[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24349-24351]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9557]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1258; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-184-AD;
Amendment 39-17033; AD 2012-08-16]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Learjet Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Learjet Inc. Model 60 airplanes. This AD was prompted by two incidents
of swapped fire extinguishing wires. This AD requires inspecting the
electrical leads routed to the fire extinguishing containers for proper
identification and missing labels, and to ensure the electrical leads
are connected to the correct squibs; and corrective actions if
necessary. We are issuing this AD to prevent the extinguishing agent of
the fire extinguishing container from being delivered to the wrong
engine in the event of an engine fire, and a consequent uncontrolled
fire.

DATES: This AD is effective May 29, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of May 29, 2012.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, Kansas 67209-2942; telephone
316-946-2000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.bombardier.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: James Galstad, Aerospace Engineer,
Mechanical Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE-116W, FAA, Wichita
Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-
Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
316-946-4107; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM published in the Federal Register on November 30, 2011 (76 FR
74010). That NPRM proposed to require inspecting the electrical leads
routed to the fire extinguishing containers for proper identification
and missing labels, and to ensure the electrical leads are connected to
the correct squibs; and corrective actions if necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comment received on the proposal
(76 FR 74010, November 30, 2011) and the FAA's response.

Request To Revise Compliance Time

    The single commenter, SpiritJets, LLC, stated that the wording of
the compliance time in paragraph (g) of the NPRM (76 FR 74010, November
30, 2011) appears to be inaccurate because many of those airplanes do
not have auxiliary power units (APU) installed. The compliance time in
the NPRM is worded as follows: ``Within 300 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, or at the next auxiliary power unit (APU)
removal, whichever occurs first * * *''
    We infer that the commenter requests we remove the reference to the
next APU removal from the compliance time. We find that clarification
is necessary. Paragraph (g) of this AD applies to all airplanes
identified in the applicability (i.e., paragraph (c) of this AD).
Therefore, if an APU is not installed on an airplane that is identified
in paragraph (c) of this AD, ``within 300 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD'' is the appropriate compliance time for
accomplishing the requirements of the AD on that airplane. For
clarification purposes, we have revised paragraph (g) of this AD to add
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2), which more clearly specify the compliance
times for airplanes with and without an APU.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD with the change described previously and minor editorial changes. We
have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (76 FR 74010, November 30, 2011) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 74010, November 30, 2011).
    We also determined that this change will not increase the economic
burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 232 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost           Parts cost      Cost per product      operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.......................  3 work-hours x $85                   0               $255            $59,160
                                    per hour = $255.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary modification
that would be required based on the results of the inspection. We have
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this
modification:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Action                              Labor cost               Parts cost      Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrective actions.........................  1 work-hour x $85 per hour =                 $8                $93
                                              $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

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

    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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2012-08-16 Learjet Inc.: Amendment 39-17033; Docket No. FAA-2011-
1258; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-184-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective May 29, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Learjet Inc. Model 60 airplanes, certificated
in any category, serial numbers 60-002 through 60-366 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 2620, Extinguishing system.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by two incidents of swapped fire
extinguishing wires, which could cause the extinguishing agent of
the fire extinguishing container to be delivered to the wrong engine
in the event of an engine fire, and a consequent uncontrolled fire.
We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these
products.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2)
of this AD: Inspect the electrical leads routed to the fire
extinguishing containers for proper identification and missing
labels, and to ensure the electrical leads are connected to the
correct squibs, as specified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-26-4,
dated May 2, 2011. Do the inspection in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-26-4,
dated May 2, 2011. If any misidentification is found, or if any
label is missing, or if the electrical leads are not connected to
the correct squibs, as specified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-
26-4, dated May 2, 2011: Before further flight, do all applicable
corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-26-4, dated May 2,
2011.
    (1) For airplanes equipped with an APU: Within 300 flight hours
after the effective date of this AD, or at the next auxiliary power
unit (APU) removal, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For airplanes not equipped with an APU: Within 300 flight
hours after the effective date of this AD.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (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.
    (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.

(i) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact James Galstad,
Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE-
116W, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 1801 Airport Road,
Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone: 316-
946-4135; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) 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:
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-26-4, dated May 2, 2011.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, Kansas 67209-2942;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (3) 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>.
    (4) 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 Renton, Washington, on April 13, 2012.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-9557 Filed 4-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


36480 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 18, 2003 / Rules and Regulations IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews This final rule establishes a temporary exemption from the tolerance requirement for Bacillus pumilus strain QST2808 under section 408( d) of the FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA), 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( UMRA) ( Public Law 104   4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations ( 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( NTTAA), Public Law 104   113, section 12( d) ( 15 U. S. C. 272 note). Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under section 408( d) of the FFDCA, such as the exemption in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act ( RFA) ( 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' `` Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408( n)( 4) of the FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have any `` tribal implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments ( 65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' `` Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: June 3, 2003. James Jones, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

 Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180   [ AMENDED]

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

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

 2. Section 180.1226 is added to subpart D to read as follows:

§ 180.1226 Bacillus pumilus strain QST2808; temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. A temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established for residues of the microbial pesticide Bacillus pumilus strain QST2808 when used in or on all agricultural commodities when applied/ used in accordance with label directions.

