[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 76 (Thursday, April 19, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23380-23382]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8584]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0330; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-43-AD;
Amendment 39-17015; AD 2012-07-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca S.A. Turboshaft Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
for Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F turboshaft engines with P3 air pipe (first
section) part number (P/N) 0 319 71 918 0, installed. That AD currently
requires inspections of the P3 air pipe (first section) and right-hand
(RH) rear half-wall for proper clearance and readjustment of the pipe
if necessary. This new AD requires the same inspections for installed
engines, eliminates readjusting of the P3 air pipe (first section),
requires replacement of the RH rear half-wall under certain conditions,
and adds an optional terminating action. This AD was prompted by
Turbomeca determining that the clearance between the P3 air pipe (first
section) and the RH rear half-wall might change during installation of
the engine on the helicopter. We are issuing this AD to prevent an
uncommanded power loss to flight idle, which could result in an
emergency autorotation landing or accident.

DATES: This AD is effective May 24, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of May 24, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in the AD as of August
19, 2009 (74 FR 34221, July 15, 2009).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact

Turbomeca, 40220 Tarnos, France; phone: 33 (0)5 59 74 40 00; telex 570
042; fax 33 (0)5 59 74 45 15. You may review 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>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
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 address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
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: Mark Riley, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
781-238-7199; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2009-14-11, Amendment 39-15961 (74 FR 34221,
July 15, 2009). That AD applies to the specified products. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on December 13, 2011 (76 FR 77446).
That NPRM proposed to continue to require inspections of the P3 air
pipe (first section) and right-hand (RH) rear half-wall for proper
clearance. That NPRM also proposed to require eliminating readjusting
of the P3 air pipe (first section), replacing the RH rear half-wall
under certain conditions, and adding an optional terminating action.

Service Bulletin Reference

    In AD 2009-14-11 (74 FR 34221, July 15, 2009), ``Version A'' was
inadvertently omitted from the reference to Turbomeca Mandatory Service
Bulletin No. 319 75 4810, dated May 14, 2008. In this AD, the service
bulletin reference reads correctly as ``Turbomeca Mandatory Service
Bulletin No. 319 75 4810, Version A, dated May 14, 2008.''

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (76 FR 77446, December 13,
2011).

Credit for Previous Action Added

    Since we issued the NPRM (76 FR 77446, December 13, 2011) the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded AD 2011-0182, dated
September 22, 2011, to include a credit for inspections done using
Turbomeca Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) No. 319 75 4810, Version A,
dated May 14, 2008. We added a paragraph for credit for previous
action, which states that inspections performed on an installed engine
before the effective date of this AD using Turbomeca MSB No. 319 75
4810, Version A, dated May 14, 2008, satisfies the inspection
requirements in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) and (e)(1)(ii) of this AD. We also
changed the EASA AD reference to EASA AD 2011-0182R1, dated February 3,
2012.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described
previously.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 120 Arrius 2F turboshaft
engines installed on helicopters of U.S. registry. We also estimate
that it will take about 2 work-hours per engine to comply with this AD.
The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost
about $2,565 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost
of the AD on U.S. operators to be $328,200. Our cost estimate is
exclusive of possible warranty coverage.

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 have 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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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 removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2009-14-11, Amendment 39-15961 (74 FR 34221, July 15, 2009), and adding
the following new AD:

2012-07-09 Turbomeca S.A: Amendment 39-17015; Docket No. FAA-2009-
0330; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-43-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective May 24, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2009-14-11, Amendment 39-15961 (74 FR
34221, July 15, 2009).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F turboshaft engines
with right-hand (RH) rear half-wall, part number (P/N) 0319 99 824
0, installed.

(d) Unsafe Condition

    The P3 air pipe (first section) and the RH rear half-wall could
rub each other. Rubbing

between the pipe and the RH rear half-wall may lead to rupture of
the P3 air pipe (first section), which could cause an uncommanded
power loss to flight idle. We are issuing this AD to prevent an
uncommanded power loss to flight idle, which could result in an
emergency autorotation landing or accident.

(e) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
    (1) For installed engines, within 100 engine hours (EH) after
the effective date of this AD:
    (i) Inspect the clearance between the P3 air pipe (first
section) and the RH rear half-wall for sufficient clearance (0.5 mm
or more).
    (ii) Use paragraph 2.B.(1) of Turbomeca Mandatory Service
Bulletin (MSB) No. 319 75 4810, Version B, dated January 25, 2011 to
do the inspection.
    (2) Thereafter, repeat the inspections in paragraphs (e)(1)(i)
through (e)(1)(ii) of this AD as follows:
    (i) At every installation of a RH rear half-wall P/N 0 319 99
824 0 on an installed engine, and
    (ii) After every installation or reinstallation of an engine
with a RH rear half-wall P/N 0 319 99 824 0 installed.
    (3) If the P3 air pipe (first section) or the RH rear half-wall
P/N 0 319 99 824 0 is found damaged, then before further flight,
replace the damaged part(s) with parts eligible for installation.
    (4) If the P3 air pipe (first section) and the RH rear half-wall
P/N 0 319 99 824 0 are found contacting each other but are not
damaged, replace the RH rear half-wall with a RH rear half-wall
eligible for installation.
    (5) If both the P3 air pipe (first section) and the RH rear
half-wall are found not damaged during the inspections specified in
paragraph (e)(1) or (e)(2) of this AD, and the clearance between
them is less than 0.5 mm, but they are not contacting each other,
then repeat the inspection in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) and (e)(1)(ii) of
this AD within every 100 EH.
    (6) Installation of RH rear half-wall, P/N 0 319 99 008 0, is
terminating action to the inspections required by paragraphs (e)(1),
(e)(2), and (e)(5) of this AD.
    (7) Once a RH rear half-wall, P/N 0 319 99 008 0, is installed
on an engine, do not install a RH rear half-wall, P/N 0 319 99 824
0, on that engine.

