Two of four females in the 3200 mg/ kg group and 2 of 4 males in the 5000 mg/ kg group died prior to the scheduled sacrifice at 38 hours. Severe cytotoxicity was seen in the hepatocytes recovered from 1 of 2 surviving males and both female survivors in the highdose groups. Lower levels were neither toxic to the animals nor cytotoxic to the target cells. A clear dose related increase in the percentage of cells in S phase (RDS) was obtained from hepatocytes harvested 38 hours posttreatment of the male rats. The response ranged from a 5.3 fold increase at 1500 mg/ kg to a 16.1 fold increase at the high dose (5000 mg/ kg). In females, a marked increase in RDS was initially seen at 1500 mg/ kg but the response declined over time with a 24.4 fold increase at 15 hours and a 12.2 fold increase at 38 hours. There was, however, no evidence that the CGA 77102 Technical at doses of 500 or 1500 mg/ kg induced a genotoxic response at 2 or 15 hours posttreatment. We conclude, therefore, that the data indicate that CGA 77102 Technical was negative for genotoxicity but positive for cellular proliferation when tested up to overtly toxic and cytotoxic doses in this in vivo/ in vitro rat hepatocyte RDS/ UDS assay. Guideline No./ Study Type MRID No. (year)/ Classification /Doses Results 49 870.7485 Metabolism and pharmacokinetics 44491401 (1996) acceptable/ guideline single dose of 0.5 (group B1) or 100 mg/ kg (group D1) radio labeled CGA77102 100 mg/ kg/ day nonradio labeled CGA 77102 for 14 days followed by 0.5 mg/ kg radio labeled CGA77102 (Group V1); single dose of 0.5 or 100 mg/ kg radio labeled CGA 77102 for bile cannulation study In all three dose groups (B1, D1, and V1), the seven day combined levels of radioactivity in urine were 31.1  36.5% for males and 40.8  45.5% for females; the fecal levels were 60.2  62.5% for males and 48.9  55.0% for females. Only 0.1% or less was eliminated in the expired air. The total recovery ranged from 96.5 ± 2.3% to 99.3 ± 0.9%. The route or extent of excretion was slightly influenced by the sex of the animal but not by pretreatment with non radio labeled CGA 77102 or by the dose level. The degree of absorption, based on adding the cumulative urinary excretion to the total residues in tissues, was 35  39% in males and 43  49% in females of both dose groups. However, based on the bile duct cannulation study, most of CGA 77102 was absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract since 85% of the dose was recovered in urine, bile fluid, and tissues during the 48 hours study period. Therefore, the biliary excretion and enterohepatic circulation play a significant role in the elimination process of CGA 77102.

Irrespective of the dose and sex, there seems to be a biphasic plasma profile with two concentration maxima (Cmax ); a fast rising first Cmax was reached at 0.25  1 hour post dosing which was succeeded by a second Cmax at 8 and at 12  24 hours following administration of the low and high dose, respectively. In the low dose group (B1), the first and second Cmax were nearly identical (~ 0.03 F g/ ml); in the high dose group (D1), the first and second Cmax were, respectively, 4.6 and >3.9 F g/ ml in males and 2.2 and 4.5 F g/ ml in females. The time to half maximum plasma concentration (tcmax/ 2 ) in males/ females was 31/ 24 hours at the low dose and 44/ 32 hours at the high dose. Bioavailability, or the area under the plasma concentration curve (AUC0 48hr ), was nearly identical (~ 0.8 mg/ kg. hr) among males and females of the low dose group. Also, both sexes in the high dose group had similar plasma AUC0 48hr (M/ F: 143/ 125 mg/ kg. hr) which increased almost proportionately with the 200 fold increase in the dose level. The residues in RBC increased steadily with time reaching peak levels (at 24  48 hours post dosing) of 0.5 0.6 and 90 ppm (or F g/ g) CGA 77102 equivalents for the low (B1) and high (D1) dose groups, respectively. The peak levels in RBC remained high and were nearly 20 fold higher than the respective plasma Cmax levels. Guideline No./ Study Type MRID No. (year)/ Classification /Doses Results 50 The kinetics of tissue distribution and depletion in both sexes were also followed for up to 144 hours following a single low or high oral dose (Groups F1  F4). Peak residue levels were reached within 12  24 hours and ranged from 0.007 ppm (female muscle) to 0.123 ppm (male kidneys) at the low dose, and from 1.29 ppm (male brain) to 16.82 ppm (male liver) at the high dose, with the highest levels being among some of the well perfused tissues (e. g., liver, kidneys, spleen, and lungs). The extent of residue depletion was variable among the tissue types but was minimally affected by the dose or the sex of the animal. The radiolabel was most persistent in some of the well perfused organs (e. g., the heart, lungs, and spleen) in addition to the brain and bone where, after 144 hours, the levels were decreased to only 45  94% of their maximal concentrations. In Groups F1  F4, peak residue concentration in the whole blood (0.2 and 42  47 F g/ ml in the low and high dose groups, respectively) was reached at 24 hours and was maintained throughout the study. Overall, the high/ low dose peak tissue levels (including blood) ranged from 132 to 282 which approximates the 200 fold increase in dosage.

CGA 77102 has a high affinity for and a long half life in blood (especially RBC) which might contribute to the retarded depletion of tissue residues. Guideline No./ Study Type MRID No. (year)/ Classification /Doses Results 51 870.7485 Metabolism and pharmacokinetics 44491402 (1996) unacceptable/ guideline single dose of 0.5 (group B1) or 100 mg/ kg (group D1) radio labeled CGA77102 100 mg/ kg/ day nonradio labeled CGA 77102 for 14 days followed by 0.5 mg/ kg radio labeled CGA77102 (Group V1); single dose of 0.5 or 100 mg/ kg radio labeled CGA 77102 for bile cannulation study (from MRID 44491401) single oral low dose (0.5 mg/ kg, Group B2) of [Phenyl U 14 C] CGA 24705 (R/ S Metolachlor, racemate) The 72 hour mean recovery of radioactivity in urine, feces, and carcass following administration of 0.5 mg/ kg of [Phenyl U 14 C] CGA 24705 was 43.1%, 47.0%, and 7.4% in males and 54.0%, 39.4%, and 4.1% in females, respectively. In contrast, both sexes excreted more of the label in the feces (M: F 59.7%: 53.4%) than in the urine (M: F 29.4%: 39.8%) during the same period following administration of the same dose of [Phenyl U 14 C] CGA 77102 (the S enantiomer) (MRID 44491401).

The urinary and fecal metabolite profiles, with 31 and 15 metabolite fractions, respectively, were qualitatively similar among all groups; however, there were large quantitative differences, based on the dosing formulation, on one hand, and the sex of the animal, on the other. Based on a percentage of the dose, several of the major urinary metabolite fractions (e. g., U1, U2, U3, U18, U24, and U30) were more abundant in the case of the racemicMetolachlor (CGA 24705) than the S Metolachlor (CGA 77102); in contrast, several fecal metabolite fractions (e. g., F9, F10, F12, and F13) were present at higher levels in the case of CGA 77102 than CGA 24705. On the other hand, there were sex related differences regardless of the dosing formulation where, for instance, females had greater urinary concentrations than males of several metabolite fractions, including U3, U4, U8, U9, U18, U20, and U30; the males, however, excreted more of fractions U1 and U24 than the females. Also, several fecal fractions including F1, F3, F5, F6, F7, F8, and F13 were influenced by the sex regardless of the dose level (e. g. B1 vs. D1) or the stereochemical make up of Metolachlor (B1 vs. B2). Other metabolite fractions were dependent on both the sex and the chemical formulation as, for instance, in the case of metabolite U2 which, relative to the opposite sex within the same group, was more abundant in the urine of the females of Group B2 (CGA 24705) and in the urine of the males of Group B1 (CGA 77102).

