[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 146 (Monday, July 30, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44525-44528]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18343]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0470]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Apalachicola River, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedules for
two bridges that cross the Apalachicola River in Florida. First, the
CSX Railroad requested to modify the operating schedule of their swing
bridge at mile 105.9, at River Junction to require eight hours advanced
notice at all times. Second, the Apalachicola and Northern Railroad
(ANRR) requested to maintain the swing bridge at mile 4.5 (GIWW mile
347.0 East of Harvey Lock (EHL)), at Apalachicola, untended and in the
open-to-navigation position at all times.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before September 28, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2012-0470 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email David Frank, Bridge Administration Branch;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2012-0470), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (http://www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or hand delivery,
but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online
via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the
Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax,
hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having
been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket
Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rules'' and insert ``USCG-2012-0470'' in the ``Keyword''
box. Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the
``Actions'' column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand
delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11
inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them
by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and may change the rule based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2012-0470'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why a public meeting would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) under 33 CFR 117.5 requires
that except as otherwise authorized by this part, drawbridges must open
promptly and fully for the passage of vessels when a request or signal
to open is given in accordance with this subpart. Presently, one bridge
over the Apalachicola River is listed as having a special operating
schedule under 33 CFR 117 Subpart B--Specific Requirements. Under 33
CFR 117.258, the draw of the CSX Railroad bridge at River Junction,
mile 105.9 on the Apalachicola River, shall open on signal Monday
through Friday from 8 a.m. until 4 p.m. At all other times the bridge
will open on signal if at least four hours notice is given. This rule
proposes to change the notice required for opening from four hours to
eight hours for the CSX Railroad bridge.
    A second bridge, the ANRR bridge at mile 4.5 on the Apalachicola
River, (GIWW mile 347.0 EHL) in Apalachicola does not have a specific
operating schedule, opening as required under 33 CFR 117.5. The Port of
St. Joe, FL, owner of the bridge, has taken the rail line out of
service and has an embargo to cease train operations for Port St. Joe
and north of the Apalachicola River due to the absence of shipments
coming in/out of Port St. Joe. While the embargo remains in effect, the
operator of the bridge, ANRR, requests to maintain the swing bridge in
the open-to-navigation position in accordance with 33 CFR 117.41. This
rule proposes to add an operating schedule specific to the ANRR bridge
under 33 CFR 117.258, stating that the bridge will be maintained in the
open-to-navigation position.
    Prior to the requests to change the operating schedules for these
two bridges, no previous requests for changes have been received. These
requests were initiated without consultation of waterway users but the
USCG Bridge Administration Office in New Orleans was consulted for
guidance on how to comply with the requirements of 33 CFR 117.41.

C. Basis and Purpose

    The CSX swing bridge across the Apalachicola River, mile 105.9,
presently opens on signal for the passage of vessels Monday through
Friday from 8 a.m. until 4 p.m. At all other times, the bridge opens on
signal if at least four hours advanced notice is given. The bridge
owner has requested to change the operation regulations to reflect
usage of the bridge by mariners. The request was made based upon a
documented decrease in the number of requests for openings in the last
three years. In 2010, the bridge opened 12 times for the passage of
vessels. Eight of those openings were for either a United States Coast
Guard (USCG) vessel or for a United States Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) vessel. In 2011, the bridge opened four times for the passage
of vessels. Three of those openings were for either a USCG vessel or
for a USACE vessel. Thus far in 2012, the bridge has only opened one
time for a USACE vessel. It should be noted that all of the openings in
the past three years have occurred between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.;
therefore, the bridge opened on signal for their passages. Information
gathered regarding the decrease in vessel movements indicates that the
lack of commercial facilities and the lack of maintenance on the
waterway have contributed to the decline in traffic. While water
elevations may return to their pre-drought levels, there is presently
no evidence that the number of requests for bridge openings will
increase in the future due to limited industrial development along the
waterway. Accordingly, the bridge owner requested to change the
operation regulations so that the bridge is allowed to open on signal
at all times if at least eight hours advanced notification is given.
USACE and USCG units using the waterway indicated that the proposed
change to the operation of the bridge will not affect their ability to
maintain the waterway and they have no objections to the proposed
change.
    The ANRR swing span bridge crosses the Apalachicola River at mile
4.5 (GIWW mile 347.0 EHL) and is required to open on signal for the
passage of vessels. Since the bridge owner applied for and received an
embargo for the suspension of train traffic on the line, the operation
of the bridge is unnecessary and the operator of the bridge requested
permission to leave the bridge in the open-to-navigation position and
have the bridge untended. The bridge provides unlimited vertical
clearance and 119 feet of horizontal clearance in the open-to-
navigation position. Transit times for mariners should not be impeded
with the bridge left in the open-to-navigation position. The bridge
owner/operator will be required to maintain all bridge navigation
lights in proper working order and will be required to periodically
check the lights to see that they are working.

D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule for the CSX Railroad Bridge will require all
vessels wishing to transit through the bridge site and needing the
bridge to be opened for their passage to provide eight hours advanced
notification. The proposed rule will require mariners to provide an
additional four hours of advanced notification of arrival to transit
through the bridge. For vessels wishing to transit through the bridge
site between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday,
these vessel operators will now be required to contact the bridge owner
at least eight hours prior to transiting the bridge. As all openings in
the past three years have been during the day, this requirement will be
new to any vessels wishing to transit through the bridge site during
these time frames. Several government vessels transit the waterway past
the bridge site to conduct maintenance on the waterway. USACE and USCG
units transiting the waterway indicated that the proposed change to the
operation of the bridge will not affect their ability to maintain the
waterway and they have no objections to the proposed change.
    The proposed rule for the ANRR bridge should not cause any undue
burden on any vessels as the bridge will remain in the open-to-
navigation position and allow all vessels presently using the waterway
at the bridge site to transit the bridge site without delay.

E. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 14 of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order

13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, and does not require
an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of
Order 12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of
Management and Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    We consider the changes proposed in this rule to be minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. Very few vessels will be
impacted by the proposed changes and those few vessels should be able
to provide adequate advanced notification of their arrivals as is
already done for the CSX Railroad bridge and vessels may transit
through the ANRR bridge without delay as it will be maintained in the
open-to-navigation position.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered the impact of this proposed rule on small entities. The
Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
needing to transit the Apalachicola River above mile 105.9. This action
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities because these few vessels should be able to provide
adequate advanced notification of their arrivals as is already done on
this waterway for three other movable bridges located upstream and
downstream of this bridge.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    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 proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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, above. 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.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    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 proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. 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.

7. 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 proposed rule will not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would 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.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use because it is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and
is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a
significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement
of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01, and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
made a preliminary determination that this action is not likely to have
a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves the regulation of drawbridge operations. This rule is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 32(e) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

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

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

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

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

    2. In Sec.  117.258, a new paragraph (a) is added and the current
regulation is revised and redesignated as paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  117.258  Apalachicola River.

    (a) The draw of the Apalachicola and Northern Railroad Bridge, mile
4.5 (GIWW mile 347.0 EHL), at Apalachicola, is maintained in the fully
open-to-navigation position and untended. The bridge will not be
returned to service until proper notification is published in Federal
Register.
    (b) The draw of the CSX Railroad Bridge, mile 105.9, at River
Junction shall open on signal if at least eight hours notice is given.