(f) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, parts eligible for installation is
defined as:
    (1) An undamaged P3 air pipe (first section).
    (2) An undamaged RH rear half-wall P/N 0 319 99 824 0.
    (3) A new design RH rear half-wall P/N 0 319 99 008 0.

(g) Credit for Previous Action

    An inspection performed on an installed engine before the
effective date of this AD using Turbomeca MSB No. 319 75 4810,
Version A, dated May 14, 2008, satisfies the inspection requirement
in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) and (e)(1)(ii) of this AD.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, may approve
alternative methods of compliance 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 Mark Riley,
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) European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2011-0182R1, dated
February 3, 2012, pertains to the subject of this AD.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact. You
may review 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>.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    You must use the following service information to do the actions
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director
of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of the following
service information.
    (1) Turbomeca Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 319 75 4810,
Version A, dated May 14, 2008, approved for IBR August 19, 2009 (74
FR 34221, July 15, 2009).
    (2) Turbomeca Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 319 75 4810,
Version B, dated January 25, 2011, approved for IBR May 24, 2012.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Turbomeca, 40220 Tarnos, France; telephone 33 (0)5 59 74 40 00;
telex 570 042; fax 33 (0)5 59 74 45 15.
    (4) You may review 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>.
    (5) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on April 3, 2012.
Colleen M. D'Alessandro,
Assistant Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-8584 Filed 4-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 13, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10786-10788]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04968]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0006]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Tennessee River, Huntsville, AL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
all navigable waters of the Tennessee River from mile marker (MM) 322.0
to MM 325.0. The safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of
life and vessels during cargo transfer operations taking place at
Redstone Arsenal. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is
prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from March 13, 2018
through March 16, 2018, or until the cargo operation ceases, whichever
comes first. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be
used from March 5, 2018 through March 13, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0006 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Vera Max, MSD Nashville, U.S. Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

BNM Broadcast Notice to Mariners
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley
DHS Department of Homeland Security
LNM Local Notice to Mariners
FR Federal Register
MM Mile marker
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. We must
establish this safety zone by March 5, 2018 and lack sufficient time to
provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those comments
before issuing the rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because the event will take place before the 30 days and this rule is
necessary to provide for public safety against the potential hazards
associated with this cargo transfer operation.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined
that potential hazards associated with a cargo transfer operation
taking place at Redstone Arsenal during the period from March 5, 2018
through March 16, 2018 will be a safety concern for all navigable
waters of the Tennessee River between mile markers (MMs) 322.0 and
325.0. The purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of life on the
navigable waters in the temporary safety zone before, during, and after
the cargo transfer operations.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from March 5, 2018
through March 16, 2018, or until the cargo operation is completed,
whichever comes first. The temporary safety zone will cover all
navigable waters of the Tennessee River between MMs 322.0 and 325.0.
Transit into and through this area is prohibited during periods of
enforcement. The periods of enforcement will be prior to, during, and
30 minutes after any vessel movement and cargo transfer operations at
Redstone Arsenal. The Coast Guard was informed that the operations will
take place during daylight hours over approximately two days. Safety
zone enforcement times will be announced via Broadcast Notice to
Mariners (BNM), Local Notices to Mariners (LNM), or through other means
of public notice and at least 1 hour notice will be provided before
each enforcement period.
    The duration of the temporary safety zone is intended to ensure the
safety of life and vessels on these navigable waters before, during,
and after the cargo transfer operations taking place at Redstone
Arsenal. All vessels intending to transit the Tennessee River between
MMs 322.0 and 325.0 from March 5, 2018 through March 16, 2018 must
contact the COTP or a designated representative to request permission
to transit at a time when critical operations

are not taking place. Entry into this safety zone is prohibited unless
specifically authorized by the COTP or a designated representative.
Entry requests will be considered and reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
The COTP may be contacted by telephone at 1-800-253-7465 or can be
reached by VHF-FM channel 16.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-year of the temporary safety zone. This
safety zone prohibits transit on a three mile stretch of the Tennessee
River only during critical cargo transfer operations at Redstone
Arsenal over approximately two days, during a time of year that
experiences lower than normal traffic. Broadcast Notices to Mariners
and Local Notices to Mariners will also inform the community of the
safety zone enforcement periods through BNM, LNM, and other means of
public notice so that they may plan accordingly for each enforcement
period restricting transit. Vessel traffic must request permission from
the COTP or a designated representative to enter the restricted area.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, 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. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves a safety zone that would prohibit entry to vessels during
cargo transfer operations at Redstone Arsenal. It is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A,
Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of
Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available
in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements, Security Measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0006 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0006   Safety zone; Tennessee River, Huntsville, AL.

