Sec.  63.788  Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) Each owner or operator that receives approval pursuant to Sec.
63.783(c) to use an add-on control system to control coating emissions
shall maintain records of the occurrence and duration of each
malfunction of operation (i.e., process equipment) or the required air
pollution control and monitoring equipment. Each owner or operator
shall maintain records of actions taken during periods of malfunction
to minimize emissions in accordance with Sec.  63.783(b)(1), including
corrective actions to restore malfunctioning process and air pollution
control and monitoring equipment to its normal or usual manner of
operation.
    (c) Reporting requirements. Before the 60th day following
completion of each 6-month period after the compliance date specified
in Sec.  63.784, each owner or operator of an affected source shall
submit a report to the Administrator for each of the previous six
months. The report shall include all of the information that must be
retained pursuant to paragraphs (b)(2) through (3) of this section,
except for that information specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through
(ii), (b)(2)(v), (b)(3)(i)(A), (b)(3)(ii)(A), and (b)(3)(iii)(A). If a
violation at an affected source is detected, the owner or operator of
the affected source shall also report the information specified in
paragraph (b)(4) of this section for the reporting period during which
the violation(s) occurred. To the extent possible, the report shall be
organized according to the compliance procedure(s) followed each month
by the affected source. If there was a malfunction during the reporting
period, the report must also include the number, duration, and a brief
description of each malfunction which occurred during the reporting
period and which caused or may have caused any applicable emission
limitation to be exceeded. The report must also include a description
of actions taken by an owner or operator during a malfunction of an
affected source to minimize emissions in accordance with Sec.
63.783(b)(1), including actions taken to correct a malfunction.
    8. Table 1 to subpart II of part 63 is amended:
    a. By removing entry 63.6(e)-(f);
    b. By adding entries 63.6(e)(1)(i), 63.6(e)(1)(ii),
63.6(e)(1)(iii); 63.6(e)(2), 63.6(e)(3), 63.6(f)(1), and 63.6(f)(2)-
(f)(3);
    c. By removing entry 63.7;
    d. By adding entries 63.7(a)-(d), 63.7(e)(1), and 63.7(e)(2)-
(e)(4);
    e. By revising entry 63.8;
    f. By removing entry 63.10(a)-(b);
    g. By adding entries 63.10(a), 63.10(b)(1), 63.10(b)(2)(i),
63.10(b)(2)(ii), 63.10(b)(2)(iii), 63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(b)(2)(v),
63.10(b)(2)(vi)-(b)(2)(xiv), and 63.10(b)(3);
    h. By removing entries 63.10(c);
    i. By adding entries 63.10(c)(1)-(9), 63.10(c)(10)-(11),
63.10(c)(12)-(14), and 63.10(c)(15);
    j. By removing entry 63.10(d); and
    k. By adding entries 63.10(d)(1)-(4) and 63.10(d)(5).
    The revisions read as follows:

                                   Table 1 to Subpart II of Part 63--General Provisions of Applicability to Subpart II
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Reference                      Applies to subpart II                                          Comment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
63.6(e)(1)(i)............................  No...........................  See Sec.   63.783(b)(1) for general duty requirement.
63.6(e)(1)(ii)...........................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.6(e)(1)(iii)..........................  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.6(e)(2)...............................  No...........................  Section reserved.
63.6(e)(3)...............................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.6(f)(1)...............................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.6(f)(2)-(f)(3)........................  No...........................  If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system)
                                                                           is used to comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.   63.783(c), then
                                                                           this section does apply.

                                                                      * * * * * * *
63.7(a)-(d)..............................  No...........................  If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system)
                                                                           is used to comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.   63.783(c), then
                                                                           these sections do apply.
63.7(e)(1)...............................  No...........................  If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system)
                                                                           is used to comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.   63.783(c), then
                                                                           see Sec.   63.786(e).
63.7(e)(2)-(e)(4)........................  No...........................  If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system)
                                                                           is used to comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.   63.783(c), then
                                                                           these sections do apply.

                                                                      * * * * * * *
63.8.....................................  No...........................  If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system)
                                                                           is used to comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.   63.783(c), then
                                                                           this section does apply, with the exception of Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(i), Sec.
                                                                           63.8(c)(1)(iii), and the last sentence of Sec.   63.8(d)(3).

                                                                      * * * * * * *
63.10(a).................................  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(b)(1)..............................  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(b)(2)(i)...........................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(b)(2)(ii)..........................  No...........................  See Sec.   63.788(b)(5) for recordkeeping of occurrence, duration, and actions
                                                                           taken during malfunctions.
63.10(b)(2)(iii).........................  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(b)(2)(v)................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(b)(2)(vi)-(b)(2)(xiv)..............  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(b)(3)..............................  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(c)(1)-(9)..........................  No...........................  If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system)
                                                                           is used to comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.   63.783(c), then
                                                                           these sections do apply.
63.10(c)(10)-(11)........................  No...........................  If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system)
                                                                           is used to comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.   63.783(c), then
                                                                           see Sec.   63.788(b)(5) for records of malfunctions.
63.10(c)(12)-(14)........................  No...........................  If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system)
                                                                           is used to comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.   63.783(c), then
                                                                           these sections do apply.
63.10(c)(15).............................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(d)(1)-(4)..........................  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(d)(5)..............................  No...........................  See Sec.   63.788(c) for reporting malfunctions.

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

    9. Table 3 to subpart II of part 63 is amended by revising entry
``Determination of whether containers meet the standards described in
Sec.  63.783(b)(2)'' to read as follows:

           Table 3 to Subpart II of Part 63--Summary of Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements a b c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       All Opts.           Option 1            Option 2            Option 3
           Requirement           -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Rec       Rep       Rec       Rep       Rec       Rep       Rec       Rep
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Determination of whether          X         X         ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........
 containers meet the standards
 described in Sec.
 63.783(b)(3).

                                                 * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Affected sources that comply with the cold-weather limits must record and report additional information, as
  specified in Sec.   63.788(b)(3)(ii)(C), (iii)(C), and (iv)(D).
\b\ Affected sources that detect a violation must record and report additional information, as specified in Sec.
    63.788(b)(4).
\c\ OPTION 4: the recordkeeping and reporting requirements of Option 4 are identical to those of Options 1, 2,
  or 3, depending on whether and how thinners are used. However, when using Option 4, the term ``VOHAP'' shall
  be used in lieu of the term ``VOC,'' and the owner or operator shall record and report the Administrator-
  approved VOHAP test method or certification procedure.

* * * * *

Subpart JJ--[AMENDED]

    10. Section 63.800 is amended:
    a. By redesignating paragraphs (f) and (g) as paragraphs (h) and
(i);
    b. By redesignating paragraphs (d) and (e) as paragraphs (e) and
(f);
    c. By adding new paragraphs (d) and (g); and
    d. By adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.800  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (d) This subpart does not apply to any surface coating or coating
operation that meets any of the criteria of paragraphs (d)(1) through
(4) of this section.
    (1) Surface coating of metal parts and products other than metal
components of wood furniture that meets the applicability criteria for
miscellaneous metal parts and products surface coating (subpart MMMM of
this part).
    (2) Surface coating of plastic parts and products other than
plastic components of wood furniture that meets the applicability
criteria for plastic parts and products surface coating (subpart PPPP
of this part).
    (3) Surface coating of wood building products that meets the
applicability criteria for wood building products surface coating
(subpart QQQQ of this part). The surface coating of millwork and trim
associated with cabinet manufacturing are subject to subpart JJ.
    (4) Surface coating of metal furniture that meets the applicability
criteria for metal furniture surface coating (subpart RRRR of this
part). Surface coating of metal components of wood furniture performed
at a wood furniture or wood furniture component manufacturing facility
are subject to subpart JJ.
* * * * *
    (g) Existing affected sources shall be in compliance with Sec.
63.802(a)(4) no later than [DATE 2 YEARS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION OF
THE FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER] and Sec.  63.803(h) no later
than [DATE three YEARS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN
THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. The owner or operator of an existing area source
that increases its emissions of (or its potential to emit) HAP such
that the source becomes a major source that is subject to this subpart
shall comply with this subpart one year after becoming a major source.
* * * * *
    (j) If the owner or operator, in accordance with 40 CFR 63.804,
uses a control system as a means of limiting emissions, in response to
an action to enforce the standards set forth in this subpart, you may
assert an affirmative defense to a claim for civil penalties for
exceedances of such standards that are caused by malfunction, as
defined in 40 CFR 63.2. Appropriate penalties may be assessed, however,
if the respondent fails to meet its burden of proving all the
requirements in the affirmative defense. The affirmative defense shall
not be available for claims for injunctive relief.
    (1) To establish the affirmative defense in any action to enforce
such a limit, the owner or operator of facilities must timely meet the
notification requirements in paragraph (j)(2) of this section, and must
prove by a preponderance of evidence that:
    (i) The excess emissions:
    (A) Were caused by a sudden, short, infrequent, and unavoidable
failure of air pollution control and monitoring equipment, process
equipment, or a process to operate in a normal or usual manner; and
    (B) Could not have been prevented through careful planning, proper
design or better operation and maintenance practices; and
    (C) Did not stem from any activity or event that could have been
foreseen and avoided, or planned for; and
    (D) Were not part of a recurring pattern indicative of inadequate
design, operation, or maintenance; and
    (ii) Repairs were made as expeditiously as possible when the
applicable emission limitations were being exceeded. Off-shift and
overtime labor were used, to the extent practicable to make these
repairs; and
    (iii) The frequency, amount and duration of the excess emissions
(including any bypass) were minimized to the maximum extent practicable
during periods of such emissions; and
    (iv) If the excess emissions resulted from a bypass of control
equipment or a process, then the bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss
of life, severe personal injury, or severe property damage; and
    (v) All possible steps were taken to minimize the impact of the
excess emissions on ambient air quality, the environment, and human
health; and
    (vi) All emissions monitoring and control systems were kept in
operation if at all possible; and
    (vii) All of the actions in response to the excess emissions were
documented by properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs; and
    (viii) At all times, the facility was operated in a manner
consistent with good practices for minimizing emissions; and
    (ix) A written root cause analysis has been prepared to determine,
correct and eliminate the primary causes of the malfunction and the
excess emissions resulting from the malfunction event at issue. The
analysis shall also specify, using best monitoring methods and
engineering judgment, the amount of excess emissions that were the
result of the malfunction.
    (2) Notification. The owner or operator of the facility
experiencing an exceedance of its emission limit(s) during a
malfunction shall notify the Administrator by telephone or facsimile
transmission as soon as possible, but no later than two business days
after the

