[Federal Register: June 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 114)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 34267-34272]
[DOCID:fr14jn06-15]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0299; FRL-8069-6]

Potassium Silicate; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of potassium silicate in or on all food
commodities when applied/used as a fungicide, insecticide or miticide
so long as the potassium silicate is not applied at rates exceeding 1%
by weight in aqueous solution and when used in accordance with good
agricultural practices. PQ Corporation submitted a petition to EPA
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by
the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA), requesting an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the
need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of potassium
silicate.

DATES: This regulation is effective June 14, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before August 14, 2006,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

ADDRESSES:  EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0299. All documents in the
docket are listed in the index for the docket. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or,

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol E. Frazer, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

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

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

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

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

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

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any person
may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also
request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations
which govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings
appear in 40 CFR part 178. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0299 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and
must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before August
14, 2006.
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit your copies, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0299, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

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

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of July 27, 2005 (70 FR 43417) (FRL-7719-
5), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance
petition (PP 5F6905) by PQ Corporation, P.O. Box 840 Valley Forge, PA
19482-0840. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing a temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance
for residues of potassium silicate. This notice included a summary of
the petition prepared by the petitioner PQ Corporation. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    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 in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Pursuant to section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give special consideration
to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue
in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . . .''
Additionally, section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA requires that 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 performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the
toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings.

III. Toxicological Profile

    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action 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.
    Potassium silicate is a synthetic compound that is chemically the
potassium salt of silicic acid. It is produced by combining pure silica
sand (SiO2) and potash (K2CO3 or
NaCO3). Silicic acid salts (i.e., silicates) are the most
common form of silicon. For the purposes of this tolerance exemption,
the Agency has relied on the extensive body of knowledge, data and/or
information from the public literature as submitted by PQ Corporation
and as researched by the Agency which document the similarity of silica
(also known as silicon dioxide) and potassium silicate and support the
conclusion that there is reasonable certainty of no harm that will
result from the use of potassium silicate as an agricultural pesticide.
    Silicon dioxide (silica) has been assessed for its pesticidal uses
by the Agency and it was determined that the toxicity of this compound
is moderate to low and therefore, the human health risk is low and not
unreasonable. Further, silicon dioxide is recognized by the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) to be a Generally-Recognized As Safe (GRAS)
substance, as a food additive (21 CFR 182.90 and 182.1711).
    Comprehensive reviews and risk assessments have been conducted on
silicon dioxide (silica) and its related soluble silicates with regard
to its toxicity to human health and have concluded that silica and its
soluble silicates (potassium silicate) are low in toxicity and the
primary hazard of concern is the corrosive nature of the compound. The
corrosive nature of potassium silicate is not of a concern when used as
a very dilute solution (less than or equal to 1%). The soluble
silicates include: potassium silicate, sodium silicate and sodium
metasilicate, the latter of which the Agency has exempted in diluted
form from the requirement of a tolerance for use on all food
commodities. Additionally, the FDA has determined that sodium silicate
and potassium silicate can be used interchangeably which substantiates
information in the public literature that the compounds are very
similar.
    The data submitted and reviewed on the end use pesticide product
containing 29.1% w/w potassium silicate caused moderate to low dermal
irritation and is classified as an eye irritant due to the high pH of
the product. When used as a pesticide (fungicide, insecticide and
miticide) the active ingredient is effective at very low concentrations
(less than or equal to 1%) and thus the dilution of the active
ingredient would reduce the risks to pesticide users. Labeling of such
products with the appropriate protective clothing, gloves and eyewear
would mitigate the risk of exposure to potassium silicate on pesticide
applicators. Potassium silicate residues which may result from its use
as an agricultural pesticide would be reduced by washing or processing
treated commodities before their consumption; this point is supported
by the water solubility of potassium silicate and the possibility of it
being washed off treated surfaces by rainfall in the field. Further,
potassium silicate is neutralized by stomach acid and primarily
excreted in the urine.