    (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone area:
all navigable waters of the Tennessee River between Mile Marker (MM)
322.0 and MM 325.0, Huntsville, AL.
    (b) Effective date. This section is effective from March 5, 2018
through March 16, 2018 or until the cargo operation is completed,
whichever comes first.
    (c) Periods of enforcement. This section will be enforced prior to
and 30 minutes after all vessel movement and cargo transfer operations
taking place at Redstone Arsenal. The Captain of the Port Sector Ohio
Valley (COTP) or a designated representative will inform the public
through Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM), Local Notices to Mariners
(LNM), or through other means of public notice at least 1 hour in
advance of each enforcement period.
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
specifically authorized by the COTP or a designated representative.
Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or pass through the zone must
request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. They
may be contacted by telephone at 1-800-253-7465 or on VHF-FM radio
channel 16.
    (2) Persons and vessels permitted to enter this safety zone must
transit at the slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful directions
issued by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public through broadcast notices to
mariners of the enforcement period for the temporary safety zone as
well as any changes in the planned schedule.

    Dated: March 5, 2018.
M.B. Zamperini,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2018-04968 Filed 3-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 106 (Thursday, June 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 33518]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11787]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94994; File No. SR-PEARL-2022-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of
Withdrawal of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX PEARL Options Fee
Schedule To Remove Certain Credits and Increase Trading Permit Fees

May 26, 2022.
    On March 30, 2022, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX Pearl'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 \1\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to remove certain credits
and increase trading permit fees. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on April 18, 2022.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94696 (April 12,
2022), 87 FR 22987. Comments on the proposed rule change can be
found at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-pearl-2022-09/srpearl202209.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 17, 2022, MIAX Pearl withdrew the proposed rule change (SR-
PEARL-2022-09).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-11787 Filed 6-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 231 (Thursday, December 1, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74667-74670]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30608]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0914; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-166-AD;
Amendment 39-16876; AD 2011-24-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 737-200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. That AD
currently requires repetitive external non-destructive inspections to
detect cracks in the fuselage skin along the chem-mill step at
stringers S-1 and S-2 right, between station (STA) 827 and STA 847, and
repair if necessary. This new AD adds inspections for cracking in
additional fuselage crown skin locations, and repair if necessary. This
new AD also reduces the inspection thresholds for certain airplanes,
extends certain repetitive inspection intervals, and adds airplanes to
the applicability of the existing AD. This AD was prompted by reports
of additional crack findings of the fuselage crown skin at the chem-
milled steps. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue
cracking of the fuselage skin panels at the chem-milled steps, which
could result in sudden fracture and failure of the fuselage skin
panels, and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective January 5, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of January 5,
2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of
February 16, 2010 (75 FR 1527, January 12, 2010).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
(206) 544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
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 address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
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: Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: (425) 917-
6447; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2010-01-09, Amendment 39-16167 (75 FR 1527,
January 12, 2010). That AD applies to the specified products. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on September 1, 2011 (76 FR 54399).
That NPRM proposed to continue to require repetitive external non-
destructive inspections to detect cracks in the fuselage skin along the
chem-mill step at stringers S-1 and S-2 right, between station (STA)
827 and STA 847, and repair if necessary. That NPRM also proposed to
add inspections for cracking in additional fuselage crown skin
locations, and repair if necessary. That NPRM also proposed to reduce
the inspection thresholds for certain airplanes, extend certain
repetitive inspection intervals, and add airplanes to the applicability
of the existing AD.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comments received. Boeing and the
National Transportation Safety Board support the NPRM.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD as proposed.

Interim Action

    We consider this proposed AD interim action. If final action is
later identified, we might consider further rulemaking then.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 654 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
            Action                Work hours     Average labor      Cost per       registered       Fleet cost
                                                 rate per hour      product         airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection in AD 2010-01-09    2..............             $85  $170 per                    135  $22,950 per
 (75 FR 1527, January 12,                                        inspection                       inspection
 2010).                                                          cycle.                           cycle.