initial occurrence of the malfunction, if it wishes to avail itself of
an affirmative defense to civil penalties for that malfunction. The
owner or operator seeking to assert an affirmative defense shall also
submit a written report to the Administrator within 30 days of the
initial occurrence of the exceedance of the standard in this subpart to
demonstrate, with all necessary supporting documentation, that it has
met the requirements set forth in paragraph (h)(1) of this section.
    11. Section 63.801 is amended by:
    a. Adding a definition for ``affirmative defense'' and revising the
definition for ``wood furniture'' in paragraph (a); and
    b. Adding (b)(24) through (b)(28).
    The additions and revisions read as follows:

Sec.  63.801  Definitions.

    (a) * * *
    Affirmative defense means, in the context of an enforcement
proceeding, a response or a defense put forward by a defendant,
regarding which the defendant has the burden of proof, and the merits
of which are independently and objectively evaluated in a judicial or
administrative proceeding.
* * * * *
    Wood furniture means any product made of wood, a wood product such
as rattan or wicker, or an engineered wood product such as
particleboard that is manufactured at any facility that is engaged,
either in part or in whole, in the manufacture of wood furniture or
wood furniture components, including, but not limited to, facilities
under any of the following standard industrial classification codes:
2434, 2511, 2512, 2517, 2519, 2521, 2531, 2541, 2599, or 5712.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (24) Cf =the formaldehyde content of a finishing
material (c), in pounds of formaldehyde per gallon of coating (lb/gal).
    (25) Ftotal= total formaldehyde emissions in each
rolling 12-month period.
    (26) Gf =the formaldehyde content of a contact adhesive
(g), in pounds of formaldehyde per gallon of contact adhesive (lb/gal).
    (27) Vc=the volume of formaldehyde-containing finishing
material (c), in gal.
    (28) Vg=the volume of formaldehyde-containing contact
adhesive (g), in gal.
    12. Section 63.802 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(4), (b)(4),
and (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.802  Emission limits.

    (a) * * *
    (4) Limit total formaldehyde (Ftotal) emissions from
finishing operations and contact adhesives to no more than 400 lb per
rolling 12-month period.
    (b) * * *
    (4) Limit total formaldehyde (Ftotal) emissions from
finishing operations and contact adhesives to no more than 400 lb per
rolling 12-month period.
    (c) At all times, the owner or operator must operate and maintain
any affected source, including associated air pollution control
equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with safety
and good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions.
Determination of whether such operation and maintenance procedures are
being used will be based on information available to the Administrator
which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, review of
operation and maintenance procedures, review of operation and
maintenance records, and inspection of the source.
    13. Section 63.803 is amended by revising paragraph (h) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.803  Work practice standards.

* * * * *
    (h) Application equipment requirements. Each owner or operator of
an affected source shall not use conventional air spray guns.
* * * * *
    14. Section 63.804 is amended by adding paragraphs (g)(9) and (h)
to read as follows:

Sec.  63.804  Compliance procedures and monitoring requirements.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (9) Continuous compliance requirements. You must demonstrate
continuous compliance with the emissions standards and operating limits
by using the performance test methods and procedures in Sec.  63.805
for each affected source.
    (i) General requirements. (A) You must monitor and collect data,
and provide a site specific monitoring plan as required by Sec. Sec.
63.804, 63.806 and 63.807.
    (B) Except for periods of monitoring system malfunctions, repairs
associated with monitoring system malfunctions, and required monitoring
system quality assurance or quality control activities (including, as
applicable, calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments),
you must operate the monitoring system and collect data at all required
intervals at all times the affected source is operating and periods of
malfunction. Any period for which data collection is required and the
operation of the CEMS is not otherwise exempt and for which the
monitoring system is out-of-control and data are not available for
required calculations constitutes a deviation from the monitoring
requirements.
    (C) You may not use data recorded during monitoring system
malfunctions, repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions,
or required monitoring system quality assurance or control activities
in calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. A
monitoring system malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not reasonably
preventable failure of the monitoring system to provide valid data.
Monitoring system failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance
or careless operation are not malfunctions. The owner or operator must
use all the data collected during all other periods in assessing the
operation of the control device and associated control system.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (h) The owner or operator of an existing or new affected source
subject to Sec.  63.802(a)(4) or (b)(4) shall comply with those
provisions by using either of the methods presented in Sec.
63.804(h)(1) and (2).
    (1) Calculate total formaldehyde emissions from all finishing
materials and contact adhesives used at the facility using Equation 5
and maintain a value of Ftotal no more than 400 lb per
rolling 12-month period.

    Ftotal=(Cf1Vc1 +
Cf2Vc2 + * * * + CfnVcn +
Gf1Vg1 + Gf2Vg2 + * * * +
GfnVgn) Equation 5

    (2) Use a control system with an overall control efficiency (R)
such that the calculated value of Ftotal in Equation 6 is no
more than 400 lb per rolling 12-month period.

    Ftotal=(Cf1Vc1 +
Cf2Vc2 + * * * + CfnVcn +
GfiVg1 + Gf2Vg2 + * * * +
GfnVgn)* (1-R) Equation 6

    15. Section 63.805 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(1) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.805  Performance test methods.

    (a)(1) * * *
    (2) Performance tests shall be conducted under such conditions as
the Administrator specifies to the owner or operator based on
representative performance of the affected source for the period being
tested. Upon request, the owner or operator shall make available to the
Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the
conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *
    16. Section 63.806 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph
(e)(4)

and adding paragraphs (b)(4) and (k) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.806  Recordkeeping requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) The formaldehyde content, in lb/gal, as applied, of each
finishing material and contact adhesive subject to the emission limits
in Sec.  63.802.
* * * * *
    (k) The owner or operator of an affected source subject to this
subpart shall maintain records of the occurrence and duration of each
malfunction of operation (i.e., process equipment) or the air pollution
control equipment and monitoring equipment. The owner or operator shall
maintain records of actions taken during periods of malfunction to
minimize emissions in accordance with Sec.  63.802(c), including
corrective actions to restore malfunctioning process and air pollution
control and monitoring equipment to its normal or usual manner of
operation.
    17. Section 63.807 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)
introductory text and (c)(3) and the first sentence in paragraph (d) to
read as follows:

Sec.  63.807  Reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) The owner or operator of an affected source demonstrating
compliance in accordance with Sec.  63.804(g)(1), (2), (3), (5), (7),
(8), and (h)(1) shall submit a report covering the previous six months
of wood furniture manufacturing operations.
* * * * *
    (3) The semiannual reports shall include the information required
by Sec.  63.804(g) (1), (2), (3), (5), (7), (8), and (h)(1), a
statement of whether the affected source was in compliance or
noncompliance, and, if the affected source was in noncompliance, the
measures taken to bring the affected source into compliance. If there
was a malfunction during the reporting period, the report shall also
include the number, duration, and a brief description for each type of
malfunction which occurred during the reporting period and which caused
or may have caused any applicable emission limitation to be exceeded.
The report must also include a description of actions taken by an owner
or operator during a malfunction of an affected source to minimize
emissions in accordance with Sec.  63.802(c), including actions taken
to correct a malfunction.
* * * * *
    (d) The owner or operator of an affected source demonstrating
compliance in accordance with Sec.  63.804(g)(4), (6), and (h)(2) of
this subpart shall submit the excess emissions and continuous
monitoring system performance report and summary report required by
Sec.  63.10(e) of subpart A. * * *
* * * * *

Subpart JJ [Amended]

    18. Table 1 to Subpart JJ of part 63 is amended:
    a. By removing entry 63.6(e)(1);
    b. By adding entries 63.6(e)(1)(i), 63.6(e)(1)(ii),
63.6(e)(1)(iii);
    c. By revising entries 63.6(e)(2) and (3);
    d. By removing entries 63.7 and 63.8;
    e. By adding entries 63.7(a)-(d), 63.7(e)(1), 63.7(e)(2)-(e)(4),
63.8(a)-(b), 63.8(c)(1)(i), 63.8(c)(1)(ii), 63.8(c)(1)(iii),
63.8(c)(2)-(d)(2), 63.8(d)(3), and 63.8(e)-(f);
    f. By removing entry 63.10(b)(2);
    g. By adding entries 63.10(b)(2)(i), 63.10(b)(2)(ii),
63.10(b)(2)(iii), 63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(b)(2)(v), 63.10(b)(2)(vi)-
(b)(2)(xiv);
    h. By removing entry 63.10(c);
    i. By adding entries 63.10(c)(1)-(9), 63.10(c)(10)-(11),
63.10(c)(12)-(c)(14), and 63.10(c)(15); and
    j. By revising entry 63.10(d)(5).
    The revisions read as follows:

                                    Table 1 to Subpart JJ of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart JJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Reference                      Applies to subpart JJ                                          Comment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
63.6(e)(1)(i)............................  No...........................  See 63.802(c) for general duty requirement.
63.6(e)(1)(ii)...........................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.6(e)(1)(iii)..........................  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.6(e)(2)...............................  No...........................  Section reserved.
63.6(e)(3)...............................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.6(f)(1)...............................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
Sec.   63.7(a)-(d).......................  Yes..........................  Applies only to affected sources using a control device to comply with the
                                                                           rule.
Sec.   63.7(e)(1)........................  No...........................  See 63.805(a)(1).
Sec.   63.7(e)(2)-(e)(4).................  Yes..........................  Applies only to affected sources using a control device to comply with the
                                                                           rule.
63.8(a)-(b)..............................  Yes..........................  Applies only to affected sources using a control device to comply with the
                                                                           rule.
63.8(c)(1)(i)............................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.8(c)(1)(ii)...........................  Yes..........................  Applies only to affected sources using a control device to comply with the
                                                                           rule.
63.8(c)(1)(iii)..........................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.8(c)(2)-(d)(2)........................  Yes..........................  Applies only to affected sources using a control device to comply with the
                                                                           rule.
63.8(d)(3)...............................  Yes, except for last sentence  Applies only to affected sources using a control device to comply with the
                                                                           rule.
63.8(e)-(g)..............................  Yes..........................  Applies only to affected sources using a control device to comply with the
                                                                           rule.

                                                                      * * * * * * *
63.10(b)(2)(i)...........................  No...........................  ..............................................................................

63.10(b)(2)(ii)..........................  No...........................  See 63.806(k) for recordkeeping of occurrence and duration of malfunctions and
                                                                           recordkeeping of actions taken during malfunction.
63.10(b)(2)(iii).........................  Yes..........................  Applies only to affected sources using a control device to comply with the
                                                                           rule.
63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(b)(2)(v)................  No...........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(b)(2)(vi)-(b)(2)(xiv)..............  Yes..........................  Applies only to affected sources using a control device to comply with the
                                                                           rule.

                                                                      * * * * * * *
63.10(c)(1)-(9)..........................  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(c)(10)-(11)........................  No...........................  See 63.806(k) for recordkeeping of malfunctions.
63.10(c)(12)-(c)(14).....................  Yes..........................  ..............................................................................
63.10(c)(15).............................  No...........................  ..............................................................................

                                                                      * * * * * * *
63.10(d)(5)..............................  No...........................  See 63.807(c)(3) for reporting of malfunctions.

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

    19. Table 3 to Subpart JJ of part 63 is amended by adding entry (e)
under ``Finishing Operations'' to read as follows:

      Table 3 to Subpart JJ of Part 63--Summary of Emission Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Existing
                Emission point                     source     New source
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
(e) Achieve total free formaldehyde emissions           400          400
 across all finishing operations and contact
 adhesives, lb per rolling 12-month period, as
 applied......................................

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

Table 5 to Subpart JJ of Part 63 [Amended]

    20. Table 5 to Subpart JJ of part 63 is amended by removing the
entry for ``Formaldehyde.''

[FR Doc. 2010-31091 Filed 12-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 48 (Tuesday, March 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 8942]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04445]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2019-0018]

Petition for Special Approval of Alternative Compliance

    Under part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this
provides the public notice that by letter dated February 14, 2019, the
Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (PATH) petitioned the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) for special approval of alternative
compliance pursuant to 49 CFR 236.586 relating to the inspection and
maintenance of locomotives. FRA assigned the petition Docket Number
FRA-2019-0018.
    Specifically, PATH seeks approval to continue compliance with Sec.
236.588, Periodic test, at the regularly scheduled 92-day intervals,
while not adding terms cited in Sec.  236.586(a), Daily or after trip
test. PATH requests this relief to operate its fleet of PA-5 cars that
are equipped with ``Communication Based Train Control technology that
employs built-in test equipment that complies with and exceeds the
inspections and tests cited in Sec.  236.586.''
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations Facility is open
from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Website: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by April 26, 2019 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered if practicable.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). In
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public
to better inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit,
including any personal information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/
ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dotransportation.gov/privacy. See also http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the
privacy notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2019-04445 Filed 3-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


and starfruit in order to alleviate trade irritant issues with the
government of Taiwan.

Tolerances for chlorothalonil residues are established under 40 CFR
§180.275.  Tolerances are established in 40 CFR §180.275(a)(1) for the
combined residues of chlorothalonil and its 4-hydroxy metabolite
(4-hydroxy-2,5,6-trichloroisophthalonitrile) for various plant
commodities.  Tolerances range from 0.05 ppm (almonds and dried cocoa
bean) to 15 ppm (celery and papaya). Tolerances for livestock
commodities are established under 40 CFR §180.275(a)(2) and expressed
in terms of the 4-hydroxy metabolite; tolerances range from 0.03 ppm
(meat of cattle, goat, hog, horse, and sheep) to 0.5 ppm (kidney of
cattle, goat, hog, horse, and sheep).  A time-limited tolerance is
established in 40 CFR §180.275(b) for the combined residues of
chlorothalonil and its 4-hydroxy metabolite (expressed as
chlorothalonil) in/on ginseng at 0.10 ppm; the tolerance has an
expiration date of 12/31/08.  Tolerances with regional registration are
established in 40 CFR §180.275(c) for the combined residues of
chlorothalonil and its metabolite in/on hazelnut at 0.1 ppm and mint hay
at 2 ppm.

Nature of the Residue in Plants

The qualitative nature of the residues in plants is adequately
understood based on metabolism studies with carrots, celery, lettuce,
snap beans, and tomatoes.  The residues of concern are chlorothalonil
and its 4-hydroxy metabolite (SDS-3701).

Nature of the Residue in Livestock

The qualitative nature of the residue in livestock is adequately
understood.  The residue of concern in meat and milk is the 4-hydroxy
metabolite of chlorothalonil (SDS-3701).  Chlorothalonil per se has been
shown to be so unstable in ruminant tissues that it is impractical to
establish tolerances that include the parent.

Residue Analytical Methods

Adequate residue analytical methods are available for purposes of
reregistration.  The Pesticide Analytical Manual (PAM) Vol. II lists
Method I, a gas chromatography (GC) method with electron-capture
detection (ECD), for the enforcement of tolerances for plant
commodities.

The FDA PESTDATA database dated 1/94 (PAM Vol. I, Appendix I) indicates
that chlorothalonil is completely recovered (>80%) using multiresidue
methods PAM Vol. I Sections 303 (Mills, Onley, Gaither method) and 304
(Mills fatty food method) and has a low recovery (<50%) using Section
302 (Luke method).

