[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 199 (Wednesday, October 14, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 65035]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22661]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG21-2-000.
    Applicants: HDSI, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of HDSI, LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/6/20.
    Accession Number: 20201006-5060.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/27/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2302-008; ER19-1342-001; ER19-1343-001; ER19-
2674-001.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico, NMRD Data Center
II, LLC, NMRD Data Center III, LLC, New Mexico PPA Corporation.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status to Reflect Participation in
Energy Imbalance Market, et al. of the PNM Entities.
    Filed Date: 10/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20201005-5138.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2719-037.
    Applicants: East Coast Power Linden Holding, L.L.C.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of East Coast
Power Linden Holding, L.L.C.
    Filed Date: 10/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20201005-5176.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1935-004.
    Applicants: UNS Electric, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Errata to Order No. 845 Compliance
Filing to be effective 5/22/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/6/20.
    Accession Number: 20201006-5048.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/27/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-29-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Termination DEF-Duette
Solar E&P Agreement to be effective 12/5/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20201005-5139.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-30-000.
    Applicants: Pattern Energy Wind Development LLC.
    Description: Request for Prospective One-Time, Limited Waivers of
Pattern Energy Wind Development LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20201005-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-31-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Cancellation of
WMPA SA No. 3915 to be effective 8/13/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20201005-5148.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-32-000.
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Rate Schedule No. 78 of
Tampa Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 10/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20201005-5157.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-33-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, Service
Agreement No. 5799; Queue No. AF1-260 and Cancellation to be effective
9/8/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/6/20.
    Accession Number: 20201006-5042.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/27/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-34-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original WMPA, Service
Agreement No. 5812; Queue No. AF1-166 to be effective 9/9/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/6/20.
    Accession Number: 20201006-5082.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/27/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying
facility filings:

    Docket Numbers: QF21-11-000.
    Applicants: SW Cogen Project, LLC.
    Description: Form 556 of SW Cogen Project, LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20201005-5153.
    Comments Due: None-Applicable.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 6, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-22661 Filed 10-13-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 40 (Thursday, February 28, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 13660]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04664]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2079-069]

Middle Fork American River Project; Notice of Availability of the
Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Middle Fork American River
Hydrolectric Project

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC)
regulations contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)(18 CFR
part 380 [FERC Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897]), the Office of Energy
Projects has reviewed the application for license for the Middle Fork
American River Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2079), located on the
Middle Fork of the American and Rubicon Rivers and Duncan and North and
South Fork Long Canyon Creeks in Placer and El Dorado Counties,
California, and has prepared a final environmental impact statement
(EIS) for the project. The project occupies 3,268 acres of federal
lands administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture--Forest
Service.
    The final EIS contains staff's analysis of the applicant's proposal
and the alternatives for relicensing the Middle Fork American River
Hydroelectric Project. The final EIS documents the views of
governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations, affected Indian
tribes, the public, the license applicant, and Commission staff.
    A copy of the final EIS is available for review at the Commission
or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov,
using the ``e-Library'' link. Enter the docket number, excluding the
last three digits, to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at (866)208-
3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    For further information, please contact Matt Buhyoff at (202) 502-
6824 or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: February 22, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-04664 Filed 2-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 82 (Monday, April 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 25128]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10032]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69362A; File No. 600-23]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing of Amended Application for Registration as a Clearing
Agency; Correction

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission published a document in
the Federal Register of April 17, 2013 concerning a Notice of Filing of
Amended Application for Registration as a Clearing Agency. The document
contained an incorrect citation regarding the Director of the Division
of Trading and Markets' delegated authority to publish notice of such
an application.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil Lombardo, Division of Trading and
Markets, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of April 17, 2013, in FR Doc. 2013-08924,
on page 22925, in footnote twenty-three, which appears in the second
column, correct the footnote to read: ``17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(16).''

    Dated: April 24, 2013.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-10032 Filed 4-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20386-20387]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8579]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Investor Form; SEC File No. 270-485; OMB Control No. 3235-0547.