New inspection in this AD....  Between 2 and                85  Between $170                654  Between
                                30.                              and $2,550 per                   $111,180 and
                                                                 inspection                       $1,667,700 per
                                                                 cycle.                           inspection
                                                                                cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the on-condition actions 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.
    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 have 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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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 removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2010-01-09, Amendment 39-16167 (75 FR 1527, January 12, 2010), and
adding the following new AD:

2011-24-12 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-16876; Docket No. FAA-
2011-0914; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-166-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective January 5, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2010-01-09, Amendment 39-16167 (75 FR
1527, January 12, 2010).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-200, -200C,
-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of additional crack findings of
the fuselage crown skin at the chem-milled steps. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the fuselage skin
panels at the chem-milled steps, which could result in sudden
fracture and failure of the fuselage skin panels, and consequent
rapid decompression of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2010-01-09, Amendment 39-16167 (75 FR
1527, January 12, 2010)

(g) Initial and Repetitive Inspections

    For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1301, dated September 3, 2009: Before the accumulation of 35,000
total flight cycles, or within 500 flight cycles after February 16,
2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-01-09), whichever occurs later,
except as provided by paragraph (i) of this AD, do an external non-
destructive inspection (NDI) to detect cracks in the fuselage skin
along the chem-mill steps at stringers S-1 and S-2 right, between
station (STA) 827 and STA 847, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, dated
September 3, 2009; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301,
Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011. If no cracking is found, repeat
the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 flight
cycles; except as provided by paragraphs (i) and (n) of this AD.
Accomplishing the inspections required by paragraph (j) of this AD
terminates the inspections required by this paragraph.

(h) Repair

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1301, dated September 3, 2009; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1301, Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011; specifies to contact
Boeing for repair instructions: Before further flight, repair the
crack using a method approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (q) of this AD.

(i) Optional Terminating Action for Repetitive Inspections in Paragraph
(g) of This AD

    Installing an external repair doubler along the chem-milled
steps at stringers S-1 and S-2 right, between STA 827 and STA 847,
constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (g) of this AD for the repaired area only,
provided all of the conditions specified in paragraphs (i)(1),
(i)(2), and (i)(3) of this AD are met.
    (1) The repair is installed after September 3, 2009;
    (2) The repair was approved by the FAA or by a Boeing Company
Authorized Representative or the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Organization Designation

Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, to make such findings; and
    (3) The repair extends a minimum of three rows of fasteners on
each side of the chem-mill line in the circumferential direction.

New Inspections Including Additional Locations and Reduced Inspection
Intervals

(j) Groups 1 Through 25: Initial and Repetitive Inspections

    For Groups 1 through 25 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011:
Except as provided by paragraph (k) of this AD, at the applicable
time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011, do
the applicable inspections required by paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2)
of this AD, in accordance with paragraphs 3.B.1 through 3.B.25 of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1301, Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011. If no cracking is
found, repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the
applicable intervals specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, Revision 2, dated April
25, 2011; except as provided by paragraphs (m) and (n) of this AD.
Doing the inspections required by this paragraph terminates the
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (1) For Groups 2, 8, 10, 13 through 18, and 21 through 25
airplanes: Do a detailed inspection and an external non-destructive
inspection (NDI) (medium frequency eddy current inspection, magneto
optical imaging inspection, c-scan inspection, or ultrasonic phased
array inspection) for cracking in the fuselage skin at the chem-mill
steps at stringers S-1 and S-2R between STA 827 and STA 847, as
identified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011.
    (2) For Groups 1 through 25 airplanes: Do a detailed inspection
and an external NDI (medium frequency eddy current inspection;
magneto optical imaging inspection, c-scan inspection, or ultrasonic
phased array inspection) for cracking in the fuselage skin at the
chem-mill steps at the specified locations other than at S-1 and S-
2R between STA 827 and STA 847, as identified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, Revision
2, dated April 25, 2011.

    Note 1:  Option 1 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301,
Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011, specifies a detailed inspection,
and one additional inspection (external NDI, medium frequency eddy
current inspection, magneto optical imaging inspection, or c-scan
inspection). Option 2 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301,
Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011, specifies a detailed inspection
and an external ultrasonic phased array inspection. These options
have different compliance times after the initial inspection.

(k) Exception

    Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, Revision 2,
dated April 25, 2011, specifies a compliance time after ``the date
of Revision 1,'' or ``the date of Revision 2'' of that service
bulletin, this AD requires compliance within the specified time
after the effective date of this AD.

(l) Repair

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (j) of this AD: Before further flight, repair the crack
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (q) of this AD. Doing the repair ends the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (j) for the repaired area only.

(m) Optional Terminating Action for Repetitive Inspections

    Installing an external repair doubler along the chem-milled
steps at any location identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1301, Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011, constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (j) of this AD for the repaired area only, provided all of
the conditions specified in paragraphs (m)(1), (m)(2), and (m)(3) of
this AD are met.
    (1) The repair is installed after the applicable date specified
in paragraph (m)(1)(i) and (m)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) For repairs at S-1 and S-2R between STA 827 and STA 847:
Installed after September 3, 2009.
    (ii) For repairs at locations other than at S-1 and S-2R between
STA 827 and STA 847: Installed after June 7, 2010.
    (2) The repair was approved by the FAA or by a Boeing Company
Authorized Representative or the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been
authorized by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO) to make such findings; and
    (3) The repair extends a minimum of three rows of fasteners on
each side of the chem-mill line in the circumferential direction.