Magnitude of Residues in Plants

To support the proposed uses, IR-4 submitted crop field trial data for
ginseng, horseradish, bell and non-bell pepper, persimmon, and rhubarb.
Adequate storage stability data have been submitted previously which
support the submitted crop field trial studies with horseradish, bell
and non-bell pepper, persimmon, and rhubarb.  A concurrent storage
stability study was conducted with ginseng which indicated the potential
for decline of chlorothalonil during storage; sample results for ginseng
were corrected for this decline.

Adequate field trial data have been submitted to support the requested
new uses of the 6 lb/gal FlC formulation (EPA Reg. No. 50534-188-100) on
ginseng, horseradish, persimmon, and rhubarb.  Label amendments for
persimmon are required before the requested uses may be approved.
Additional crop field trial data are required for non-bell pepper to
support the proposed use; submission of these data may be considered a
condition of registration.  The submitted data for bell and non-bell
peppers and the existing residue data for tomato may be used to support
the proposed uses on fruiting vegetables and okra.

The petitioner is relying on existing residue data for broccoli,
Brussels sprouts, cabbage, and cauliflower to support the proposed uses
on the Brassica head and stem subgroup; for cucumber, melon, pumpkin,
and summer and winter squash to support the proposed uses on the
cucurbit vegetable group; for dry bean to support the proposed use on
lentil; and for potato to support the proposed use on yam.  The existing
residue data are adequate to support proposed uses provided the proposed
use on the Brassica head and stem subgroup is modified to specify a
lower maximum seasonal rate.

RD has also requested that HED recommend levels for tolerances on lychee
and starfruit in order to alleviate trade irritant issues with the
government of Taiwan.  Based on translation from existing tolerances on
tropical fruits, HED is recommending for tolerances of 15 ppm for lychee
(translated from papaya) and 3 ppm for starfruit (translated from
passionfruit; personal communication from B. Schneider, 7/16/08).

Tolerance Summary

A summary of tolerance reassessment is presented in Table 4.2.1.    SEQ
CHAPTER \h \r 1 The Codex Alimentarius Commission has established
maximum residue limits (MRLs) for chlorothalonil per se at 7 ppm for
sweet pepper; 5 ppm each for broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cucumber,
tomato, and squash (summer and winter); 2 ppm for melons (except
watermelon); 1 ppm each for cabbage, heads and cauliflower; and 0.2 ppm
for dry beans.  Mexican MRLs for “clorotalonil” have been
established at 0.1 ppm for bean and 5 ppm each for broccoli, Brussels
sprouts, cabbage, cauliflower, cucumber, melon, squash, and tomato.  As
the U.S. tolerance definition differs from the Codex and Mexican
definitions, harmonization is not possible.  Canadian MRLs for
chlorothalonil and its 4-hydroxy metabolite are established at 5 ppm
each for beans, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, cauliflower,
cucumber, melons, pumpkins, squash, and tomatoes.  With the exception of
beans (which presumably includes dried beans), the Canadian MRLs are
harmonized with U.S. tolerances.

Table 4.2.1.  Tolerance Summary for Chlorothalonil.

Commodity	Established Tolerance (ppm)1	Proposed Tolerance (ppm)
Recommended Tolerance (ppm)	Comments; Correct Commodity Definition

Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A	--	5.0	5.0	Tolerance recommendation
is based on residue data translated from broccoli, Brussels sprouts,
cabbage, and cauliflower and pending label revision to specify a 7-day
PHI and a maximum seasonal rate of 8.8 lb ai/A.

Broccoli	5	--	Remove from 180.275(a)(1)	Covered by tolerance for
Brassica head and stem subgroup.

Brussels sprouts	5	--

Cabbage	5	--

Cauliflower	5	--

Cucumber	5	--	Remove from 180.275(a)(1)	Covered by tolerance for
cucurbit vegetable group.

Ginseng	0.102	3.0	4.0	Established tolerance under 180.275(b) should be
removed when 4.0-ppm tolerance is established under 180.275(a)(1).

Horseradish	--	4.0	4.0

	Lentil	--	0.1	0.10	Tolerance recommendation based on residue data
translated from dry bean seed.

Lupin	--	0.1	None	Covered by the established tolerance for dry bean
seed.

Melon	5	--	Remove from 180.275(a)(1)	Covered by tolerance for cucurbit
vegetable group.

Okra	--	5.0	6.0	Tolerance recommendation based on residue data for
representative crops of fruiting vegetables crop group.

Persimmon	--	1.9	1.5	Tolerance should be established under 40 CFR
§180.275(c) and proposed use should be amended to restrict use to FL
and HI.

Pepper, non-bell	53	--	Remove from 180.275(a)(1)	Covered by tolerance
for fruiting vegetable crop group.

Pumpkin	5	--	Remove from 180.275(a)(1)	Covered by tolerance for cucurbit
vegetable group.

Rhubarb	--	5.0	4.0

	Squash, summer	5	--	Remove from 180.275(a)(1)	Covered by tolerance for
cucurbit vegetable group.

Squash, winter	5	--

Tomato	5

5.0

	Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9	--	5.0	5.0	Tolerance recommendation is
based on residue data for cucumber, melon, summer squash, and winter
squash.

Vegetables, fruiting, group 8	--	5.0	6.0	Tolerance recommendation is
based on residue data for bell pepper.

Vegetable, fruiting, group 8, except tomato.

Yam	--	5.0	0.10	Tolerance recommendation is based on residue data
translated from potato.

Lychee 	--	--	15	Recommended at the request of RD.

Starfruit	--	--	3.0

	1  Established under 40 CFR §180.275(a)(1) unless otherwise specified.

2  Established under 40 CFR §180.275(b).

3  No U.S. registrations.

4.2.2  Dietary-Exposure Analyses

™, Version 2.03, which incorporates consumption data from USDA’s
CSFII, 1994-1996 and 1998.  The 1994-96, 98 data are based on the
reported consumption of more than 20,000 individuals over two
non-consecutive survey days.  Foods “as consumed” (e.g., apple pie)
are linked to EPA-defined food commodities (e.g. apples, peeled fruit -
cooked; fresh or N/S; baked; or wheat flour - cooked; fresh or N/S,
baked) using publicly available recipe translation files developed
jointly by USDA/ARS and EPA.  Consumption data are averaged for the
entire U.S. population and within population subgroups for chronic
exposure assessment, but are retained as individual consumption events
for acute exposure assessment.

™ analysis evaluated the individual food consumption as reported by
respondents in the USDA 1994-1996 and 1998 nationwide CSFII and
accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity.

For chronic exposure and risk assessment, an estimate of the residue
level in each food or food-form (e.g., cranberry or cranberry juice) on
the food commodity residue list is multiplied by the average daily
consumption estimate for that food/food form.  The resulting residue
consumption estimate for each food/food form is summed with the residue
consumption estimates for all other food/food forms on the commodity
residue list to arrive at the total average estimated exposure.
Exposure is expressed in mg/kg body weight/day and as a percent of the
cPAD.  This procedure is performed for each population subgroup.

<IP_ADDRESS>  Acute Dietary-Exposure Analysis

An acute dietary-exposure assessment was not performed because there
were no toxic effects attributable to a single dose.  Thus, an endpoint
of concern was not identified to quantitate acute dietary risk to the
general population or to any population subgroup.

<IP_ADDRESS>  Chronic Dietary-Exposure Analysis

™ analyses estimate the dietary exposure of the U.S. population and
various population subgroups.  The results reported in Table <IP_ADDRESS> are
for the general U.S. Population, all infants (<1 year old), children
1-2, children 3-5, children 6-12, youth 13-19, females 13-49, adults
20-49, and adults 50+ years.

A conservative chronic dietary-exposure assessment was performed using
100% CT, tolerance-level residues, and DEEM™ 7.81 default processing
factors for all foods except for tomatoes (average field-trial residues
and empirical processing factors used), peppers (average field-trial
residues used), and snap beans (average field-trial residues used).
Chlorothalonil chronic dietary (food + water) exposure estimates using
the DEEM-FCID™ software are below HED’s LOC for the U.S. population
and each of the population subgroups.  Dietary exposure was estimated at
0.008587 mg/kg/day for the U.S. population (43% of the cPAD) and
0.018821 mg/kg/day (94% of the cPAD) for children 1-2 years old, the
population subgroup with the highest estimated chronic dietary exposure
to chlorothalonil.

Table <IP_ADDRESS>.  Summary of Chronic Dietary Exposure and Risk for
Chlorothalonil (Food + Water).