[ FR Doc. 03   15129 Filed 6   17   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [ OPP   2003   0196; FRL   7311   2]

Azoxystrobin; Pesticide Tolerance AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for combined residues of azoxystrobin, methyl ( E) 2[[ 6( 2 cyanophenoxy) 4 pyrimidinyl] oxy]  ( methoxymethylene) benzeneacetate, and its Z isomer, methyl ( Z) 2[[ 6( 2 cyanophenoxy) 4 pyrimidinyl] oxy]  ( methoxymethylene) benzeneacetate, in or on artichoke, globe; asparagus; brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A; herb subgroup 19A, ( dried) except chive; and herb subgroup 19A, ( fresh) except chive. Interregional Research Project Number 4 ( IR 4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ( FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 ( FQPA).

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 15: 35 Jun 17, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 18JNR1. SGM 18JNR1 36481 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 18, 2003 / Rules and Regulations DATES: This regulation is effective June 18, 2003. Objections and requests for hearings, identified by docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2003   0196, must be received on or before August 18, 2003. ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit VI. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shaja R. Brothers, Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 308   3194; e mail address: brothers. shaja@ epa. gov.

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

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket ID number OPP   2003   0196. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 is available at http:// www. access. gpo. gov/ nara/ cfr/ cfrhtml__ 00/ Title__ 40/ 40cfr180_ 00. html, a beta site currently under development. To access the OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines referenced in this document, go directly to the guidelines at http:// www. epa. gov/ opptsfrs/ home/ guidelin. htm. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. Background and Statutory Findings In the Federal Register of March 26, 2003 ( 68 FR 14622) ( FRL   7299   3), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U. S. C. 346a, as amended by FQPA ( Public Law 104   170), announcing the filing of pesticide petitions ( PP 2E6375, 2E6488, 2E6489, and 2E6495) by IR 4, 681 U. S. Highway # 1 South, North Brunswick, NJ 08902   3390. That notice included a summary of the petitions prepared by Syngenta, the registrant. The petitions requested that 40 CFR 180.507 be amended by establishing tolerances for combined residues of the fungicide azoxystrobin, methyl ( E) 2[[ 6 ( 2 cyanophenoxy) 4 pyrimidinyl] oxy]  ( methoxymethylene) benzeneacetate and its Z isomer methyl ( Z) 2[[ 6( 2 cyanophenoxy) 4 pyrimidinyl] oxy]  ( methoxymethylene) benzeneacetate, in or on artichoke, globe at 4.0 parts per million ( ppm); asparagus at 0.02 ppm; brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3.0 ppm; herb subgroup 19A, dried, except chive at 260 ppm; and herb subgroup 19A, fresh, except chive at 50 ppm. Section 408( b)( 2)( A)( i) of the 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 the 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 the 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....'' EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the regulatory requirements of section 408 of the FFDCA and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see the final rule on Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances ( 62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997) ( FRL   5754   7).

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety Consistent with section 408( b)( 2)( D) of the 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, consistent with section 408( b)( 2) of the FFDCA, for tolerances for combined residues of azoxystrobin on artichoke, globe at 4.0 ppm; asparagus at 0.04 ppm; brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3.0 ppm; herb subgroup 19A, dried, except chive at 260 ppm; and herb subgroup 19A, fresh, except chive at 50 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerances follow.

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 VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 15: 35 Jun 17, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 18JNR1. SGM 18JNR1 36482 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 18, 2003 / Rules and Regulations infants and children. The nature of the toxic effects caused by azoxystrobin are discussed in Unit III. A of the Final Rule on Azoxystrobin Pesticide Tolerance published in the Federal Register on September 20, 2002 ( 67 FR 59169)( FRL   7198   9).

B. Toxicological Endpoints The dose at which no adverse effects are observed ( the NOAEL) from the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment is used to estimate the toxicological level of concern ( LOC). However, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified ( the LOAEL) is sometimes used for risk assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected. An uncertainty factor ( UF) is applied to reflect 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. An UF of 100 is routinely used, 10X to account for interspecies differences and 10X for intraspecies differences. For dietary risk assessment ( other than cancer) the Agency uses the UF to calculate an acute or chronic reference dose ( acute RfD or chronic RfD) where the RfD is equal to the NOAEL divided by the appropriate UF ( RfD = NOAEL/ UF). Where an additional safety factor ( SF) is retained due to concerns unique to the FQPA, this additional factor is applied to the RfD by dividing the RfD by such additional factor. The acute or chronic Population Adjusted Dose ( aPAD or cPAD) is a modification of the RfD to accommodate this type of FQPA SF. For non dietary risk assessments ( other than cancer) the UF is used to determine the LOC. For example, when 100 is the appropriate UF ( 10X to account for interspecies differences and 10X for intraspecies differences) the LOC is 100. To estimate risk, a ratio of the NOAEL to exposures ( margin of exposure ( MOE) = NOAEL/ exposure) is calculated and compared to the LOC. The linear default risk methodology ( Q*) is the primary method currently used by the Agency to quantify carcinogenic risk. The Q* approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of cancer risk. A Q* is calculated and used to estimate risk which represents a probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases ( e. g., risk is expressed as 1 x 10 6 or one in a million). Under certain specific circumstances, MOE calculations will be used for the carcinogenic risk assessment. In this non linear approach, a `` point of departure'' is identified below which carcinogenic effects are not expected. The point of departure is typically a NOAEL based on an endpoint related to cancer effects though it may be a different value derived from the dose response curve. To estimate risk, a ratio of the point of departure to exposure ( MOEcancer = point of departure/ exposures) is calculated. A summary of the toxicological endpoints for azoxystrobin used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III. B. of the Final Rule on Azoxystrobin Pesticide Tolerance published in the Federal Register on September 20, 2002 ( 67 FR 59169)( FRL   7198   9).