    Dated: July 13, 2012.
Peter Troedsson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District,
Acting.
[FR Doc. 2012-18343 Filed 7-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: May 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 104)]
[Notices]
[Page 30915-30916]
[DOCID:fr29my08-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP08-401-000]

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC; Notice of Request
Under Blanket Authorization

May 21, 2008.
    Take notice that on May 15, 2008, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of
America LLC (Natural), 3250 Lacey Road, Suite 700, Downers Grove,
Illinois 60515, filed in Docket No. CP08-401-000, a prior notice
request pursuant to sections 157.205, 157.208, 157.211, and 157.212 of
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations under the
Natural Gas Act for authorization to construct, own, and operate an
interconnection with Golden Pass Pipeline LLC (Golden Pass) to receive
re-vaporized liquefied natural gas (LNG), located in Jefferson County,
Texas, and initially to deliver gas into Golden Pass to facilitate the
commissioning of the new pipeline system, all as more fully set forth
in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to
public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web at http://
www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Natural proposes to construct and operate facilities necessary to
receive up to 900 MMcf/day of re-vaporized LNG from Golden Pass (and
initially, to deliver natural gas into it for commissioning purposes)
at a new interconnect that will be located near Dennis Gahagan Survey,
Abstract A-123 in Jefferson County, Texas. Natural proposes to
construct two 24-inch taps, approximately 0.4 miles of 24-inch pipe,
and appurtenances, on its Louisiana No. 1 and No. 2 Lines to receive
the re-vaporized gas. Golden Pass will install and own four 12-inch
ultrasonic meter runs, flow control valves, electronic flow measurement
and other related equipment. The proposed facilities will provide
Natural with a new receipt interconnect and allow Golden Pass to
deliver up to 900 MMcf/day. The estimated cost of the project is
approximately $2.5 million, and all costs associated with the project
will be reimbursed by Golden Pass. The proposed in-service date for the
interconnect facilities is September 1, 2008.
    Any questions regarding the application should be directed to
Norman Watson, Director, Business Development, Natural Gas Pipeline
Company of America LLC, 500 Dallas Street, Suite 1000, Houston, Texas
77002, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or Bruce H. Newsome, Vice President, Natural
Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC, 3250 Lacey Road, Suite 700,
Downers Grove, Illinois 60515, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any person may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant
notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's
Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of
intervention. Any person filing to intervene or the Commission's staff
may, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) (18 CFR 157.205), file a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not
withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest,
the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the

Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing''
link.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-11914 Filed 5-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


From:
Kiechle, Fredric S<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Thursday, August 4, 2016 2:28 PM
To:
Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
May, Jeffrey X<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Zavoda, Rich<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Hill, John R<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
Coke MACT ICR submittal, ArcelorMittal Burns Harbor LLC sections I-III attachments only, email #3

Dr. Jones, find attached in email #3 ICR requested reports for Q3 2014 and 2015.

F. Scott Kiechle  Sr. Engineer-Environmental
ArcelorMittal Burns Harbor
Maintenance, Environmental & Utilities | 250 W. U.S. Highway 12 Burns Harbor, IN 46304-9745
T +219 787 4968 | F +219 787 4973  | M +219 313 2661  | www.arcelormittal.c
 Qapla'!

<< Q3 14 Benzene_FF.pdf >>
<< Q3 14 COB2_Att5_VEE.pdf >>
<< Q3 14 FINAL  3Q14Coke Plant MACT COMS Report.pdf >>
<< Q3 14 FINAL  2014 IDEM 3rd Qtr #2_COMS.pdf >>
<< Q3 14 Final 2014 IDEM 3rd Qtr_#1_ COMS.pdf >>
<< Q3 15 COB2_Att5_VEE.pdf >>
<< Q3 15 DRAFT 3rd Qtr 2015 Coke Plant MACT COMS Report.pdf >>
<< Q3 15 FINAL IDEM 3rd Qtr #2 COMS.pdf >>
<< Q3 15 IDEM 3rd Qtr 2015 #1 COMS.pdf >>


MEMORANDUM

DATE:		November 13, 2014

TO:		111(b) Rule for New Construction of Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR - 2013-0495

FROM:	Howard J. Hoffman, EPA - OGC

SUBJECT:	Nov. 13, 2014 Meeting with GE Regarding Proposed 111(b) Rule for New Construction of Power Plants --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY On Nov. 13, 2014, EPA-OGC and OAQPS met with General Electric (GE) to discuss legal issues concerning the proposed CAA section 111(b) rule for new construction of power plants.

       ATTENDEES Avi Garbow, Ethan Shenkman, Lorie Schmidt, Scott Jordan, and Steve Silverman of EPA-OGC Nick Hutson and Christian Fellner of OAQPS  Michael Fitzpatrick, Patric Hedren, Larry Boggs, and Andy Dicke of General Electric (GE) Chet M. Thompson of Crowell & Moring LLP and Charles H. Knauss of Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, both counsel to GE


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 168 (Thursday, August 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53464-53465]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21076]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2013-0017; OMB No. 1660-0086]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will submit the
information collection abstracted below to the Office of Management and
Budget for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission will describe the
nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents,
the estimated burden (i.e., the time, effort and resources used by
respondents to respond) and cost, and the actual data collection
instruments FEMA will use.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 30, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on the proposed information
collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office
of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the Desk
Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection should be made to Director,
Records Management Division, 1800 South Bell Street, Arlington, VA
20598-3005,

facsimile number<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Collection of Information

    Title: National Flood Insurance Program-Mortgage Portfolio
Protection Program.
    Type of Information Collection: Extension, without change, of a
currently approved information collection.
    Form Titles and Numbers: None.
    Abstract: FEMA needs the information to ensure that insurance
companies that join the NFIP's WYO program meet all state and federal
requirements for insurance companies; these include a good record and
are well rated in their field. There is no other way to obtain this
information which is specific to each company that applies to join the
NFIP.
    Affected Public: Business or other non-profits.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 341.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 171.
    Estimated Cost: There are no recordkeeping, capital, start-up or
maintenance costs associated with this information collections.

    Dated: August 20, 2013.
Charlene D. Myrthil,
Director, Records Management Division, Mission Support Bureau, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2013-21076 Filed 8-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-11-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 8, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47287-47291]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19319]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 174

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0109; FRL-9357-4]

Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab Protein in Corn; Exemption From
the Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of the plant-incorporated protectant (PIP),
Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab protein in corn, in or on the food and
feed commodities of corn; corn, field; corn, sweet; and corn, pop.
Syngenta Seeds, Inc., Field Crops NAFTA submitted a petition to EPA
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation
eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for
residues of Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab protein in corn.

DATES: This regulation is effective August 8, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 9, 2012,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0109, is available either
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the OPP Docket in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center
(EPA/DC), located in EPA West, Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OPP Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket
available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Mendelsohn, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 174 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0109 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
October 9, 2012. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit a copy of
your non-CBI objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0109, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), Mail Code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001.

     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of April 4, 2012 (77 FR 20337) (FRL-9340-
4), EPA issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance petition (PP
1F7857) by Syngenta Seeds, Inc., Field Crops NAFTA, P.O. Box 12257,
3054 E. Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2257. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 174.532 be amended by establishing a
permanent exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of
Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab protein in corn, in or on the food and
feed commodities of corn; corn, field; corn, sweet; and corn, pop. This
notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner
Syngenta Seeds, Inc., Field Crops NAFTA, which is available in the
docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Pursuant to FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue * *
*.'' Additionally, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D) requires that the Agency
consider ``available information concerning the cumulative effects of a
particular pesticide's residues'' and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the
toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings.

III. Toxicological Profile

    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action and considered its validity, completeness and reliability,
and the relationship of this information to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.

A. Product Characterization

    Based on amino acid sequence homology and crystal structures, known
Cry proteins have a similar three-dimensional structure comprised of
three domains, Domain I, II, and III (Refs. 1, 2, 3, and 4). The toxin
portions of Cry proteins are characterized by having five conserved
blocks (CB) across their amino acid sequence. These are numbered CB1 to
CB5 from the N-terminus to the C-terminus (Ref. 5). The sequences
preceding and following these conserved blocks are highly variable and
are designated as variable regions V1 to V6. Because Cry proteins share
structural similarities, chimeric cry genes can be engineered via the
exchange of domains that are homologous between different cry genes.
    eCry3.1Ab is an engineered chimera protein, composed of portions of
modified Cry3A (mCry3A) protein, a protein derived from the native
Cry3A protein from Bt subsp. tenebrionis, and of the Cry1Ab protein
from Bt thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki HD-1. The ecry3.1Ab gene (Entrez
Accession Number GU327680 NCBI, 2011) (Walters et al. 2010) consists of
a fusion between the N-terminus (Domain I, Domain II, and a portion of
Domain III) of a mcry3A gene and the C-terminus (a portion of Domain
III and Variable Region 6) of a cry1Ab gene (Ref. 5). The eCry3.1Ab
protein is 654 amino acid residues in size and is approximately 74.8
kilodaltons.