    The components of potassium silicate are potassium and silicon.
Potassium is found in the environment and is an essential element in
human and plant nutrition. It is found in many fruits and vegetables
consumed by humans. A common soil plant nutrient and fertilizer (as
K2O), potassium comprises approximately 2.59% of the Earth's
crust by weight. The primary source of naturally-occurring soluble
potassium is from the weathering of potassium containing minerals.
    Silicon is ubiquitous in the environment, the second most abundant
element in the lithosphere after oxygen. A nutritional element, silica
is required for proper and strong growth of mammalian bones. Silica is
present naturally in all plant stems and is present in larger amounts
in crops such as rice and sugar cane. It comprises approximately 31% of
the Earth's crust by weight and is present as dissolved silica,
amorphous silica in the solid phase (for example, silica and silica gel
(FDA GRAS chemicals), and silica bound to organic matter. In the normal
range of soil pH, silicic acid is the major silicate in soil water. In
natural waters most dissolved silica results from weathering of
silicate minerals. Research demonstrates that commercial soluble
silicates rapidly degrade to molecular forms that are indistinguishable
from natural dissolved silica (IUCLID, 1995). Beach sand, for example
is comprised of nearly 100% silica (Crop Protection handbook, 2003).
Additionally, silica is approved by the FDA for use as an anti-caking
agent in food.
    Potassium silicate immediately breaks down in the presence of water
to the potassium and silicate ions which are indistinguishable from
natural components. As stated above, potassium silicate is produced by
direct fusion of precisely measured portions of pure silica sand
(SiO2) and potash (K2CO3) in a fired
furnace at temperatures above 1000[deg]C. Solutions of potassium
silicate are produced by dissolving alkali silica lumps in water at
elevated temperatures. Potassium silicate is classified as GRAS by FDA
(21 CFR 182.90 and 21 CFR 182.1711) for limited use in canned potable
water as a corrosion inhibiting agent and the EPA has exempted
potassium silicate from the requirement of a tolerance when used as an
inert ingredient, a surfactant, emulsifier, wetting agent, stabilizer,
or inhibitor (40 CFR 180.910). Data and/or information from the public
literature demonstrates a long history of safe use of fertilizers
containing potassium and silica. (HERA 2005, NOSB/TAP, 2003 and the
Silicon Dioxide and Silica Gel RED EPA, 1991, Kant, T., et al, 2003,
Savant N.K., et al., 1999). Fertilizers used in the agricultural
industry contain plant nutrients and micronutrients such as potassium
and silicon. Potassium silicate is approved by the USDA as a fertilizer
for conventional agriculture and is used on a variety of crops
including rice, wheat, barley, sugar cane, melons, grapes and cucurbits
(USDA/ERS, 2002, NOSB/TAP, 2003).
    As mentioned above, silicon dioxide and its soluble silicates which
include potassium silicate have been fully characterized and assessed
by the Agency and other notable resources and it has been concluded
that silicon dioxide and its related soluble silicates exhibit moderate
to low toxicity, the Agency has therefore concluded there is a
reasonable certainty of no harm resulting from the use of potassium
silicate as an agricultural pesticide. This determination is based on
information from the literature which as stated above document the
similarity of silica (also known as silicon dioxide) and potassium
silicate. This information combined with the fact that the components
of potassium silicate (potassium and silica) are already naturally
present in the stems of all plants (silica) and naturally in foods
supports the Agency's conclusion that there is a reasonable certainty
of no harm resulting from the use of potassium silicate as an
agricultural pesticide and exposure from the use of potassium silicate
as a pesticide will not add to the exposure already present from its
natural occurrence, its presence in foods, in the human diet and in the
environment.