C. Exposure Assessment 1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. Tolerances have been established ( 40 CFR 180.507) for the combined residues of azoxystrobin, in or on a variety of raw agricultural commodities. Tolerances have been established for residues of azoxystrobin in or on a variety of raw agricultural commodities at levels ranging from 0.01 ppm ( pecans) to 55 ppm ( soybean hay), and on meat, fat, and meat byproducts of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep at levels ranging from 0.01 to 0.07 ppm, and on milk at 0.006 ppm. A timelimited tolerance ( to expire on 12/ 31/ 2003) is currently established at 30 ppm for the head and stem Brassica vegetables, subgroup 5A. Risk assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from azoxystrobin in food as follows: i. Acute exposure. Acute dietary risk assessments are performed for a fooduse pesticide if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a one day or single exposure. In conducting this acute risk assessment, EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database ( DEEM FCIDTM) which incorporates food consumption data as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994   1996 and 1998 nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals ( CSFII) and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. The following assumption was made for the acute exposure assessment: A Tier 1 acute dietary exposure analysis was performed for azoxystrobin. ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting this chronic risk assessment, EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database ( DEEM FCIDTM) which incorporates food consumption data as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994   1996 and 1998 nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals ( CSFII) and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. The following assumptions were made for the chronic exposure assessments: The chronic dietary exposure analysis was performed for the general U. S. Population and all population subgroups using tolerance level residues ( livestock) and total residues of concern ( plants; parent and metabolites) and 100% crop treated data for the proposed commodities and all registered uses. iii. Cancer. EPA's Cancer Assessment Review Committee ( CARC) evaluated the carcinogenic potential of azoxystrobin and classified azoxystrobin as `` not likely to be a human carcinogen'' based on the revised Cancer Guidelines. 2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for azoxystrobin in drinking water. Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data, drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on simulation or modeling taking into account data on the physical characteristics of azoxystrobin. The Agency uses the FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool ( FIRST) or the Pesticide Root Zone model/ Exposure Analysis Modeling System ( PRZM/ EXAMS), to produce estimates of pesticide concentrations in an index reservoir. The screening concentration in groundwater ( SCI GROW) model is used to predict pesticide concentrations in shallow groundwater. For a screening level assessment for surface water EPA will use FIRST ( a tier 1 model) before using PRZM/ EXAMS ( a tier 2 model). The FIRST model is a subset of the PRZM/ EXAMS model that uses a specific high end runoff scenario for pesticides. FIRST and PRZM/ EXAMS incorporate an index reservoir environment, and a percent crop area factor as an adjustment to account for the maximum percent crop coverage within a watershed or drainage basin. None of these models include consideration of the impact processing ( mixing, dilution, or treatment) of raw water for distribution as drinking water would likely have on the removal of pesticides from the source water. The primary use of these models by the Agency at this stage is to provide a coarse screen for sorting out pesticides for which it is highly unlikely that drinking water concentrations would ever exceed human health levels of concern.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 15: 35 Jun 17, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 18JNR1. SGM 18JNR1 36483 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 18, 2003 / Rules and Regulations Since the models used are considered to be screening tools in the risk assessment process, the Agency does not use estimated environmental concentrations ( EECs) from these models to quantify drinking water exposure and risk as a % RfD or % PAD. Instead, drinking water levels of comparison ( DWLOCs) are calculated and used as a point of comparison against the model estimates of a pesticide's concentration in water. DWLOCs are theoretical upper limits on a pesticide's concentration in drinking water in light of total aggregate exposure to a pesticide in food, and from residential uses. Since DWLOCs address total aggregate exposure to azoxystrobin they are further discussed in the aggregate risk section in Unit III. E. Although moderately persistent in soils and stable to hydrolysis, the likelihood of azoxystrobin moving into ground and surface water is low due to high soil/ water partitioning coefficients and low single application rates. However, with multiple applications and repeated usage, azoxystrobin and especially its degradate (`` compound 2'', ( E) 2 2[ 6( 2 cyanophenoxy) pyrimidin 4 yloxy] 3 methoxyacrylic acid) may eventually build up in environmental compartments and move into drinking water resources. Based on the Tier I modeling results using the FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool ( FIRST) model, azoxystrobin EECs in surface water are not likely to exceed 170 parts per billion ( ppb) for the acute ( peak) concentration or 33 ppb for the chronic ( 365   day) concentration. These values represent upper bound estimates of the concentrations that might be found in surface water which result from the use of azoxystrobin on turf. The SCI GROW screening model developed in the Agency estimates potential ground water concentrations under hydrologically vulnerable conditions. Based on the highest use rate ( turf use, nine applications per year, 10   day interval, and 0.55 lb ai/ A/ application), the upper bound concentration of azoxystrobin was estimated at 3.1 ppb. This value was used for both acute and chronic risk assessments. This value represents upper bound estimates of the concentrations that might be found in ground water which result from the use of azoxystrobin on turf. 3. From non dietary exposure. The term `` residential exposure'' is used in this document to refer to nonoccupational non dietary exposure ( e. g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Azoxystrobin is currently registered for use on residential non dietary sites ( turf and ornamentals). The risk assessment was conducted using the following residential exposure assumptions: There is a potential for short term dermal and inhalation exposures to homeowners who apply products containing azoxystrobin; however, EPA did not identify dermal endpoints for azoxystrobin. Because no dermal endpoints could be indentified, EPA expects no risk from dermal exposure to azoxystrobin. There is also potential for non dietary, oral exposure following lawn treatment. Short and intermediate term non dietary, oral exposure assessments were included for toddlers, since EPA selected toxicology endpoints for these exposures and there is a potential for hand to mouth and object to mouth transfer of residues from treated turfgrass and incidential ingestion of soil from treated turfgrass. Postapplication exposures from various activities following lawn treatment are considered to be the most common and significant in residential settings. The exposure via incidental ingestion of other plant material may occur but is considered negligible. The residential exposure and risk assessment was conducted using the application for turf because it is the highest single use rate. Azoxystrobin may be applied to turf at rates of up to 0.9516 active ingredient ( a. i.) per acre five times per year ( i. e., not to exceed 5 lb/ ai/ acre/ year). 4. Cumulative exposure to substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. 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.'' EPA does not have, at this time, available data to determine whether azoxystrobin has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to azoxystrobin and any other substances and azoxystrobin does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that azoxystrobin 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 Office of Pesticide Programs concerning common mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism on EPA's Web site at http:/ / www. epa. gov/ pesticides/ cumulative/.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children 1. In general. Section 408 of the FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold 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 data base on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a MOE analysis or through using uncertainty ( safety) factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans. 2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Azoxystrobin studies have indicated no increased susceptibility of rats or rabbits to in utero and/ or postnatal exposure to azoxystrobin. 3. Conclusion. There is a complete toxicity data base for azoxystrobin and exposure data are complete or are estimated based on data that reasonably accounts for potential exposures. EPA determined that the 10   fold safety factor for increased susceptibility of infants and children be removed ( i. e., reduced to 1X). The FQPA factor is removed because:   The toxicology data base is complete   The developmental and reproductive toxicity data did not indicate increased susceptibility of rats or rabbits to in utero and/ or postnatal exposure   Unrefined chronic dietary exposure estimates ( assuming all commodities contain tolerance level residues) will overestimate dietary exposure   Modeling data are used for ground and surface source drinking water exposure assessments resulting in estimates considered to be upper bound concentrations E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety To estimate total aggregate exposure to a pesticide from food, drinking water, and residential uses, the Agency calculates DWLOCs which are used as a VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 15: 35 Jun 17, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 18JNR1. SGM 18JNR1 36484 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 18, 2003 / Rules and Regulations point of comparison against the model estimates of a pesticide's concentration in water ( EECs). DWLOC values are not regulatory standards for drinking water. DWLOCs are theoretical upper limits on a pesticide's concentration in drinking water in light of total aggregate exposure to a pesticide in food and residential uses. In calculating a DWLOC, the Agency determines how much of the acceptable exposure ( i. e., the PAD) is available for exposure through drinking water [ e. g., allowable chronic water exposure ( mg/ kg/ day) = cPAD  ( average food + residential exposure)]. This allowable exposure through drinking water is used to calculate a DWLOC. A DWLOC will vary depending on the toxic endpoint, drinking water consumption, and body weights. Default body weights and consumption values as used by the USEPA Office of Water are used to calculate DWLOCs: 2 liter ( L)/ 70 kg ( adult male), 2L/ 60 kg ( adult female), and 1L/ 10 kg ( child). Default body weights and drinking water consumption values vary on an individual basis. This variation will be taken into account in more refined screening level and quantitative drinking water exposure assessments. Different populations will have different DWLOCs. Generally, a DWLOC is calculated for each type of risk assessment used: Acute, short term, intermediate term, chronic, and cancer. When EECs for surface water and groundwater are less than the calculated DWLOCs, EPA concludes with reasonable certainty that exposures to the pesticide in drinking water ( when considered along with other sources of exposure for which EPA has reliable data) would not result in unacceptable levels of aggregate human health risk at this time. Because EPA considers the aggregate risk resulting from multiple exposure pathways associated with a pesticide's uses, levels of comparison in drinking water may vary as those uses change. If new uses are added in the future, EPA will reassess the potential impacts of residues of the pesticide in drinking water as a part of the aggregate risk assessment process. 1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food to azoxystrobin will occupy 10% of the aPAD for the U. S. population, 17% of the aPAD for children 1   2 years old, 9% of the aPAD for females 13 years and older, and 10% of the aPAD for adults 50+ years old. In addition, there is potential for acute dietary exposure to azoxystrobin in drinking water. After calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to the EECs for surface and ground water, EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of the aPAD, as shown in Table 1 of this unit:

TABLE 1.   AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ACUTE EXPOSURE TO AZOXYSTROBIN Population Subgroup aPAD ( mg/ kg) % aPAD ( Food) Surface Water EEC ( ppb) Ground Water EEC ( ppb) Acute DWLOC ( ppb)

U. S. Population .................................................................................... 0.67 10 170 3.1 21,000 Children 1   2 years old ......................................................................... 0.67 17 170 3.1 5,600 Females 13   49 years .......................................................................... 0.67 9 170 3.1 18,000 Adults ( 50+ years) ............................................................................... 0.67 10 170 3.1 21,000 2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to azoxystrobin from food will utilize 12% of the cPAD for the U. S. population, 22% of the cPAD for children 1   2 years old, 11% of the cPAD for females 13   49 years old, and 11% for adults 50+ years old. Based on the use pattern, chronic residential exposure to residues of azoxystrobin is not expected. In addition, there is potential for chronic dietary exposure to azoxystrobin in drinking water. After calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to the EECs for surface and ground water, EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of the cPAD, as shown in the following Table 2:

TABLE 2.   AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CHRONIC ( NON CANCER) EXPOSURE TO AZOXYSTROBIN Population Subgroup cPAD mg/ kg/ day % cPAD ( Food) Surface Water EEC ( ppb) Ground Water EEC ( ppb) Chronic DWLOC ( ppb)