Age Group	cPAD (mg/kg/day)	Exposure (mg/kg/day)	% cPAD

	General U.S. Population	0.02	0.008587	43

All Infants (<1 year old)	0.02	0.013143	66

Children 1-2 years old	0.02	0.018821	94

Children 3-5 years old	0.02	0.015688	78

Children 6-12 years old	0.02	0.010345	52

Youth 13-19 years old	0.02	0.006170	31

Adults 20-49 years old	0.02	0.007151	36

Adults 50+ years old	0.02	0.008517	43

Females 13-49 years old	0.02	0.007187	36

<IP_ADDRESS>  Cancer Dietary-Exposure Analysis

Dietary cancer risk concerns due to long-term consumption of
chlorothalonil residues are adequately addressed by the chronic exposure
analysis using the cPAD.  Previously, and based on the extensive
“old” chlorothalonil database, “…HED/CPRC unanimously agreed
that the weight of the evidence supported a classification of
chlorothalonil as a “likely” human carcinogen by all routes of
exposure.  While it was recognized that the mechanistic data supported a
non-linear mode of action for tumor production by chlorothalonil, the
HED/CPRC also recognized that the kidney tumors were the result of
administration of test chemical, were considered rare, and the submitted
data supported the non-neoplastic pathology as directly related to
eventual neoplasia.  The HED/CPRC agreed that a non-linear approach to
risk assessment, using the MOE, should be used.”

4.3  Water Exposure/Risk Pathway

Chlorothalonil degrades through both photolytic and microbial processes.
 Chlorothalonil degrades rapidly in clear, shallow water through aqueous
photolysis.  Chlorothalonil is more persistent under terrestrial aerobic
conditions, and even more persistent under aquatic conditions. Biotic
degradation rates for chlorothalonil are sensitive to the biogeochemical
environment and ambient conditions, and may depart from first-order
kinetics.  Apparent initial aquatic "half-lives" ranging from a few
hours to around two weeks, while overall half-lives for the total system
are much longer.  An identified major metabolite, SDS-3701, which is
considered to be of toxicological concern, forms under differing test
conditions, and appears to be persistent.  As is true in any fate
assessment, total toxic residues are more persistent than the parent
alone.  Mobility data for the degradation product, SDS-3701, are not
available.  Therefore, it is assumed, for modeling purposes, that the
mobility of this metabolite is equal to that of the parent compound.

™ into the food categories “water, direct, all sources” and
“water, indirect, all sources” for both the acute and chronic
assessment.

4.4  Residential Exposure/Risk Pathway

Chlorothalonil is a broad-spectrum fungicide applied to turfgrass
(including sod farms, golf courses, and other non-residential turf), and
formulated into paints for interior and exterior applications.  There is
potential for residential exposure from treated golf courses and from
using treated paint.  Note that all other residential turf uses of
chlorothalonil have been cancelled.  Therefore, residential exposures
resulting from contact with chlorothalonil treated turf were not
assessed.  HED has determined that there is no hazard via the dermal
route; therefore, quantification of a dermal risk assessment is not
required.  For this assessment, only inhalation and incidental oral
exposures from the use of treated paint were assessed.  Inhalation
postapplication exposures for golf courses were not assessed since
inhalation exposures are thought to be negligible in outdoor
postapplication scenarios.

Risk from Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Exposures:  For the purposes
of this assessment, short-term exposures are of 1-30 days duration and
intermediate-term exposures are of 1-6 months duration.  Because the
endpoints are the same, short- and intermediate-term risk estimates are
derived from the same daily (short/intermediate-term) exposures.  Short-
and intermediate-term handler risk estimates are presented in Table
4.4.1.

Risk from Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal Exposures:  Dermal
exposures were not assessed.  A 21-day dermal toxicity study with the
rat was chosen that included dose levels up to 600 mg/kg/day, but only
produced slight dermal irritation.  There is no systemic hazard via the
dermal route; therefore, quantification of the dermal risk assessment is
not required.

Risk from Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Inhalation Exposure:  Except
for an acute inhalation toxicity study, no inhalation toxicity studies
were available for this assessment.  The dose identified for assessing
inhalation risk is from a 90 day oral rat study.  A NOAEL of 3.0
mg/kg/day was used based on dilated renal medullary tubules seen at the
LOAEL of 10 mg/kg/day.  An inhalation-absorption factor of 100% was
used.  Inhalation MOEs for all durations for occupational and
residential handlers are calculated as follows:

MOEI = (NOAELoral / Dose) = (3.0 mg/kg/day / Inhalation Exposure
(mg/kg/day))

HED’s LOC for chlorothalonil exposure is 100 (i.e., a MOE less than
100 exceeds HED’s LOC).  The LOC is based on 10X to account for
interspecies extrapolation to humans from the animal test species and
10X to account for intraspecies sensitivity.  Exposure risk estimates
for short- and intermediate-term exposures are summarized in Table
4.4.1.  The estimates in these tables are based on a 70-kg default body
weight.  The short-and intermediate-term inhalation MOEs are greater
than the target MOE of 100 and, therefore, do not exceed HED’s LOC.

Carcinogenic Risk to Handlers:  Chlorothalonil has been classified as
“likely” to be a human carcinogen by all routes of exposure (HED
CPRC, 4th Meeting, 6/11/1997); however, the SAP decision (6/30/98)
supports the use of an MOE approach for cancer risk assessment.  Based
on the use pattern, HED has determined that long-term residential
exposures to chlorothalonil are not expected; therefore, cancer risks
were not assessed.

Table 4.4.1.  Estimated Short- and Intermediate-Term Residential
Exposures and Risks for Chlorothalonil.

Exposure Scenario	Target	Application Rate (lb ai/gallon)	Amount handled
(gallons)	Baseline Inhalation Unit Exposure (mg/lb ai)	Baseline
Inhalation Dose (mg/kg/day)	Baseline Inhalation MOE

Mixer/Loader/Applicator

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with a Paint Brush (PHED)
painting with latex interior paint	0.048	2	0.284	0.00039	7,700

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with a Paint Brush (using
chlorothalonil data from MRID 43600102)

0.048	2	0.507	0.0007	4,300

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with an Airless Sprayer
(PHED)

0.048	2	0.83	0.0011	2,600

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with a Paint Brush (PHED)
painting with latex exterior paint	0.096	2	0.284	0.00078	3,900

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with a Paint Brush (using
chlorothalonil data from MRID 43600102)

0.096	2	0.507	0.0014	2,200

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with an Airless Sprayer
(PHED)

0.096	2	0.83	0.0023	1,300

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with a Paint Brush (PHED)
painting with alkyd exterior paint	0.11	2	0.284	0.00089	3,400

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with a Paint Brush (using
chlorothalonil data from MRID 43600102)

0.11	2	0.507	0.0016	1,900

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with an Airless Sprayer
(PHED)

0.11	2	0.83	0.0026	1,200

Post-application exposure and risk:  Incidental oral exposure was
assessed for children from ingestion of paint chips containing pesticide
residues.  The dose identified for assessing incidental oral exposure to
children is from an oral toxicity study in rats.  A NOAEL of 3.0
mg/kg/day was used based on dilated renal medullary tubules and
hyperplasia and hyperkeratosis of the non-glandular area of the stomach
at a LOAEL of 10 mg/kg/day.

The assumptions and factors used in the risk calculations are consistent
with current HED policy for assessing residential exposure and risk
(SOPs For Residential Exposure Assessment, 2000) and include:  (1) the
ingestion rate for paint chips is 0.04 g/day for children based on the
assumption that a child ingests a paint chip with an overall size of 1
square inch and an average weight of 6.5 mg/cm2 for a paint chip that is
one layer thick; and (2) the paint chips contain 20% of the active
ingredient, which is available for ingestion.  Ingestion of paint chips
is considered an episodic event and not a routine behavior.  Because HED
does not believe that this would occur on a regular basis, our concern
for human health is related to acute poisoning rather than short -term
residue exposure.

This scenario was assessed using the residential SOP 2.3.1,
Postapplication Potential Among Toddlers from Ingestion of Pesticide
Granules from Treated Areas.  This SOP provides a standard method for
estimating postapplication doses among toddlers from incidental
ingestion of pesticide granules.

Incidental Oral MOE = NOAEL (3.0 mg/kg/day) ( PDR

Where

PDR = Potential Dose Rate (mg/day) = IgR x (P/100) x F x CF1 / BW

And

IgR	=	ingestion rate of paint chips containing pesticide residues
(g/day);

P	=	% of ai in paint;

F	=	fraction of ai available for ingestion (unitless);

CF1	=	weight unit conversion factor (1,000 mg/g); and

BW	=	body weight.

Table 4.4.2 summarizes the short- and intermediate-term oral MOEs for
children’s ingestion of paint chips containing chlorothalonil
residues.  The short- and intermediate-term oral MOE (1,200) is greater
than the target MOE of 100 and, therefore, does not exceed HED’s LOC.