B. Mammalian Toxicity Assessment

    Syngenta has submitted acute oral toxicity data demonstrating the
lack of mammalian toxicity at high levels of exposure to the pure
eCry3.1Ab protein. These data demonstrate the safety of the product at
a level well above maximum possible exposure levels that are reasonably
anticipated in the crop. Basing this conclusion on acute oral toxicity
data without requiring further toxicity testing and residue data is
similar to the Agency position regarding toxicity testing and the
requirement of residue data for the microbial Bacillus thuringiensis
products from which this plant-incorporated protectant was derived (see
40 CFR 158.2130(d)(1)(i) and 158.2140(d)(7)). For microbial products,
further toxicity testing and residue data are triggered by significant
adverse acute effects in studies, such as the mouse oral toxicity
study, to verify and quantify the observed adverse effects and clarify
the source of these effects (Tiers II & III).
    An acute oral toxicity study in mice (MRID No. 477539-01) indicated
that eCry3.1Ab is non-toxic. Two groups of 10 male and 10 female mice
were orally dosed (via gavage) with 2,000 milligrams/kilograms
bodyweight (eCry3.1Ab protein mg/kg bwt) of the eCry3.1AB-0208 test
substance, a biochemically and functionally equivalent microbially-
produced eCry3.1Ab protein. All treated animals gained weight and had
no test material-related clinical signs and no test material-related
findings at necropsy. Since there were no significant differences
between the test and control groups related to the oral administration
of the eCry3.1AB-0208 test material, the eCry3.1Ab protein does not
appear to cause any significant adverse effects at an exposure level of
up to 2000 mg/kg bwt, which supports the finding that the eCry3.1Ab
protein would be non-toxic to mammals.
    When proteins are toxic, they are known to act via acute mechanisms
and at very low dose levels (Ref. 6). Therefore, since no acute effects
were shown to be caused by eCry3.1Ab, even at relatively high dose
levels, the eCry3.1Ab protein is not considered toxic. Further, amino
acid sequence comparisons showed no similarities between the eCry3.1Ab
protein and known toxic proteins in protein databases that would raise
a safety concern.

C. Allergenicity Assessment

    Since eCry3.1Ab is a protein, allergenic sensitivities were
considered. Currently, no definitive tests exist for

determining the allergenic potential of novel proteins. Therefore, EPA
uses a ``weight-of-the evidence'' approach where the following factors
are considered: source of the trait; amino acid sequence similarity
with known allergens; prevalence in food; and biochemical properties of
the protein, including in vitro digestibility in simulated gastric
fluid (SGF), and glycosylation (as recommended by CAC, 2003) (Ref. 7).
Current scientific knowledge suggests that common food allergens tend
to be resistant to degradation by acid and proteases; may be
glycosylated; and may be present at high concentrations in the food.
    1. Source of the trait. Bacillus thuringiensis is not considered to
be a source of allergenic proteins.
    2. Amino acid sequence. A comparison of the amino acid sequence of
eCry3.1Ab with known allergens showed no significant overall sequence
similarity or identity at the level of eight contiguous amino acid
residues. This is the appropriate level of sensitivity to detect
possible IgE epitopes without high false positive rates.
    3. Prevalence in food. Expression level analysis of eCry.1Ab
protein demonstrates that it is present at relatively low levels. The
expression has been shown to be in the parts per million range. Thus,
dietary exposure is expected to be correspondingly low.
    4. Digestibility. The eCry3.1Ab protein was rapidly digested in
less than 30 seconds in simulated mammalian gastric fluid containing
pepsin (pH 1.2) after incubation at 37 [deg]C.
    5. Glycosylation. The eCry3.1Ab protein expressed in corn was shown
not to be glycosylated.
    6. Conclusion. Considering all of the available information, EPA
has concluded that the potential for eCry3.1Ab to be a food allergen is
minimal.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    In examining aggregate exposure, FFDCA section 408 directs EPA to
consider available information concerning exposures from the pesticide
residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures, including
drinking water from ground water or surface water and exposure through
pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings (residential and other
indoor uses).
    The Agency has considered available information on the aggregate
exposure levels of consumers (and major identifiable subgroups of
consumers) to the pesticide chemical residue and to other related
substances. First, with respect to other related substances, the
eCry3.1Ab protein is a chimeric Bacillus thuringiensis protein,
composed of portions of Cry1Ab and mCry3A proteins, both of which are
registered PIPs that were previously assessed as having a lack of
mammalian toxicity at high levels of exposure. Exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance already have been established for Cry1Ab in
food and mCry3A in maize, see 40 CFR 174.505 and 40 CFR 174.511,
respectively. Second, and specific to the eCry3.1Ab protein, EPA has
considered dietary exposure under the tolerance exemption and all other
tolerances or exemptions in effect for the plant-incorporated
protectant chemical residue and exposure from non-occupational sources.
Exposure via the skin or inhalation is not likely since the plant-
incorporated protectant is contained within plant cells, which
essentially eliminates these exposure routes or reduces these exposure
routes to negligible. The amino acid similarity assessment included
similarity to known aeroallergens. It has been demonstrated that there
is no evidence of occupationally related respiratory symptoms, based on
a health survey on migrant workers after exposure to Bt pesticides
(Ref. 8). Exposure via residential or lawn use to infants and children
is also not expected because the use sites for the eCry3.1Ab protein
are all agricultural for control of insects. Oral exposure, at very low
levels, may occur from ingestion of processed corn products and,
potentially, drinking water.
    However, oral toxicity testing done at a dose of 2 gm/kg showed no
adverse effects. Furthermore, the expected dietary exposure from corn
is several orders of magnitude lower than the amounts of eCry3.1Ab
protein shown to have no toxicity. Therefore, even if negligible
aggregate exposure should occur, the Agency concludes that such
exposure would present no harm due to the lack of mammalian toxicity
and the rapid digestibility demonstrated for the eCry3.1Ab protein.

V. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of
Toxicity

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency
consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of
a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.''
    Since eCry3.1Ab is not considered toxic, EPA has not found
eCry3.1Ab to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and eCry3.1Ab does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance
action, therefore, EPA has assumed that eCry3.1Ab does not have a
common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. Following from
this, therefore, EPA concludes that there are no cumulative effects
associated with eCry3.1Ab that need be considered. For information
regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, Infants and Children

    The data submitted and cited regarding potential health effects for
the eCry3.1Ab protein include the characterization of the expressed
eCry3.1Ab protein in corn, as well as the acute oral toxicity, heat
stability, and in vitro digestibility of the proteins. The results of
these studies were used to evaluate human risk, and the validity,
completeness, and reliability of the available data from the studies
were also considered.
    As discussed more fully in Unit III. B. above, the acute oral
toxicity data submitted supports the prediction that the eCry3.1Ab
protein would be nontoxic to humans. Moreover, eCry3.1Ab showed no
sequence similarity to any known toxin. Because of this lack of
demonstrated mammalian toxicity, no protein residue chemistry data for
eCry3.1Ab were required for a human health effects assessment. Even so,
preliminary expression level analysis showed eCry3.1Ab protein is
present at relatively low levels. Dietary exposure is expected to be
correspondingly low.
    Since eCry3.1Ab is a protein, its potential allergenicity is also
considered as part of the toxicity assessment. Data considered as part
of the allergenicity assessment include that the eCry3.1Ab protein came
from Bacillus thuringiensis which is not a known allergenic source,
showed no sequence similarity to known allergens, was readily degraded
by pepsin, and was not glycosylated when expressed in the plant.
Therefore, there is a reasonable certainty that eCry3.1Ab protein will
not be an allergen.
    Considered together, the lack of mammalian toxicity at high levels
of exposure to the eCry3.1Ab protein and the minimal potential for that
protein to be a food allergen demonstrate the safety of the product at
levels well

above possible maximum exposure levels anticipated in the crop.
    Finally, and specifically in regards to infants and children, FFDCA
section 408(b)(2)(C) provides that EPA shall assess the available
information about consumption patterns among infants and children,
special susceptibility of infants and children to pesticide chemical
residues, and the cumulative effects on infants and children of the
residues and other substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. In
addition, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the data base, unless EPA determines
that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children.
    Based on its review and consideration of all the available
information, as discussed in more detail above, the Agency concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the
U.S. population, including infants and children, from aggregate
exposure to residues of the eCry3.1Ab protein and the genetic material
necessary for its production in corn. This includes all anticipated
dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information. The Agency has also concluded, again for the reasons
discussed in more detail above, that there are no threshold effects of
concern and, as a result, that an additional margin of safety for
infants and children is unnecessary in this instance.