U. S. Population .................................................................................... 0.18 12 33 3.1 5,500 Children 1   2 years ............................................................................... 0.18 22 33 3.1 1,400 Females 13   49 years .......................................................................... 0.18 11 33 3.1 4,800 Adults 50+ years .................................................................................. 0.18 11 33 3.1 5,600 3. Short term risk. Short term aggregate exposure takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water ( considered to be a background exposure level). Azoxystrobin is currently registered for use that could result in short term residential exposure and the Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic food and water and short term exposures for azoxystrobin. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short term exposures, EPA has concluded that food and residential exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of 1,200 for adults, and 430 for children 1   2 years old. These aggregate MOEs do not exceed the Agency's level of concern for aggregate exposure to food and residential uses. In addition, short term DWLOCs were calculated and compared to the EECs for chronic exposure of azoxystrobin in ground and surface water. After calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to the EECs for surface and ground water, EPA does not expect short term aggregate exposure to exceed the Agency's level of concern, as shown in the following Table 3:

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 15: 35 Jun 17, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 18JNR1. SGM 18JNR1 36485 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 18, 2003 / Rules and Regulations TABLE 3.   AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR SHORT TERM EXPOSURE TO AZOXYSTROBIN Population Subgroup Aggregate MOE ( Food + Residential) Aggregate Level of Concern ( LOC) Surface Water EEC ( ppb) Ground Water EEC ( ppb) Short Term DWLOC ( ppb)

U. S. Population .................................................................................... 1,200 100 33 3.1 8,000 Children 1   2 years old ......................................................................... 430 100 33 3.1 1,900 4. Intermediate term risk. Intermediate term aggregate exposure takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water ( considered to be a background exposure level). Azoxystrobin is currently registered for use( s) that could result in intermediate term residential exposure and the Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic food and water and intermediate term exposures for azoxystrobin. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for intermediateterm exposures, EPA has concluded that food and residential exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of 420 for children 1   2 years old. These aggregate MOEs do not exceed the Agency's level of concern for aggregate exposure to food and residential uses. In addition, intermediate term DWLOCs were calculated and compared to the EECs for chronic exposure of azoxystrobin in ground and surface water. After calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to the EECs for surface and ground water, EPA does not expect intermediate term aggregate exposure to exceed the Agency's level of concern, as shown in the following Table 4:

TABLE 4.   AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR INTERMEDIATE TERM EXPOSURE TO AZOXYSTROBIN Population Subgroup Aggregate MOE ( Food + Residential) Aggregate Level of Concern ( LOC) Surface Water EEC ( ppb) Ground Water EEC ( ppb) Intermediate Term DWLOC ( ppb)

Children 1   2 years old ......................................................................... 420 100 33 3.1 1,600 5. Aggregate cancer risk for U. S. population. There is no evidence for mutagenicity or carcinogenicity. Azoxystrobin has been classified as `` not likely to be carcinogenic in humans'' by EPA; therefore, azoxystrobin is not expected to pose a carcinogenic risk. 6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, and to infants and children from aggregate exposure to azoxystrobin residues.

IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology Adequate methodology is available for enforcement of these tolerances. The gas chromatography/ nitrogen phosphorous detector ( GC/ NPD) method ( RAM 243/ 04) has undergone a method validation by the EPA analytical laboratory. EPA comments have been incorporated and the revised method ( designated RAM 243) will be submitted to FDA for inclusion in PAM, Volume II as an enforcement method. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755   5350; telephone number: ( 410) 305   2905; email address: residuemethods@ epa. gov. B. International Residue Limits No Codex, Canadian, or Mexican Maximum Residue Levels ( MRLs) have been established for residues of azoxystrobin. Therefore, no tolerance discrepancies exist between countries for this chemical.

V. Conclusion Therefore, the tolerances are established for combined residues of azoxystrobin, methyl ( E) 2[[ 6( 2 cyanophenoxy) 4 pyrimidinyl] oxy]  ( methoxymethylene) benzeneacetate, and its Z isomer, methyl ( Z) 2[[ 6( 2 cyanophenoxy) 4 pyrimidinyl] oxy]  ( methoxymethylene) benzeneacetate, in or on artichoke, globe at 4.0 ppm; asparagus at 0.04 ppm; brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3.0 ppm; herb subgroup 19A, dried, except chive at 260 ppm; and herb subgroup 19A, fresh, except chive at 50 ppm.

VI. Objections and Hearing Requests Under section 408( g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. Although the procedures in those regulations require some modification to reflect the amendments made to the FFDCA by the FQPA, EPA will continue to use those procedures, with appropriate adjustments, until the necessary modifications can be made. The new section 408( g) of the FFDCA provides essentially the same process for persons to `` object'' to a regulation for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance issued by EPA under new section 408( d) of FFDCA, as was provided in the old sections 408 and 409 of the FFDCA. However, the period for filing objections is now 60 days, rather than 30 days.

