research, Inc.  June 1998.   National Agricultural Aviation Association’s 1998 Industrial Survey for Agricultural Aviation. (values for acres treated per day range from 1,017 to 1,643 for all crops , 1,351 to 2,071 for cotton, 1,101 to 1,953 for rice, and 970 to 1,625 for wheat ); N. Akesson and W. Yates. 1974.  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Agricultural Development Paper No. 94 titled “The Use of Aircraft in Agriculture”;  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (1,380 acres treated per day, average) and cultural use patterns.

Tractor-drawn Broadcast Spreaders

40

Acres per day

Golf courses.  Based the following data:  Andersen, J.  November 12, 1992.  “Use Data for Turf Cluster Insecticides.”  Memorandum from J. Anderson, BEAD to L. Dorsey, HED.

80

Typical field crops.  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

200

Upper range for high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data:  Brassard, D.  June 17, 1993.   “Transmittal of Corn Cluster Exposure Parameters.”   Memorandum from D.  Brassard, BEAD, to L.  Dorsey, HED (values range from 112 to 286 acres treated per day); PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (256 acres treated per day), average and cultural use patterns.

Applicator

Applying sprays

Aerial

350

Acres per day

Typical field crops.  Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

1200

Upper range for forestry and high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data: Timber Mill Research, Inc.  June 1998.   National Agricultural Aviation Association’s 1998 Industrial Survey for Agricultural Aviation. (values for acres treated per day range from 1,017 to 1,643 for all crops , 1,351 to 2,071 for cotton, 1,101 to 1,953 for rice, and 970 to 1,625 for wheat ); N. Akesson and W. Yates. 1974.  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Agricultural Development Paper No. 94 titled “The Use of Aircraft in Agriculture”;  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (1,380 acres treated per day, average) and cultural use patterns.

7500

Ultra Low Volume (ULV) and wide area applications such as mosquito control.  Based on the following data:  N. Akesson and W. Yates. 1974.  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Agricultural Development Paper No. 94 titled “The Use of Aircraft in Agriculture”.

Groundboom

40

Acres per day

Golf courses.  Based the following data:  Andersen, J.  November 12, 1992.  “Use Data for Turf Cluster Insecticides.”  Memorandum from J. Anderson, BEAD to L. Dorsey, HED.

80

Typical field crops.  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

200

Upper range for high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data:  Brassard, D.  June 17, 1993.   “Transmittal of Corn Cluster Exposure Parameters.”   Memorandum from D.  Brassard, BEAD, to L.  Dorsey, HED (values range from 112 to 286 acres treated per day); PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (256 acres treated per day), average and cultural use patterns.

ULV Ground Fogger

3000

Acres per day

ULV and wide area applications such as mosquito control.  Calculated based on a speed of 15 miles per hour, a 6 hour day, and a 275 ft wide swath in a residential neighborhood setting.

Airblast

20

Acres per day

Lower range when high number of gallons are needed per acre  (e.g., 500 to 1000 gallons per acre).

 (40 acres per day value based on an average application rate of 150 gallons/acre, so a higher application rate is assumed to have a lower total acreage treated)

40

Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.  (Typical application rate of 150 gallons/acre.  Lower application rates are assumed to have higher total acreage treated per day)

Rights-of-way Sprayer

1000

Gallons per day

 Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.  (Typical application rate of 150 gallons/acre.  Lower application rates are assumed to have higher total acreage treated per day)

High-pressure Handwand

1000

Gallons per day

Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

Applying granulars

Aerial

350

Acres per day

Typical field crops.  Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

1200

Upper range for forestry and high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data: Timber Mill Research, Inc.  June 1998.   National Agricultural Aviation Association’s 1998 Industrial Survey for Agricultural Aviation. (values for acres treated per day range from 1,017 to 1,643 for all crops , 1,351 to 2,071 for cotton, 1,101 to 1,953 for rice, and 970 to 1,625 for wheat ); N. Akesson and W. Yates. 1974.  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Agricultural Development Paper No. 94 titled “The Use of Aircraft in Agriculture”;  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (1,380 acres treated per day, average) and cultural use patterns.