A. Acute Toxicity

    The registrant did not submit any toxicity data testing the
technical grade of the active ingredient. Data waivers were requested
by the registrant and granted by the Agency based on the body of
extensive knowledge from the public literature and as researched by the
Agency. The toxicity of the soluble silicates via oral toxicity,
teratogenicity and genotoxicity were tested on the Technical Grade of
the Active Ingredient (TGAI) and reported and the Agency has relied
upon this information to support its decision to grant the waiver
requests for these studies. Acute toxicity data were submitted using
the end-use product as the test material which is approximately
a1/89/21/13/23/87/83/8 dilution of the technical grade of the
active ingredient. Requests for data waivers were granted for
additional toxicity studies described below. These data waiver requests
were granted based on the findings from comprehensive reviews and risk
assessments conducted on silicon dioxide (silica) and its related
soluble silicates (potassium silicate) with regard to its toxicity to
human health and the conclusion that silicon dioxide and its related
soluble silicates have moderate to low toxicity, and therefore, the
Agency concludes that there is a reasonable certainty of no harm
resulting from the use of potassium silicate. The data submitted and
waivers that were granted are as follows:
    Acute oral rat OPPTS Harmonized Guideline 870.1100; Master Record
Identification (MRID) Number 46434903). LD50 = 5,000
milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg) (29.1% potassium silicate aqueous
solution). The test material is classified as a Toxicity Category IV
for acute oral toxicity and demonstrates that a dilution of the active
ingredient to a level that is comparable to the concentration of
potassium silicate in the proposed end-use product eliminates the
potential of the active ingredient to cause acute toxic effects. There
were no adverse effects reported at 5,000 mg/kg.
    Technical grade of the active ingredient. A request to waive this
data requirement was submitted by the registrant. The Agency has
granted this data waiver based on: (1) Data from the public literature
which shows soluble silicates have a moderate to low acute toxicity by
the oral route (HERA 2005), (2) potassium silicate, a soluble silicate
that is both chemically and toxicologically similar to silicon dioxide
(silica) which has been fully characterized, assessed, and therefore
determined by the Agency that silicon dioxide and its related soluble
silicates pose no unreasonable adverse effects to human health when
used as an agricultural pesticide and (3) potassium and silica are
already present in the human diet as they are contained naturally in
various crops.
    Acute dermal rat OPPTS 870.1200; (MRID 4643902). LD50 =
5,000 mg/kg (29.1% potassium silicate aqueous solution). The test
material is classified as a Toxicity Category IV for acute dermal
toxicity and demonstrates that a dilution of the active ingredient to a
level that is comparable to the concentration of potassium silicate in
the proposed end use product will be moderately irritating to the skin.
    Technical grade of the active ingredient. Section 158.690(c)(2)(I)
states this test is not required if the test material is corrosive to
skin. Therefore, this test was not required. However, this active
ingredient is classified Toxicity Category I on the basis of potential
dermal irritation effects.

    Acute inhalation rat OPPTS 870.1300; (MRID 46434906).
LC50 >2.06 milligrams per liter (mg/L) (29.1% potassium
silicate aqueous solution). The test material is classified as a
Toxicity Category IV for acute inhalation toxicity and demonstrates
that a dilution of the active ingredient to a level that is comparable
to the concentration of potassium silicate in the proposed end use
product will not cause acute inhalation effects at greater than 2.06
mg/L.
    Technical grade of the active ingredient. This test is only
required if the product consists of a respirable material. Since
potassium silicate does not consist of a respirable material under
normal conditions of use, this test is not required.

B. Genotoxicity, Immune Response, Mutagenicity, Developmental,
Oncogenicity, Subchronic and Chronic Toxicity

    The applicant requested to waive the data requirements below and
submitted a summary of public literature to satisfy the data
requirements for 90-day oral toxicity (OPPTS 870.3100), genotoxicity
(OPPTS 870.5100; 870.5300; 870.5375), teratogenicity (OPPTS 870.3700)
and immunotoxicity (OPPTS 880.3550) for the active ingredient.
Potassium silicate waiver requests were submitted (MRID 46434701). As
mentioned above, the Agency has determined that the data requirements
were met by the submission of public literature. The public literature
demonstrates that potassium silicate has low toxicity by the oral route
when tested as the TGAI because potassium silicate is neutralized by
stomach acid and primarily excreted in the urine. The high pH of the
pesticide product may cause eye and skin irritation to humans. However,
risks to humans will be reduced by dilution of the pesticide product
and further mitigated by the use of protective personal equipment.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    In examining aggregate exposure, section 408 of FFDCA directs EPA
to consider available information concerning exposures from the
pesticide residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures,
including drinking water from ground water or surface water and
exposure through pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings
(residential and other indoor uses).