The bile fluid accounted for 79.8% of the administered low or high dose of CGA 77102 (Groups G1 and G2) where the 2D TLC showed 14 biliary metabolite fractions (G1 G14) in the high dose Group and only six metabolites in the low dose Group. The two metabolite fractions G7 and G8 accounted, respectively, for 33.3% and 9.6% of the administered low dose and 31.3% and 14.6% of the administered high dose. Other major biliary metabolites were G3, G9, and G10 which accounted for about 5%, 5 7%, and 3 5%, respectively, of either dose group. Guideline No./ Study Type MRID No. (year)/ Classification /Doses Results 52 The results clearly show that the metabolite profile in excreta and bile fluid is very complex and that Metolachlor (racemate or Senantiomer is extensively metabolized. This was also shown earlier by another rat metabolism study on the absorption, distribution, excretion, and metabolite identification of racemic CGA 24705 (MRID 43164201, reviewed by T. McMahon, HED doc. no. 010990 dated May 23, 1994). No actual metabolites or pathways were identified in the current study and there were no data to support or refute the previous findings of four major degradation pathways with more than 30 metabolites. However, knowing the enantiomeric stereospecific reactions/ metabolites is not likely to help in making comparative risk assessments between R/ S Metolachlor (CGA 24705) and S Metolachlor (CGA 77102) since the contribution of each metabolite to the overall toxicity of Metolachlor is not well understood. Furthermore, other bridging animal studies with CGA 77102 should highlight possible toxicity differences from the well studied CGA 24705 due to variations in the metabolite profiles.

The Registrant is requested to comment on or provide information on a number of issues including: 1) The stereoisomeric purity of CGA 24705 and CGA 77102. 2) The adequacy of the storage conditions and the validity of the metabolite profile results in light of the storage related results variability. 3) Explain why, relative to the other dosing formulation, some metabolite fractions (e. g., F10, F12, and F13) were up to 7 fold higher in the case of the S enantiomer CGA77102 while some urinary metabolite fractions (e. g., U1, U2, and U3) were up to 4 fold higher in the case of CGA 24705. 4) Provide rational for dose selection. 5) The Registrant might also have to comment on the possible formation and the level of methylethylaniline from either dosing formulation and the possible contribution of this metabolite to the carcinogenicity of Metolachlor. This issue was raised earlier by T. McMahon (HED document no. 010990 dated May 23, 1994) and might need to be followed up by HED's risk assessors who are in charge of SMetolachlor 53 Appendix A Table 3: Tolerance Reassessment Summary for Metolachlor (PC Code 108801)

Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition Tolerances listed under 40 CFR §180.368( a):

Almond, hulls 0.3 Data were not available for review (DNA) TBD Barley, fodder 0. 5 Not applicable (NA) Reassign to 180.368( d) To be determined (TBD) Additional data are required. The definition for fodder should be changed to Barley, straw Barley, grain 0. 1 Buckwheat, grain 0. 1 Cabbage 1.0 NA Revoke Registered uses (SLNs) on cabbage have been canceled.

Cattle, fat 0. 02 Extrapolating to a 1x feeding level, maximum combined residues would be <0.011 ppm in fat, <0.016 ppm in meat, 0.035 ppm in liver, and 0.11 ppm in kidney. 0.04 Tolerances for fat, meat, and meat byproducts (except kidney) should be set at the method LOQ of 0.04 ppm. The tolerance for liver should be revoked, and the tolerance for kidney should remain at 0.2 ppm. Cattle, kidney 0. 2 0. 20 Cattle, liver 0.05 Revoke Cattle, meat 0. 02 0. 04 Cattle, meat byproducts (exc. liver and kidney) 0.02 0.04 Celery 0.1 NA Revoke Registered uses (SLNs) on celery have been canceled.

Corn, fodder 8. 0 field (0.11 2.81) sweet (0.24 5.54) 6.0 Corn, Stover. The available metolachlor residue data indicate that the tolerance can be lowered to 6.0 ppm Corn, forage 8.0 field (< 0.12 3.02) sweet (0.27 5.75) 6.0 The available metolachlor residue data indicate that the tolerance can be lowered to 6.0 ppm Corn, fresh (inc. sweet) (K+ CWHR) 0.1 <0.08< 0.10 0. 10 Corn, sweet (K+ CWHR)

Corn, grain 0. 1 <0.08 0. 10 Cotton, undelinted seed 0.1 <0.08 0.10 Egg 0. 02 Residues were not detected in eggs of hens dosed at up to 5.7x the MTDB 0.04 The tolerance for eggs should be set at the combined LOQ for the enforcement method.

Goat, fat 0. 02 See cattle above 0.04 See cattle above. Goat, kidney 0. 2 0.20 Goat, liver 0.05 Revoke Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition 54 Goat, meat 0.02 0.04 Goat, meat byproducts (exc. liver and kidney) 0.02 0.04 Hog, fat 0. 02 NA Revoke Based on the results of the ruminant feeding study and a MTDB for swine of 0.315 ppm, there is no reasonable expectation of finding quantifiable residues in hog tissues [40 CFR 180.6( a)( 3)]. Hog, kidney 0. 2 Hog, liver 0.05 Hog, meat 0.02 Hog, meat byproducts (exc. liver and kidney) 0.02 Horse, fat 0. 02 See cattle above 0.04 See cattle above. Horse, kidney 0. 2 0.20 Horse, liver 0.05 Revoke Horse, meat 0.02 0.04 Horse, meat byproducts (exc. liver and kidney) 0.02 0.04 Legume vegetables group foliage (exc. soybean forage and hay) 15.0 forage (0.44 11.5) hay (0.31 2.2) 15 Residue data for forage (vines) reflect a  60 day PHI and residue data on hay reflect at 120 day PHI.

Milk 0.02 Extrapolating to a 1x feeding level, maximum combined residues in milk would be 0.004 ppm 0.02 Millet, fodder 0. 5 NA Reassign to 180.368( d) TBD Additional data are required. The definition for fodder should be changed to millet, straw. Millet, forage 0. 5 Millet, grain 0. 1 Milo, fodder 0. 5 NA Revoke Residues on milo commodities are covered by tolerances on sorghum. Milo, forage 0.5 Milo, grain 0. 1 Nongrass animal feed (forage, fodder, straw, hay) group 3.0 forage  <0.08 0.54 hay  <0.08< 0.47 1.0 Reassign to 180.368( d) The available alfalfa and clover data indicate that the tolerance can be reduced to 1.0 ppm. Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition 55 Oats, fodder 0.5 NA Reassign to 180.368( d) TBD Additional data are required. The definition for fodder should be changed to oats, straw. Oats, forage 0.5 Oats, grain 0. 1 Peanut 0.5 <0.08 0.19 0.20 Peanut, nutmeats. New residue data indicate that the tolerance can be lowered to 0.2 ppm.

Peanut, forage 30.0 NA Revoke Peanut forage is no longer listed a regulated commodity of peanuts Peanut, hay 30.0 1. 04 16.5 20.0 New residue data indicate that the tolerance can be lowered to 20.0 ppm.

Peppers, bell 0.1 <0.02 0.108 Revoke Registered uses (SLNs) on peppers have been canceled.