A. What Do I Need to Do to File an Objection or Request a Hearing?

You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in this unit and in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number OPP   2003   0196 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before August 18, 2003. 1. Filing the request. Your objection must specify the specific provisions in the regulation that you object to, and the grounds for the objections ( 40 CFR 178.25). If a hearing is requested, the objections must include a statement of the factual issues( s) on which a hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 15: 35 Jun 17, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 18JNR1. SGM 18JNR1 36486 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 18, 2003 / Rules and Regulations on such issues, and a summary of any evidence relied upon by the objector ( 40 CFR 178.27). Information submitted in connection with an objection or hearing request may be claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the information that does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public record. Information not marked confidential may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Mail your written request to: Office of the Hearing Clerk ( 1900C), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. You may also deliver your request to the Office of the Hearing Clerk in Rm. 104, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. The Office of the Hearing Clerk is open from 8 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Office of the Hearing Clerk is ( 703) 603   0061. 2. Tolerance fee payment. If you file an objection or request a hearing, you must also pay the fee prescribed by 40 CFR 180.33( i) or request a waiver of that fee pursuant to 40 CFR 180.33( m). You must mail the fee to: EPA Headquarters Accounting Operations Branch, Office of Pesticide Programs, P. O. Box 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. Please identify the fee submission by labeling it `` Tolerance Petition Fees.'' EPA is authorized to waive any fee requirement `` when in the judgement of the Administrator such a waiver or refund is equitable and not contrary to the purpose of this subsection.'' For additional information regarding the waiver of these fees, you may contact James Tompkins by phone at ( 703) 305   5697, by e mail at tompkins. jim@ epa. gov, or by mailing a request for information to Mr. Tompkins at Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. If you would like to request a waiver of the tolerance objection fees, you must mail your request for such a waiver to: James Hollins, Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. 3. Copies for the Docket. In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit VI. A., you should also send a copy of your request to the PIRIB for its inclusion in the official record that is described in Unit I. B. 1. Mail your copies, identified by docket ID number OPP   2003   0196, to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. In person or by courier, bring a copy to the location of the PIRIB described in Unit I. B. 1. You may also send an electronic copy of your request via e mail to: oppdocket epa. gov. Please use an ASCII file format and avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Copies of electronic objections and hearing requests will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 6.1/ 8.0 or ASCII file format. Do not include any CBI in your electronic copy. You may also submit an electronic copy of your request at many Federal Depository Libraries.

B. When Will the Agency Grant a Request for a Hearing? A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator determines that the material submitted shows the following: There is a genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable possibility that available evidence identified by the requestor would, if established resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts to the contrary; and resolution of the factual issues( s) in the manner sought by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested ( 40 CFR 178.32).

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408( d) of the FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA), 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( UMRA) ( Public Law 104   4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations ( 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( NTTAA), Public Law 104   113, section 12( d) ( 15 U. S. C. 272 note). Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under section 408( d) of the 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. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' `` Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408( n)( 4) of the FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have any `` tribal implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments ( 65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 15: 35 Jun 17, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 18JNR1. SGM 18JNR1 36487 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 18, 2003 / Rules and Regulations an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' `` Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: June 6, 2003. Debra Edwards, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

 Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180   [ AMENDED]

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

Authority: 21 U. S. C. 321( q), 346( a) and 371.  2. Section 180.507 is amended by adding alphabetically commodities to the table in paragraph ( a)( 1) to read as follows:

§ 180.507 Azoxystrobin; tolerances for residues. ( a) * * *

Commodity Parts per million * * * * * Artichoke, globe .................... 4.0 Asparagus ............................. 0.04 * * * * * Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A ...................... 3.0 * * * * * Herb subgroup 19A, dried, except chive ...................... 260 Herb subgroup 19A, fresh, except chive ...................... 50 * * * * *

* * * * * [ FR Doc. 03   15261 Filed 6   17   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 257 and 258 [ FRL   7514   7]

RIN 2050   AE86 Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices and Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills: Disposal of Residential Lead Based Paint Waste AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: To help accelerate the pace of lead based paint removal from residences, and thereby reduce exposure to children and adults from the health risks associated with lead, EPA is promulgating a change to its definition of `` municipal solid waste landfill unit'' in both the Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices and the Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. In addition, EPA is promulgating two new definitions for `` construction and demolition ( C& D) landfill'' and `` residential lead based paint waste.'' This final rule will expressly allow residential lead based paint waste that is exempted from the hazardous waste management requirements as household waste to be disposed of in construction and demolition landfills by stating that a construction and demolition landfill accepting residential lead based paint waste, and no other household waste, is not a municipal solid waste landfill unit. Today's action would not prevent a municipal solid waste landfill unit from continuing to receive residential lead based paint waste. DATES: This final rule will become effective on June 18, 2003. The Agency finds good cause to make this rule effective immediately because today's final rule provides an additional disposal option for residential leadbased paint waste. ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action ( Docket No. RCRA   2001   0017) are available for public inspection during normal business hours from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays, at the RCRA Information Center ( RIC), located at EPA West, Room B   102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW. Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the RCRA Hotline at ( 800) 424   9346 or TDD ( 800) 553   7672 ( hearing impaired). In the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, call ( 703) 412   9810 or TDD ( 703) 412   3323. For information on specific aspects of this rule, contact Paul Cassidy, Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division, Office of Solid Waste ( mail code 5306W), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA, HQ), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460; ( 703) 308   7281, cassidy. paul@ epa. gov. The index and some supporting materials are available on the Internet. You can find these materials at http:// www. epa. gov/ epaoswer/ non hw/ muncpl/ landfill/ pbpaint htm.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Regulated Entities Entities potentially covered by this regulation are public or private individuals or groups that generate residential lead based paint ( LBP) waste as a result of abatement, rehabilitation, renovation and remodeling in homes, residences, and other households. By `` households,'' we mean single and multiple residences, hotels and motels, bunkhouses, ranger stations, crew quarters, campgrounds, picnic grounds, and day use recreation areas. Affected categories and entities include:

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 15: 35 Jun 17, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 18JNR1. SGM 18JNR1


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59832-59833]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24233]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2019-N-2312]

Request for Nominations From Industry Organizations Interested in
Participating in the Selection Process for Nonvoting Industry
Representatives and Request for Nominations for Nonvoting Industry
Representatives on the Allergenic Products Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is requesting
that any industry organizations interested in participating in the
selection of a nonvoting industry representative to serve on the
Allergenic Products Advisory Committee (APAC) for the Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research notify FDA in writing. FDA is also
requesting nominations for a nonvoting industry representative(s) to
serve on the APAC. A nominee may either be self-nominated or nominated
by an organization to serve as a nonvoting industry representative.
Nominations will be accepted for current vacancies effective with this
notice.