A. Dietary Exposure

    1. Food. Potassium is found in the environment and is present in
the cells of humans and plants and is therefore an essential element in
human and plant nutrition. It is found in many fruits and vegetables
consumed by humans. Humans require an adequate supply of potassium from
consumption of foods for healthy growth and development. Humans consume
daily many sources of potassium, including a variety of fruits,
vegetables and beverages such as barley, bananas, plums, apricots,
strawberries, oranges, apples, grapes, spinach, potatoes, carrots,
celery, tomatoes, lettuce, cucumbers, milk, fruit juices, coffee, white
wine and light beers, etc. The average potassium content of the above
fruits and vegetables ranges from 2.4 K/kg (tomato) - 3.7 K/kg
(banana).
    As mentioned above, potassium is a common soil plant nutrient and
fertilizer (as K2O), and comprises approximately 2.59% of
the Earth's crust by weight. Silicon is a ubiquitous mineral nutrient
in the environment (soil, water) and the second most abundant element
in the lithosphere after oxygen. A nutritional trace element, silicon
is required for proper and strong growth and development of mammalian
bones. In plants, silicic acid (Si(OH)4) is rapidly
absorbed. Once absorbed, silicic acid is readily circulated throughout
the plant and deposited as silicon dioxide. Consequently exposure to
soluble silica occurs on a daily basis and is a property of all plant
products in the human diet. The concentration of silicon in vegetable
plants varies greatly with cereals and grasses containing the highest
concentrations (0.2-2.0%).
    Good agricultural practice when using potassium silicate means it
will most likely be used in aqueous solutions because application of
pure potassium silicate to crops is likely to be corrosive to crops
since the active ingredient is a known corrosive. When applied to food
crops at concentrations not to exceed 1% by weight of potassium
silicate in aqueous solution, it is highly unlikely there will be any
residues of significance in or on food.
    Further dilution by tank mixing with water of a pesticide product
containing the active ingredient at 29% w/w of potassium silicate
before application of the pesticide reduces the amount of active
ingredient (to concentrations not to exceed 1% active ingredient) that
will be on the crop.
    Furthermore, potassium silicate breaks down in the presence of
water to potassium and silicate ions, both of which occur naturally in
animals and plants. Concentrations of potassium silicate as a pesticide
in foliar sprays and nutrient solutions are dominated by silicic acid,
which as mentioned above, is readily absorbed by plants.
    Therefore, given the use dilution of the pesticide product and
other good agricultural practices as required on product labels, the
likely dietary exposures to potassium silicate from the pesticidal uses
are not expected to add significantly to those levels of potassium
silicate already found in foods, beverages, and in drinking water as a
result of conventional agriculture and its natural occurrence in the
environment.
    2. Drinking water exposure. Because potassium silicate breaks down
into potassium and silicate ions in the presence of water, there will
be no residues of potassium silicate in drinking water from its use as
a pesticide. The Agency does not expect the resulting potassium and
silicate ions resulting from this breakdown process will add
significantly to the level of potassium and silica presently in the
water.
    Potassium and silicon dioxide are ubiquitous in the environment,
and the uses of soluble silicates are widespread in dishwashing soaps,
other soaps, and detergents. Potassium silicate is classified by the
FDA as a GRAS substance (21 CFR 182.90 and 21 CFR 182.1711) for limited
use in canned potable water as a corrosion inhibiting agent. Moreover,
both potassium and silicon are already present in natural waters. The
potassium (natural) content of drinking water varies greatly depending
on its source and may be larger in mineral and spa waters than ordinary
tap water. On average, the daily water consumption by adults supplies
less than 0.1% of their potassium intake (European Fertilizer
Manufacturers Association, 1997). In natural waters most dissolved
silica results from weathering of silicate minerals and it has been
demonstrated that commercial soluble silicates rapidly degrade to
molecular forms that are indistinguishable from natural dissolved
silica. Therefore, because of the levels at which potassium and silica
(silicon dioxide) are already present in the water supply, the Agency
does not expect that the use of potassium silicate as a pesticide will
result in detectable exposures aside from what is currently in the
environment.