Potato 0.2 <0.08 0.14 0.20 Poultry, fat 0. 02 Residues were not detected in tissues of hens dosed at up to 5.7x the MTDB 0.04 Tolerances for poultry tissues should be set at the combined LOQ for the enforcement method, and the separate tolerance for liver should be revoked. Poultry, liver 0.05 Revoke Poultry, meat 0.02 0.04 Poultry, meat byproducts (exc. liver) 0.02 0.04 Rice, fodder 0. 5 NA Reassign to 180.368( d) TBD Additional data are required. The tolerance for rice forage should be revoked as it is not a regulated commodity, and the definition for fodder should be changed to rice, straw. Rice, forage 0.5 Revoke Rice, grain 0. 1 Reassign to 180.368( d) TBD Rye, fodder 0. 5 NA Reassign to 180.368( d) TBD Additional data are required. The tolerance for rye fodder should be changed to rye, straw. Rye, forage 0.5 Rye, grain 0. 1 Safflower, seed 0.1 <0.08 0.10 Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition 56 Seed and pod vegetables (exc. soybean) 0.3 <0.08 0.44 0.50 Edible podded legume vegetables subgroup. The available data support a tolerance of 0.5 ppm on this subgroup.

<0.08< 0.11 0. 10 Dried shelled pea and bean (except soybean) subgroup The available data support a tolerance of 0.1 ppm on this subgroup.

NA TBD Succulent shelled pea and bean subgroup Data are required for this subgroup.

Sheep, fat 0. 02 see cattle above 0.04 See cattle above Sheep, kidney 0. 2 0.20 Sheep, liver 0.05 revoke Sheep, meat 0.02 0.04 Sheep, meat byproduct (exc. liver and kidney) 0.02 0.04 Sorghum grain, fodder 2. 0 <0.11 3.19 4.0 Sorghum grain, stover The available data support increasing the tolerance on stover to 4.0 ppm and decreasing the tolerance on forage to 1.0 ppm Sorghum grain, forage 2.0 <0.08 0.45 1.0 Sorghum grain, grain 0. 3 0.08 0.19 0.30 Soybean 0.2 <0.08< 0.18 0. 20 Soybean, seed Soybean, forage 8.0 0. 15 4.37 5.0 The available data indicate that the tolerance on forage can be lowered to 5.0 ppm Soybean, hay 8. 0 0.38 6.90 8.0 Fruit, stone, group 0.1 <0.08 0.08 Revoke The registrant no longer wishes to support the use on stone fruits. Nuts, tree, group 0.1 <0.08 0.08 0.10 Wheat, fodder 0. 5 NA Reassign to 180.368( d) TBD Additional data are required. The definition for fodder should be changed to wheat, straw. Wheat, forage 0.5 Wheat, grain 0. 1 Time limited Tolerances Listed under 40 CFR §180.368( b): Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition 57 Grass, forage 10.0 b 0.04 8.4 10 Permanent tolerances are pending. Grass, hay 0. 2 b <0.08 0.11 0.20 Spinach 0.3 b <0.08 0.38 0.50 New data support an increased permanent tolerance for metolachlor residues of 0.5 ppm in/ on spinach (PP# 8E5011).

Tomato 0.1 c <0.08 0.08 0.10 New data support a permanent tolerance for metolachlor residues of 0.1 ppm in/ on tomatoes (PP# 6F4751).

Tomato, puree 0.3 c <0.10 Revoke New data indicate that the tolerances for metolachlor residues in/ on tomato paste and puree are not necessary. Tomato, paste 0. 6 c <0.10 Revoke Tolerances with Regional Registrations Listed under 40 CFR §180.368( c):

Onion, dry bulb 1. 0 <0.08< 0.43 ppm Revoke Registered uses (SLNs) of metolachlor on onions and various peppers have been canceled. Pepper, chili 0.5 <0.02 0.03 Revoke Pepper, tabasco 0. 5 0.09 0.45 Revoke Pepper, cubanelle 0.1 0. 03 0.04 Revoke Tolerances Needed under 40 CFR §180.368( a)( 1):

Cotton, gin byproducts None 0.08 3.2 4. 0 New residue data indicates that a tolerance of 4.0 ppm may be established.

Peanut, meal None <3.85 0. 40 The available processing data indicates that residues concentrate in presscake (1.75x).

a Expressed in terms of metolachlor b Time limited tolerances on grass forage and hay and spinach were set to expire on 12/ 31/ 01. c Time limited tolerances on tomato commodities are set to expire on 6/ 30/ 02. d Based on current residue data for peanuts, additional data are required to support the current lower use rate. 58 Appendix A Table 4: Tolerance Reassessment Summary for s Metolachlor (PC Code 108800)

Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition Tolerances needed under 40 CFR §180.368( a)( 2):

Cabbage 1.0 NA TBD Additional data are required to support the use of S metolachlor on cabbage and the registrant should pursue a section 3 registration.

Cattle, fat 0. 02 Extrapolating to a 1x feeding level, maximum combined residues would be <0.011 ppm in fat, <0.016 ppm in meat, 0.035 ppm in liver, and 0.11 ppm in kidney. 0.04 Tolerances for fat, meat, and meat byproducts (except kidney) should be set at the method LOQ of 0.04 ppm, but the tolerance for kidney should remain at 0.2 ppm. Cattle, kidney 0. 2 0. 20 Cattle, meat 0. 02 0. 04 Cattle, meat byproducts (exc. kidney) 0.02 0.04 Celery 0.1 <0.08 0.10 The available metolachlor data support a tolerance of 0.10 ppm for s metolachlor.

Corn, fodder 8. 0 field (0.11 2.81) sweet (0.24 5.54) 6.0 Corn, Stover. The available metolachlor residue data indicate that the tolerance can be lowered to 6.0 ppm Corn, forage 8.0 field (< 0.12 3.02) sweet (0.27 5.75) 6.0 The available metolachlor residue data indicate that the tolerance can be lowered to 6.0 ppm Corn, fresh (inc. sweet) (K+ CWHR) 0.1 <0.08< 0.10 0. 10 Corn, sweet (K+ CWHR) Supported by the available metolachlor data.

Corn, grain 0. 1 <0.08 0. 10 Corn, Field, grain. Supported by the available metolachlor data.

Cotton, undelinted seed 0.1 <0.08 0.10 Supported by the available metolachlor data.

Cotton, gin byproducts NA 0.08 3.2 4. 0 New metolachlor residue data indicates that a tolerance of 4.0 ppm may be established.

Egg 0. 02 Residues were not detected in eggs of hens dosed at up to 5.7x the MTDB 0.04 The tolerance for eggs should be set at the combined LOQ for the enforcement method.

Goat, fat 0. 02 See cattle above 0.04 See cattle above Goat, kidney 0. 2 0.20 Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition 59 Goat, meat 0.02 0.04 Goat, meat byproducts (exc. kidney) 0.02 0.04 Horse, fat 0. 02 See cattle above 0.04 See cattle above. Horse, kidney 0. 2 0.20 Horse, meat 0.02 0.04 Horse, meat byproducts (exc. kidney) 0.02 0.04 Legume vegetables group foliage (exc. soybean forage and hay) 15.0 forage (0.44 11.5) hay (0.31 2.2) 15 Residue data for forage (vines) reflect a  60 day PHI and residue data on hay reflect at 120 day PHI.

Milk 0.02 Extrapolating to a 1x feeding level, maximum combined residues in milk would be 0.004 ppm 0.02 Peanut 0.5 <0.09 0.20 Peanut, nutmeats. New metolachlor residue data indicate that the tolerance can be lowered to 0.2 ppm.

Peanut, hay 30.0 4.19 20.0 New metolachlor residue data indicate that the tolerance can be lowered to 20.0 ppm.

Peppers, bell 0.1 <0.02 0.108 TBD Additional data are required for a general tolerance on peppers.

Potato 0.2 <0.08 0.14 0.20 Supported by the available metolachlor data.

