[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 87 (Thursday, May 5, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27025-27030]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10582]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0213; FRL-9945-58]

Butanedioic Acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich,
Disodium Salts; 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 butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-
isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts (CAS Reg. No. 815583-91-6)
when used as an inert ingredient (surfactant) in pesticides applied to
growing crops and raw agricultural commodities after harvest under 40
CFR 180.910 limited to maximum concentration of 10% by weight in
pesticide formulations. Keller and Heckman LLP on behalf of Cytec
Industries, Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting establishment of an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation
eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for
residues of butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-
rich, disodium salts.

DATES: This regulation is effective May 5, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 5, 2016, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0213, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following

list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes
is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help
readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially
affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

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

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0213 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
July 5, 2016. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0213, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

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

II. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of May 20, 2015 (80 FR 28925) (FRL-9927-
39), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-10760) by
Keller and Heckman LLP, (1001 G Street NW., Suite 500, Washington, DC
20001) on behalf of Cytec Industries, Inc. (5 Garret Mountain Plaza,
Woodland Park, NJ 07424). The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.910 be
amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl
esters, C10-rich, disodium salts (CAS Reg. No. 815583-91-6) when used
as an inert ingredient (surfactant) in pesticide formulations applied
to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities after harvest. That
document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Keller and
Heckman LLP, on behalf of Cytec Industries, Inc., the petitioner, which
is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
limited the maximum concentration of butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-
11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts to 10% by weight in
pesticide formulations. This limitation is based on the Agency's risk
assessment which can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document
``Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich,
disodium salts (CAS Reg No. 815583-91-6); Human Health Risk Assessment
and Ecological Effects Assessment to Support Proposed Exemption from
the Requirement of a Tolerance When Used as an Inert Ingredient in
Pesticide Formulations'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0213.

III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    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. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance or exemption and
to ``ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .''
    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert ingredient in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of
the inert ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other
exposures that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential
settings. If EPA is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not
necessary to ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate

exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-
C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts including exposure
resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with butanedioic acid, 2-
sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-
isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in this unit.
    Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich,
disodium salts is of low acute oral and dermal toxicity in rats. The
acute oral and dermal LD50s are >1,600 milligram/kilogram
(mg/kg). It is irritating to the eyes but not the skin of rabbits.
Neither inhalation nor sensitization studies are available.
    90-day oral toxicity studies are available in rats and dogs. In the
rat, toxicity is manifested as decreased body weight and food
efficiency at 4% (equivalent to 3,080 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/
day)) of butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich,
disodium salts. In dogs, toxicity is manifested as testicular atrophy
at 0.5% (equivalent to 125 mg/kg/day). The NOAEL in this study is 0.12%
(equivalent to 30 mg/kg/day). The chronic reference dose (cRfD) is
based on this study.
    A combined reproductive and developmental study on rats is
available with butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters,
C10-rich, disodium salts. Quantitative fetal susceptibility is observed
as reduced pup weight at 1% (equivalent to 750 mg/kg/day). Maternal
toxicity is reported only with regard to reproduction toxicity and
included a reduced number of viable embryos and live-born per litter,
and reduced fertility, viability and lactation indices at 4%
(equivalent to 3,000 mg/kg/day).
    Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich,
disodium salts is not expected to be carcinogenic based on the absence
of structural alerts using the Derek Nexus program and the lack of
mutagenicity in two Ames tests.
    Neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies with butanedioic acid, 2-
sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts are not
available for review. However, no evidence of potential neurotoxicity
or immunotoxicity is observed in the submitted studies.
    Metabolism studies with butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-
isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts are not available for review.
However, it is expected that these salts will readily hydrolyze
(primarily in the intestine, blood and liver) by carboxylesterases
resulting in the corresponding alcohol (C9-C l1 isoalkyl, Cl0 rich).
The fatty alcohol is expected to be metabolized via normal metabolic
pathways (oxidation, followed by normal fatty acid metabolism).