Table 4.4.2.  Postapplication Exposure and Risk Ingestion of Paint Chips
Containing Pesticide Residues.

Scenario	IgR (g/day)	Percent of ai in painta	Fraction of ai available
for ingestion	CF1 (mg/g)	BW (kg)	PDRb (mg/kg/day)	MOEc

Incidental paint chip ingestion	0.04	0.48%	0.2	1,000	15	0.0026	1,200

a. % of ai in product is 40.4% however the % of ai in a gallon of paint
is 0.48% (153.6 oz/12,800 oz x 40.4%

= 0.48%).

b. PDR = potential dose rate = IgR x (Percent ai in paint) x Fraction of
ai available for ingestion x CF1 / BW.

c. MOE = NOAEL (3.0 mg/kg/day)/PDR.

5.0  AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENTS AND RISK CHARACTERIZATION

5.1  Acute Aggregate Risk

An acute aggregate-risk assessment was not performed because no
appropriate endpoint was available to determine the aRfD for the general
population or any population subgroup.

5.2  Short- and Intermediate-Term Aggregate Risk

In aggregating short- and intermediate-term risk, the Agency routinely
combines background chronic dietary exposure (food + water) with short-
and intermediate-term residential exposure.  Because there is no
systemic hazard via the dermal route, and since incidental oral exposure
from treated paint is considered to be episodic, only inhalation (see
Table 4.4.1) exposures for homeowners applying chlorothalonil products
were included in the short- and intermediate-term aggregate risk
assessment.

Dietary (food + water) exposure can be added to the estimated
residential exposure because the short-term oral and inhalation
endpoints are the same.  The combined exposure may then be used to
calculate an MOE for aggregate risk.  Using the scenario with highest
exposure (mixing/loading/applying liquid concentrates with an airless
sprayer at the 0.11 lb/gal rate (MOE = 1200)), combined with
subpopulation with the greatest dietary exposure for those applying
paint – i.e., adults 50+ years old, the total short- and
intermediate-term food and residential aggregate MOE is 270.  As this
MOE is greater than 100, the short- and intermediate-term aggregate risk
does not exceed the HED’s LOC.  Table 5.2 summarizes the
short/intermediate-term aggregate exposure to chlorothalonil residues.

Table 5.2.  Short-Term and/or Intermediate-Term Aggregate Risk.

Population	Short- or Intermediate-Term Scenario

	NOAEL

mg/kg/day	Target

MOE1	Max

Exposure2

mg/kg/day	Average Food + Water Exposure mg/kg/day	Residential Exposure3

mg/kg/day	Aggregate MOE (food and residential)4

Adults 50+ years old5	3.0	100	0.030	0.008517	0.0026	270

1 The target MOE is based on the 10X for interspecies extrapolation and
the 10X for intraspecies variations, totaling 100.

2 Maximum Exposure (mg/kg/day) = NOAEL/Target MOE.

3 Residential Exposure = [Inhalation Exposure].

4 Aggregate MOE = [NOAEL/(Avg Food Exposure + Residential Exposure)].

5 Relevant population subgroup with highest exposure (Table <IP_ADDRESS>).

6.0  CUMULATIVE RISK

Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the 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.”

In the RED, chlorothalonil was grouped in the polychlorinated fungicide
class of pesticides.  Other members of this class include HCB,
pentachlorophenol (PCP), and pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB).  This is a
very loose classification, the only thing they have common is that they
are polychlorinated compounds used as fungicides.  Available data do not
support a finding for a common mechanism of toxicity for chlorothalonil
and the other pesticides in the polychlorinated fungicide class.
Chlorothalonil produces renal (kidney) tubular adenomas and carcinomas
and papillomas of the stomach in rats.  Chlorothalonil also produces
gastric lesions and kidney toxicity due to perturbation of mitochondrial
respiration.  The other pesticides in the class do not have the same
toxic effects and do not have the same mode of action.

For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not
assumed that chlorothalonil has 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 the policy
statements released by EPA’s OPP concerning common mechanism
determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from substances
found to have a common mechanism on EPA’s website at   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/"
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/ .

7.0  OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE

An occupational exposure assessment for chlorothalonil was prepared in
an ARIA memorandum dated 7/14/08 (M. Dow, DP# 346460).

7.1  Occupational Handler

For the proposed new uses (Table 4.1), the most highly exposed
occupational pesticide handlers are expected to be mixer/loaders using
open-pour loading of liquid formulations, mixer/loader/applicators using
high-pressure hand-wand sprayers, mixer/loader/applicators using
backpack sprayers, applicators using open-cab, ground-boom sprayers,
applicators using open-cab airblast sprayers, aerial applicators and
handlers preparing for use in chemigation systems.

Occupational pesticide handlers preparing to apply pesticides via
chemigation systems are believed to experience exposures similar to
mixer/loaders supporting aerial or large scale ground operations.
Handlers preparing chemigation systems are not expected to be more
highly exposed. Typically, concentrate is metered into the irrigation
stream via “siphon” tubes.  Those preparing for use in center pivot
or similar types are not expected to be more highly exposed than
mixer/loaders supporting aerial operations.  The total acres treated per
day are believed to be similar.

It is anticipated that most ground applications will be applied by the
grower.  Although treatment blocks may be quite large, it is unlikely
that pesticide handlers would be exposed continuously for 30 days or
more (short-term duration exposures).  The HED Science Advisory Council
for Exposure (ExpoSAC) maintains it is possible for handlers to have
intermediate-term exposure; therefore, estimates of intermediate-term
exposures (1-6 months) are presented.

Particularly for ground applications, private (i.e., grower) applicators
may perform all functions; that is, mix, load and apply the material.
HED standard procedure directs that although the same individual may
perform all those tasks, they shall be assessed separately.  The
available exposure data for combined mixer/loader/applicator scenarios
are limited in comparison to the monitoring of these two activities
separately.  These exposure scenarios are outlined in the PHED Surrogate
Exposure Guide (August 1998).  HED has adopted a methodology to present
the exposure and risk estimates separately for the job functions in some
scenarios and to present them as combined in other cases.  Most exposure
scenarios for hand-held equipment (such as hand wands, backpack
sprayers, and push-type granular spreaders) are assessed as a combined
job function.  With these types of hand-held operations, all handling
activities are assumed to be conducted by the same individual.  The
available monitoring data support this and HED presents them in this
way.  Conversely, for equipment types such as fixed-wing aircraft,
groundboom tractors, or air-blast sprayers, the applicator exposures are
assessed and presented separately from those of the mixers and loaders.
By separating the two job functions, HED determines the most appropriate
levels of personal-protective equipment (PPE) for each aspect of the job
without requiring an applicator to wear unnecessary PPE that might be
required for a mixer/loader (e.g., chemical-resistant gloves may only be
necessary during the pouring of a liquid formulation).

No chemical-specific data were available with which to assess potential
exposure to pesticide handlers.  The estimates of exposure to pesticide
handlers are based upon surrogate study data available in the PHED (v.
1.1, 1998).  For pesticide handlers, it is HED standard practice to
present estimates of dermal exposure for “baseline;” that is, for
workers wearing a single layer of work clothing consisting of a
long-sleeved shirt, long pants, shoes plus socks and no protective
gloves as well as for “baseline” and the use of protective gloves or
other PPE as might be necessary.

The label directs:  “Mixers, Loaders, Applicators and all other
handlers must wear:  Long-sleeved shirt and long pants,
chemical-resistant gloves made of any waterproof material and shoes plus
socks.”

Chlorothalonil has a low order of acute toxicity by the oral and dermal
routes of exposure (Toxicity Category IV).  It is toxic via the
inhalation route (Toxicity Category II).  Chlorothalonil is severely
irritating to the eye (Toxicity Category I) and is moderately irritating
to the skin (Toxicity Category III).  Chlorothalonil is not a skin
sensitizer.

The RAB1 toxicology team did not identify short-term (1-30 days) or
intermediate-term (1-6 months) exposure duration dermal toxicological
endpoints.  Two route-specific 21-day dermal toxicity studies exist, one
in the rat and one in the rabbit.  The rat study was conducted to dose
levels up to 600 mg ai/kg bw/day which produced slight dermal irritation
but NO signs of systemic toxicity.  The team found that there were no
developmental or neurotoxicity concerns.  As stated, there was no
systemic toxicity in doses up to 600 mg ai/kg bw/day.  Quantitation of
dermal risk using data obtained from oral toxicity studies would not
accurately reflect actual toxic effects expressed by the dermal route of
exposure.  Therefore, an assessment of dermal exposure and risk is not
necessary.