Poultry, fat 0. 02 Residues were not detected in tissues of hens dosed at up to 5.7x the MTDB 0.04 Tolerances for poultry tissues should be set at the combined LOQ for the enforcement method, and the separate tolerance for liver should be revoked. Poultry, meat 0.02 0.04 Poultry, meat byproducts (exc. liver) 0.02 0.04 Safflower, seed 0.1 <0.08 0.10 Supported by the available metolachlor data. Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition 60 Seed and pod vegetables (exc. soybean) 0.3 <0.08 0.44 0.50 Edible podded legume vegetables subgroup. The available data support a tolerance of 0.5 ppm on this subgroup.

<0.08< 0.11 0. 10 Dried shelled pea and bean (except soybean) subgroup The available data support a tolerance of 0.1 ppm on this subgroup.

NA TBD Succulent shelled pea and bean subgroup Data are required for this subgroup.

Sheep, fat 0. 02 see cattle above 0.04 See cattle above Sheep, kidney 0. 2 0.20 Sheep, meat 0.02 0.04 Sheep, meat byproducts (exc. kidney) 0.02 0.04 Sorghum grain, fodder 2. 0 <0.11 3.19 4.0 Sorghun, stover. The available data support increasing the tolerance on stover to 4.0 ppm and decreasing the tolerance on forage to 1.0 ppm Sorghum grain, forage 2.0 <0.08 0.45 1.0 Sorghum grain, grain 0. 3 0.08 0.19 0.30 Soybean 0.2 <0.08< 0.18 0. 20 Soybean, seed. Supported by the available metolachlor and s metolachlor data.

Soybean, forage 8.0 0. 15 4.37 5.0 The available metolachlor data indicate that the tolerance on forage can be lowered to 5.0 ppm. Soybean, hay 8. 0 0.38 6.90 8.0 Soybean, hulls None <0.14 None New s metolachlor data indicate that s metolachlor residues in/ on soybean hulls will not exceed the established tolerance on soybean seeds.

Time limited Tolerances needed under 40 CFR §180.368( b)( 2): Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition 61 Grass, forage 10.0 b 0.04 8.4 10 Permanent tolerances are pending. Grass, hay 0. 2 b <0.08 0.11 0.20 Spinach 0.3 b <0.08 0.38 0.50 New metolachlor data support an increased permanent tolerance for s metolachlor residues of 0.5 ppm in/ on spinach.

Tomato 0.1 c <0.08 0.08 0.10 New metolachlor data support a permanent tolerance for smetolachlor residues of 0.1 ppm in/ on tomatoes.

Tomato, puree 0.3 c <0.10 revoke New metolachlor residue data indicate that the tolerances for s metolachlor residues in/ on tomato paste and puree are not necessary. Tomato, paste 0. 6 c <0.10 revoke Tolerances with Regional Registrations needed under 40 CFR §180.368( c)( 2):

Onion, dry bulb 1. 0 <0.08< 0.43 ppm 0.50 The available metolachlor residue data support lowering the tolerance to 0. 5 ppm; however, additional data are required to support the use of s metolachlor and the registrant should pursue a section 3 registration.

Pepper, chili 0.5 <0.02 0.03 0.10 With the exception of chili peppers, the available residue data support the current tolerances. Tolerances for chili peppers could be lowered to 0.1 ppm. If a general tolerance on peppers is established at 0.5 ppm, than these separate tolerances should be revoked. Pepper, tabasco 0. 5 0.09 0.45 0.50 Pepper, cubanelle 0.1 0. 03 0.04 0.10 Tolerances Needed under 40 CFR §180.368( d)( 2):

Barley, grain 0. 5 NA TBD Additional data are required. Barley, hay None Barley, straw 0. 1 Buckwheat, grain 0. 1 NA TBD Additional data are required Millet, forage 0. 5 NA TBD Additional data are required. Millet, grain 0. 1 Millet, hay None Commodity Current Tolerance (ppm) a Range of residues (ppm) Tolerance Reassessment (ppm) Comment/ Correct Commodity Definition 62 Millet, straw 0. 5 Nongrass animal feed (forage, fodder, straw, hay) group 3.0 forage  <0.08 0.54 hay  <0.08< 0.47 1.0 The available alfalfa and clover data indicate that the tolerance can be reduced to 1.0 ppm.

Oats, forage 0.5 NA TBD Additional data are required. Oats, grain 0. 1 Oats, hay None Oats, straw 0.5 Peanut, meal None <3.85 0. 40 The available metolachlor processing data indicates that residues concentrate in presscake (1.75x).

Rice, grain 0. 1 NA TBD Additional data are required. Rice, straw 0. 5 Rye, forage 0.5 NA TBD Additional data are required. Rye, grain 0.1 Rye, straw 0. 5 Wheat, forage 0.5 NA TBD Additional data are required. Wheat, grain 0. 1 Wheat, hay None Wheat, straw 0. 5 a Expressed in terms of s metolachlor b Time limited tolerances on grass forage and hay and spinach were set to expire on 12/ 31/ 01. c Time limited tolerances on tomato commodities are set to expire on 6/ 30/ 02.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 198 (Wednesday, October 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 61809]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26079]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 7518-000]

Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P.; Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe; Notice
of Authorization for Continued Project Operation

    On September 30, 2013, Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P., and Saint
Regis Mohawk Tribe, co-licensees for the Hogansburg Hydroelectric
Project, filed an Application for a New License pursuant to the Federal
Power Act (FPA) and the Commission's regulations thereunder. The
Hogansburg Hydroelectric Project is located on the St. Regis River in
Franklin County, New York.
    The license for Project No.7518 was issued for a period ending
September 30, 2015. Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 808(a)(1),
requires the Commission, at the expiration of a license term, to issue
from year-to-year an annual license to the then licensee under the
terms and conditions of the prior license until a new license is
issued, or the project is otherwise disposed of as provided in section
15 or any other applicable section of the FPA. If the project's prior
license waived the applicability of section 15 of the FPA, then, based
on section 9(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c),
and as set forth at 18 CFR 16.21(a), if the licensee of such project
has filed an application for a subsequent license, the licensee may
continue to operate the project in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the license after the minor or minor part license
expires, until the Commission acts on its application. If the licensee
of such a project has not filed an application for a subsequent
license, then it may be required, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.21(b), to
continue project operations until the Commission issues someone else a
license for the project or otherwise orders disposition of the project.
    If the project is subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that an annual license for Project No. 7518 is issued to
the licensee for a period effective October 1, 2015 through September
30, 2016 or until the issuance of a new license for the project or
other disposition under the FPA, whichever comes first. If issuance of
a new license (or other disposition) does not take place on or before
September 30, 2016, notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 18 CFR
16.18(c), an annual license under section 15(a)(1) of the FPA is
renewed automatically without further order or notice by the
Commission, unless the Commission orders otherwise.
    If the project is not subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that the co-licensees, Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P.,
and Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe are authorized to continue operation of
the Hogansburg Hydroelectric Project, until such time as the Commission
acts on its application for a subsequent license.

    Dated: October 6, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-26079 Filed 10-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 125 (Friday, June 28, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 39027]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15580]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, July 2,
2013 at 11:00 a.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(5),
(7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at
the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Paredes, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Tuesday,
July 2, 2013 will be:
    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
    adjudicatory matters; and
    other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact the Office of the
Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 25, 2013.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15580 Filed 6-26-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Page 1 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES MEMORANDUM Date: May 15, 2002 SUBJECT: BEAD Review of Korpalski Handler Exposure Assessment for Lindane Use as a Seed Treatment in the U. S.