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which the NOAEL and the LOAEL are identified.
Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to
calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a population-
adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe margin of
exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the
adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    An acute effect was not found in the database therefore an acute
dietary assessment was not conducted. The cRfD as well as all exposure
scenarios was based on the 90-day oral toxicity study in the dog. In
this study, the LOAEL was 0.5% (equivalent to 125 mg/kg/day) based on
testicular atrophy in males. The NOAEL was 0.12% (equivalent to 30 mg/
kg/day). This represents the lowest NOAEL in the most sensitive species
in the toxicity database. The standard uncertainty factors were applied
to account for interspecies (10x) and intraspecies (10x) variations.
Default values of 100% absorption were used for the dermal and
inhalation factors.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-
rich, disodium salts, EPA considered exposure under the proposed
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters,
C10-rich, disodium salts in food as follows:
    Dietary exposure (food and drinking water) to butanedioic acid, 2-
sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts can occur
following ingestion of foods with residues from treated crops. Because
no adverse effects attributable to a single exposure of butanedioic
acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts are
seen in the toxicity databases, an acute dietary risk assessment was
not conducted. For the chronic dietary risk assessment, EPA used the
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 3.16, and food
consumption information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
(USDA's) 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, no
residue data were submitted for butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-
isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts. In the absence of specific
residue data, EPA has developed an approach which uses surrogate
information to derive upper bound exposure estimates for the subject
inert ingredient. Upper bound exposure estimates are based on the
highest tolerance for a given commodity from a list of high use
insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides. 100 percent crop treated
(PCT), default processing

factors, and tolerance-level residues were assumed for all foods, and
the assessment incorporated the use limitation that the ingredient will
be present in pesticide formulations at a concentration of not more
than 10% by weight. A complete description of the general approach
taken to assess inert ingredient risks in the absence of residue data
is contained in the memorandum entitled ``Alkyl Amines Polyalkoxylates
(Cluster 4): Acute and Chronic Aggregate (Food and Drinking Water)
Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessments for the Inerts,'' (D361707, S.
Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0738.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. For the purpose of the
screening level dietary risk assessment to support this request for an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for butanedioic acid, 2-
sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts, a
conservative drinking water concentration value of 100 parts per
billion (ppb) based on screening level modeling was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for the chronic dietary risk assessments
for parent compound. These values were directly entered into the
dietary exposure model.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
    Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich,
disodium salts may be used in inert ingredients in products that are
registered for specific uses that may result in residential exposure,
such as pesticides used in and around the home. Based on the available
data for products registered for residential use, the Agency concluded
that products containing inert chemicals similar to butanedioic acid,
2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts (ie
surfactant) usually comprise no more than 2-5% of the inert ingredient
in the final product. Therefore, the Agency conducted an assessment to
represent conservative residential exposure by assessing butanedioic
acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts in
pesticide formulations (outdoor scenarios) and in disinfectant-type
uses (indoor scenarios) at no more than 5% in the final formulation.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl
esters, C10-rich, disodium salts to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-
C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium
salts does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The toxicity database for
butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium
salts contains subchronic, combined reproduction/teratology and
mutagenicity studies. There is no indication of potential neurotoxicity
or immunotoxicity in the available studies. Quantitative increased
fetal susceptibility was observed in the combined reproduction/
teratology study in rats. Fetal toxicity (reduced pup weight) was
observed at the lowest dose tested, 750 mg/kg/day. Maternal/
reproduction toxicity was observed at 3,000 mg/kg/day and manifested as
a reduction in the number of viable embryos, live-born per litter,
fertility, viability, and lactation indices. The addition of a 10x FQPA
safety factor to account for quantitative susceptibility and LOAEL to
NOAEL extrapolation is not necessary because it would result in a cRfD
of 0.75 mg/kg/day and the established cRfD is 0.30 mg/kg/day. The cRfD
is considerably lower and will be protective of fetal susceptibility
and effects observed at 750 mg/kg/day. Therefore, retention of the FQPA
safety factor is unnecessary. There is low concern for reproduction
toxicity since the aforementioned effects occurred above the limit dose
of 1,000 mg/kg/day and a clear NOAEL of 750 mg/kg/day was established.
Therefore, the established cRfD will be protective of these effects. In
addition, the Agency used the most conservative (highest) exposure
estimates and assumptions, including 100 PCT and tolerance-level
residues for all foods, conservative estimates of drinking water
exposure, and a conservative assessment of potential residential
exposure for infants and children. Therefore, the FQPA SF of 10x is
reduced to 1x.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium
salts is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium
salts from food and water will utilize 47.9% of the cPAD for children
1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water