(n) Modification

    Accomplishing a modification of the chem-milled steps at any
location identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301,
Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011, using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (q)(1) of this
AD, terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraphs (g)
and (j) of this AD for the modified area only.

(o) Group 26 Airplanes

    For Group 26 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1301, Revision 2, dated April 25, 2011: Within 1,800
flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, accomplish
applicable inspections and corrective action, as identified in the
service bulletin, using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (q)(1) of this AD.

(p) Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    Actions done before the effective date of this AD in accordance
with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, Revision 1, dated
June 7, 2010, are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
requirements of this AD.

(q) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, 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 local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD. Information may be emailed
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO to make those findings. For a repair method to
be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the
airplane.

(r) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(s) Material Incorporated by Reference

    You must use the following service information to do the actions
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director
of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of the following
service information on the date specified:
    (1) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, Revision 2, dated
April 25, 2011, approved for IBR January 5, 2012.
    (2) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1301, dated September
3, 2009, approved for IBR February 16, 2010 (75 FR 1527, January 12,
2010).
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
(206) 544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    (5) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at an NARA facility, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 17, 2011.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-30608 Filed 11-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 134)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 34252-34257]
[DOCID:fr15jy09-21]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0458; FRL-8423-8]

Fenamidone; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
fenamidone in or on cilantro, leaves; grape; okra; turnip, greens; and
vegetable, root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B, except radish; and
combined residues of fenamidone and its metabolite RPA 717879 in or on
corn, field, forage; corn, field, grain; corn, field, stover; corn,
sweet, forage; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed; corn,
sweet, stover; soybean, forage; soybean, hay; and soybean, seed. It
also removes existing permanent and time-limited tolerances on carrot
that are superseded by the new tolerance on vegetable, root, except
sugar beet, subgroup 1B, except radish. The new tolerance on grape will
be a tolerance with regional registration (East of the Rocky Mountains)
and will replace the current tolerance which is restricted to imported
grapes. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) and Bayer
CropScience requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective July 15, 2009. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 14, 2009,
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-2008-0458. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at http://
www.regulations.gov. 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 Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those
engaged in the following activities:
     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 to
provide 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 electronically available documents 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 EPA's tolerance regulations
at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR cite
at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 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-2008-0458 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 as required by 40 CFR part 178
on or before September 14, 2009.
    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 this copy, identified by docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0458, 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
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Petition for Tolerance

    In the Federal Registers of June 13, 2008 (73 FR 33814) (FRL-8367-
3) and December 3, 2008 (73 FR 73644) (FRL 8386-9), EPA issued notices
pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3),
announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 8E7350) by
Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East,
Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540; and a pesticide petition (PP 8F7410)
by Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC
27709. PP 8E7350 requested that 40 CFR 180.579 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide fenamidone, 4H-
Imidazol-4-one, 3,5-dihydro-5-methyl-2-(methylthio)-5-phenyl-3-
(phenylamino)-, (S)-, in or on vegetables, root, except sugar beet,
subgroup 1B, except radish at 0.2 parts per million (ppm); turnip,
leaves at 55 ppm; coriander, leaves at 60 ppm; okra at 3.5 ppm; and a
tolerance with regional registration for residues of fenamidone on
grape at 1.0 ppm. The grape tolerance would replace an existing grape
tolerance that was established only to address the importation of
grapes containing fenamidone residues. PP 8F7410 requested that 40 CFR
180.579 be amended by establishing tolerances for indirect or
inadvertent residues of fenamidone and its metabolite RPA 717879, 2,4-
imidazolidinedione, 5-methyl-5-phenyl, in or on corn, field, forage at
0.50 ppm; corn, field grain at 0.02 ppm; corn, stover at 0.35 ppm;
corn, sweet, forage at 0.15 ppm; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with
husks removed at 0.02 ppm; soybean, forage at 0.20 ppm; soybean, hay at
0.20 ppm; and soybean, seed at 0.02 ppm (all in PP 8F7410). The notices
referenced summaries of the petitions prepared by Bayer CropScience,
the registrant, which are available to the public in docket ID numbers
EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0458 (PP 8E7350) and EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0848 (PP 8F7410)
at http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in
response to the notices of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the commodity terms, and/or tolerance levels for several
commodities. EPA also determined that separate tolerances should be
established on stover from field and sweet corn. The reasons for these
changes are explained in Unit IV.C.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue....''
    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for
tolerances for residues of fenamidone on cilantro, leaves at 60 ppm;
okra at 3.5 ppm; turnip, greens at 55 ppm; and vegetable, root, except
sugar beet, subgroup 1B, except radish at 0.15 ppm; a tolerance with
regional registration in or on grape at 1.0 ppm; and tolerances for
combined residues of fenamidone and its metabolite RPA 717879 in or on
corn, field, forage at 0.25 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.02 ppm; corn,
field, stover at 0.40 ppm; corn, sweet, forage at 0.15 ppm; corn,
sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed at 0.02 ppm; corn, sweet,
stover at 0.20 ppm; soybean, forage at 0.15 ppm; soybean, hay at 0.25
ppm; and soybean, seed at 0.02 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and
risks associated with establishing tolerances follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    Fenamidone has low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal and
inhalation routes of exposure. It is a moderate eye irritant, but is
not a dermal irritant or a dermal sensitizer. The liver is the target
organ in chronic studies in the rat, mouse and dog. The thyroid is also
a target organ in the rat. There is no evidence of immunotoxicity in
the available toxicity studies with fenamidone and no indication of
carcinogenicity in the carcinogenicity studies conducted in rats and
mice. EPA has classified fenamidone as ``not likely to be a human
carcinogen'' by all relevant routes of exposure.
    Fenamidone did not demonstrate any qualitative or quantitative
increased susceptibility of fetuses or offspring in the rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies or the 2-generation rat reproduction
study. In the rat reproduction study (Sprague Dawley rat), decreased
absolute brain weight and pup body weight occurred at the same dose
levels as decreased absolute brain weight and parental body weight,
food consumption and increased liver and spleen weight. Developmental
toxicity (decreased fetal weights and incomplete ossification) was
observed in the rat only at the limit dose. Fenamidone did not produce
developmental toxicity in the rabbit or reproductive toxicity in the
rat.
    No treatment-related effects were observed on motor activity or in
the functional observation battery (FOB) parameters measured in the
subchronic neurotoxicity study in rats. In this subchronic
neurotoxicity study, marginal decreases in brain weights were observed
only in high dose males. In the acute neurotoxicity study in rats, the
most commonly observed clinical sign was staining/soiling of the
anogenital region. Other day-1 FOB findings included mucous in the
feces,