VII. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation. Nonetheless, Syngenta has
submitted validation method studies on two qualitative lateral flow
strip kits for the analytical detection of eCry3.1Ab protein in corn
grain, leaf and seed corn matrices. Results showed the test kits are
able to detect eCry3.1Ab protein residues in corn with sufficient
accuracy, precision, and sensitivity.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for establishing a difference tolerance.
    The Codex has not established a MRL for Bacillus thuringiensis
eCry3.1Ab protein in corn.

VIII. Conclusions

    For all the reasons summarized above, EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the U.S. population,
including infants and children, from aggregate exposure to residues of
the plant incorporated protectant (PIP) Bacillus thuringiensis
eCry3.1Ab protein in corn and the genetic material necessary for its
production. Therefore, the current temporary exemption for residues of
Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab protein in corn, in or on the food or
feed commodities of corn; corn, field; corn, sweet; and corn, pop, when
used as a plant-incorporated protectant is amended in order to remove
its expiration date and make it a permanent exemption.

IX. References

1. Nakamura K, Oshie K, Shimizu M, Takada Y, Oeda K, Ohkawa H. 1990.
Construction of Chimeric Insecticidal Proteins Between the 130-kDa
and 135-kDa Proteins of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. aizawai for
Analysis of Structure-Function Relationship. Agricultural Biological
Chemistry. 54: 715-724.
2. Li J, Carroll J, Ellar DJ. 1991. Crystal Structure of
Insecticidal delta-Endotoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis at 2.5 A
resolution. Nature. 353: 815-821.
3. Ge A, Rivers D, Milne R, Dean DH. 1991. Functional Domains of
Bacillus thuringiensis Insecticidal Crystal Proteins. Refinement of
Heliothis virescens and Trichoplusiani Specificity Domains on
Cry1A(c). Journal of Biological Chemistry. 266: 17954-17958.
4. Honee G, Convents D, Van Rie J, Jansens S, Peferoen M, Visser B.
1991. The C-Terminal Domain of the Toxic Fragment of a Bacillus
thuringiensis Crystal Protein Determines Receptor Binding. Molecular
Microbiology. 5: 2799-2806.
5. Hofte H, Whitley HR. 1989. Insecticidal Crystal Proteins of
Bacillus thuringiensis. Microbiology Review. 53: 242-255.
6. Sjoblad RD, McClintock JT, Engler R. 1992. Toxicological
Considerations for Protein Components of Biological Pesticide
Products. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 15(1): 3-9.
7. CAC. 2003. Alinorm 03/34: Joint FAO/WHO Food Standard Programme.
Codex Alimentarius Commission, Twenty-Fifth Session, 30 July 2003.
Rome, Italy. Appendix III: Guideline for Conduct of Food Safety
Assessments of Foods Derived from Recombinant-DNA Plants; Appendix
IV: Annex on Assessment of Possible Allergenicity. Codex
Alimentarius Commission, 47-60.
8. Bernstein IL, Bernstein JA, Miller M, Tierzieva S, Bernstein DI.,
Lummus Z, Selgrade MK, Doerfler DL, Seligy VL. 1999. Immune
responses in farm workers after exposure to Bacillus thuringiensis
pesticides. Environmental Health Perspectives. 107(7):575-82.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance exemption under section
408(d) of FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of
actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final
rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this
final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order
13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule
does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor
does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898,
entitled ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the exemption in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by

Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As
such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a
substantial direct effect on States or tribal governments, on the
relationship between the national government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order
13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not
apply to this final rule. In addition, this final rule does not impose
any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L.
104-4).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).

XI. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 174

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

    Dated: July 30, 2012.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 174--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 174 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. Section 174.532 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  174.532  Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab protein in corn;
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance.

    Residues of Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab protein in corn, in or
on the food and feed commodities of corn; corn, field; corn, sweet; and
corn, pop are exempt from the requirement of a tolerance when Bacillus
thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab protein in corn is used as a plant-incorporated
protectant.

[FR Doc. 2012-19319 Filed 8-7-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 220 (Thursday, November 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 53513]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24910]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4344-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

California; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of California (FEMA-4344-DR), dated October 10, 2017, and
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued November 7, 2017.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident
period for this disaster is closed effective October 31, 2017.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-24910 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


Table 3a. Ranked Freshwater Genus Mean Acute Values with Species Mean Acute Chronic Ratios Rank GMAV Species SMAV ( µ g/ L) ACR 27 101,999 Golden shiner, Notemigonus crysoleucas 101,999 26 17,484 Stonefly, Acroneuria lycorias 17,484 25 3,027 Snail, Campeloma decisum 3,027 171.19 24 1,968 Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus 1,968 40.49 23 1,925 Midge, Chironomus decorus 1,925 22 187.5 Chiselmouth, Acrocheilus alutaceus 187.5 21 83.76 Fantail darter, Etheostoma flabellare 130.2 Greenthroat darter, Etheostoma lepidum 86.34 Johnny darter, Etheostoma nigrum 187.3 Fountain darter, Etheostoma rubrum 23.38 20 81.75 Razorback sucker, Xyrauchen texanus 81.75 19 72.50 Shovelnose sturgeon, Scaphirhynchus platorynchus 72.50 18 72.36 Bull trout, Salvelinus confluentus 72.36 17 72.07 Fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas 72.07 11.40 16 65.62 Bonytail chub, Gila elegans 65.62 15 58.32 Gila topminnow, Poeciliposis occidentalis 58.32 14 50.12 Worm, Lumbriculus variegatus 50.12 13 49.06 Boreal toad, Bufo boreas 49.06 12 42.64 Colorado squawfish, Ptychocheilus lucius 138.2 Northern squawfish, Ptychocheilus oregonensis 13.15 11 35.97 Freshwater mussel, Utterbackia imbecillis 35.97 10 29.11 Apache trout, Oncorhynchus apache 33.70 Cutthroat trout, Oncorhynchus clarki 31.28 Pink salmon, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha 37.30 Coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch 15.98 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss 21.60 2.88 Sockeye salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka 50.83 Chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha 25.68 5.59 9 18.60 Snail, Physa integra 18.60 8 11.36 Amphipod, Hyalella azteca 11.36 7 11.35 Freshwater mussel, Actinonaias pectorosa 11.35 6 10.84 Snail, Juga plicifera 10.84 5 8.77 Cladoceran, Scapholeberis sp. 8.77 4 8.57 Amphipod, Gammarus pseudolimnaeus 8.57 3 5.75 Cladoceran, Ceriodaphnia dubia 5.75 2.90 2 5.75 Snail, Lithoglyphus virens 5.75 1 3.56 Cladoceran, Daphnia magna 4.98 3.42 Cladoceran, Daphnia pulicaria 2.54 46 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g Worm, adult ( mixed age) S, M, T N 130  LUVA01S 39.06 50.12 Lumbriculus variegatus adult ( mixed age) S, M, T N 270  LUVA02S 57.44 adult ( mixed age) S, M, T N 500  LUVA03S 56.12 Snail, 1.1 2.7 cm F, M, T S 2000  CADE01F 3661 3027 Campeloma decisum 1.1 2.7 cm F, M, T S 1400  CADE02F 2502 Snail,