(considered to be a background exposure level).
    Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich,
disodium salts may be used as inert ingredients in pesticide products
that could result in short-term residential exposure, and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure
through food and water with short-term residential exposures to
butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium
salts. Using the exposure assumptions described above, EPA has
concluded that the combined short-term aggregated food, water, and
residential exposures result in MOEs of 126 for both adult males and
females. Adult residential exposure combines high end dermal and
inhalation handler exposure from liquids/trigger sprayer/home garden
use with a high end post application dermal exposure from contact with
treated lawns. Also, EPA has concluded the combined short-term
aggregated food, water, and residential exposures result in an
aggregate MOE of 135 for children. Children's residential exposure
includes total exposures associated with contact with treated lawns
(dermal and hand-to-mouth exposures). As the level of concern is for
MOEs that are lower than 100, these MOEs are not of concern.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
    Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich,
disodium salts may be used as inert ingredients in pesticide products
that could result in intermediate-term residential exposure and the
Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic
exposure through food and water with intermediate-term residential
exposures to butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-
rich, disodium salts. Using the exposure assumptions described above,
EPA has concluded that the combined intermediate-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 480 for adult males
and females. Adult residential exposure combines liquids/trigger
sprayer/home garden use with a high end post application dermal
exposure from contact with treated lawns. As the level of concern is
for MOEs that are lower than 100, this MOE is not of concern. EPA has
concluded the combined intermediate-term aggregated food, water, and
residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 158 for children.
Children's residential exposure includes total exposures associated
with contact with treated surfaces (dermal and hand-to-mouth
exposures). As the level of concern is for MOEs that are lower than
100, this MOE is not of concern.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on a DEREK
structural alert analysis and the lack of mutagenicity, butanedioic
acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts is
not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-
rich, disodium salts residues.

V. Other Considerations

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is not establishing a numerical tolerance for residues of
butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium
salts in or on any food commodities. EPA is establishing limitations on
the amount of butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-
rich, disodium salts that may be used in pesticide formulations applied
to growing crops. These limitations will be enforced through the
pesticide registration process under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (``FIFRA''), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. EPA
will not register any pesticide formulation for use on growing crops or
raw agricultural commodities after harvest for sale or distribution
that exceeds 10% by weight of butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-
isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts unless additional data are
submitted.

VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established under 40 CFR 180. 910 for of butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-
C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich, disodium salts (CAS Reg. No. 815583-
91-6) when used as inert ingredients (surfactant) at a maximum
concentration of 10% by weight in pesticide formulations applied to
growing crops or to raw agricultural commodities after harvest.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology

Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: April 26, 2016.
Susan Lewis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.910, add alphabetically the inert ingredient
``Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-rich,
disodium salts (CAS Reg. No. 815583-91-6)'' to the table to read as
follows:

Sec.  180.910  Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Inert ingredients                Limits                Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, C-  Not to exceed 10% by    Surfactant.
 C9-11-isoalkyl esters, C10-     weight in pesticide
 rich, disodium salts (CAS       formulation for
 Reg. No. 815583-91-6).          agricultural use.

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

[FR Doc. 2016-10582 Filed 5-4-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 77 (Thursday, April 21, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23755-23757]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08494]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0091; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01123-T;
Amendment 39-22011; AD 2022-08-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus SAS Model A318 series airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -
113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212,
-214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -
131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. This AD was prompted
by reports that, during inspections accomplished as specified in
certain airworthiness limitation items (ALIs), cracks were detected in
the double joggle areas at frame (FR) 16 and FR20 in the nose forward
fuselage. This AD requires repetitive special detailed inspections of
certain areas and applicable on-condition actions, as specified in a
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated
by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 26, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 26,
2022.

ADDRESSES: For EASA material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2022-0091.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0091; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations is
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0227, dated October 11, 2021
(EASA AD 2021-0227) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A318 series airplanes;
Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes;
Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and
Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR

part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus SAS Model
A318 series airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -
132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232,
and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -
231, and -232 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
February 8, 2022 (87 FR 7062). The NPRM was prompted by reports that
during inspections accomplished in accordance with certain ALIs, cracks
were detected in double joggle areas at FR16 and FR20, right hand and
left hand sides. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive special
detailed inspections of certain areas and applicable on-condition
actions, as specified in EASA AD 2021-0227. The NPRM also proposed an
optional modification of the double joggle area, which terminates the
repetitive inspections.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address cracks in the double joggle
areas at FR16 and FR20 in the nose forward fuselage, which, if not
detected and corrected, could reduce the structural integrity of the
fuselage. See the MCAI for additional background information.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from the Air Line Pilots Association,
International (ALPA) who supported the NPRM without change.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule as proposed. Except for minor
editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of
the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0227 specifies procedures for repetitive special
detailed inspections (rototest inspections) of double joggle areas at
FR16 and FR20, right hand and left hand sides for cracking, applicable
on-condition actions (repair) and an optional modification of the
double joggle area, which terminates the repetitive inspections. The
modification includes a rotating probe inspection of certain fastener
holes for cracks, a check of the fastener holes for a minimum diameter,
and applicable on-condition actions (repair and oversizing holes). This
material is reasonably available because the interested parties have
access to it through their normal course of business or by the means
identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD would affect 1,549 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Labor cost                   Parts cost              Cost per product         Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 55 work-hours x $85 per   $0......................  Up to $4,675..............  Up to $7,241,575.
 hour = $4,675.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Estimated Costs for Optional Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
60 work-hours x $85 per hour = $5,100.          $1,624           $6,724
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost
estimates for the on-condition repairs specified in this AD.

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.
    The FAA is 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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2022-08-08 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-22011; Docket No. FAA-2022-0091;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01123-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective May 26, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2020-20-05, Amendment 39-21261 (85 FR 65197,
October 15, 2020) (AD 2020-20-05).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this AD, certificated in any
category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD 2021-0227, dated October 11, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0227).
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233
airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports that, during inspections
accomplished as specified in certain airworthiness limitation items
(ALIs), cracks were detected in the double joggle areas at frame
(FR) 16 and FR20 in the nose forward fuselage. The FAA is issuing
this AD to address cracks in these areas, which, if not detected and
corrected, could reduce the structural integrity of the fuselage.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2021-0227.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0227

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0227 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0227 does not apply
to this AD.
    (3) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2021-0227 specifies to
``contact Airbus for approved repair instructions and, within the
compliance time specified therein, accomplish those instructions
accordingly'' if any cracks are detected, for this AD if any
cracking is detected, the cracking must be repaired before further
flight using a method approved by Airbus SAS's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (4) Where paragraphs (3) and (4) of EASA AD 2021-0227 specify
``Airbus approved repair instructions,'' or ``post-repair inspection
instructions approved by Airbus,'' for this AD, to be acceptable for
credit, the repair instructions must be approved by Airbus SAS's
EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA
authorized signature.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-0227
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Terminating Action for Certain Requirements in AD 2020-20-05

    Accomplishing the initial inspections required by this AD
terminates ALI Tasks 531153-02-1, 531153-02-2, 531155-02-1 and
531155-02-2, as required by paragraph (i) of AD 2020-20-05 only for
the airplanes identified in paragraph (c) of this AD.

(k) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) of this
AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include
the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraphs (h)(3), (i), and (k)(2) of this AD, if any service
information contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC,
those procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir Ulyanov,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone
206-231-3229; email [email protected].

(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0227,
dated October 11, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2021-0227, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on April 4, 2022.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-08494 Filed 4-20-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 7 (Thursday, January 10, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2195-2197]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31588]

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

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

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

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

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 7 / Thursday, January 10, 2013 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1202; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-38-AD;
Amendment 39-17309; AD 2012-26-14]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG
Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG BR700-715A1-30, BR700-715B1-30, and
BR700-715C1-30 turbofan engines. This AD requires a one-time removal
from service of the high-pressure (HP) compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor
disc assembly before exceeding certain thresholds. This AD was prompted
by a report of silver chloride-induced stress corrosion cracking of the
HP compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor disc assembly, identified during
overhaul. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the HP
compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor disc assembly, which could result in
uncontained failure of the engine and damage to the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective January 10, 2013.
    We must receive comments on this AD by February 25, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC
20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Rolls-Royce
Deutschland Ltd & Co KG, Eschenweg 11, Dahlewitz, 15827 Blankenfelde-
Mahlow, Germany; telephone: 49 0 33-7086-1883; fax: 49 0 33-7086-3276.
You may view copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the same as the
Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frederick Zink, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2012-0230, dated October 30, 2012 (referred to
hereinafter as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

Silver chloride-induced stress corrosion cracking was identified
during overhaul of a BR700-715 engine, on the High Pressure
Compressor (HPC) stages 1 to 6 rotor disc assembly. Subsequent
evaluation concluded that the affected part life limitation values
declared in the engine Time Limits Manual cannot be supported for
high cyclic life HPC discs.