DATES: Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests must send a letter stating that interest to FDA by December
6, 2019 (see sections I and II of this document for further details).
Concurrently, nomination materials for prospective candidates should be
sent to FDA by December 6, 2019.

ADDRESSES: All statements of interest from industry organizations
interested in participating in the selection process of nonvoting
industry representative nominations should be sent via email to
Prabhakara Atreya (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). All
nominations for nonvoting industry representatives must be submitted
electronically by accessing the FDA Advisory Committee Membership
Nomination Portal: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/FACTRSPortal/FACTRS/index.cfm. Information about becoming a member of an FDA
advisory committee can also be obtained by visiting FDA's website at:
http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Prabhakara Atreya, Division of
Scientific Advisors and Consultants, Center for Biologics Evaluation
and Research, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 6306, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Agency intends to add a nonvoting
industry representative(s) to the following advisory committee:

I. Allergenic Products Advisory Committee

    The APAC reviews and evaluates data concerning the safety,
effectiveness, and adequacy of labeling of marketed and investigational
allergenic biological products or materials that are administered to
humans for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of allergies and
allergic diseases, and makes appropriate recommendations to the
Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner) of its findings
regarding the affirmation or revocation of biological product licenses;
on the safety, effectiveness, and labeling of the products; on clinical
and laboratory studies of such products; on amendments or revisions to
regulations governing the manufacture, testing, and licensing of
allergenic biological products; and on the quality and relevance of
FDA's research programs which provide the scientific support for
regulating these agents.

II. Selection Procedure

    Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests should send a letter via email stating that interest to the
FDA contact (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) within 30 days of
publication of this document (see DATES). Within the subsequent 30
days, FDA will send a notification to each organization that has
expressed an interest, attaching a complete list of all such
organizations; and a list of all nominees along with their current
resumes. The letter will also state that it is the responsibility of
the interested organizations to confer with one another and to select a
candidate, within 60 days after the receipt of the FDA letter, to serve
as the nonvoting member to represent industry interests for the APAC.
The interested organizations are not bound by the list of nominees in
selecting a candidate. However, if no individual is selected within 60
days, the Commissioner will select the nonvoting member to represent
industry interests.

III. Application Procedure

    Individuals may self-nominate, and/or an organization may nominate
one or more individuals to serve as a nonvoting industry
representative. Contact information, a current curriculum vitae, and
the name of the committee of interest should be sent to the FDA
Advisory Committee Membership Nomination Portal (see ADDRESSES) within
30 days of publication of this document (see DATES). FDA will forward
all nominations to the organizations expressing interest in
participating in the selection process for the committee. (Persons who
nominate themselves as nonvoting industry representatives will not
participate in the selection process).
    FDA seeks to include the views of women and men, members of all
racial

and ethnic groups, and individuals with and without disabilities on its
advisory committees and, therefore, encourages nominations of
appropriately qualified candidates from these groups.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: October 29, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-24233 Filed 11-5-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13271-13274]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05515]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-4222; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-017-AD;
Amendment 39-18433; AD 2016-06-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. This AD
requires repetitive inspections for cracking in the horizontal and
vertical flanges of the rear spar upper chord of the horizontal
stabilizer, and related investigative and corrective actions if
necessary. This AD was prompted by a report of cracking in the center
section of the horizontal stabilizer. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracking of the rear spar center section of the horizontal
stabilizer that could lead to departure of the horizontal stabilizer
from the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective March 29, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 29,
2016.
    We must receive comments on this AD by April 28, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
4222.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
4222; 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 street address for the Docket Office (phone:
800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available
in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Payman Soltani, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:
562-627-5313; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We have received a report of cracking in the center section of the
horizontal stabilizer. A review of empennage loading of the Model 737-
300, -400, and -500 series airplanes identified several loading
discrepancies that included landing rollout (LRO) buffet condition
within the ground-air-ground (GAG) operational loads. These loading
discrepancies impact the operating stress level on the rear spar upper
chord of the horizontal stabilizer center section, which can lead to
cracking. We have determined that the inspection threshold for
detecting the cracking needs to be lower than the existing required
compliance threshold of 66,000 total flight cycles. This horizontal
stabilizer center section cracking, if not corrected, could result in
departure of the horizontal stabilizer from the airplane.

Related Rulemaking

    On April 8, 2008, we issued AD 2008-09-13, Amendment 39-15494 (73
FR 24164, May 2, 2008), for all Boeing Model 737-300, -400, and -500
series

airplanes. AD 2008-09-13 requires revising the FAA-approved maintenance
or inspection program to include inspections that will give no less
than the required damage tolerance rating for each structural
significant item (SSI), doing repetitive inspections to detect cracks
of all SSIs, and repairing cracked structure.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated
January 26, 2016. This service information describes procedures for
inspections for cracking in the horizontal and vertical flanges of the
rear spar upper chord of the horizontal stabilizer, an inspection to
identify the fasteners common to the rear spar upper chord upper gusset
of the horizontal stabilizer center section, and related investigative
and corrective actions if necessary. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between this AD and the Service Information.'' For
information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service
information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2016-4222.
    The phrase ``related investigative actions'' is used in this AD.
Related investigative actions are follow-on actions that (1) are
related to the primary action, and (2) further investigate the nature
of any condition found. Related investigative actions in an AD could
include, for example, inspections.
    The phrase ``corrective actions'' is used in this AD. Corrective
actions are actions that correct or address any condition found.
Corrective actions in an AD could include, for example, repairs.