Juga plicifera adult F, M, T C 15  JUPL01F 10.84 10.84 Snail, Lithoglyphus virens adult F, M, T C 8  LIVI01F 5.75 5.75 Snail, 0.4 0.7 cm F, M, T S 41  PHIN01F 19.91 18.60 Physa integra 0.4 0.7 cm F, M, T S 37  PHIN02F 17.37 Freshwater mussel, juvenile S, M, T S 27  ACPE01S 10.47 11.35 Actinonaias pectorosa juvenile S, M, T S < 29  ACPE02S 12.31 Freshwater mussel, 1 2 d juv S, M, T S 86  UTIM01S 170.8 35.97 Utterbackia imbecillis 1 2 d juv S, M, T S 199  UTIM02S 175.3 juvenile S, M, T N 76  UTIM03S 36.22 juvenile S, M, T N 85  UTIM04S 38.09 juvenile S, M, T N 41  UTIM05S 21.54 juvenile S, M, T S 79  UTIM06S 41.38 juvenile S, M, T S 72  UTIM07S 35.34 juvenile S, M, T S 38  UTIM08S 29.87 Cladoceran, < 4 h S, M, T C 19  CEDU01S 9.24 5.75 Ceriodaphnia dubia < 4 h S, M, T C 17  CEDU02S 8.24 < 12 h S, M, D   25 CEDU03S 7.25 < 12 h S, M, D   17 CEDU04S 4.71 < 12 h S, M, D   30 CEDU05S 8.96 < 12 h S, M, D   24 CEDU06S 6.92 < 12 h S, M, D   28 CEDU07S 8.26 < 12 h S, M, D   32 CEDU08S 9.67 < 12 h S, M, D   23 CEDU09S 6.60 < 12 h S, M, D   20 CEDU10S 5.64 < 12 h S, M, D   19 CEDU11S 5.33 < 12 h S, M, D   26 CEDU12S 2.99 < 12 h S, M, D   21 CEDU13S 2.36 < 12 h S, M, D   27 CEDU14S 3.12 < 12 h S, M, D   37 CEDU15S 4.51 < 12 h S, M, D   34 CEDU16S 4.07 < 12 h S, M, D   67 CEDU17S 5.16 < 12 h S, M, D   38 CEDU18S 2.52 < 12 h S, M, D   78 CEDU19S 6.35 < 12 h S, M, D   81 CEDU20S 6.70 < 12 h S, M, D   28 CEDU21S 3.97 26 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g < 12 h S, M, D   84 CEDU22S 10.21 < 12 h S, M, T S 13.4  CEDU23S 6.10 < 24 h R, M, T, D S 6.98 5.54 CEDU24R 5.06 Cladoceran, 1 d S, M, T C 9.1  DAMA01S 2.93 4.98 Daphnia magna 1 d S, M, T C 11.7  DAMA02S 3.83 < 2 h S, M, T C 6.6  DAMA03S 2.12 < 2 h S, M, T C 9.9  DAMA04S 3.25 1 d S, M, T C 11.7  DAMA05S 12.06 < 4 h S, M, T C 6.7  DAMA06S 7.26 1 d S, M, T C 9.1  DAMA07S 3.76 < 2 h S, M, T C 5.2  DAMA08S 1.80 < 24 h S, M, T S 41.2  DAMA09S 22.21 < 24 h S, M, T S 10.5  DAMA10S 5.83 < 24 h S, M, T S 20.6  DAMA11S 11.68 < 24 h S, M, T S 17.3  DAMA12S 9.77 < 24 h S, M, T S 70.7  DAMA13S 34.71 < 24 h S, M, T S 31.3  DAMA14S 17.37 < 24 h S, M, I S 7.1  DAMA15S 2.08 < 24 h S, M, I S 16.4  DAMA16S 3.38 < 24 h S, M, I S 39.9  DAMA17S 4.16 < 24 h S, M, I S 18.7  DAMA18S 2.68 < 24 h S, M, I S 18.9  DAMA19S 1.53 < 24 h S, M, I S 39.7  DAMA20S 2.38 < 24 h S, M, I S 46  DAMA21S 7.37 < 24 h S, M, I S 71.9  DAMA22S 8.26 < 24 h S, M, I S 57.2  DAMA23S 4.65 < 24 h S, M, I S 67.8  DAMA24S 3.30 < 24 h S, M, T C 26  DAMA25S 9.24 < 24 h S, M, T C 30  DAMA26S 8.09 < 24 h S, M, T C 38  DAMA27S 8.84 < 24 h S, M, T C 69  DAMA28S 11.12 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 4.8  DAMA29S 1.08 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 7.4  DAMA30S 15.57 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 6.5  DAMA31S 2.17 Cladoceran,  S, M, T S 11.4  DAPC01S 1.37 2.54 Daphnia pulicaria  S, M, T S 9.06  DAPC02S 0.87  S, M, T S 7.24  DAPC03S 0.74  S, M, T S 10.8  DAPC04S 0.94  S, M, T S 55.4  DAPC05S 7.87  S, M, T S 55.3  DAPC06S 5.33  S, M, T S 53.3  DAPC07S 3.59 27 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g  S, M, T S 97.2  DAPC08S 3.59  S, M, T S 199  DAPC09S 2.70  S, M, T S 213  DAPC10S 7.02  S, M, T S 165  DAPC11S 5.28  S, M, T S 35.5  DAPC12S 1.45  S, M, T S 78.8  DAPC13S 2.29  S, M, T S 113  DAPC14S 0.98  S, M, T S 76.4  DAPC15S 1.89  S, M, T S 84.7  DAPC16S 6.27  S, M, T S 184  DAPC17S 6.78  S, M, T S 9.3  DAPC18S 0.93  S, M, T S 17.8  DAPC19S 1.69  S, M, T S 23.7  DAPC20S 2.13  S, M, T S 27.3  DAPC21S 2.17  S, M, T S 25.2  DAPC22S 3.40  S, M, T S 25.1  DAPC23S 3.93  S, M, T S 25.1  DAPC24S 4.66 Cladoceran, Scapholeberis sp. adult S, M, T C 18  SCSP01S 8.77 8.77 Amphipod, 1 3 d F, M, T S 22  GAPS01F 9.31 8.57 Gammarus pseudolimnaeus 1 3 d F, M, T S 19  GAPS02F 7.88 Amphipod, 7 14 d S, M, T N 17  HYAZ01S 12.50 11.36 Hyalella azteca 7 14 d S, M, T N 24  HYAZ02S 10.24 7 14 d S, M, T N 87  HYAZ03S 16.20 < 7 d S, M, T S 24.3  HYAZ04S 7.19 < 7 d S, M, T S 23.8  HYAZ05S 7.03 < 7 d S, M, T S 8.2  HYAZ06S 13.79 < 7 d S, M, T S 10  HYAZ07S 16.83 Stonefly, Acroneuria lycorias  S, M, T S 8300  ACLY01S 17484 17484 Midge, Chironomus decorus 4th instar S, M, T S 739  CHDE01S 1925 1925 Shovelnose sturgeon,