FROM: David W. Brassard, Senior Entomologist Herbicide and Insecticide Branch Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503C)

THRU: Arnet Jones, Chief Herbicide and Insecticide Branch Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503C)

TO: Mark Howard, Chemical Review Manager Reregistration Branch III Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508C)

Peer Review Date: May 8, 2002 SUMMARY In response to a request from SRRD, BEAD reviewed the "Handler Exposure Assessment for Lindane Use as a Seed Treatment in the United States" submitted by Uniroyal Chemical Company. BEAD believes that the application rates and seed planting rates used in Uniroyal's assessment are reasonable but disagrees with Uniroyal's estimate of 80 acres planted per day for corn, wheat, and canola. Based on the Science Advisory Council for Exposure Policy Number: 9.1, BEAD believes that 200 acres planted per day is a more reasonable upper bound estimate. BEAD also disagreed with Uniroyal's seed treatment equipment throughput assumptions for wheat of 165,000 pounds of wheat seed per day. Based on personal communications with seed treaters in the field and review of seed treatment equipment technical specifications, BEAD believes that commercial seed treaters commonly use equipment which treats 480,000 pounds of wheat seed per day.

BACKGROUND 1 BEAD estimate based on the percentage of growers using 4 to 20 row planters on farm sizes less than 500 acres as discussed in Brassard and Ng (1993).

Page 2 In response to a request from SRRD, BEAD reviewed the "Handler Exposure Assessment for Lindane Use as a Seed Treatment in the United States" submitted by Uniroyal Chemical Company and Authored by Stefan J. Korpalski. In their request, SRRD asked BEAD to review throughput assumptions and lindane handling scenarios made by the registrant in their risk assessment of occupational exposures to lindane.

BEAD's REVIEW OF LINDANE HANDLING SCENARIOS AND THROUGHPUT ASSUMPTIONS The application rates and seed planting rate used in the Korpalski study appear to be reasonable (Table 1). In BEAD's opinion, Korpalski's estimate of acres planted per day are too low. Korpalski assumed an 80 acre per day planting rate for corn, wheat, and canola. Their basis was that this is the standard EPA assumption (Policy 009, 4/ 1/ 99). EPA's current policy (Science Advisory Council for Exposure Policy Number: 9.1, revised 4/ 25/ 01) for granular applications to corn and wheat are 200 acres per day. The EPA policy estimates are based (in part) on an analysis by Brassard and Ng (1993) which assumed the use of 20 row (or 50 foot wide) planters and an eight hour work day. These estimates should be considered as reasonable upper bound (95 th percentile) 1 . BEAD is aware of situations in which growers working long hours on 24 row (60 foot wide) planters have planted 300 to 400 acres in a day. (Muggeridge, 1997).

In BEAD's opinion, Korpalski's seed treatment equipment throughput assumptions are reasonable for canola but on the low side for wheat. For canola, Korpalski estimated that 92,000 pounds of seed could be treated per day with a Gustafson® continuous batch coater, model CBT50. The manufacturers specifications for this piece of equipment state that it is capable of treating up to 13,000 lbs of seed per hour or 104,000 pounds of seed per day (Gustafson, 2002). I spoke to Roger Weinlaeder (of Weinlaeder Seeds in Drayton, ND) and he uses a Cerguard® seed treater which treats an average of 5,000 pounds of canola seeds hour and can treat up to 7,000 or 8,000 pounds of seed per hour under ideal conditions (equivalent to 40,000 to 64,000 pounds of canola seed per day (Weinlaeder, 2002).

For wheat, the Korpalski assessment assumed that wheat seed is treated with equipment such as the Gustafson S 100, which can treat about 165,000 lbs of wheat seed per day. Roger Weinlaeder treats wheat seed with a Boss® seed treater that can treat 60,000 pounds of seed per hour or 480,000 pounds of seed per day (Weinlaeder, 2002). There are several other large seed treaters commercially available that can treat this volume (i. e. 480,000 lbs of seed per day) of wheat including the Petkus® CTD and the Niklas® W. N. 36 S (Niklas, 2002, Petkus, 2002)..

Table 1. Comparison of Korpalski and BEAD Estimates Page 3 Crop Application Rate (lbs ai/ cwt) Seed Planting Rate (lbs/ acre) Acres Planted/ Treated per day Seed Treatment Equipment Throughput Assumptions (Pounds of seed treated per day)

Korpalski BEAD Korpalski BEAD corn 0.056 14 80 200

wheat 0.031 120 80 200 165,000 480,000 canola 0. 75 5. 36 80 200 92,000 40,000 104,000 References Brassard, D. W. and Y. Ng. 1993. Transmittal of Corn Cluster Exposure Parameters. Internal Memorandum Larry Dorsey (HED). 12 pp.

Gustafson, 2002. Technical Specifications for the Gustafson Continuous Batch Coater, Model CBT50, http:// www. gustafson. com/ gustafson_ equipment/ id69.htm Korpalski, S. J. 2002. Handler Exposure Assessment for Lindane Use as a Seed Treatment in the United States. Exposure study submitted to EPA by Uniroyal Chemical Company, Bethany, CT 06524, 13 pp.

Muggeridge, J. M. 1997. Up to 400 acres a day. Farm & Country Magazine, February 1997 issue, Agricultural Publishing Company Ltd., Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Niklas, 2002. Technical Specifications for the Niklas liquid seed treaters type W. N. 36 S. http:// www. niklas beizgeraete. de/ English/ Conti_ Units/ Tech Data/ tech data. html Petkus, 2002. Technical Specifications for the Petkus CTD. Seed Treater. http:// www. petkus. net/ treater. htm# THE CTD SERIES Weinlaeder, Roger. 2002. Personal Communication with David W. Brassard on 4/ 26/ 02. ND Weinlaeder Seeds, Drayton, ND. 701 454 6427


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 140 (Monday, July 26, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39963-39965]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15806]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2020-0056]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Fox River, Oshkosh, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending the operating schedule that
governs the Canadian National Railroad Bridge, mile 55.72, across the
Fox River to operate remotely. The request was made by the bridge
owner. This rule re-establishes remote operations of the bridge and
will not change the operating schedule of the bridge.

DATES: This rule is effective August 25, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Type USCG-
2020-0056 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, Ninth
Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec.  Section
TD Temporary deviation with request for comments
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    In 2010 we published a NPRM to solicit comments concerning allowing
the Canadian National Railroad Bridge, mile 55.72 to operate remotely
(75 FR 76322, December 8, 2010; USCG-2010-1029). The public requested
the bridge owner to install and maintain additional warning lights. The
NPRM was withdrawn because the railroad refused to install and maintain
the additional warning lights the public requested (76 FR 13312, March
11, 2011). Recently, the Railroad has agreed that from April 27 through
October 7 additional warning lights, specifically those alternating
flashing red lights that mimic a Grade Crossing Signal commonly found
at highway railroad crossing would be installed and maintained to warn
mariners that the bridge was about to close. The remote operator shall
also announce that the bridge is opening or closing on VHF-FM Marine
Radiotelephone. The owners of the bridge shall maintain 2 board gauges
in accordance with 33 CFR 118.160. The remote drawtender may be
contacted by mariners at any time by radiotelephone or commercial phone
number; this information shall be so posted on the bridge so that they
are plainly visible to vessel operators approaching the up or
downstream side of the bridge.
    The current winter operating schedule requiring vessels to provide
at least 12-hours advance notice for a bridge opening during the winter
will remain in effect. Additionally, the clearance gauges would still
be required to indicate to vessels the water levels and clearance while
the bridge is in the closed position. During the comment period, a
tender will be at the bridge to allow the public to observe the
proposed bridge operations. We

published an after the fact TD in the Federal Register (85 FR 54496) on
September 2, 2020, for a test schedule that ran from April 26, 2020,
through September 2, 2020. Posting in the Federal Register was delayed
due to COVID-19 but we supplemented the request with direct emails,
Local Notice to Mariners, and internet based meetings platforms. No
comments were received.
    We published a NPRM in the Federal Register (86 FR 18925) that was
published on April 12, 2021, and requested comments until June 11,
2021. We received one comment concerned with general safety at the
bridge. The commenter predicted remotely operating the bridge would
result in a higher risk of allision and collisions at the bridge along
with increased delays for boaters. Most of the commenter's concerns
were addressed in the TD and NPRM and no reports of mishap or allision
was received during the TD. The commenter stated long delays at the
bridge for vessels; however, the Coast Guard has not received any
reports of delay in approximately five years.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 33 U.S.C. 499.
This rule will allow the bridge to operate remotely and it will not
change the operating schedule of the bridge. The bridge will open on
signal, except when ice forms in the waterway and vessels can request
an opening if a 12-hour advance notice is provided.