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) that the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    In both 2009 and 2010, the Commission received over a million
contacts from investors on a wide range of investment-related issues.
These contacts generally fall into the following three categories:
    (a) Complaints against Commission-regulated individuals or
entities;
    (b) Questions concerning the federal securities laws, companies or
firms that the Commission regulates, or other investment-related
questions; and
    (c) Tips concerning potential violations of the federal securities
laws.
    Investors who submit complaints, ask questions, or provide tips do
so voluntarily. To make it easier for the public to contact the agency
electronically, the Commission created a series of online investor
forms. Investors may access these forms through the SEC Center for
Complaints and Enforcement Tips. The Investor form, asks for the same
information as the Enforcement form, (OMB 3235-0672) but also provides
options to choose to categorize the investor's complaint, and possibly
provide the investor with information about that issue. The investor
will have the opportunity to describe their complaint, and they will be
free to submit it without their name or contact information.
    Although the Investor form provides a structured format for
incoming investor correspondence, the Commission does not require that
investors use any particular form or format when contacting the agency.
To the contrary, investors may submit complaints, questions, and tips
through a variety of other means, including telephone, letter,
facsimile, or e-mail.
    Approximately 20,000 investors each year voluntarily choose to use
the complaint and question forms. Investors who choose not to use the
Investor Form receive the same level of service as those who do. The
dual purpose of the form is to make it easier for the public to contact
the agency with complaints, questions, tips, or other feedback and to
streamline the workflow of the Commission staff who handle those
contacts.
    The Commission has used--and will continue to use--the information
that investors supply on the Investor Form to review and process the
contact (which may, in turn, involve responding to questions,
processing complaints, or, as appropriate, initiating enforcement
investigations), to maintain a record of contacts, to track the volume
of investor complaints, and to analyze trends. Use of the Investor Form
is strictly voluntary. The Investor Form asks investors to provide
information concerning, among other things, their names, how they can
be reached, the names of the individuals or entities involved, the
nature of their complaint, question, or tip, what documents they can
provide, and what, if any, actions they have taken.
    The staff of the Commission estimates that the total reporting
burden for using the complaint and question forms is 5,000 hours. The
calculation of this estimate depends on the number of investors who use
the forms each year and the estimated time it takes to complete the
forms: 20,000 respondents x 15 minutes = 5,000 burden hours.
    The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a
collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a
valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Thomas Bayer, Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA, 22312; or send an
e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: April 5, 2011.
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-8579 Filed 4-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 55 (Thursday, March 21, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10521-10524]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05396]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2014-0005]

Individual Assistance Declarations Factors Guidance

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document provides notice of the availability of the final

Individual Assistance Declarations Factors Guidance. The Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published a notice of availability
and request for comment for the proposed guidance on September 22,
2016.

DATES: This policy is effective on June 1, 2019.

ADDRESSES: This final guidance is available online at http://www.regulations.gov and on FEMA's website at http://www.fema.gov. The
proposed and final guidance, all related Federal Register Notices, and
all public comments received during the comment period are available at
http://www.regulations.gov under docket ID FEMA-2014-0005. You may also
view a hard copy of the final guidance at the Office of Chief Counsel,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Room 8NE, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Millican, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (phone) 202-
212-3221 or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 1109 of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013 requires
FEMA, in cooperation with State, local, and Tribal emergency management
agencies, to review, update, and revise through rulemaking the factors
found at 44 CFR 206.48(b) that FEMA uses to determine whether to
recommend provision of Individual Assistance during a major disaster.
On November 12, 2015, FEMA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) proposing to implement the requirements of section 1109. 80 FR
70116. On September 22, 2016, FEMA sought comment on its proposed
Individual Assistance Declarations Factors Guidance, which is intended
to provide additional information to the public regarding the manner in
which FEMA is proposing to evaluate a request for a major disaster
declaration authorizing Individual Assistance. 81 FR 65369.