hunched posture and unsteady gait. In a developmental neurotoxicity
study in Wistar rats, no neurobehavioral effects and no
neuropathological changes were observed at any dose in the offspring,
but decreased body weight was observed during pre- and post-weaning.
     Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by fenamidone as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://
www.regulations.gov in the document Fenamidone. Human Health Risk
Assessment to Support Section 3 Proposals to Add New Uses on the Root
Vegetable Subgroup 1B (except radish), Okra, Turnip Greens, Cilantro
Leaves, Grapes Grown East of the Rock Mountains and Rotational Crop
Uses for Field Corn, Sweet Corn and Soybeans, page 30 in docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0458.

B. Toxicological Endpoints

    For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, a toxicological point of departure (POD) is
identified as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk
assessment. The POD may be defined as the highest dose at which no
adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) in the toxicology study
identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment. However, if a
NOAEL cannot be determined, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of
concern are identified (the LOAEL) or a Benchmark Dose (BMD) approach
is sometimes used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs)
are used in conjunction with the POD to take into account uncertainties
inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and
in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population
as well as other unknowns. Safety is assessed for acute and chronic
dietary risks by comparing aggregate food and water exposure to the
pesticide to the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic
population adjusted dose (cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are calculated by
dividing the POD by all applicable UFs. Aggregate short-term,
intermediate-term, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing
food, water, and residential exposure to the POD to ensure that the
margin of exposure (MOE) called for by the product of all applicable
UFs is not exceeded. This latter value is referred to as the Level of
Concern (LOC).
    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
greater than that 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.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for fenamidone used for
human risk assessment can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in the
document Fenamidone. Human Health Risk Assessment to Support Section 3
Proposals to Add New Uses on the Root Vegetable Subgroup 1B (except
radish), Okra, Turnip Greens, Cilantro Leaves, Grapes Grown East of the
Rock Mountains and Rotational Crop Uses for Field Corn, Sweet Corn and
Soybeans, page 12 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0458.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fenamidone, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing fenamidone tolerances in 40 CFR
180.579. EPA assessed dietary exposures from fenamidone in food as
follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
    In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed that
100% of all crops with existing or proposed registrations are treated
with fenamidone and that residues are present at maximum field trial
levels.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed that 100% of
all crops with existing or proposed registrations are treated with
fenamidone and that residues are present at maximum field trial levels.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the results of carcinogenicity studies in
rats and mice, EPA classified fenamidone as ``not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans;'' therefore, an exposure assessment for
evaluating cancer risk is not needed for this chemical.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in
food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after
the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect,
demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be submitted no later
than 5 years from the date of issuance of these tolerances.
    EPA did not use PCT information in assessing dietary exposure to
fenamidone.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The fenamidone residues of
toxicological concern in drinking water include parent fenamidone and
its degradation products, RPA 412636, RPA 412108, RPA 411639, RPA
413255, RPA 409446, and RPA 410995. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for fenamidone and its degradates in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and
fate/transport characteristics of fenamidone and its degradates.
Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in
pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
fenamidone and its degradates for acute exposures are estimated to be
47.88 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 176 ppb for ground
water. The EDWCs of fenamidone and its degradates for chronic exposures
for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 12.86 ppb for surface
water and 176 ppb for ground water.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute and chronic dietary
risk assessment, the water concentration value of 176 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in