IV. Discussion of Final Rule

    We carefully reviewed the comments and did not find good reason to
alter the language as published in the NPRM.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has
not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels can still transit the bridge given advanced notice in the
winter and by signal all other times.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V. A
above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
    We did not receive any comments from Indian Tribal Governments.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy COMDTINST 5090.1
(series) which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). The
Coast Guard has determined that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This rule promulgates the operating
regulations or procedures for drawbridges and is categorically excluded
from further review, under paragraph L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of
the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementation Procedures.
    Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are required for this rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Amend Sec.  117.1087 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.1087   Fox River.

* * * * *
    (c) The draw of the Canadian National Railroad Bridge at mile 55.72
shall open on signal, except from October 8 through April 26; the draw
shall open if at least 12-hours advance notice is given. The bridge is
authorized to be operated remotely. The owners of the bridge shall
provide and keep in good legible condition two board gauges painted
white with black figures to indicate the vertical clearance under the
closed draw at all water levels. The gauges shall be so placed on the
bridge that they are plainly visible to operators of vessels
approaching the bridge either up or downstream. The bridge shall
operate and maintain a VHF-FM Marine Radio. In addition to the required
bridge lights, the owner's shall install and maintain alternating red
lights in a horizontal line that mimic grade crossing lights and bell
to warn mariners that the bridge is lowering.
* * * * *

M.J. Johnston,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2021-15806 Filed 7-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12297-12299]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4846]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0061; FRL-9337-7]

Petition To Demonstrate Paperwork Reduction Act Compliance of the
Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is seeking public comment on a December 7, 2011 petition
from the Chemical Producers & Distributors Association (CPDA), the
Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance, Inc., and the People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). The petition requested that the
Agency abide by the Paperwork Reduction Act and Office of Management
and Budget Terms of Clearance for the approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) of the first list of 67 chemicals to receive orders under
the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program by demonstrating the
information being sought has practical utility and is not duplicative
before proceeding with Tier 1 screening orders for additional
chemicals.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 29, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0061, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental

Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr. Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket Facility
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2012-0061. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or email. The
regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means
EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr. Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane Smith, Pesticide Re-Evaluation
Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders, including environmental,
human health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides and other chemical substances; or if
you are or may otherwise be involved in the testing of chemical
substances for potential endocrine effects. Potentially affected
entities identified by the North American Industrial Classification
System (NAICS) codes, may include, but are not limited to:
     Chemical manufacturers, importers and processors (NAICS
code 325), e.g., persons who manufacture, import or process chemical
substances.
     Pesticide, fertilizer, and other agricultural chemical
manufacturing (NAICS code 3253), e.g., persons who manufacture, import
or process pesticide, fertilizer and agricultural chemicals.
     Scientific research and development services (NAICS code
5417), e.g., persons who conduct testing of chemical substances for
endocrine effects.
    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. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine section 408(p) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 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. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What action is the agency taking?

    In October 2009, the Agency initiated the Endocrine Disruptor
Screening Program (EDSP) Tier 1 screening for the first list of 67
chemicals by issuing orders between October 29, 2009, and February 26,
2010, pursuant to the authority provided to EPA under section 408(p)(5)
of FFDCA. The orders require the testing of chemicals through 11 Tier 1
screening assays. The purpose of the 11 Tier 1 screening assays is to
determine the potential for a chemical

to interact with estrogen, androgen and thyroid hormone systems. Based
on the data from the 11 Tier 1 assays, should the determination be made
that the chemical is shown to interact, additional Tier 2 testing may
be required.
    EPA is seeking public comment on a December 6, 2011 petition from
the Chemical Producers & Distributors Association (CPDA), the
Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance, Inc., and the People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). The petition requested that the
Agency abide by the Paperwork Reduction Act and Office of Management
and Budget Terms of Clearance for the approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) of the first list of 67 chemicals to receive orders under
the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program by demonstrating that the
information collected: (1) Has practical utility in that it can
distinguish whether a chemical has the potential to interact with the
endocrine system or not; (2) has practical utility before proceeding
with more Tier 1 screening orders for additional chemicals; and (3) is
not duplicative of other information collection activities by the
Agency but also is not duplicative of existing information.

B. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    This action is taken under the authority of FFDCA section 408(p),
21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3).

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, EDSP, Endocrine Disruptors Screening
Program, FFDCA orders, List 1 chemicals, Pesticides.

    Dated: February 15, 2012.
Michael Goodis,
Acting Director, Pesticides Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-4846 Filed 2-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 118 (Tuesday, June 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36586-36587]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14909]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 204; OMB Control No. 3235-0647; SEC File No. 270-586.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (``PRA''), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information provided for in Rule 204 (17 CFR 242.204) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.). The Commission
plans to submit this existing collection of information to the Office
of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Rule 204 requires that, subject to certain limited exceptions, if a
participant of a registered clearing agency has a fail to deliver
position at a registered clearing agency it must immediately close out
the fail to deliver position by purchasing or borrowing securities by
no later than the beginning of regular trading hours on the settlement
day following the day the participant incurred the fail to deliver
position. Rule 204 is intended to help further the Commission's goal of
reducing fails to deliver by maintaining the reductions in fails to
deliver achieved by the adoption of temporary Rule 204T, as well as
other actions taken by the Commission. In addition, Rule 204 is
intended to help further the Commission's goal of addressing
potentially abusive ``naked'' short selling in all equity securities.
    The information collected under Rule 204 will continue to be
retained and/or provided to other entities pursuant to the specific
rule provisions and will be available to the Commission and self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') examiners upon request. The
information collected will continue to aid the Commission and SROs in
monitoring compliance with these requirements. In addition, the
information collected will aid those subject to Rule 204 in complying
with its requirements. These collections of information are mandatory.
    Several provisions under Rule 204 will impose a ``collection of
information'' within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
    I. Allocation Notification Requirement: As of December 31, 2011,
there were 4,695 registered broker-dealers. Each of these broker-
dealers could clear trades through a participant of a registered
clearing agency and, therefore, become subject to the notification
requirements of Rule 204(d). If a broker-dealer has been allocated a
portion of a fail to deliver position in an equity security and after
the beginning of regular trading hours on the applicable close-out
date, the broker-dealer has to determine whether or not that portion of
the fail to deliver position was not closed out in accordance with Rule
204(a), we estimate that a broker-dealer will have to make such
determination with respect to approximately 2.09 equity securities per
day.\1\ We estimate a total of 2,472,762 notifications in accordance
with Rule 204(d) across all broker-dealers (that were allocated
responsibility to close out a fail to deliver position) per year (4,695
broker-dealers notifying participants once per day \2\ on 2.09
securities, multiplied by 252 trading days in a year). The total
estimated annual burden hours per year will be approximately 395,642
burden hours (2,472,762 multiplied by 0.16 hours/notification).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As stated in the adopting release for Interim Final
Temporary Rule 204T, the Commission's Office of Economic Analysis
(``OEA'') estimates that there are approximately 9,809 fail to
deliver positions per settlement day. Across 4,695 broker-dealers,
the number of securities per broker-dealer per day is approximately
2.09 equity securities. During the period from January to July 2008,
approximately 4,321 new fail to deliver positions occurred per day.
The National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'') data for
this period includes only securities with at least 10,000 shares in
fails to deliver. To account for securities with fails to deliver
below 10,000 shares, the figure is multiplied by a factor of 2.27.
The factor is estimated from a more complete data set obtained from
NSCC during the period from September 16, 2008 to September 22,
2008. It should be noted that these numbers include securities that
were not subject to the close-out requirement of Rule 203(b)(3) of
Regulation SHO. Exchange Act Release No. 58733 (Oct. 14, 2008), 73
FR 61706, 61718 n.107 (Oct. 17, 2008) (``Rule 204T Adopting
Release'').
    \2\ Because failure to comply with the close-out requirements of
Rule 204(a) is a violation of the rule, we believe that a broker-
dealer would make the notification to a participant that it is
subject to the borrowing requirements of Rule 204(b) at most once
per day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    II. Demonstration Requirement for Fails to Deliver on Long Sales:
As of January 31, 2012, there were 191 participants of NSCC, the
primary registered clearing agency responsible for clearing U.S.
transactions that were registered as broker-dealers.\3\ If a
participant of a registered clearing agency has a fail to deliver
position in an equity security at a registered clearing agency and
determines that such fail to deliver position resulted from a long
sale, we estimate that a participant of a registered clearing agency
will have to make such determination with respect to approximately 35
securities per day.\4\