Public Comments on the Proposed Guidance

    FEMA received 23 comments on the proposed Individual Assistance
Declarations Factors Guidance. The majority of the comments were
duplicative of comments that were received on the NPRM and are
addressed in the Factors Considered When Evaluating a Governor's
Request for Individual Assistance for a Major Disaster final rule,
which is published elsewhere in today's Federal Register. Several
comments were specific to the guidance document and are discussed
below.
    One commenter suggested that Table 2: Number of IA Requests and
Granted IA Requests by ICC Ratio could be broken up from a 10-25 range
into 10-15, 15-20 and 20-25 ranges for the future. FEMA believes that
the ICC ratios should not be stratified any further at this point. Any
further stratification is likely to be incorrectly viewed as a
threshold by the States which is not what FEMA intended ICC to be used
for. FEMA is providing this information to States as a historical
reference to help guide States for planning in future disaster
situations. FEMA will update the table as necessary to provide trends
and historic data to the States in a timely manner to guide States on
what level of damage they should likely be prepared to handle on their
own without supplemental Federal assistance. However, it should be
noted that there are various other circumstances and factors that may
impact the President's determination of whether a major disaster
declaration is necessary that are not captured in the ICC ratio.
    Another commenter suggested that FEMA modify Table 1: Estimated
Cost of Assistance to Declaration Decision Comparative, to use a 50
percent benchmark instead of the breakdown of $7.5 million or more,
$1.5 to $7.5 million, and $1.5 million or less. FEMA has also declined
to use a 50 percent benchmark because we feel that the three different
benchmarks are more helpful to States for planning purposes. A 50
percent benchmark may inevitably lead to certain individuals or States
use that benchmark as a hard threshold which FEMA seeks to avoid. In
addition, it should be noted that there are various other circumstances
and factors that may impact the President's determination of whether a
major disaster declaration is necessary that are not captured in the
single data point of the estimated cost of assistance.
    One commenter asked whether the factors were weighted differently
depending on the IA program. In addition, they suggested casualties
should have a higher weight for a program such as Crisis Counseling.
With respect to IA programs other than IHP, FEMA has not identified a
formula similar to the ICC approach described elsewhere in the
guidance. Instead, FEMA considers the factors holistically to determine
which IA programs would best suit the needs of a community after a
disaster. In addition, there is a table in the guidance correlating
each Individual Assistance program with the factors that FEMA will
consider when evaluating a Governor's request for a major disaster
declaration authorizing such program. States may use this table to
better understand how the new IA declaration factors align with the
various IA programs.
    A commenter requested that FEMA include a statement that not all of
the IA programs will be available as soon as a major disaster is
declared. FEMA added a clarifying statement to the guidance that
authorization of Individual Assistance programs under a major disaster
declaration means that such programs are available for the State. FEMA
further clarified that a State may be required to submit an additional
application or additional information post major disaster declaration
to determine which IA programs are necessary, the scope of each IA
program, or the amount of each IA program funding.
    Another commenter requested that FEMA clarify that the
Transportation Infrastructure and Utilities sub-factor to the Impact to
Community Infrastructure factor encompasses private roads, bridges, and
tunnels as well as public roads, bridges, and tunnels. The commenters
felt that this clarification would address situations in rural or other
areas where a private road allows individuals access to publicly owned
transportation infrastructure. FEMA agrees with the commenter that this
clarification was needed and made the requested change to the guidance
document.
    A commenter proposed that FEMA should use metropolitan statistical
areas or census tract-level data instead of county-level data to
identify per capita income or the true impact to a local area and the
communities within it. Major disasters are generally declared by the
President on the county or parish level for ease of administration
because county- or parish-level designations clearly delineate which
areas within a State are or are not eligible for supplemental Federal
assistance. Census tracts are not as well known by disaster survivors.
FEMA has chosen to continue to use county-level data to match with how
disasters are declared. However, a State is always welcome to provide
any additional relevant information at the census tract level, or at
any other level, if such information illustrates the disaster impacted
local area or community in a different light than the county-level
data.
    A commenter requested clarification of what a reasonable commuting
distance from the impacted area was for