this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g.,
for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides,
and flea and tick control on pets). Fenamidone is not registered for
any specific use patterns that would result in residential exposure.
    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 fenamidone to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and fenamidone does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
fenamidone 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 website 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 FQPA safety
factor (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 pre- and postnatal
toxicity database for fenamidone includes rat and rabbit developmental
toxicity studies, a rat developmental neurotoxicity study (DNT) and a
2-generation reproduction toxicity study in rats. No evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of rat or rabbit
fetuses to in utero exposure was observed in the developmental toxicity
studies. There was no developmental toxicity in rabbit fetuses up to
100 milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day), the highest dose tested (HDT);
whereas an increase in absolute liver weight was observed in the does
at 30 and 100 mg/kg/day. Since the liver was identified as one of the
principal target organs in rodents and dogs, the occurrence of this
finding in rabbits at 30 and 100 mg/kg/day was considered strong
evidence of maternal toxicity. In the rat developmental study,
developmental toxicity manifested as decreased fetal body weight and
incomplete fetal ossification in the presence of maternal toxicity in
the form of decreased body weight and food consumption at the limit
dose (1,000 mg/kg/day). The effects at the limit dose were comparable
between fetuses and dams. No quantitative or qualitative evidence of
increased susceptibility was observed in the 2-generation reproduction
study in rats. In that study, both the parental and offspring LOAELs
were based on decreased absolute brain weight in female F1
adults and female F2 offspring at 89.2 mg/kg/day. At 438.3
mg/kg/day, parental effects consisted of decreased body weight and food
consumption, and increased liver and spleen weight. Decreased pup body
weight was also observed at the same dose level of 438.3 mg/kg/day.
There were no effects on reproductive performance up to 438.3 mg/kg/day
(HDT).
    The results of the DNT study indicated an increased susceptibility
of offspring. There was no maternal toxicity at the HDT (429 mg/kg/
day). Effects in the offspring included decreased body weight (9-11%)
and body weight gain (8-20%) during pre-weaning and decreased body
weight (4-6%) during post-weaning at 429 mg/kg/day (LOAEL). There were
no neurobehavioral effects and no neuropathological changes at any dose
in the offspring. The concern for the increased susceptibility observed
in the DNT is low because:
    i. Of the lack of neurobehavioral or neuropathological changes in
the offspring at any dose;
    ii. A clear NOAEL for the adverse effects in the study was
identified;
    iii. The endpoints used for the various risk assessment scenarios
are much more sensitive than that of the decreased bodyweight of the
offspring occurring at almost half the limit-dose (429 mg/kg/day); and
    iv. The NOAELs of 10.4, 5.4 and 2.83 mg/kg/day used for short-term,
intermediate-term and long-term risk assessments, respectively, are
considerably (9-45 fold) lower than the offspring NOAEL of 92.3 mg/kg/
day in the DNT.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for fenamidone is adequate to assess the
pre- and postnatal toxicity of fenamidone. In accordance with the
revised 40 CFR part 158 Data Requirements for Pesticides, an
immunotoxicity study (870.7800) is required for fenamidone. In the
absence of specific immunotoxicity studies, EPA has evaluated the
available fenamidone toxicity data to determine whether an additional
database uncertainty factor is needed to account for potential
immunotoxicity. There was no evidence of adverse effects on the organs
of the immune system in any study with fenamidone, and fenamidone does
not belong to a class of chemicals (e.g., the organotins, heavy metals,
or halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons) that would be expected to be
immunotoxic. Based on these considerations, EPA does not believe that
conducting immunotoxicity testing will result in a point of departure
lower than those already selected for fenamidone; therefore, an
additional database uncertainty factor is not needed to account for
potential immunotoxicity.
    ii. There was no evidence of neurotoxicity in the subchronic
neurotoxicity study submitted for fenamidone. There was evidence of
neurotoxicity (urination, staining/soiling of the anogenital region,
mucous in the feces and unsteady gait in females) in the acute
neurotoxicity study, and EPA used the NOAEL from this study to assess
acute dietary exposure. There was also evidence of neurotoxicity
(decreased absolute brain weights) in the 2-generation rat reproduction
study; however, there was no indication of increased susceptibility of
offspring with regard to these effects. Finally, there was no evidence
of neurotoxicity at any dose in the submitted DNT study. Based on the
results of these studies, EPA concluded that there is no need for
additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that fenamidone results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in offspring in the 2-generation reproduction
study. Although there is evidence of increased quantitative
susceptibility in the DNT study, the degree of concern is low and the
Agency did not identify any residual uncertainties after establishing
toxicity