This condition, if not corrected, could lead to uncontained HPC disc
failure, possibly resulting in damage to, and/or reduced control of
the aeroplane.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of
Germany, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with Germany, they have notified us of the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. We are issuing
this AD because we evaluated all information provided by EASA and
determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same type design. This AD requires a
one-time removal from service of the HP compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor
disc assembly before exceeding certain thresholds.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because of
the short compliance times for HP compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor disc
assemblies that are at or over the removal thresholds. Therefore, we
determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before
issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making
this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-1202; Directorate
Identifier 2012-NE-38-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments

received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of those
comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact
with FAA personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of the
Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets,
including, if provided, the name of the individual who sent the comment
(or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement
in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2012-26-14 Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (Formerly Rolls-Royce
Deutschland GmbH, formerly BMW Rolls-Royce GmbH): Amendment 39-
17309; Docket No. FAA-2012-1202; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-38-
AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective January 10,
2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG
BR700-715A1-30, BR700-715B1-30, and BR700-715C1-30 turbofan engines.

(d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of silver chloride-induced
stress corrosion cracking of the high-pressure (HP) compressor
stages 1 to 6 rotor disc assembly, identified during overhaul. We
are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the HP compressor stages 1
to 6 rotor disc assembly, which could result in uncontained failure
of the engine and damage to the airplane.

(e) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions.

(1) BR700-715A1-30 Turbofan Engines Operated Under the Hawaiian Flight
Mission Only

    For BR700-715A1-30 turbofan engines operated under the Hawaiian
Flight Mission only, do the following:
    (1) If the HP compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor disc assembly has
accumulated 15,700 flight cycles since new or fewer on the effective
date of this AD, remove the rotor disc assembly from service before
exceeding 16,000 flight cycles since new (CSN).
    (2) If the HP compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor disc assembly has
accumulated more than 15,700 flight CSN on the effective date of
this AD, remove the rotor disc assembly from service within 300
flight cycles.

(2) BR700-715A1-30, BR700-715B1-30, and BR700-715C1-30 Turbofan Engines
(All Flight Missions Except the Hawaiian Flight Mission)

    For BR700-715A1-30, BR700-715B1-30, and BR700-715C1-30 turbofan
engines (all flight missions except the Hawaiian Flight Mission), do
the following:
    (1) If the HP compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor disc assembly has
accumulated 13,700 flight CSN or fewer on the effective date of this
AD, remove the rotor disc assembly from service before exceeding
14,000 flight CSN.
    (2) If the HP compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor disc assembly has
accumulated more than 13,700 flight cycles since new on the
effective date of this AD, remove the rotor disc assembly from
service within 300 flight cycles.

(f) Terminating Action

    Performing the one-time removal from service of the stages 1 to
6 rotor disc assembly, as specified in this AD, is terminating
action to this AD.

(g) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, flight cycles is the total flight
CSN on the HP compressor stages 1 to 6 rotor disc assembly, without
any pro-rated calculations applied for different flight missions.
Guidance on calculating total flight cycles can be found in Rolls-
Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG Notice to Operators BR715 engines NTO:
No. 184, dated October 25, 2012.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, may approve AMOCs for
this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.

(i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Frederick Zink,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2012-0230, dated
October 30, 2012, and Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG Alert
Service Bulletin No. SB-BR700-72-A900401, dated October 25, 2012,
for related information.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG, Eschenweg 11, Dahlewitz, 15827
Blankenfelde-Mahlow, Germany; telephone: 49 0 33-7086-1883; fax: 49
0 33-7086-3276. You may view copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on December 27, 2012.
Colleen M. D'Alessandro,
Assistant Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-31588 Filed 1-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 54446-54448]
[DOCID:fr19se08-110]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58518; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2008-94]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule
Change by NYSE Arca, Inc. Amending NYSE Arca Equities Rules 5.1(b)(14)
and 5.2(j)(2) To Permit the Listing of ELNs That Are Linked to
Securities Issued by Companies Registered Under the Investment Company
Act of 1940