Differences Between the AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016,
specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair
certain conditions, but this AD would require repairing those
conditions in one of the following ways:
     In accordance with a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have
authorized to make those findings.
    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016,
specifies compliance using ``horizontal stabilizer center section
flight cycles'' or ``center section flight cycles;'' this AD requires
compliance for those conditions or compliance times in terms of
airplane flight cycles.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because
cracking of the rear spar center section of the horizontal stabilizer
could lead to departure of the horizontal stabilizer from the airplane.
Therefore, we find that notice and opportunity for prior public comment
are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment
effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2016-4222 and
Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-017-AD at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 400 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost           Parts cost     Cost per product       operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections....................  Up to 15 work-hours x                $0   Up to $1,275 per    Up to $510,000
                                  $85 per hour = $1,275                     inspection cycle.   per inspection
                                  per inspection cycle.                                         cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs that
would be required based on the results of the inspection. We have no
way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
repairs:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                  Action                                Labor cost                 Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair....................................  8 work-hours x $85 per hour = $680           (\1\)             $680
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide parts cost estimates for the 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

    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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2016-06-02 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18433; Docket No. FAA-
2016-4222; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-017-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective March 29, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

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

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55, Stabilizers.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracking in the center
section of the horizontal stabilizer. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct cracking of the rear spar center section of the
horizontal stabilizer that could lead to departure of the horizontal
stabilizer from the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Actions for the Rear Spar Upper Chord Horizontal Flange of the
Horizontal Stabilizer Center Section

    At the applicable times specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated
January 26, 2016, except as required by paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2),
and (j)(3) of this AD: Do the actions required by paragraph (g)(1)
or (g)(2) of this AD; and do all applicable related investigative
and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated
January 26, 2016, except as required by paragraph (j)(4) of this AD.
Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions at
the applicable times specified in tables 5, 6, 7, and 8 of paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100,
dated January 26, 2016. For airplanes on which ``Option 1'' of
``CONDITION 15: SURFACE HFEC INSPECTION OF THE CHORD AROUND THE
GUSSETS--NO CRACK FOUND'' is done as specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated
January 26, 2016, repeat the inspection specified in paragraph
(g)(2) of this AD thereafter at the applicable times specified in
table 8 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016.
    (1) Do an inspection to identify the fasteners common to the
rear spar upper chord upper gusset of the horizontal stabilizer
center section.
    (2) Do a surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection
of the rear spar upper chord around the two inboard gusset plates
common to the thrust and auxiliary beams for any crack.

(h) Repetitive Inspections of the Vertical Flange of the Rear Spar
Upper Chord on the Horizontal Stabilizer Center Section

    At the applicable times specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated
January 26, 2016, except as required by paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2)
of this AD: Do a surface HFEC inspection of the vertical flange of
the rear spar upper chord; and do all applicable corrective actions;
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016, except as
required by paragraph (j)(4) of this AD. Do all applicable
corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the inspection of
the vertical flange of the rear spar upper chord thereafter at the
time specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016.

(i) Repetitive Inspections of the Vertical Flange Stiffener Fasteners
of the Rear Spar Upper Chord on the Horizontal Stabilizer Center
Section

    At the applicable times specified in table 3 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated
January 26, 2016, except as required by paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2)
of this AD: Do the actions required by paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of
this AD; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective
actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016,
except as required by paragraph (j)(4) of this AD. Do all applicable
related investigative and corrective actions at the applicable times
specified in tables 3 and 4 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016.
Repeat the inspection specified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD
thereafter at the applicable times specified in tables 3 and 4 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016.
    (1) Do an open hole HFEC inspection of the vertical flange at
the stiffeners of the rear spar upper chord on the horizontal
stabilizer center section for any crack.
    (2) Do a surface HFEC inspection of the vertical flange around
the stiffeners of the rear spar upper chord on the horizontal
stabilizer center section for any crack.

(j) Exceptions to Service Information

    (1) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016, specifies a
compliance time ``after the original issue date of this service
bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26, 2016, refers to
condition or compliance time in ``horizontal stabilizer center
section flight cycles'' or ``center section flight cycles,'' this AD
requires

compliance for those conditions or compliance time in terms of
airplane flight cycles.
    (3) The Condition column of table 1 in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated
January 26, 2016, refers to ``horizontal stabilizer center section
flight cycles.'' This AD, however, applies to the airplanes with the
specified airplane total flight cycles as of the effective date of
this AD.
    (4) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated
January 26, 2016; specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate
action: Before further flight, repair using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this
AD.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(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 paragraph (l) 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, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make those findings. To be approved,
the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation
must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) Except as required by paragraph (j)(4) of this AD: For
service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required
for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (k)(4)(i) and
(k)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps,
including substeps and identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Payman Soltani,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles ACO,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-
5313; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-55A1100, dated January 26,
2016.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this 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 Renton, Washington, on March 3, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-05515 Filed 3-11-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P