B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure

    1. Dermal exposure. Non-occupational dermal exposures to potassium
silicate when used as a pesticide are expected to be negligible because
it is limited to agricultural use.
    2. Inhalation exposure. Non-occupational inhalation exposures to

potassium silicate when used as a pesticide are expected to be
negligible because it is limited to agricultural use and will be used
as a spray.

V. Cumulative Effects

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency
considers available information concerning the cumulative effects of a
particular pesticide's residues and other substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.
    The information available at this time indicates that potassium
silicate when applied to food crops at a rate less than or equal to 1%
of potassium silicate by weight in aqueous solution does not have a
toxic effect. Therefore, cumulative effects from the residues of this
product are not anticipated.

VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, Infants and Children

    1. U.S. population. The Agency has determined that there is
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the U.S. population
from aggregated exposure to residues of potassium silicate when used in
an aqueous solution in which the potassium silicate does not exceed
29.1% by weight. This includes all anticipated dietary exposures and
other exposures for which there is reliable information. The Agency
arrived at this conclusion based on the anticipated low acute exposure
estimates from its pesticidal use, the low mammalian toxicity in its
diluted form, the widespread exposure to potassium and silica, from
foods in the human diet, and the similarity both chemically and
toxicologically to silicon dioxide which has already been fully
characterized and assessed, and found that there is reasonable
certainty of no harm that will result from the use of silicon dioxide
and its related soluble silicates (potassium silicate) as an
agricultural pesticide.
    2. Infants and children. FFDCA section 408 provides that EPA shall
apply an additional tenfold margin of exposure (MOE) for infants and
children in the case of threshold effects. Margins of exposure are
often referred to as uncertainty or safety factors, and are used to
account for potential prenatal and postnatal toxicity and any lack of
completeness of the data base. Based on available data and other
information, EPA may determine that a different MOE will define a level
of concern for infants and children or that a MOE approach is not
appropriate. Based on all the available information the Agency reviewed
on potassium silicate, including a lack of threshold effects, the
Agency concluded that potassium silicate, in its diluted form, is
practically non-toxic to mammals, including infants and children. Since
there are no effects of concern, the provision requiring an additional
margin of safety does not apply.

VII. Other Considerations

A. Endocrine Disruptors

    Based on available data, no endocrine system-related effects have
been identified with consumption of potassium silicate. In addition,
there is no evidence to suggest that potassium silicate functions in a
manner similar to any known hormone.

B. Analytical Method(s)

    The Agency proposes to establish an amendment to the exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance without any numerical limitation for
residues since it has determined that residues resulting from the
pesticidal uses of potassium silicate would be so low as to be
indistinguishable from the naturally occurring silicates that are
ubiquitous in the environment.

C. Codex Maximum Residue Level

    There are no Codex Maximum Residue Levels for this chemical.

VIII. Conclusions

    Based on the toxicology data submitted, there is reasonable
certainty no harm will result to the U.S. population including infants
and children from aggregate exposure of residues of potassium silicate
when the product is used in accordance with good agricultural
practices. This includes all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures about which there is reliable information. As a result,
EPA establishes an exemption from tolerance requirements pursuant to
FFDCA 408(c) and (d) for residues of potassium silicate in or on all
food commodities so long as the potassium silicate is not applied to
food crops at rates that exceed 1% potassium silicate by weight in an
aqueous solution.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes an exemption from the tolerance
requirement under section 408(d) of FFDCA in response to a petition
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive
Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject
to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as described underTitle II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor does it
require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898,
entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994);
or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not
involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration
of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA),
Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a
petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the exemption 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. The Agency hereby certifies that this rule will not
have significant negative economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This final
rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers and
food retailers, not States. This action does not alter the
relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established
by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA.
For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does
not have any ``tribal implications'' as described in Executive Order
13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175,
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' This rule will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

X. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: May 31, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--AMENDED

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

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

0
2. Section 180.1268 is added to subpart D to read as follows:

Sec.  180.1268  Potassium silicate; exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance.