endpoints and traditional UFs to be used in the risk assessment of
fenamidone.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on reliable data from residue field trials and assuming 100 PCT. EPA
made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure to fenamidone in drinking water.
Residential exposure is not expected from the existing and new uses of
fenamidone. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by fenamidone.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the aPAD and cPAD.
The aPAD and cPAD represent the highest safe exposures, taking into
account all appropriate SFs. EPA calculates the aPAD and cPAD by
dividing the POD by all applicable UFs. For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the probability of additional cancer cases given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-term, intermediate-term, and
chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate
food, water, and residential exposure to the POD to ensure that the MOE
called for by the product of all applicable UFs is not exceeded.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account exposure estimates from acute dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit
for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water to
fenamidone will occupy 5% of the aPAD for children, 1 to 2 years old,
the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
fenamidone from food and water will utilize 88% of the cPAD for
children, 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for fenamidone.
    3. Short-term and intermediate-term risk. Short-term and
intermediate-term aggregate exposure take into account short-term or
intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Fenamidone is
not registered for any use patterns that would result in residential
exposure. Therefore, the short-term or intermediate-term aggregate risk
is the sum of the risk from exposure to fenamidone through food and
water and will not be greater than the chronic aggregate risk.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Fenamidone is
classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans'' and is,
therefore, not expected to pose a cancer risk.
    5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to fenamidone residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatographic method
coupled with tandem mass spectrum detection (LC/MS/MS)) is available to
enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    There are no Codex, Canadian or Mexican MRLs (maximum residue
levels) for residues of fenamidone in or on any of the commodities
requested in these petitions.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances

    EPA has revised the commodity terms and/or tolerance levels for
several commodities. EPA revised the commodity terms proposed by IR-4
as ``vegetables, root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B, except radish'';
``coriander, leaves''; and ``turnip, leaves'' to read ``vegetable,
root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B, except radish''; ``cilantro,
leaves''; and ``turnip, greens''; and determined that separate
tolerances were needed for stover from field and sweet corn (i.e.,
``corn, field, stover'' and ``corn, sweet, stover'') to agree with the
Food and Feed Vocabulary. EPA revised the tolerance level for
``vegetable, root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B, except radish'' from
0.2 ppm to 0.15 ppm to agree with the existing tolerance on carrot, the
representative commodity on which the proposed tolerance was based. EPA
revised the tolerances for ``corn, field, forage'' from 0.50 ppm to
0.25 ppm''; ``corn, field, stover'' from 0.35 ppm to 0.40 ppm; ``corn,
sweet, stover'' from 0.35 ppm to 0.20 ppm; ``soybean, forage'' from
0.20 ppm to 0.15 ppm; and ``soybean, hay'' from 0.20 ppm to 0.25 based
on analyses of field trial data using the Agency's Tolerance
Spreadsheet in accordance with the Agency's Guidance for Setting
Pesticide Tolerances Based on Field Trial Data.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of fenamidone,
4H-Imidazol-4-one, 3,5-dihydro-5-methyl-2-(methylthio)-5-phenyl-3-
(phenylamino)-, (S)-, on cilantro, leaves at 60 ppm; okra at 3.5 ppm;
turnip, greens at 55 ppm; and vegetable, root, except sugar beet,
subgroup 1B, except radish at 0.15 ppm; a tolerance with regional
registration is established for residues of fenamidone in or on grape
at 1.0 ppm; and tolerances are established for combined residues of
fenamidone and its metabolite RPA 717879 in or on corn, field, forage
at 0.25 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.02 ppm; corn, field, stover at
0.40 ppm; corn, sweet, forage at 0.15 ppm; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob
with husks removed at 0.02 ppm; corn, sweet, stover at 0.20 ppm;
soybean, forage at 0.15 ppm; soybean, hay at 0.25 ppm; and soybean,
seed at 0.02 ppm. The existing permanent and time-limited tolerances on
carrot are removed, since residues on carrots will be covered by the
new tolerance on vegetable, root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B,
except radish.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances 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 final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule 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 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., 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 section 408(d) of FFDCA, 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 final rule 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 section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. 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 final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4).
    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).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report 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: July 1, 2009.
G. Jeffery Herndon,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

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

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. Section 180.579 paragraph (a)(1) table is amended by removing the
commodities ``carrot'' and ``grape (imported)'' and adding the
following commodities; by removing and reserving paragraph (b); by
revising paragraph (c); and by adding the following commodities to the
table in paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.579  Fenamidone; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. (1) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Commodity                        Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
Cilantro, leaves.....................................                 60
                                * * * * *
Okra.................................................                3.5
                                * * * * *
Turnip, greens.......................................                 55
                                * * * * *
Vegetable, root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B,                    0.15
 except radish.......................................
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
    (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. A tolerance with
regional registration as defined in Sec. 180.1(m) is established for
residues of fenamidone, 4H-Imidazol-4-one, 3,5-dihydro-5-methyl-2-
(methylthio)-5-phenyl-3-(phenylamino)-, (S)-, in or on the following
commodity:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Commodity                        Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grape\1\.............................................                1.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Applicable to grapes grown East of the Rocky Mountains.

    (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Commodity                        Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corn, field, forage..................................               0.25
Corn, field, grain...................................               0.02
Corn, field, stover..................................               0.40
Corn, sweet, forage..................................               0.15
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed......               0.02
Corn, sweet, stover..................................               0.20
Soybean, forage......................................               0.15
Soybean, hay.........................................               0.25
Soybean, seed........................................               0.02
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E9-16817 Filed 7-14-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S