The toxicology team did identify toxicological endpoints via the
inhalation route of exposure.  The endpoints were identified from a 90
day oral rat study where the effects were based on dilated renal
medullary tubules.  The NOAEL is 3.0 mg ai/kg bw/day.  HED’s LOC for
chlorothalonil exposure is 100 (i.e., a MOE less than 100 exceeds
HED’s LOC).  The LOC is based on 10X to account for interspecies
extrapolation to humans from the animal test species and 10X to account
for intraspecies sensitivity.  HED and RD assume 100% absorption via the
inhalation route of exposure.

Chlorothalonil was classified as “Likely” to be a human carcinogen
by all routes of exposure (HED Cancer Peer Review Meeting, 6/11/1997).
However the SAP decision (6/30/98) supports the use of an MOE approach
in cancer risk assessment for chlorothalonil.  The HED HASPOC reviewed
the approach on 3/12/08 and supported the MOE approach.  Since long-term
(i.e., chronic) exposures are not expected, it is not necessary to
perform a cancer risk assessment.

Table 7.1.  Estimated Handler Exposure and Risk from the Proposed Uses
of Chlorothalonil.

Unit Exposure1

mg ai/lb handled	Applic. Rate2	Units Treated3

Per Day	Average Daily

Dose4

mg ai/kg bw/day	NOAEL5

mg ai/kg bw/day	MOE6

Inhalation

Mixer/Loader - Liquid - Open-pour

Inhal             0.0012 	2.25 lb ai/A	350 A/day	Inhal           0.0135
3.0	220

Applicator - Ground-boom - Open Cab

Inhal           0.00074	2.25 lb ai/A	80 A/day	Inhal          0.0019	3.0
1,600

Applicator - Fixed-wing - Aerial (Pilots not required to wear gloves)

Inhal         0.000068	2.25 lb ai/A	350 A/day	Inhal        0.000765	3.0
3,900

Applicator – Open-cab Airblast (persimmon)

Inhal              0.45 	0.9375 lb ai/A	40 A/day	Inhal          0.0024
3.0	1,200

Mixer/Loader/Applicator - High-pressure Hand-Wand (Ginseng)

Inhal             0.12

PF5-Resp    0.024	1.5 lb ai/A	1,000* gal/day = 50 A/day	Inhal
0.13

                  0.026	3.0	23

120

Mixer/Loader/Applicator – Backpack (Ginseng)

Inhal              0.03	1.5 lb ai/A	40* gal/day = 2 A/day	Inhal
0.0013	3.0	2,300

1.  Unit Exposures are taken from “PHED SURROGATE EXPOSURE GUIDE.”
Estimates of Worker Exposure from the PHED Version 1.1, August 1998.
Inhal. = Inhalation.  Units = mg ai/pound of active ingredient handled.

2.  Applic. Rate. = Taken from Sections B of the IR-4 submissions.

3.  Units Treated are taken from “Standard Values for Daily Acres
Treated in Agriculture;” SOP No. 9.1 ExpoSAC; Revised 5 July 2000.  It
is assumed that chlorothalonil is applied to ginseng in 20 gal spray/A.
There were no directions regarding volume of spray for ginseng.  The
Bravo Weather Stik® label indicates 25-50 gal spray per acre for
asparagus and 20–100 gal spray per acre for blueberries.

4.  Average Daily Dose = Unit Exposure * Applic. Rate * Units Treated (
Body Weight (70 kg).

5.  NOAEL = No-Observable Adverse-Effect Level:  3.0 mg ai/kg bw/day for
short- and intermediate–term inhalation exposures.

6.  MOE = Margin of Exposure = NOAEL ( ADD.

A MOE of 100 is adequate to protect occupational pesticide handlers from
short- and intermediate-term inhalation exposures to chlorothalonil.
All MOEs are greater than 100 except for a mixer/loader/applicator using
high-pressure, hand-wand sprayer.  Use of a dust/mist filtering
respirator will reduce inhalation exposure by about 80% and resulting
MOEs will be >100.  With the use of a dust/mist filtering respirator,
the use pattern does not exceed the LOC.  The remaining proposed use
patterns do not exceed HED’s LOC.

7.2  Occupational Post-Application Exposure

It is possible for agricultural workers to have post-application
exposures to pesticide residues during the course of typical
agricultural activities.  HED assumes post-application inhalation
exposure is negligible.  The label lists a 12-hour REI.  By that time
sprays have likely dried.  Chlorothalonil has a vapor pressure of 3.47
mm HG at 25ºC.  Volatilization is not considered to be a factor.

Since no dermal toxicological endpoints were identified, it is not
necessary to conduct assessments of post-application exposure and risk.

7.3  REI

Chlorothalonil is classified in Acute Toxicity Category IV for acute
dermal toxicity.  It is classified in Toxicity Category III for primary
dermal irritation.  It is classified in Toxicity Category II for acute
inhalation toxicity and is classified in Toxicity Category I for primary
eye irritation.

Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations § 156.208 (c),(2) states
“If a product contains only one active ingredient and it is in
Toxicity Category I by the criteria in paragraph (c)(1) of this section,
the REI shall be 48 hours.”  Chlorothalonil is classified in Toxicity
Category I for primary eye irritation and Category II for inhalation
toxicity.  The REI for Category II is 24 hours.  It is suggested that RD
confirm or correct the REI for chlorothalonil as may be appropriate.

8.0  DATA DEFICIENCIES/LABEL REVISIONS

860.1200 Directions for Use

The proposed uses on the Brassica head and stem subgroup should be
revised to specify a maximum seasonal application rate of 8.8 lb ai/A.

The proposed use on persimmon should be modified to specify that
chlorothalonil may only be applied to persimmon grown in Florida and
Hawaii, and that applications may be made with a RTI of 14 days.  In
addition, the proposed use should specify that aerial applications to
persimmon be made in a minimum of 10 gal/A.

Use of a dust/mist filtering respirator should be specified for a
mixer/loader/applicator using high-pressure, hand-wand sprayer.

Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations § 156.208 (c),(2) states
“If a product contains only one active ingredient and it is in
toxicity category I by the criteria in paragraph (c)(1) of this section,
the REI shall be 48 hours.”  Chlorothalonil is classified in Toxicity
Category I for primary eye irritation and Category II for inhalation
toxicity.  The REI for Category II is 24 hours.  It is suggested that RD
confirm or correct the REI for chlorothalonil as may be appropriate.

860.1550 Proposed Tolerances

The petitioner should submit a revised Section F reflecting the
recommended tolerances and commodity definitions presented above and in
Table 6.

860.1650 Submittal of Analytical Reference Standards

The analytical reference standard for 4-hydroxy chlorothalonil at the
EPA National Pesticide Standards Repository has expired.  The registrant
should either recertify the lot in the repository and send in an updated
COA, or submit a new standard (different lot #) if the previous lot will
not be recertified.

860.1500 Crop Field Trials

To support use of the FlC formulation on non-bell peppers, the
petitioner should conduct one additional side-by-side field trial with
non-bell peppers.  The trial should reflect side-by-side plots receiving
applications of the FlC and WDG formulations at 1x the proposed maximum
seasonal rate, and the trial should be conducted in Zone 8.  If the
trial indicates that residues in/on samples treated with the FlC
formulation are higher than in/on samples treated with the WDG
formulation, two additional field trials will be required, so that a
total of three field trials are available reflecting application of the
FlC formulation to non-bell peppers.

Toxicology (required as a result of the revisions of 40 CFR §158)

Immunotoxicity studies

Acute neurotoxicity study

cc: G. Kramer (RAB1), W. Greear (RAB1), M. Dow (RD)

RDI: Branch (7/30/08); RAB1 Chemists (7/30/08); RAB1 Toxicologists
(6/17/08)

G.F. Kramer:S10781:PY-S:(703)305-5079:7509P:RAB1

Appendix 1.  Toxicological Data Requirements (Vischim S.r.l.)

The requirements (40 CFR 158.340) for Food Use for chlorothalonil are
presented below.  Use of the new guideline numbers does not imply that
the new (1998) guideline protocols were used.