    Potassium silicate is exempt from the requirement of a tolerance in
or on all food commodities so long as the potassium silicate is not
applied at rates exceeding 1% by weight in aqueous solution and when
used in accordance with good agricultural practices.
[FR Doc. E6-8939 Filed 6-13-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 18, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15017-15019]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05821]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2013-0817; FRL-9908-02-Region 7] Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve revisions to the Missouri State Implementation
Plan (SIP) which were submitted to EPA on July 12, 2012. This
submission revises two heavy duty diesel vehicle idling rules that are
applicable in Kansas City and St. Louis. This revision provides clarity
to the rules in the applicability section by listing owners and
operators of passenger load/unload locations where commercial, public
and institutional heavy-duty vehicles load or unload passengers. The
affected parties were unintentionally omitted from the applicability
section of the rule even though they are required to comply with the
rule in the general provisions section. These revisions do not have an
adverse affect on air quality. EPA's approval of these SIP revisions is
being done in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA).

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective May 19, 2014, without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by April 17, 2014.
If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2013-0817, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Paula Higbee, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2013-0817. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or
email information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch,
11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:00 to 4:30
excluding Federal holidays. The interested persons wanting to examine
these documents should make an appointment with the office at least 24
hours in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paula Higbee, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219, or at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by
addressing the following:

I. What is being addressed in this document?
II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
III. What action is EPA taking?

I. What is being addressed in this document?

    EPA is taking direct final action to amend Missouri's SIP by
approving the state's requests to amend 10 CSR 10-2.385 and 10 CSR 10-
5.385, Control of Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling Emissions.
Specifically, Missouri is inserting additional clarifying language to
subsection, (1)(C) to both rules, as follows, ``This regulation applies
to owners and operators of load/unload locations where commercial,
public, and institutional heavy duty diesel vehicles load or unload
passengers.'' The purpose of this revision is to clarify the rule by
listing owners and operators of passenger load/unload locations where
commercial, public and institutional heavy-duty vehicles load or unload
passengers. The affected parties were unintentionally omitted from the
applicability section of the rule even though they are required to
comply with the rule in the general provisions section. EPA has
determined that these changes will not relax the SIP or adversely
impact air emissions.

II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The state submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In
addition, as explained above, the revision meets the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing
regulations.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    We are publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule because
we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse
comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal
Register, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the
proposed rule to approve the SIP and operating permits revision if
adverse comments are received on this direct final rule. We will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. For further
information about commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of
this document. If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that
this direct final rule will not take effect. We will address all public

comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action 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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by May 19, 2014. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 3, 2014.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq.

Subpart AA--Missouri

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320 the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entries for 10-2.385 and 10-5.385 to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1320  Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

                                        EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      State
    Missouri citation              Title         effective date   EPA approval  date          Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Missouri Department of Natural Resources

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
  Chapter 2 Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Rules Specific to the Kansas City Metropolitan Area

                                                  * * * * * * *
10-2.385.................  Control of Heavy           7/30/2012  3/18/2014 [insert FR  .........................
                            Duty Diesel Vehicle                   page number where
                            Idling Emissions.                     the document
                                                                  begins].

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 0* * * * * * *
   Chapter 5 Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Rules Specific to the St. Louis Metropolitan Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
10-5.385.................  Control of Heavy           7/30/2012  3/18/2014 [insert FR  .........................
                            Duty Diesel Vehicle                   page number where
                            Idling Emissions.                     the document
                                                                  begins].

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-05821 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 24, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 15769]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06045]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0819]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of a New Approval of Information Collection: National Sleep
Study