We estimate a total of 1,684,620 demonstrations in accordance with Rule
204(a)(1) across all participants per year (191 participants checking
for compliance once per day on 35 securities, multiplied by 252 trading
days in a year). The total approximate estimated annual burden hour per
year will be approximately 269,540 burden hours (1,684,620 multiplied
by 0.16 hours/documentation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Those participants not registered as broker-dealers include
such entities as banks, U.S.-registered exchanges, and clearing
agencies. Although these entities are participants of a registered
clearing agency, generally these entities do not engage in the types
of activities that will implicate the close-out requirements of the
rule. Such activities of these entities include creating and
redeeming Exchange Traded Funds, trading in municipal securities,
and using NSCC's Envelope Settlement Service or Inter-city Envelope
Settlement Service. These activities rarely lead to fails to deliver
and, if fails to deliver do occur, they are small in number and are
usually closed out within a day.
    \4\ OEA estimates approximately 68% of trades are long sales and
applies this percentage to the number of fail to deliver positions
per day. OEA estimates that there are approximately 9,809 fail to
deliver positions per settlement day. Across 191 broker-dealer
participants of the NSCC, the number of securities per participant
per day is approximately 51 equity securities. 68% of 51 securities
per day is approximately 35 securities per day. The 68% figure is
estimated as 100% minus the proportion of short sale trades found in
the Regulation SHO Pilot Study. See http://www.sec.gov/news/studies/2007/regshopilot020607.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    III. Pre-Borrow Notification Requirement: As of January 31, 2012,
there were 191 participants of NSCC, the primary registered clearing
agency responsible for clearing U.S. transactions that were registered
as broker-dealers.\5\ If a participant of a registered clearing agency
has a fail to deliver position in an equity security and after the
beginning of regular trading hours on the applicable close-out date,
the participant has to determine whether or not the fail to deliver
position was closed out in accordance with Rule 204(a), we estimate
that a participant of a registered clearing agency will have to make
such determination with respect to approximately 51 equity securities
per day.\6\ We estimate a total of 2,454,732 notifications in
accordance with Rule 204(c) across all participants per year (191
participants notifying broker-dealers once per day on 51 securities,
multiplied by 252 trading days in a year). The total estimated annual
burden hours per year will be approximately 392,758 burden hours
(2,454,732 @ 0.16 hours/documentation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See supra note 3.
    \6\ OEA estimates that there are approximately 9,809 fail to
deliver positions per day. Across 191 broker-dealer participants of
the NSCC, the number of securities per participant per day is
approximately 51 equity securities. During the period from January
to July 2008, approximately 4,321 new fail to deliver positions
occurred per day. The NSCC data for this period includes only
securities with at least 10,000 shares in fails to deliver. To
account for securities with fails to deliver below 10,000 shares,
the figure is grossed-up by a factor of 2.27. The factor is
estimated from a more complete data set obtained from NSCC during
the period from September 16, 2008 to September 22, 2008. It should
be noted that these numbers include securities that were not subject
to the close-out requirement of Rule 203(b)(3) of Regulation SHO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IV. Certification Requirement: If the broker-dealer determines that
it has not incurred a fail to deliver position on settlement date in an
equity security for which the participant has a fail to deliver
position at a registered clearing agency or has purchased securities in
accordance with the conditions specified in Rule 204(e), we estimate
that a broker-dealer will have to make such determinations with respect
to approximately 2.09 securities per day. As of December 31, 2011,
there were 4,695 registered broker-dealers. Each of these broker-
dealers may clear trades through a participant of a registered clearing
agency. We estimate that on average, a broker-dealer will have to
certify to the participant that it has not incurred a fail to deliver
position on settlement date in an equity security for which the
participant has a fail to deliver position at a registered clearing
agency or, alternatively, that it is in compliance with the
requirements set forth in Rule 204(e), 2,472,762 times per year (4,695
broker-dealers certifying once per day on 2.09 securities, multiplied
by 252 trading days in a year). The total approximate estimated annual
burden hour per year will be approximately 395,642 burden hours
(2,472,762 multiplied by 0.16 hours/certification).
    V. Pre-Fail Credit Demonstration Requirement: If a broker-dealer
purchases or borrows securities in accordance with the conditions
specified in Rule 204(e) and determines that it has a net long position
or net flat position on the settlement day on which the broker-dealer
purchases or borrows securities we estimate that a broker-dealer will
have to make such determination with respect to approximately 2.09
securities per day.\7\ As of December 31, 2011, there were 4,695
registered broker-dealers. We estimate that on average, a broker-dealer
will have to demonstrate in its books and records that it has a net
long position or net flat position on the settlement day for which the
broker-dealer is claiming credit, 2,472,762 times per year (4,695
broker-dealers checking for compliance once per day on 2.09 securities,
multiplied by 252 trading days in a year). The total approximate
estimated annual burden hour per year will be approximately 395,642
burden hours (2,472,762 multiplied by 0.16 hours/demonstration).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See supra note 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total aggregate annual burden for the collection of information
undertaken pursuant to all five provisions is thus 1,849,224 hours per
year (395,642 + 269,540 + 392,758 + 395,642 + 395,642).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a
collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a
valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: Thomas Bayer, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 14, 2012.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-14909 Filed 6-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


From:
Zavoda, Rich<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Friday, April 22, 2016 11:41 AM
To:
Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
USEPA 114 Request - Coke Ovens (63 Subpart CCCCC Pushing, Quenching, Battery Stack - Information Collection Request (Coke ICR)