rental resources under the State, Tribal, and Local Government; Non-
Governmental Organizations (NGO); and Private Sector Activity sub-
factor for the Resource Availability factor. Reasonable commuting
distance is defined in regulation at 44 CFR 206.111 as a distance that
does not place undue hardship on an applicant. The regulatory
definition also takes into consideration the traveling time involved
due to road conditions, e.g., mountainous regions or bridges out and
the normal commuting patterns of the area.
    Another commenter stated that the Disaster Impacted Population
Profile factor violates Section 308 of the Stafford Act and recommended
that FEMA exclude this factor. Section 308 of the Stafford Act covers
nondiscrimination in disaster assistance and states that activities
shall be accomplished in an equitable and impartial manner, without
discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, nationality,
sex, age, disability, English proficiency, or economic status. FEMA
notes that in the current practice and regulation, FEMA considers how a
disaster impacts ``special populations'' such as low-income, the
elderly, or the unemployed, and whether such populations may have a
greater need for assistance. 44 CFR 206.48(b)(3). FEMA believes that it
is important to consider how disasters may disproportionality have a
negative impact on certain populations. For instance, a disaster may
disproportionality impact individuals who are 65 years or older because
they may live on a fixed income with less disposable income and
therefore may have a difficult time paying for repairs to a disaster
damaged home. Information on the percentage of the population that are
non-English speaking assists FEMA in structuring their outreach efforts
to ensure that any messaging is conducted in the appropriate language
for the disaster impacted population.
    Another comment stated that with respect to the Impact to Community
Infrastructure factor, FEMA should define what ``impact'' to community
infrastructure means, and what a ``significant'' disruption is. The
commenter also requested that FEMA provide additional guidance
regarding how it would assess this factor. For purposes of evaluating
the impact of a major disaster on a community's infrastructure, FEMA
considers any covered activity (such as search and rescue) or
disruption (such as power loss) to be sufficiently significant to fall
under this factor if that activity or disruption lasts for more than 72
hours. With respect to impact of the disaster on life-saving and life-
sustaining services, FEMA is specifically seeking information on
disruption to services such as, but not limited to, police, fire/EMS,
hospital/medical, sewage, and water treatment services because
prolonged disruption may affect the viability of a community and
necessitate survivor relocation. Regarding the impact of the disaster
on transportation infrastructure and utilities, FEMA is seeking
information on the number of roads, bridges, tunnels, and public
transit closures and utility outages of water, power, sewage, and gas
that last longer than 72 hours. A State is welcome to provide any
additional information that highlights the impact of the disaster on
the State and local community infrastructure.
    A commenter stated that FEMA should exclude the ``casualties''
factor or explain how it is weighted. FEMA does not believe that it is
appropriate to exclude the casualties factor because it is an important
factor to help determine the level of trauma that a community and State
suffered from a disaster. A large amount of injured, missing, or
deceased individuals can indicate a heightened need for supplemental
Federal assistance because casualties are indicative of the level of
trauma in the disaster affected areas. Regarding the weight given to
the casualties factor, FEMA has not assigned any percentage or given
weight to the factor. FEMA considers casualties holistically along with
the other factors in the final rule to determine the need of
supplemental Federal assistance for a State and local community.
    A commenter recommended that FEMA move the table that correlates
each IA program to the factors considered earlier in the guidance as
well as add a column with a tentative timeline for each IA program.
FEMA declined to move table earlier in the document because it is
important to have an understanding of the factors considered in
evaluating the need for a major disaster authorizing IA before
associating each factor with the applicable IA program. In addition,
FEMA has declined to add a tentative timeline because the timeline of
the IA programs varies from disaster to disaster based on numerous
factors such as the size and scope of the recovery.
    A commenter asked that FEMA include in the guidance the
calculations that are used to determine the estimated cost of
assistance so that States can do the calculation themselves based on
local and State level damage assessments to assist in their evaluation
of whether or not to request a joint FEMA-State preliminary damage
assessment. Currently, the estimated cost of assistance is calculated
by FEMA during completion of the joint FEMA-State preliminary damage
assessment. Previously, FEMA was not consistent in sharing the results
of the estimated cost of assistance with the affected States. FEMA
clarified in the guidance that it would provide the estimated cost of
assistance to the State during and after the preliminary damage
assessment. Regarding the calculations, that is beyond the scope of the
Individual Assistance Declarations Factors guidance and is more
appropriately considered in any potential future updates to the
preliminary damage assessment guidance and materials.
    A commenter to the proposed guidance recommended that FEMA include
in the regulation and guidance sub-factors related to the number of
rental units impacted, the degree of damage, the percent of disaster
impacted rental units occupied by persons of low and moderate income,
and other similar data. FEMA has declined to include this sub-factor
because during the disaster response phase it may be hard to capture
this granularity of detail especially the percent of disaster impacted
rental units occupied by persons of low and moderate income. If a State
is able to collect this level of detailed data during the preliminary
damage assessment phase they are welcome to provide this information
and FEMA will consider it when evaluating the State's request for
supplemental Federal assistance.