Scaphirhynchus platorynchus fry, 6.01 cm, 0.719 g S, M, T S 160  SCPL01S 72.50 72.50 Apache trout, Oncorhynchus apache larval, 0.38 g S, M, T S 70  ONAP01S 33.70 33.70 Lahontan cutthroat trout, larval, 0.34 g S, M, T S 80  ONCL01S 35.50 31.28 Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi larval, 0.57 g S, M, T S 60  ONCL02S 25.55 28 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g Cutthroat trout, 7.4 cm, 4.2 g F, M, T, D C 398.91 367 ONCL03F 69.79 Oncorhynchus clarki 6.9 cm, 3.2 g F, M, T, D C 197.87 186 ONCL04F 42.67 8.8 cm, 9.7 g F, M, T, D C 41.35 36.8 ONCL05F 19.52 8.1 cm, 4.4 g F, M, T, D C 282.93 232 ONCL06F 47.53 6.8 cm, 2.7 g F, M, T, D C 186.21 162 ONCL07F 109.1 7.0 cm, 3.2 g F, M, T, D C 85.58 73.6 ONCL08F 36.29 8.5 cm, 5.2 g F, M, T, D C 116.67 91 ONCL09F 17.19 7.7 cm, 4.4 g F, M, T, D C 56.20 44.4 ONCL10F 16.79 8.9 cm, 5.7 g F, M, T, D C 21.22 15.7 ONCL11F 9.80 Pink salmon, alevin ( newly hatched) F, M, T S 143  ONGO01F 38.75 37.30 Oncorhynchus gorbuscha alevin F, M, T S 87  ONGO02F 18.46 fry F, M, T S 199  ONGO03F 72.52 Coho salmon, 6 g R, M, T, I  164  ONKI01R 91.75 15.98 Oncorhynchus kisutch parr F, M, T C 33  ONKI02F 18.70 adult, 2.7 kg F, M, T C 46  ONKI03F 29.13 fry F, M, T, D, I  61 49 ONKI04F 11.42 smolt F, M, T, D, I  63 51 ONKI05F 11.90 fry F, M, T, D, I  86 58 ONKI06F 10.76 parr F, M, T, D, I  103 78 ONKI07F 20.95 Rainbow trout, larval, 0.67 g S, M, T S 110  ONMY01S 43.37 21.60 Oncorhynchus mykiss larval, 0.48 g S, M, T S 50  ONMY02S 26.12 larval, 0.50 g S, M, T S 60  ONMY03S 30.49 swim up, 0.25 g R, M, T, D C 46.7 40 ONMY04R 10.21 swim up, 0.25 g R, M, T, D C 24.2 19 ONMY05R 9.04 swim up, 0.20 0.24 g R, M, T, D C 0 3.4 ONMY06R 5.49 swim up, 0.20 0.24 g R, M, T, D C 0 8.1 ONMY07R 10.29 swim up, 0.20 0.24 g R, M, T, D C 0 17.2 ONMY08R 14.63 swim up, 0.20 0.24 g R, M, T, D C 0 32 ONMY09R 20.86 alevin F, M, T C 28  ONMY10F 18.16 swim up, 0.17 g F, M, T C 17  ONMY11F 11.06 parr, 8.6 cm, 6.96 g F, M, T C 18  ONMY12F 8.63 smolt, 18.8 cm, 68.19 g F, M, T C 29  ONMY13F 20.04 1 g F, M, T, D C  169 ONMY14F 22.60 4.9 cm F, M, T, D C  85.3 ONMY15F 9.77 6.0 cm, 2.1 g F, M, T, D C  83.3 ONMY16F 9.50 6.1 cm, 2.5 g F, M, T, D C  103 ONMY17F 12.21 2.6 g F, M, T, D C  274 ONMY18F 42.87 4.3 g F, M, T, D C  128 ONMY19F 15.91 9.2 cm, 9.4 g F, M, T, D C  221 ONMY20F 32.16 9.9 cm, 11.5 g F, M, T, D C  165 ONMY21F 21.91 11.8 cm, 18.7 g F, M, T, D C  197 ONMY22F 27.61 29 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g 13.5 cm, 24.9 g F, M, T, D C  514 ONMY23F 95.34 13.4 cm, 25.6 g F, M, T, D C  243 ONMY24F 36.51 6.7 cm, 2.65 g F, M, T C 2.8  ONMY25F 5.83 parr F, M, T, D, I  90 68 ONMY26F 17.96 swim up, 0.29 g F, M, T, D C 19.6 18 ONMY27F 8.85 swim up, 0.25 g F, M, T, D C 12.9 12 ONMY28F 34.48 swim up, 0.23 g F, M, T, D C 5.9 5.7 ONMY29F 23.48 swim up, 0.23 g F, M, T, D C 37.8 35 ONMY30F 15.35 swim up, 0.26 g F, M, T, D C 25.1 18 ONMY31F 35.69 swim up, 0.23 g F, M, T, D C 17.2 17 ONMY32F 24.39 0.64 g, 4.1 cm F, M, T, D C 101  ONMY33F 42.35 0.35 g, 3.4 cm F, M, T, D C 308  ONMY34F 94.18 0.68 g, 4.2 cm F, M, T, D C 93  ONMY35F 100.8 0.43 g, 3.7 cm F, M, T, D C 35.9  ONMY36F 52.78 0.29 g, 3.4 cm F, M, T, D C 54.4  ONMY37F 49.46 Sockeye salmon, alevin ( newly hatched) F, M, T S 190  ONNE01F 65.95 50.83 Oncorhynchus nerka alevin F, M, T S 200  ONNE02F 73.27 alevin F, M, T S 100  ONNE03F 22.28 alevin F, M, T S 110  ONNE04F 25.68 alevin F, M, T S 130  ONNE05F 33.19 fry F, M, T S 150  ONNE06F 42.32 smolt, 5.5 g F, M, T S 210  ONNE07F 80.98 smolt, 5.5 g F, M, T S 170  ONNE08F 53.26 smolt, 5.5 g F, M, T S 190  ONNE09F 65.95 smolt, 4,8 g F, M, T S 240  ONNE10F 104.3 Chinook salmon, alevin, 0.05 g F, M, T C 26  ONTS01F 12.84 25.68 Oncorhynchus tshawytscha swim up, 0.23 g F, M, T C 19  ONTS02F 9.11 parr, 9.6 cm, 11.58 g F, M, T C 38  ONTS03F 25.34 smolt, 14.4 cm, 32.46 g F, M, T C 26  ONTS04F 17.95 3 mo, 1.35 g F, M, T, I C 10.2  ONTS05F 17.68 3 mo, 1.35 g F, M, T, I C 24.1  ONTS06F 30.37 3 mo, 1.35 g F, M, T, I C 82.5  ONTS07F 33.95 3 mo, 1.35 g F, M, T, I C 128.4  ONTS08F 21.38 swim up, 0.36 0.45 g F, M, T, D C 0 7.4 ONTS09F 35.81 swim up, 0.36 0.45 g F, M, T, D C 0 12.5 ONTS10F 28.39 swim up, 0.36 0.45 g F, M, T, D C 0 14.3 ONTS11F 31.17 swim up, 0.36 0.45 g F, M, T, D C 0 18.3 ONTS12F 44.51 30 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g Bull trout, 0.130 g, 2.6 cm F, M, T, D C 228  SACO01F 75.20 72.36 Salvelinus confluentus 0.555 g, 4.0 cm F, M, T, D C 207  SACO02F 69.33 0.774 g, 4.5 cm F, M, T, D C 66.6  SACO03F 77.73 1.520 g, 5.6 cm F, M, T, D C 50  SACO04F 66.12 1.160 g, 5.2 cm F, M, T, D C 89  SACO05F 74.05 Chiselmouth,

Acrocheilus alutaceus 4.6 cm, 1.25 g F, M, T C 143  ACAL01F 187.5 187.5 Bonytail chub,