Tractor-drawn Broadcast Spreaders

40

Acres per day

Golf courses.  Based the following data:  Andersen, J.  November 12, 1992.  “Use Data for Turf Cluster Insecticides.”  Memorandum from J. Anderson, BEAD to L. Dorsey, HED.

80

Typical field crops.  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

200

Upper range for high acre crops including, but not limited to cotton, corn, wheat, alfalfa, rice, and soybeans.  Based on the following data:  Brassard, D.  June 17, 1993.   “Transmittal of Corn Cluster Exposure Parameters.”   Memorandum from D.  Brassard, BEAD, to L.  Dorsey, HED (values range from 112 to 286 acres treated per day); PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day (256 acres treated per day), average and cultural use patterns.

Flagging

Flagging

Sprays

350

Acres per day

 Based on  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

Granulars

350

Acres per day

 Based on  PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

Mixer/Loader/Applicator

M/L/A liquids

Low Pressure Handwand (commercial)

40

Gallons per day

Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.  Spot treatments may have a lower amount of gallons applied in one day.

Backpack Sprayer (commercial)

40

Gallons per day

Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.  Spot treatments may have a lower amount of gallons applied in one day.

High Pressure Handwand (greenhouse)

1000

Gallons per day

Based on PHED application data normalized to an 8 hour day and cultural use patterns.

Handgun (lawn) Sprayer (commercial)

5

Acres per day

Includes turf and golf course greens and tees.  Based the following data:  Andersen, J.  November 12, 1992.  “Use Data for Turf Cluster Insecticides.”  Memorandum from J. Anderson, BEAD to L. Dorsey, HED.

Loading/Applying granulars

Belly Grinder (commercial)

1

Acres per day

If more than one acre to cover, different application equipment will likely be employed.  Based on cultural use patterns.

 Spot treatments may have a lower amount of acres treated in one day.

Push-type Spreader (commercial)

5

Acres per day

Based on cultural use patterns and trade group information.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 17, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30607-30609]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11593]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0076; Notice 2]

Chrysler Group, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Chrysler Group, LLC (Chrysler), a wholly owned subsidiary of
Fiat S.p.A., has determined that certain model year (MY) 2014 RAM 2500
and RAM 3500 trucks do not fully comply with paragraph S4.3 of Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims
and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity
Information for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000
pounds) or less, or do not fully comply with paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS
No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle
Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles with a
GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). Chrysler filed a
report dated May 6, 2014, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports and amended that report on
June 10, 2014. Chrysler then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556
requesting a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Stuart
Seigel, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile
(202) 366-5930.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Chrysler's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
and the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, Chrysler
has petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of Chrysler's petition was published, with a 30-
Day public comment period, on August 25, 2014 in the Federal Register
(79 FR 50735). No comments were received. To view the petition and all
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online
search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2014-0076.''
    II. Vehicles Involved: The affected vehicles include approximately
198 MY 2014 RAM 2500 trucks and 87 MY 2014 RAM 3500 trucks that were
produced from March 4, 2014 through March 6, 2014.
    III. Noncompliances: Chrysler explains that due to the absence of
the designated rim size and type on the certification labels required
by 49 CFR part 567, the subject vehicles do not fully comply with
either paragraph S4.3 of FMVSS No. 110, or paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No.
120.
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S4.3 of FMVSS No. 110 requires in
pertinent part:

. . . S4.3.3 Additional labeling information for vehicles other than
passenger cars. Each vehicle shall show the size designation and, if
applicable, the type designation of rims (not necessarily those on
the vehicle) appropriate for the tire appropriate for use on that
vehicle, including the tire installed as original equipment on the
vehicle by the vehicle manufacturer, after each GAWR listed on the
certification label required by Sec.  567.4 or Sec.  567.5 of this
chapter. This information shall be in the English language, lettered
in block capitals and numerals not less than 2.4 millimeters high
and in the following format: . . .
    Paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 120 requires in pertinent part:
    S5.3 Each vehicle shall show the information specified in S5.3.1
and S5.3.2 and, in the case of a vehicle equipped with a non-
pneumatic spare tire, the information specified in S5.3.3, in the
English language, lettered in block capitals and numerals not less
than 2.4 millimeters high and in the format set forth following this
paragraph. This information shall appear either--
    (a) After each GAWR listed on the certification label required
by Sec.  567.4 or Sec.  567.5 of this chapter; or at the option of
the manufacturer,
    (b) On the tire information label affixed to the vehicle in the
manner, location, and form described in Sec.  567.4(b) through (f)
of this chapter as appropriate of each GVWR=GAWR combination listed
on the certification label.
    S5.3.1 Tires. The size designation (not necessarily for the
tires on the vehicle) and the recommended cold inflation pressure
for those tires such that the sum of the load ratings of the tires
on each axle (when the tires' load carrying capacity at the
specified pressure is reduced by dividing by 1.10, in the case of a
tire subject to FMVSS No. 109) is appropriate for the GAWR as
calculated in accordance with S5.1.2.
    S5.3.2. Rims. The size designation and, if applicable, the type
designation of Rims (not necessarily those on the vehicle)
appropriate for those tires. . . .

    V. Summary of Chrysler's Analyses: Chrysler stated its belief that
the subject noncompliance for the absence of the rim marking on the
certification label is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the
following reasons:
    1. Tire size and pressure information is located on the Tire
Inflation Pressure label which is located in the same door opening as
the certification label.
    a. Certification label is located on the driver door.
    b. Tire placard is located on the forward edge of the driver's B-
pillar.
    2. Tire size and inflation pressure can be found on each tire.
    3. Tire and rim information can be found in the vehicle owner's
manual.
    4. Rim/wheel size can be derived using the tire information printed
on the Tire Inflation Pressure label or the tire sidewall information.
    5. Chrysler mentioned that in a previous similar petition the
agency stated, ``that this noncompliance will not have an adverse
effect on vehicle safety. Since rim size and type information are
marked on the wheels of the vehicles, and the rim diameter can be
determined from the tire size on the placard attached to some of the
vehicles, the information needed to ensure that the vehicles are
equipped with the proper rims and compatible tires is readily available
to potential users.''
    6. Chrysler is not aware of any warranty claims, field reports,
customer complaints, legal claims or any incidents or injuries related
to the subject condition.
    7. Chrysler also stated its belief that NHTSA has previously
granted petition similar in nature.
    With respect to the incorrect statement used to indicate that
vehicles conforms to all applicable Federal Standards Chrysler states
that the purpose of the statement is to communicate to a reader that a
vehicle is both certified and meets applicable safety standards. The
vehicles in question meet and/or exceed all applicable FMVSS required
for sale in the United States.
    Chrysler has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the
noncompliances so that all future production of these vehicles will
fully comply with FMVSS Nos. 110 and 120.
    In summation, Chrysler believes that the described noncompliances
of the subject vehicles are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety,
and that its petition, to exempt from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.

NHTSA Decision

    NHTSA Analysis: NHTSA has reviewed Chrysler's petition requesting a
decision that the subject noncompliances are inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety and has decided to moot the petition in part and grant
it in part based on the following analysis.
    Chrysler noted that the certification label attached to the subject
vehicles, required by 49 CFR part 567, does not include the correct
required statement of certification. The use of the incorrect
certification statement on the certification labels is considered a
violation of 49 U.S.C. 30115, Certification and the implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 567, and not a noncompliance with a Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard that would require notification and remedy
under of 49 U.S.C. chapter 301. Therefore, this portion of the subject
petition, as filed under 49 CFR part 556, is moot.
    Second, the affected vehicles (approximately 285 RAM 2500 and 3500
trucks) must comply with either FMVSS No. 110 or FMVSS No. 120
depending on the GVWR. The vehicles with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or
less do not comply with paragraph S4.3.3 of FMVSS No. 110 which
requires that the rim size designation appear on the certification
label for vehicles other than passenger cars. Likewise, the vehicles
with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds, do not comply with paragraph
S5.3 of FMVSS No. 120 which requires that the rim size designation
appear on the certification label or at the manufacture's option on a
separate tire information label.
    For all affected vehicles, the rim size information can be found in
the vehicle's owner's manual or on the rim itself, and the tire size
information is available from multiple sources including the owner's
manual, the sidewalls of the tires on the vehicle and on the tire
placard or information label located on the door or door opening. The
rim size can be derived using this tire information. In addition,
according