Changes to the Proposed Guidance

    FEMA made four changes to the proposed guidance based on comments
received on both the NPRM and the proposed guidance. First, as
discussed above, FEMA added a clarifying statement that a major
disaster declaration merely authorizes Individual Assistance;
additional applications or additional information are required to
determine the program scope or program funding amount. Second, also as
discussed above, FEMA clarified that it will evaluate the impact of the
disaster on both private and public roads under the ``Transportation
Infrastructure and Utilities'' sub-factor in the ``Impact to Community
Infrastructure'' factor. Third, as discussed the in the final rule
preamble, FEMA removed the ``Planning After Prior Disasters'' and the
``State Services'' sub-factors in the ``Resource Availability'' factor
based on comments received on the NPRM. Fourth, as discussed above in
the Public

Comments on the Proposed Guidance section FEMA clarified that it would
provide the estimated cost of assistance to the State during and after
the Preliminary Damage Assessment. Finally, FEMA also made changes to
the two tables that are found in the guidance document based on an
updated data set that was used in the final rule.
    The final guidance does not have the force or effect of law.

    Authority: Pub. L. 113-2.

Peter Gaynor,
Deputy Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2019-05396 Filed 3-20-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 129 (Thursday, July 5, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31387-31388]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14346]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 8315-013]

Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments,
Motions To Intervene, and Protests; Eagle Creek Sartell Hydro, LLC

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Request for temporary variance of Article
34.
    b. Project No.: 8315-013.
    c. Date Filed: June 19, 2018.
    d. Applicant: Eagle Creek Sartell Hydro, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Sartell Dam Hydro Project.
    f. Location: Mississippi River in Stearns and Benton counties,
Minnesota.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Ms. Melissa Rondou, Eagle Creek Sartell
Hydro, LLC, 116 N. State Street, P.O. Box 167, Neshkoro, WI 54960,
(920) 293-4628 ext. 347, [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Jeremy Jessup,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests, is 15 days from the issuance date of this notice by the
Commission. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.
Please file comments, motions to intervene, and protests using the
Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/doc-sfiling/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket numbers P-8315-013.
    k. Description of Request: The applicant requests a temporary
variance from the run-of-river and reservoir elevation requirements of
Article 34 of the license. The variance will allow the licensee to
drawdown the reservoir approximately three feet over a six-week period,
from August 1 through September 15, 2018. The drawdown is to assist the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the Little Rock Lake
Association, and the Benton Soil and Water Conservation District to
facilitate water quality, fish habitat, and restoration improvements in
the reach of the Mississippi River upstream of the project, and at
Little Rock Lake, located approximately six miles upstream of the
project.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed on
the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
[email protected], for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Motions To Intervene, or Protests: Anyone may submit
comments, a motion to intervene, or a protest in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, motions to
intervene, or protests must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS, MOTION TO INTERVENE, or
PROTEST as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number(s) of the application to which the
filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of
the person intervening or protesting; and (4) otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions
to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and
otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments,
motions to intervene, or protests should relate to project works which
are the subject of the application. Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. A copy of any motion to
intervene or protest must be served upon each representative of the
applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener
files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits
of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular
resource

agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource
agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application
must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the
service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in
accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: June 27, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-14346 Filed 7-3-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 12 (Wednesday, January 19, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3026-3029]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1019]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0032; FRL-8859-3]

Fluazinam; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
fluazinam in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. Interregional Research Project Number
4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective January 19, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before March 21, 2011, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0032. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.