Date: September 11, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
\1\ (the ``Exchange Act'') and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is
hereby given that on August 25, 2008, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or
``Exchange''), through its wholly owned subsidiary, NYSE Arca Equities,
Inc. (``NYSE Arca Equities''), filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.1(b)(14),
the Exchange's definition of Equity-Linked Notes (``ELNs''), and NYSE
Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2), the Exchange's listing standards for
ELNs, to permit the listing of ELNs that are linked to securities that
are issued by companies registered under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (``1940 Act'') \3\

and are listed on a national securities exchange. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://
www.nyse.com, at the Exchange's principal office, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-1.
    \4\ E-mail from Tim Malinowski, Director, NYSE Euronext, to
Arisa Tinaves, Division of Trading and Markets, Commission, dated
September 3, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.1(b)(14), the Exchange's definition of ELNs, and NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 5.2(j)(2), the Exchange's listing standards for ELNs, to permit
the listing of ELNs that are linked to securities that are issued by
companies registered under the 1940 Act and are listed on a national
securities exchange, as set forth below. This proposal is based upon
the Exchanges listing rules for Equity Index-Linked Securities which
allow underlying indexes to be based in whole or in part upon companies
registered under the 1940 Act and are listed on a national securities
exchange.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(I). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56879 (December 3, 2007), 72 FR
69271 (December 7, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-110) (approving Equity
Index-Linked Securities underlying indexes to be based in whole or
in part upon companies registered under the 1940 Act and are listed
on a national securities exchange).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definition of ELN
    NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.1(b)(14) currently defines ELNs as notes
that are linked, in whole or in part, to the market performance of up
to thirty (30) common stocks or non-convertible preferred stocks. The
Exchange proposes to amend the Rule to define ELNs as notes that are
linked, in whole or in part, to the market performance of up to thirty
(30) underlying equity securities that meet the criteria in NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2). The Exchange believes that it is more
appropriate to set forth the criteria for the underlying securities in
the listing criteria for ELNs rather than in the definitions section.
Further, the Exchange believes that the cross-reference serves a useful
purpose in that it alerts readers to the fact that the Exchange has
listing criteria for ELNs and where it can be found. In addition, the
Exchange proposes this change in order to avoid the administrative
burden of amending the definition each time that the Exchange proposes
to amend the ELN listing criteria.
The Linked Securities
    NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2)(C) currently provides minimum
standards applicable to the linked securities and the issuers of such
securities. Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2)(C)(ii), each issuer
of an underlying security to which an ELN is to be linked must be a
reporting company pursuant to the Exchange Act that is listed on a
national securities exchange. The Exchange proposes to expand this
provision to provide that an issuer of an underlying security to which
an ELN is to be linked may also be a 1940 Act registered investment
company. In addition, the Exchange proposes to further clarify the Rule
to state that, in either case, any underlying security to which the ELN
is to be linked must be listed on a national securities exchange.
    The Exchange believes that expanding the listing criteria for ELNs
to encompass notes that are linked to the securities of investment
companies will provide investors with enhanced investment options and
flexibility. The Exchange also believes that there would be no investor
protection concerns with this expansion because each linked security is
required to individually satisfy the applicable listing standards set
forth in Rule 5.2(j)(2), including that the investment company be
registered under the 1940 Act and that the underlying securities be
listed on a national securities exchange. The Exchange also believes
that the availability of financial information for the underlying
securities of 1940 Act registered investment companies, like the
Exchange Act reporting companies, have disclosure obligations under the
federal securities laws. The Exchange believes that such information
serves to protect investors and the public interest.
    The Exchange notes that 1940 Act registered investment company
securities trade on the same exchange platforms as equity securities
registered under the Exchange Act and are subject to the same exchange
trading rules as equity securities. As such, the Exchange believes that
it is appropriate to permit 1940 Act registered investment companies to
be an underlying security for ELNs.
    In NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2)(C)(ii)(2), the Exchange
proposes to replace the term ``common stock'' with the term ``shares''
in order to take into account that certain underlying securities,
particularly those that are securities issued by 1940 Act registered
investment companies, are not labeled ``common stock.'' Similarly, in
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2)(D)(i), the Exchange proposes to
eliminate the term ``common'' when it qualifies ``shares'' in order to
take into account that certain underlying securities, particularly
those that are securities issued by 1940 Act registered investment
companies, are not labeled ``common shares.''
    As revised, the term ``shares'' shall encompass common stock, non-
convertible preferred stock and securities issued by 1940 Act
registered investment companies as eligible underlying securities.
Therefore, with respect to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2)(C)(ii)(2),
the combined trading volume of each non-U.S. security (a security
issued by a non-U.S. company) and other related non-U.S. securities
occurring in the U.S. market or in markets with which the Exchange has
in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement must represent
(on a share equivalent basis for any American Depository Shares
(``ADSs'')) at least 50% of the combined world-wide trading volume in
each such non-U.S. security, other related non-U.S. securities, and
other classes of common stock, non-convertible preferred stock or
securities of 1940 Act registered investment companies related to each
such non-U.S. security, as the case may be, over the six month period
preceding the date of listing. In addition, with respect to NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2)(D)(i): (1) An issuance of ELNs relating to any
U.S. security may not exceed five percent of the total outstanding
common stock, non-convertible preferred stock, or securities of 1940
Act registered investment companies for each such underlying security,
as the case may be; and (2) the issuance of ELNs relating to any
underlying non-U.S. security represented by ADSs, common stock, non-
convertible preferred stock, or securities of 1940 Act registered
investment companies, or otherwise, may not exceed: (a) Two percent of
the total shares outstanding of the relevant underlying security
worldwide if at least 20 percent of the worldwide