Gila elegans larval, 0.29 g S, M, T S 200  GIEL01S 65.62 65.62 Golden shiner,

Notemigonus crysoleucas  F, M, T C 84600  NOCR01F 101999 101999 Fathead minnow, adult, 40 mm S, M, T S 310  PIPR01S 236.3 72.07 Pimephales promelas adult, 40 mm S, M, T S 120  PIPR02S 95.02 adult, 40 mm S, M, T S 390  PIPR03S 193.6  S, M, T C 55  PIPR04S 34.74  S, M, T C 85  PIPR05S 63.41 < 24 h S, M, T N 15  PIPR06S 11.54 < 24 h S, M, T N 44  PIPR07S 18.53 < 24 h S, M, T N > 200  PIPR08S 25.04 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 4.82  PIPR09S 7.75 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 8.2  PIPR10S 14.86 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 31.57  PIPR11S 22.35 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 21.06  PIPR12S 15.66 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 35.97  PIPR13S 18.72 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 59.83  PIPR14S 14.72 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 4.83  PIPR15S 5.06 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 70.28  PIPR16S 11.66 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 83.59  PIPR17S 6.98 < 24 h, 0.68 mg S, M, T S 182  PIPR18S 11.99 larval, 0.32 g S, M, T S 290  PIPR19S 76.77 larval, 0.56 g S, M, T S 630  PIPR20S 165.4 larval, 0.45 g S, M, T S 400  PIPR21S 107.6 larval, 0.39 g S, M, T S 390  PIPR22S 169.2 3.2 5.5 cm, 0.42 3.23 g S, M, T S 450  PIPR23S 161.2 2.8 5.1 cm, 0.30 2.38 g S, M, T S 297  PIPR24S 81.18 1.9 4.6 cm, 0.13 1.55 g S, M, T S 311  PIPR25S 70.03 3.0 4.8 cm, 0.23 1.36 g S, M, T S 513  PIPR26S 78.68 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 62.23 53.96 PIPR27S 23.42 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 190.5 165.18 PIPR28S 72.39 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 68.58 59.46 PIPR29S 26.01 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 168.91 146.46 PIPR30S 74.50 31 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g < 24 h S, M, T, D S 94.62 82.04 PIPR31S 44.23 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 143.51 124.43 PIPR32S 91.55 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 120.65 103.76 PIPR33S 76.77 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 196.85 167.32 PIPR34S 100.2 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 133.35 120.02 PIPR35S 114.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 184.15 169.42 PIPR36S 192.6 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 304.8 268.22 PIPR37S 119.2 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 292.1 242.44 PIPR38S 161.1 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 133.35 113.35 PIPR39S 91.76 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 92.71 77.88 PIPR40S 66.17 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 152.4 128.02 PIPR41S 108.5 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 177.8 151.13 PIPR42S 133.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 203.2 166.62 PIPR43S 137.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 190.5 163.83 PIPR44S 125.8 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 196.85 157.48 PIPR45S 148.8 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 234.95 199.71 PIPR46S 161.2 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 146.05 128.52 PIPR47S 109.2 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 171.45 150.88 PIPR48S 129.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 152.4 131.06 PIPR49S 95.81 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 184.15 160.21 PIPR50S 107.2 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 203.2 182.88 PIPR51S 105.7 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 203.2 180.85 PIPR52S 85.58 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 203.2 176.78 PIPR53S 104.4 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 222.25 188.91 PIPR54S 119.3 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 146.05 125.60 PIPR55S 99.21 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 139.7 117.35 PIPR56S 78.65 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 139.7 114.55 PIPR57S 72.30 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 152.4 126.49 PIPR58S 76.77 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 203.2 172.72 PIPR59S 103.1 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 196.85 167.32 PIPR60S 91.87 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 266.7 226.70 PIPR61S 119.7 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 99.06 84.20 PIPR62S 127.2 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 111.13 97.79 PIPR63S 151.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 78.74 70.08 PIPR64S 103.9 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 92.71 81.58 PIPR65S 108.4 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 85.09 77.43 PIPR66S 93.19 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 123.19 110.87 PIPR67S 105.3 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 165.1 151.89 PIPR68S 93.38 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 190.5 175.26 PIPR69S 72.74 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 165.1 145.29 PIPR70S 122.1 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 127 111.76 PIPR71S 88.62 32 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g < 24 h S, M, T, D S 92.08 79.18 PIPR72S 52.68 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 66.68 60.01 PIPR73S 34.17 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 393.70 370.08 PIPR74S 156.7 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 317.50 292.10 PIPR75S 233.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 107.95 101.47 PIPR76S 153.7 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 67.95 62.51 PIPR77S 129.3 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 45.72 42.06 PIPR78S 108.4 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 177.80 172.47 PIPR79S 170.7 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 13.97 12.43 PIPR80S 25.34 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 304.80 271.27 PIPR81S 138.7 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 71.12 71.12 PIPR82S 97.64 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 83.82 79.63 PIPR83S 99.81 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 104.78 99.54 PIPR84S 105.8 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 139.70 132.72 PIPR85S 126.7 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 152.40 137.16 PIPR86S 106.1 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 260.35 182.25 PIPR87S 105.9 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 488.95 268.92 PIPR88S 112.4 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 203.20 188.98 PIPR89S 135.6 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 704.85 662.56 PIPR90S 172.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 952.50 904.88 PIPR91S 183.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 1244.60 995.68 PIPR92S 174.9 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 1485.90 891.54 PIPR93S 126.5 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 781.05 757.62 PIPR94S 170.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 476.25 404.81 PIPR95S 161.2 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 273.05 262.13 PIPR96S 175.3 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 22.23 20.45 PIPR97S 51.55 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 24.13 23.16 PIPR98S 57.82 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 36.83 34.99 PIPR99S 89.18 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 27.94 27.94 PIPR100S 69.87 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 26.67 26.67 PIPR101S 65.31 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 20.32 20.32 PIPR102S 44.85 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 26.67 26.67 PIPR103S 58.92 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 190.50 182.88 PIPR104S 134.8 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 109.86 96.67 PIPR105S 85.13 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 203.20 182.88 PIPR106S 121.76 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 209.55 190.69 PIPR107S 109.6 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 146.05 127.06 PIPR108S 94.04 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 165.10 148.59 PIPR109S 115.0 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 254.00 223.52 PIPR110S 122.7 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 311.15 283.15 PIPR111S 122.3 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 165.10 150.24 PIPR112S 98.55 33 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g < 24 h S, M, T, D S 920.75 644.53 PIPR113S 121.8 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 1073.15 697.55 PIPR114S 112.5 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 1003.30 752.48 PIPR115S 107.9 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 933.45 653.42 PIPR116S 116.9 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 742.95 646.37 PIPR117S 128.2 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 1879.60 939.80 PIPR118S 111.3 < 24 h S, M, T, D S 266.70 253.37 PIPR119S 161.4  F, M, T S 114.00  PIPR120F 16.27  F, M, T S 121.00  PIPR121F 17.88  F, M, T S 88.50  PIPR122F 11.98  F, M, T S 436.00  PIPR123F 69.67  F, M, T S 516.00  PIPR124F 46.18  F, M, T S 1586.00  PIPR125F 61.17  F, M, T S 1129.00  PIPR126F 67.41  F, M, T S 550.00  PIPR127F 41.03  F, M, T S 1001.00  PIPR128F 31.96 30 d, 0.15 g F, M, T, D N 96.00 88.32 PIPR129F 35.79 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 31.75 27.94 PIPR130F 7.72 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 117.48 105.73 PIPR131F 32.23 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 48.26 40.06 PIPR132F 18.97 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 73.03 64.26 PIPR133F 19.48 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 59.06 49.02 PIPR134F 18.47 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 78.74 67.72 PIPR135F 16.80 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 22.23 18.67 PIPR136F 12.29 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 6.99 6.15 PIPR137F 9.83 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 22.23 20.45 PIPR138F 16.03 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 107.32 93.36 PIPR139F 59.69 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 292.10 245.36 PIPR140F 4.33 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 81.28 72.34 PIPR141F 37.18 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 298.45 229.81 PIPR142F 3.79 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 241.30 195.45 PIPR143F 8.56 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 133.35 109.35 PIPR144F 8.64 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 93.98 78.00 PIPR145F 45.63 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 67.95 45.52 PIPR146F 21.06 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 4.76 4.38 PIPR147F 35.59 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 13.97 12.43 PIPR148F 40.38 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 29.85 26.86 PIPR149F 52.53 < 24 h F, M, T, D S 59.69 51.33 PIPR150F 51.59 Northern squawfish, larval, 0.32 g S, M, T S 380  PTLU01S 92.13 138.2 Ptychocheilus oregonensis larval, 0.34 g S, M, T S 480  PTLU02S 207.4 34 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Speciesa Organism Age,