Dr. Jones,
ArcelorMittal Burns Harbor LLC and ArcelorMittal Monessen LLC were selected by EPA in the 4/4/16 Section 114 request to complete a comprehensive information request (Enclosure 1) and to conduct extensive stack testing (Enclosure 2). EPA also selected ArcelorMittal Warren to complete the Coke ICR Enclosure 1, as noted in your attached 4/4/16 email.  These combined actions impose a disadvantage to ArcelorMittal compared to its competitors.
EPA is not requiring any other byproduct coke plant entity to test at more than one coke plant or at more than one coke battery.  EPA did not request every byproduct coke plant to complete the comprehensive information request (Enclosure 1).  Several of our byproduct coke plant competitors were not required to complete either the information request (Enclosure 1) or to conduct stack testing (Enclosure 2).
Attached is your 4/1/16 email that provided the table of ICR companies required to complete the Coke ICR Enclosure 1 and/or 2.
Also attached is the list of all coke plants that David Ailor, American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute, emailed to you on 4/1/16.
ArcelorMittal respectfully requests that EPA not require ArcelorMittal Warren to complete the Coke ICR Enclosure 1.
Rich Zavoda | Regional Manager, Air Quality Program
ArcelorMittal USA
Environmental Affairs| 4020 Kinross Lakes Parkway, Richfield, Ohio 44286-9000
T +1<PHONE_NUMBER> | F +1<PHONE_NUMBER> | www.arcelormittal.com


[Federal Register: December 17, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 241)]
[Notices]
[Page 71392]
[DOCID:fr17de07-52]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER07-1332-000; ER07-1332-001; ER07-1332-002]

Smoky Hills Wind Farm, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

December 10, 2007.
    Smoky Hills Wind Farm, LLC (Smoky Hills Wind Farm) filed an
application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate
schedule. The proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sale
of energy and capacity at market-based rates. Smoky Hills Wind Farm
also requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In
particular, Smoky Hills Wind Farm requested that the Commission grant
blanket approval under 18 CFR part 34 of all future issuances of
securities and assumptions of liability by Smoky Hills Wind Farm.
    On November 29, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the
Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development-West, granted the
requests for blanket approval under Part 34 (Director's Order). The
Director's Order also stated that the Commission would publish a
separate notice in the Federal Register establishing a period of time
for the filing of protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be
heard concerning the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or
assumptions of liability by Smoky Hills Wind Farm, should file a
protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214
of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211,
385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests is
December 28, 2007.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition to such blanket
approvals by the deadline above, Smoky Hills Wind Farm is authorized to
issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor,
indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another
person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful
object within the corporate purposes of Smoky Hills Wind Farm,
compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or
appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of Smoky Hills Wind Farm's issuance of securities
or assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at  http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a) (1) (iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-24298 Filed 12-14-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 3, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19930-19931]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7939]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1338; Airspace Docket No. 11-ANM-27]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Tobe, CO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E airspace at Tobe, CO.
Decommissioning of the Tobe Tactical Air Navigation System (TACAN) has
made this action necessary for the safety and management of Instrument
Flight Rules (IFR) operations in the vicinity of the Tobe VHF Omni-
Directional Radio Range/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME).

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, May 31, 2012. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On January 31, 2012, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend controlled airspace at Tobe, CO
(77 FR 4708). Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the
FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, of
FAA Order 7400.9V dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by amending Class E airspace extending upward from 8,500 feet
Mean Sea Level (MSL) in the vicinity of the Tobe VOR/DME. Airspace
reconfiguration is necessary due to the decommissioning of the Tobe
TACAN. This action would enhance the safety and management of aircraft
operations in the vicinity of the Tobe VOR/DME, CO.
    The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments
are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this
regulation: (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);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to
issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S.
Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to
ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This
regulation is within the

scope of that authority as it amends controlled airspace at Tobe, CO.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ANM CO E5 Tobe, CO [Modified]

Tobe VOR/DME
    (Lat. 37[deg]15'31'' N., long. 103[deg]36'00'' W.)

    That airspace north of the Tobe VOR/DME extending upward from
8,500 feet MSL, bounded on the north by V-210, on the southeast by
V-263, and on the west by V-389.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on March 26, 2012.
Robert Henry,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012-7939 Filed 4-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 64)]
[Notices]
[Page 17139]
[DOCID:fr05ap10-53]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

March 18, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP10-497-000.
    Applicants: Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C.
    Description: Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, LLC submits Fourth
Revised Sheet 5 to FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume 1, to be
effective 4/15/10.
    Filed Date: 03/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100317-0214.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 29, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-498-000.
    Applicants: Steckman Ridge, LP.
    Description: Steckman Ridge, LP submits First Revised Sheet 222A to
its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1, to be effective 4/1/10.
    Filed Date: 03/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100317-0215.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 29, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-499-000.
    Applicants: Chandeleur Pipe Line Company.
    Description: Chandeleur Pipe Line Company submits Seventh Revised
Sheet 18 et al. of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1, to be
effective 5/1/10.
    Filed Date: 03/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100317-0216.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 29, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-500-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company,
    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company submits a firm
transportation service agreement under Rate Schedule FT dated 9/11/00
that contains negotiated rates and non-conforming language.
    Filed Date: 03/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100317-0233.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 29, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-501-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits 12 Revised Sheet
135 et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume 1, to be
effective 4/17/10.
    Filed Date: 03/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100317-0234.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 29, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-502-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits Second Revised
Sheet 21 et al. of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume 1, to be
effective 4/17/2010.
    Filed Date: 03/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100317-0235.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 29, 2010.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-7539 Filed 4-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 7, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76298-76299]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31332]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2011-1071]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; New Rochelle Harbor, New
Rochelle, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
Glen Island Bridge, mile 0.8, across New Rochelle Harbor at New
Rochelle, New York. The deviation is necessary to facilitate bridge
rehabilitation repairs. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in
the closed position to facilitate bridge rehabilitation.

DATES: This deviation is effective from December 5, 2011 through March
30, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-1071 and are available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-1071 in the
``Keyword''

and then clicking ``Search''. They are also available for inspection or
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, 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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Ms. Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First Coast Guard
District<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. If
you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The Glen Island Bridge, across New Rochelle Harbor, mile 0.8, at
New Rochelle, New York, has a vertical clearance in the closed position
of 13 feet at mean high water and 20 feet at mean low water. The
drawbridge operation regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.802.
    The waterway users are recreational vessels of various sizes.
During the winter months the bridge rarely opens since the recreational
vessels that transit this waterway are normally in winter storage.
    The owner of the bridge, Westchester County, requested a temporary
deviation from the regulations to help facilitate rehabilitation
repairs at the bridge.
    Under this temporary deviation the Glen Island Bridge may remain in
the closed position from December 5, 2011 through March 30, 2012.
Vessels that can pass under the bridge in the closed position may do so
at any time.
    The Coast Guard believes that this temporary deviation should meet
the reasonable needs of navigation because the recreational users that
normally use this bridge are recreational vessels that do not operate
during the winter months when this deviation will be in effect.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the bridge must return to its
regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: November 23, 2011.
Gary Kassof,
Bridge Program Manager, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-31332 Filed 12-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations: Correcting and Other Amendments

Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0018

Item: Email message to Amy Flynn of OMB documenting changes to Ambient
Air Monitoring Direct Final Rule.

Date: March 9, 2007

Amy:

Thanks for the comments - here is the corrected file.

1) Clarified the language on page 18 to remove the unneeded reference to
discretionary SLAMS monitors "in rural areas."  You will note I
simplified the sentence further to clarify that the context is PM2.5
monitors in excess of minimum monitoring requirements.

2) I also changed the language on page 36 concerning the "There is a
period......".  In fact, our discussion of the typo was incorrect.  We
are indeed removing an unintended period.  My thanks to your eagle-eyed
reviewer for spotting this.

3) I learned something today about ellipsis.  I changed the "dots"
language to ellipsis on page 39.

If possible, please let me know today by email or phone if the comments
have been satisfactorily addressed.  If your office is in a position to
waive the formal review based on today's changes, that would be
something we would need in an email message.

Lewis Weinstock

US EPA (C304-06)

OAQPS/AQAD/AAMG

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

919-541-3661

919-541-1903 (Fax)