trading volume in each non-U.S. security and related non-U.S. security
occurs in the U.S. market during the six-month period preceding the
date of listing; or (b) three percent of the total shares outstanding
of the relevant underlying security worldwide if at least 50 percent of
the worldwide trading volume in each non-U.S. security and related non-
U.S. security occurs in the U.S. market during the six-month period
preceding the date of listing; and (c) five percent of the total shares
outstanding of the relevant underlying security worldwide if at least
70 percent of the worldwide trading volume in each non-U.S. security
and related non-U.S. security occurs in the U.S. market during the six-
month period preceding the date of listing.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ E-mail from Tim Malinowski, Director, NYSE Euronext, to
Edward Cho, Special Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets,
Commission, dated September 9, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Technical Changes
    The Exchange proposes to correct the numbering of NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2)(C)(iv) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(2)(C)(iii). The Exchange also proposes to change the reference
to the Division of Market Regulation to the Division of Trading and
Markets in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2)(D)(i).
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) \7\ of the Exchange Act, in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\8\ in particular, in that it is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of
a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general,
to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes
that expanding the listing criteria for ELNs to encompass notes that
are linked to the securities of investment companies will provide
investors with enhanced investment options and flexibility. The
Exchange also believes that the availability of financial information
for the underlying securities of 1940 Act registered investment
companies, like the Exchange Act reporting companies, have disclosure
obligations under the federal securities laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve the proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

The Exchange has requested accelerated approval of this proposed rule
change prior to the 30th day after the date of publication of the
notice in the Federal Register.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ E-mail from Tim Malinowski, Director, NYSE Euronext, to
Edward Cho, Special Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets,
Commission, dated August 27, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Exchange Act. Comments may be submitted
by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2008-94 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-Arca-2008-94. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2008-94 and should
be submitted on or before October 6, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-21901 Filed 9-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 56779]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23508]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4013-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

Nebraska; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Nebraska (FEMA-4013-DR), dated August 12, 2011, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 7, 2011.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Nebraska is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of August 12, 2011.

    Lincoln County for Individual Assistance (already designated for
Public Assistance).

    Nemaha and Richardson Counties for Individual Assistance
(already designated for emergency protective measures [Category B]
under the Public Assistance 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. 2011-23508 Filed 9-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: November 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 214)]
[Notices]
[Page 67465]
[DOCID:fr07no05-61]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EC06-17-000]

BBPOPWind Equity LLC, Blue Canyon Windpower LLC, Eurue Combine
Hills 1 LLC, Caprock Wind LLC, Babcock & Brown Wind Partners Ltd.,
Babcock & Brown Wind Partners Trust, Babcock & Brown Wind Partners
(Bermuda) Ltd., Babcock & Brown Infrastructure Management Pty. Ltd.,
BBWP (US) LLC; Notice of Filing

November 1, 2005.
    Take notice that on October 27, 2005, BBPOP Wind Equity LLC, Blue
Canyon Windpower LLC, Eurus Combine Hills 1 LLC, Caprock Wind LLC,
Babcock & Brown Wind Partners Ltd., Babcock & Brown Wind Partners
trust, Babcock & Brown Wind Partners (Bermuda) Ltd., BBWP (US) LLC, and
Babcock & Brown Infrastructure Management Pty. Ltd. (collectively,
Applicants), pursuant to section 203 of the Federal Power Act, hereby
request authorization for the reorganization and sale of upstream
ownership interest in jurisdictional facilities owned by Blue Canyon,
Combine Hills, and Caprock.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on November 17, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-6155 Filed 11-4-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P