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval for a new information collection.
The collection involves study on relationships between aircraft noise
events and the probability of awakening.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by April 23, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2019-0819
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Doyle by email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-XXXX.
    Title: National Sleep Study.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Type of Review: Clearance of a new information collection.
    Background: As part of FAA's broader noise research program, the
National Sleep Study has been designed to collect nationally
representative information on the effects of aircraft noise on sleep
and to derive exposure-response relationships between aircraft noise
and its effect on communities around United States civilian airports.
This Study will collect information from residents living near airports
to determine their probability of awakening due to aircraft noise
exposure. The FAA will use the information from this collection to
derive the empirical data to inform any potential updates to or
validation of the national aviation noise policy. Further information
on National Sleep Study as part of the FAA's noise research program was
also made available through a separate notice 86 FR 2722.
    Respondents: Approximately 4,400 respondents to 25,000 postal
surveys (18% response rate). From among these survey respondents,
approximately 400 respondents (9.1%) will be recruited into the field
study.
    Frequency: Response to the postal survey, and participation in the
field study, will be a one-time event.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: The postal survey will take
an estimated 8.25 minutes to complete. The field study will take an
estimated 2 hours and 33 minutes of active participation across 5 study
days to complete.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: The estimated total annual burden
for the postal survey is 302 hours and 30 minutes in each of the two
years of the study, and 510 hours for field study.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Kevin Welsh,
Executive Director, FAA Office of Environment & Energy.
[FR Doc. 2021-06045 Filed 3-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 29 (Friday, February 11, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7840-7841]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3159]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 3705-004]

American Hydro Power Company; Notice of Termination of Exemption
by Implied Surrender and Soliciting Comments, Protests, and Motions To
Intervene

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric proceeding has been
initiated by the Commission:
    a. Type of Proceeding: Termination of exemption by implied
surrender.
    b. Project No.: 3705-004.
    c. Date Initiated: February 2, 2011.
    d. Exemptee: American Hydro Power Company.
    e. Name and Location of Project: The Gilpin Falls Project is
located on Northeast Creek in Cecil County, Maryland.
    f. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 4.106.
    g. Exemptee Contact Information: Mr. Richard J. Halloran, American
Hydro Power Company, 771 E. Lancaster Ave., Suite 101, Villanova, PA
19085.
    h. FERC Contact: Henry Woo,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene
is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents may be
filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. The Commission strongly
encourages electronic filings. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and seven
copies should be sent to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. Please include the project number (P-3705-
004) on any documents or motions filed.
    j. Description of Existing Facilities: The inoperative project
consists of the following existing facilities: (1) Concrete-masonry dam
with an overall length of 161 feet and a maximum height of 6 feet; (2)
a 30-foot-long intake structure; (3) a 36-inch-diameter, 1300-foot-long
penstock; and (4) a powerhouse containing three units with a total
capacity of 396 kilowatts.
    k. Description of Proceeding: The exemptee is currently in
violation of Standard Article 1 of its exemption granted on May 11,
1982 (19 FERC ] 62,223). Section 4.106 of the Commission's regulations,
18 CFR 4.106, provides, among other things, that the Commission
reserves the right to revoke an exemption if any term or condition of
the exemption is violated. The project has not operated since 2004, and
has been abandoned by the exemptee. By not operating the project as
proposed and authorized, the exemptee is in violation of the terms and
conditions of the exemption.
    On October 25, 2007, the Commission directed the exemptee to file a
report stating its reason for abandoning project operation and plans
for either resuming operation and restoring the project or surrendering
the exemption. A response was not filed by the exemptee. On February
11, 2009, the Commission reiterated its directive to file a report
stating its reason for abandoning project operation and plans for
either resuming operation and restoring the project or surrendering the
exemption. A response was not filed by the exemptee.
    On April 1, 2010, the Commission informed the exemptee that it was
in violation of the terms and conditions of the exemption. The
Commission required the exemptee to show cause within 30 days why the
exemption should not be revoked. A response was not filed by the
exemptee. To date, the information requested from the exemptee has not
been filed and the project remains inoperative.
    l. This notice is available for review and reproduction at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room, Room 2A, 888 First Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the Docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket
number field to access the notice. 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, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210,
385.211, and 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to take,
the Commission will consider all protests filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any protests or motions to
intervene must be received on or before the specified deadline date for
the particular proceeding.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE,'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading
the project number of the proceeding to which the filing responds; (3)
furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person
commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with
the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments,
protests or motions to intervene must set forth their evidentiary basis
and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All
comments, protests, or motions to intervene should relate to project
works which are the subject of the termination of exemption. A copy of
any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each
representative of the exemptee specified in item g above. If an
intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to
this notice must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons
listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    p. Agency Comments--Federal, State, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described proceeding. If any agency does not
file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be
presumed to have no comments.

    Dated: February 7, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-3159 Filed 2-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P