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-2009-0032 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
March 21, 2011. 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-2009-0032, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of August 19, 2009 (74 FR 41898) (FRL-8426-
7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of two pesticide petitions: PP
9E7570 by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College
Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540; and PP 9F7571 by ISK
Biosciences Corporation, 7470 Auburn Rd., Suite A, Concord, OH 44077.
PP 9E7570 requested that 40 CFR 180.574 be amended by establishing
tolerances for residues of the fungicide fluazinam, (3-chloro-N-[3-
chloro-2,6-dinitro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-
pyridinamine), in or on carrot, root at 0.8 parts per million (ppm). PP
9F7571 requested that 40 CFR 180.574 be amended by establishing
tolerances for residues of the fungicide fluazinam and the metabolite
AMGT, (3-[[4-amino-3-[[3-chloro-5-(trifloromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]amino]-
2-nitro-6-(trifluoromethyl) phenyl] thio]-2-(beta-D-glucopyranosyloxy)
propionic acid), in or on the raw agricultural commodity apple at 1.7
ppm and wet apple pomace at 5.0 ppm, and by establishing tolerances for
the combined residues of fluazinam and its metabolites, DAPA and AMPA,
in the following animal tissues and meat byproducts at 0.03 ppm:
Cattle, fat; cattle, kidney; cattle, liver; cattle, meat; cattle, meat
byproducts; goat, fat; goat, kidney; goat, liver; goat, meat; goat,
meat byproducts; horse, fat; horse, kidney; horse, liver; horse, meat;
horse, meat byproducts; milk; sheep, fat; sheep, kidney; sheep, liver;
sheep, meat; and sheep, meat byproducts. PP 9E7570 referenced a summary
of the petition prepared on behalf of IR-4 by ISK Biosciences, the
registrant; PP 9F7571 referenced a summary of the petition prepared by
the registrant, ISK Biosciences. Petition summaries are available in
the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received
in response to the notices of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised several proposed tolerances and has determined that several
other proposed tolerances are not necessary. The reasons for these
changes are explained in Unit IV.C.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.''
    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for fluazinam including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with fluazinam
follows.
    In the Federal Register of May 12, 2010 (75 FR 26662) (FRL-8824-5),
EPA published a Final Rule establishing tolerances for residues of the
fungicide fluazinam in or on bushberry subgroup 13-07B at 7.0 pm;
lettuce, head at 0.02 ppm; lettuce, leaf at 2.0 ppm; and onion, bulb,
subgroup 3-07A at 0.20 ppm,