to Paragraph S4.4.2(b) of FMVSS No. 110 and paragraph S5.2(b) of FMVSS
No. 120, the rim size designation must be marked on the rims to allow
for the direct determination of the proper rim size for the vehicle.
    NHTSA considers both the Ram 2500 and 3500 trucks to be light duty
work trucks that are primarily used by operators experienced with and
knowledgeable of their vehicles. It is highly likely that these
individuals will readily be able to determine the correct rim sizing if
necessary.
    Therefore, although the rim size was omitted from the certification
labels, the information needed to ensure that the vehicles are equipped
with the proper rims and compatible tires is readily available to
potential users.
    NHTSA Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that
Chrysler has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 110 and
FMVSS No. 120 noncompliances are inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
    Accordingly, Chrysler's petition is hereby moot in part and granted
in part and Chrysler is exempted from the obligation of providing
notification of, and a free remedy for, that noncompliance under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that Chrysler no
longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance
existed. However, the granting of this petition does not relieve
Chrysler distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale,
offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control
after Chrysler notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-11593 Filed 5-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 56 (Monday, March 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16030-16031]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06292]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4164-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2014-0003]

Oklahoma; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-4164-DR), dated January 30,
2014, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: January 30, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated January 30, 2014, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of
Oklahoma resulting from a severe winter storm during the period of
December 5-6, 2013, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to
warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.
(the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major
disaster exists in the State of Oklahoma.
In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to
allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you
find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative
expenses.
You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the designated
areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Consistent with
the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal
funds provided under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation will be
limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. Federal funds
provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also will be
limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs, with the
exception of projects that meet the eligibility criteria for a
higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the Public Assistance
Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for Debris Removal implemented
pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford Act.
Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for
the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford
Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Sandy Coachman, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Oklahoma have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

Choctaw, Le Flore, McCurtain, and Pushmataha Counties for Public
Assistance.
All counties within the State of Oklahoma are eligible to apply for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,

Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2014-06292 Filed 3-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76613-76614]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29976]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0770; FRL-9402-9]

Registration Applications for Pesticide Products Containing New
Active Ingredients; Corrections

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; corrections.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the Federal Register of August 14,
2012, concerning a new active ingredient (AI). The name of an AI was
changed during the registration assessment process. This document
corrects the name of the AI.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert McNally, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    The Agency included in the August 14, 2012 notice a list of those
who may be potentially affected by this action.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The dockets for these actions, identified by the docket ID number
of the notice being corrected, 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), EPA West 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 (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-
5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. What does this correction do?

    1. EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0391. In FR Doc. 2012-19989, published in the
Federal Register of August 14, 2012 (77 FR 48519) (FRL-9357-7), is
corrected as follows: On page 48520, under the heading ``II.
Registration Applications,'' first column, paragraph number 2., File
Symbol: 88847-R, lines 5 and 6, correct

``GS-U-ACTX-Hv1a-SEQ2'' to read ``GS-omega/kappa-Hxtx-Hv1a.''
    2. EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0391. In FR Doc. 2012-19989, published in the
Federal Register of August 14, 2012 (77 FR 48519) (FRL-9357-7), is
corrected as follows: On page 48520, under the heading ``II.
Registration Applications,'' first and second columns, paragraph number
3., File Symbol: 88847-E, lines 5 and 6, correct ``GS-U-ACTX-Hv1a-
SEQ2'' to read ``GS-omega/kappa-Hxtx-Hv1a.''

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: December 11, 2013.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-29976 Filed 12-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P