Test 	Technical

	Required	Satisfied

870.1100	Acute Oral Toxicity

870.1200	Acute Dermal Toxicity

870.1300	Acute Inhalation Toxicity

870.2400	Primary Eye Irritation

870.2500	Primary Dermal Irritation

870.2600	Dermal Sensitization	yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes	yes

no

yes

no

no

no

870.3100	Oral Subchronic (rodent)

870.3150	Oral Subchronic (nonrodent)

870.3200	21-Day Dermal

870.3250	90-Day Dermal

870.3465	90-Day Inhalation	yes

yes

yes

no

no	yes

yes

no

-

-

870.3700a	Developmental Toxicity (rodent)

870.3700b	Developmental Toxicity (nonrodent)

870.3800	Reproduction	yes

yes

yes	yes

yes

yes

870.4100a	Chronic Toxicity (rodent)

870.4100b	Chronic Toxicity (nonrodent)

870.4200a	Oncogenicity (rat)

870.4200b	Oncogenicity (mouse)

870.4300	Chronic/Oncogenicity	yes

yes

yes

yes

yes	yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

870.5100	Mutagenicity—Gene Mutation - bacterial

870.5300	Mutagenicity—Gene Mutation - mammalian

870.5400	Mutagenicity—Structural Chromosomal Aberrations

870.5500	Mutagenicity—Other Genotoxic Effects	yes

yes

yes

yes	yes

yes

yes

no

870.6100a	Acute Delayed Neurotox. (hen)

870.6100b	90-Day Neurotoxicity (hen)

870.6200a	Acute Neurotox. Screening Battery (rat)

870.6200b	90-Day Neuro. Screening Battery (rat)

870.6300	Develop.
敎牵瑯硯捩瑩ݹ潮渍൯敹൳敹൳潮ⴇⴍ渍൯敹൳ܭ㠇〷
㜮㠴व敇敮慲敍慴潢楬浳㠍〷㜮〶र敄浲污倠湥瑥慲
楴湯㠍〷㜮〸र浉畭潮潴楸楣祴礇獥渍൯敹ݳ敹൳ഭ潮
܇灓捥慩瑓摵敩⁳潦⁲捏汵牡䔠晦捥獴䄍畣整传慲
爨瑡ऩ匍扵档潲楮牏污⠠慲⥴ഉ楓⵸潭瑮牏污⠠潤
⥧܉渍൯潮渍ݯ

-

*

N

O

l

r

s

u

y

h

h

+

O

u

y

—

ࠀ—

Ë

j

摧⹸

옍)

옍)

옍)

 h

 h

옍)

옍)

㄀Ĥ摧≰´

㄀Ĥ摧搨m

옍)

hÚ

hÚ

hÚ

hÚ

hÚ

hÚ

hÚ

H*

攃昀ĴЀ

Æ

휆

휆

Æ

휆

萏Ũ葞Ũ摧⸵Ó-਀&䘋

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

㓿ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6ऀ

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

’

“

¨

©

ß

á

â

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6

.

N

§

¨

Î

ö

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

摧ᮁ6ऀ@

^

_

`

u

”

á

â

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

㐀ۖĀ̊>㸃昀Ĵ瑹勧/

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

摧ᮁ6

옍

@

gÈ

愀Ĥ摧ᮁ6

瑹磢*

瑹磢*

瑹磢*

摧墽

h\

$

옍)

옍)

옍)

␃ഃࣆȀᥐ᪸

␃ഃࣆȀᥐ᪸

옍)

h

h

h

h

è

é

옍)

옍)

옍)

Ü

ä

,é

옍)

”

옍)

@

옍)

옍)

옍)

 h

kd-

kd·

#

ó

옍)

@

@

 h

@

瑹墽

h

 h

h

h

옍)

옍)

h

옍)

h

h

h

h

%̀Ĥ옍)

h

h

h

h

h

h

h

h

h

%̀Ĥ옍)

h

h

h

h

h

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

h

h

h

h

ༀ킄ᄂや䃽Ħ葞ː葠ﴰ摧⤂Í

옍)

옍)

愀Ĥ摧墽

愀Ĥ摧墽

愀Ĥ摧墽

愀Ĥ摧墽

愀Ĥ摧墽

摧䈊

hb

옍)

㄀Ĥ摧⤂Í

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

愀Ĥ摧浂

摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

葞и葠﯈摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

葞и摧浂

摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

愀Ĥ摧浂

葞и摧浂

-

-

-

Appendix 2.  Toxicological Data Requirements (Old Data)

The requirements (40 CFR 158.340) for previously approved food Use for
chlorothalonil are presented below.  Use of the new guideline numbers
does not imply that the new (1998) guideline protocols were used.

Test 	Technical

	Required	Satisfied

870.1100	Acute Oral Toxicity

870.1200	Acute Dermal Toxicity

870.1300	Acute Inhalation Toxicity

870.2400	Primary Eye Irritation

870.2500	Primary Dermal Irritation

870.2600	Dermal Sensitization	yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes	yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

870.3100	Oral Subchronic (rodent)

870.3150	Oral Subchronic (nonrodent)

870.3200	21-Day Dermal

870.3250	90-Day Dermal

870.3465	90-Day Inhalation	yes

yes

yes

no

no	yes

yes

yes

-

-

870.3700a	Developmental Toxicity (rodent)

870.3700b	Developmental Toxicity (nonrodent)

870.3800	Reproduction	yes

yes

yes	yes

yes

yes

870.4100a	Chronic Toxicity (rodent)

870.4100b	Chronic Toxicity (nonrodent)

870.4200a	Oncogenicity (rat)

870.4200b	Oncogenicity (mouse)

870.4300	Chronic/Oncogenicity	yes

yes

yes

yes

yes	yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

870.5100	Mutagenicity—Gene Mutation - bacterial

870.5300	Mutagenicity—Gene Mutation - mammalian

870.5400	Mutagenicity—Structural Chromosomal Aberrations

870.5500	Mutagenicity—Other Genotoxic Effects	yes

yes

yes

yes	yes

yes

yes

yes

870.6100a	Acute Delayed Neurotox. (hen)

870.6100b	90-Day Neurotoxicity (hen)

870.6200a	Acute Neurotox. Screening Battery (rat)

870.6200b	90-Day Neuro. Screening Battery (rat)

870.6300	Develop. Neurotoxicity	no

no

yes

yes

no	-

-

no

no

-

870.7485	General Metabolism

870.7600	Dermal Penetration

870.7800	Immunotoxicity	yes

no

yes	yes

-

no

Special Studies for Ocular Effects

Acute Oral (rat)

Subchronic Oral (rat)

Six-month Oral (dog)

no

no

no

-

-

-

Chlorothalonil	Dietary Exposure Assessment		DP# 327261

Chlorothalonil	                       Human-Health Risk Assessment		DP#
353243

Page   PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  60

Chlorothalonil	                       Human-Health Risk Assessment		DP#
327261

Page   PAGE  46  of   NUMPAGES  60


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 50921]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21935]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM98-1-000]

Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of
the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission
decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-
the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested
proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of
the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any
oral communication.
    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional
file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the
proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited
communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the
decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not
be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a
proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or
contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may
request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and
responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant
such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any
person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record
communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the
official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with
Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional
record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a
cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR
385.2201(e)(1)(v).
    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently
received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed
are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are
available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected] or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Docket No.                              File date                   Presenter or requester
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Prohibited
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. EL16-49-000, ER18-1314-000, ER18-1314-    9-21-2018                          Natural Gas Supply Association.
 001, EL18-178-000.
2. CP15-554-002............................  9-27-2018                          Pipeliners Union 798.
3. CP15-88-000.............................  9-28-2018                          Brea College, President Lyle D.
                                                                                Roelofs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Exempt
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ER18-2208-000...........................  9-18-2018                          U.S. Congress.\1\
2. EL15-95-000.............................  9-19-2018                          State of New Jersey Assemblyman
                                                                                Ron Dancer.
3. CP15-115-000, CP15-115-001..............  9-21-2018                          Duffield Camp & Retreat Center
                                                                                Inc.
4. CP15-88-000.............................  9-21-2018                          Lexington-Fayette Urban County
                                                                                Government Office of the Mayor.
5. P-10808-000.............................  9-25-2018                          U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow.
6. CP14-96-000.............................  9-25-2018                          U.S. Congresswoman Nita M.
                                                                                Lowey.
7. ER18-2208-000...........................  9-26-2018                          U.S. Senate.\2\
8. P-2413-000..............................  9-26-2018                          U.S. Congressman Jody Hice.
9. CP17-495-000............................  9-27-2018                          FERC Staff.\3\
10. CP16-9-000.............................  9-27-2018                          U.S. Congressman Stephen F.
                                                                                Lynch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Congressmen Joseph P. Kennedy III, Frank Pallone, Jr., Bobby L. Rush, Fred Upton, Richard E. Neal, Peter
  Welch, Niki Tsongas, James P. McGovern, Katherine Clark, Seth Moulton, Michael E. Capuano, and David N.
  Cicilline.
\2\ Senators Richard Blumenthal, Sheldon Whitehouse, Jack Reed, Edward J. Markey, Elizabeth Warren, and Jeanne
  Shaheen.
\3\ Memorandum dated September 27, 2018 forwarding letter from the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office.

    Dated: October 2, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-21935 Filed 10-9-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P