Size, or Lifestage Methodb Chemicalc Reported LC50 or EC50 ( total µ g/ L) d Reported LC50 or EC50 ( Diss. µ g/ L) e BLM Data Label BLM Normalized LC50 or EC50 ( µ g/ L) f Species Mean Acute Value ( µ g/ L) g Northern squawfish, 5.0 cm, 1.33 g F, M, T C 23  PTOR01F 15.23 13.15 Ptychocheilus oregonensis 7.2 cm, 3.69 g F, M, T C 18  PTOR02F 11.36 Razorback sucker, larval, 0.31 g S, M, T S 220  XYTE01S 66.16 81.75 Xyrauchen texanus larval, 0.32 g S, M, T S 340  XYTE02S 101.0 Gila topminnow,

Poeciliposis occidentalis 2.72 cm, 0.219 g S, M, T S 160  POAC01S 58.32 58.32 Bluegill, 3.58 cm, 0.63 g R, M, D C  2200 LEMA01R 2026 1968 Lepomis macrochirus 12 cm, 35 g F, M, T S 1100  LEMA02F 1965 2.8 6.8 cm F, M, T C 1000  LEMA03F 3512 3.58 cm, 0.63 g F, M, D C  1300 LEMA04F 1073 Fantail darter, 3.7 cm S, M, T S 330  ETFL01S 123.2 130.2 Etheostoma flabellare 3.7 cm S, M, T S 341  ETFL02S 126.6 3.7 cm S, M, T S 373  ETFL03S 128.5 3.7 cm S, M, T S 392  ETFL04S 143.1 Greenthroat darter,

Etheostoma lepidum 2.26 cm, 0.133 g S, M, T S 260  ETLE01S 86.34 86.34 Johnny darter, 3.9 cm S, M, T S 493  ETNI01S 175.5 187.3 Etheostoma nigrum 3.9 cm S, M, T S 483  ETNI02S 172.5 3.9 cm S, M, T S 602  ETNI03S 210.4 3.9 cm S, M, T S 548  ETNI04S 193.2 Fountain darter,

Etheostoma rubrum 2.02 cm, 0.062 g S, M, T S 60  ETRU01S 23.38 23.38 Boreal toad,

Bufo boreas tadpole, 0.012 g S, M, T S 120  BUBO01S 49.06 49.06 a Species appear in order taxonomically, with invertebrates listed first, fish, and an amphibian listed last. Species within each genus are ordered alphabetically. Within each species, tests are orde test method ( static, renewal, flow through) and date.

b S = static, R = renewal, F = flow through, U = unmeasured, M = measured, T = exposure concentrations were measured as total copper, D = exposure concentrations were measured as dissolved copper.

c S = copper sulfate, N = copper nitrate, C = copper chloride.

d Values in this column are total copper LC50 or EC50 values as reported by the author.

e Values in this column are dissolved copper LC50 or EC50 values either reported by the author or if the author did not report a dissolved value then a conversion factor ( CF) was applied to the total copper LC50 to estimate dissolved copper values.

g Underlined LC50s or EC50s not used to derive SMAV because considered extreme value. 35 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Schubauer Berigan et al. 1993 Schubauer Berigan et al. 1993 Schubauer Berigan et al. 1993 Arthur and Leonard 1970 Arthur and Leonard 1970 Nebeker et al. 1986b Nebeker et al. 1986b Arthur and Leonard 1970 Arthur and Leonard 1970 Keller unpublished Keller unpublished Keller and Zam 1991 Keller and Zam 1991 Keller unpublished Keller unpublished Keller unpublished Keller unpublished Keller unpublished Keller unpublished Carlson et al. 1986 Carlson et al. 1986 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger et al. 1989 Belanger and Cherry 1990 36 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Belanger and Cherry 1990 Oris et al. 1991 Diamond et al. 1997b Nebeker et al. 1986a Nebeker et al. 1986a Nebeker et al. 1986a Nebeker et al. 1986a Nebeker et al. 1986a Nebeker et al. 1986a Nebeker et al. 1986a Nebeker et al. 1986a Baird et al. 1991 Baird et al. 1991 Baird et al. 1991 Baird et al. 1991 Baird et al. 1991 Baird et al. 1991 Meador 1991 Meador 1991 Meador 1991 Meador 1991 Meador 1991 Meador 1991 Meador 1991 Meador 1991 Meador 1991 Meador 1991 Chapman et al. Manuscript Chapman et al. Manuscript Chapman et al. Manuscript Chapman et al. Manuscript Long's MS Thesis Long's MS Thesis Long's MS Thesis Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

37 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Carlson et al. 1986 Arthur and Leonard 1970 Arthur and Leonard 1970 Schubauer Berigan et al. 1993 Schubauer Berigan et al. 1993 Schubauer Berigan et al. 1993 Welsh 1996 Welsh 1996 Welsh 1996 Welsh 1996 Warnick and Bell 1969 Kosalwat and Knight 1987 Dwyer et al. 1999 Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1995 38 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Buckley 1983 Chapman 1975 Chapman and Stevens 1978 Mudge et al. 1993 Mudge et al. 1993 Mudge et al. 1993 Mudge et al. 1993 Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1995 Cacela et al. 1996 Cacela et al. 1996 Welsh et al. 2000 Welsh et al. 2000 Welsh et al. 2000 Welsh et al. 2000 Chapman 1975, 1978 Chapman 1975, 1978 Chapman 1975, 1978 Chapman 1975, 1978 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 39 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Chakoumakos et al. 1979 Cusimano et al. 1986 Mudge et al. 1993 Cacela et al. 1996 Cacela et al. 1996 Cacela et al. 1996 Cacela et al. 1996 Cacela et al. 1996 Cacela et al. 1996 Hansen et al. 2000 Hansen et al. 2000 Hansen et al. 2000 Hansen et al. 2000 Hansen et al. 2000 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Servizi and Martens 1978 Chapman 1975, 1978 Chapman 1975, 1978 Chapman 1975, 1978 Chapman 1975, 1978 Chapman and McCrady 1977 Chapman and McCrady 1977 Chapman and McCrady 1977 Chapman and McCrady 1977 Welsh et al. 2000 Welsh et al. 2000 Welsh et al. 2000 Welsh et al. 2000 40 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Hansen et al. 2000 Hansen et al. 2000 Hansen et al. 2000 Hansen et al. 2000 Hansen et al. 2000 Andros and Garton 1980 Dwyer et al. 1995 Hartwell et al. 1989 Birge et al. 1983 Birge et al. 1983 Birge et al. 1983; Benson & Birge Carlson et al. 1986 Carlson et al. 1986 Schubauer Berigan et al. 1993 Schubauer Berigan et al. 1993 Schubauer Berigan et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Welsh et al. 1993 Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1995 Richards and Beitinger 1995 Richards and Beitinger 1995 Richards and Beitinger 1995 Richards and Beitinger 1995 Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b 41 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b 42 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b 43 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Lind et al. Manuscript ( 1978)

Spehar and Fiandt 1986 Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Erickson et al. 1996a, b Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1995 44 Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Copper to Freshwater Animals Reference Andros and Garton 1980 Andros and Garton 1980 Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1995 Dwyer et al. 1999 Blaylock et al. 1985 Benoit 1975 Cairns et al. 1981 Blaylock et al. 1985 Lydy and Wissing 1988 Lydy and Wissing 1988 Lydy and Wissing 1988 Lydy and Wissing 1988 Dwyer et al. 1999 Lydy and Wissing 1988 Lydy and Wissing 1988 Lydy and Wissing 1988 Lydy and Wissing 1988 Dwyer et al. 1999 Dwyer et al. 1999 rdered by 45 Temp pH Diss Cu DOC % HA Ca Mg Na K SO4 Cl HCO3 S Deg C ug/ L mg/ L mg/ L mg/ L mg/ L mg/ L mg/ L mg/ L mg/ L mg/ L 20.00 7.50 1.00E+ 00 5.00E 01 10.00 1.40E+ 01 1.21E+ 01 2.63E+ 01 2.10E+ 00 1.90E+ 00 8.14E+ 01 6.50E+ 01 3.00E 04 f Normalization Chemistry