associated with PP 8E7506. When the Agency conducted the risk
assessment in support of the May 12, 2010 tolerance action, it
considered the use of fluazinam in or on carrot, root (PP 9E7570),
apples and wet apple pomace (PP 9F7571), and fluazinam and its
metabolites AMPA and DAPA in the following animal tissues and meat
byproducts: Cattle, fat; cattle, kidney; cattle, liver; cattle, meat;
cattle, meat byproducts; goat, fat; goat, kidney; goat, liver; goat,
meat; goat, meat byproducts; horse, fat; horse, kidney; horse, liver;
horse, meat; horse, meat byproducts; milk; sheep, fat; sheep, kidney;
sheep, liver; sheep, meat; and sheep, meat byproducts (PP 9F7571).
However, because of data deficiencies identified during the course of
review, EPA was not able to recommend in favor of the tolerances
associated with PP 9E7570 and PP 9F7571. The deficiencies related to an
apple processing study, a cattle feeding study, and the analytical
method for the metabolites AMPA and DAPA in fat, liver, and kidney.
    In response to the noted data deficiencies, the registrant provided
additional data for the apple processing study and a rebuttal to the
cattle feeding study; after further review, EPA has determined that
these studies are now acceptable. Additionally, in response to the
analytical method data deficiency, the registrant submitted a revised
analytical method and independent laboratory validation, which EPA has
concluded is adequate as an enforcement method for residues of
fluazinam, AMPA, and DAPA and their sulfamate conjugates in kidney,
liver, and fat. Detailed considerations regarding EPA's resolution of
these data deficiencies are discussed in the document, ``Fluazinam,
Petitions for the Establishment of Tolerances and Registration of New
Uses on Apples and Carrots. HED's Conclusions Regarding Registrant's
Response to Data Deficiencies'' which is available at http://regulations.gov in docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0032.
    Since EPA considered the additional uses proposed by PP 9E7570 and
PP 9F7571 in its most recent risk assessments, establishing tolerances
on these commodities will not change the estimated aggregate risks
resulting from use of fluazinam, as discussed in the May 12, 2010 (75
FR 26662) (FRL-8824-5) Federal Register. Therefore, EPA concludes that
there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general
population, and to infants and children from aggregate exposure to
fluazinam residues. Refer to the May 12, 2010 Federal Register
document, available at http://www.regulations.gov, for a detailed
discussion of the aggregate risk assessments and determination of
safety. EPA relies upon those risk assessments and the findings made in
the Federal Register document in support of this action.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An adequate enforcement methodology, gas chromatography with
electron capture detection (GC/ECD), is available to enforce the
tolerance expression for plant commodities. For livestock commodities,
an adequate enforcement method, liquid chromatography/mass
spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS), is available to enforce the
tolerance expression for residues of fluazinam, AMPA, and DAPA and
their sulfamate conjugates in bovine liver, fat, and milk.
    The methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    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 U.N. 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 departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established MRLs for fluazinam in or on apple or
carrot. However, these tolerance petitions have been evaluated as a
joint review with Canada, and the United States and Canada have agreed
that the appropriate tolerance levels for carrot, roots is 0.70 ppm and
apple is 2.0 ppm.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    Based on analysis of the data supporting the petitions, EPA has
revised the proposed tolerances in or on carrot, roots from 0.8 ppm to
0.70 ppm; apples from 1.7 ppm to 2.0 ppm; and the following proposed
tolerances from 0.03 ppm to 0.05 ppm: Cattle, fat; cattle, meat
byproducts; goat, fat; goat, meat byproducts; horse, fat; horse, meat
byproducts; sheep, fat; and sheep, meat byproducts. EPA revised these
tolerance levels based on analysis of the residue data using the
Agency's Tolerance Spreadsheet in accordance with the Agency's
``Guidance for Setting Pesticide Tolerances Based on Field Trial
Data.''
    Additionally, based on the results of an animal feeding study and
the calculated dietary burden for dairy cattle, EPA has determined that
the proposed tolerances of 0.03 ppm for the meat of cattle, goat,
horse, and sheep are not necessary. The Agency has further determined
that the proposed tolerances of 0.03 ppm for the liver and kidney of
cattle, goat, horse, and sheep are not necessary because tolerances are
being established for meat byproducts of cattle, goat, horse, and
sheep; EPA previously determined that individual tolerances are not
needed for liver and kidney when a tolerance is being established for
meat byproducts.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of fluazinam,
(3-chloro-N-[3-chloro-2,6-dinitro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-5-
(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinamine), in or on carrot, roots at 0.70 ppm;
apple at 2.0 ppm; apple, wet pomace at 5.0 ppm; and tolerances are
established for residues of fluazinam and its metabolites AMPA and DAPA
in or on cattle, fat at 0.05 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm;
goat, fat at 0.05 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; horse, fat at
0.05 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.05 ppm;
and sheep, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain
any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or Tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (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).

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: January 7, 2011.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. Section 180.574 is amended by alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph (a)(1), and by adding paragraph
(a)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.574  Fluazinam; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. (1) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apple......................................................         2.0
Apple, wet pomace..........................................         5.0

                                * * * * *
Carrot, roots..............................................         0.70

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

* * * * *
    (3) Tolerances are established for residues of fluazinam (3-chloro-
N-[3-chloro-2,6-dinitro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-5-(trifluoromethyl)-
2-pyridinamine), including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by measuring only fluazinam, AMPA
(2-(6-amino-3-chloro-[alpha],[alpha],[alpha]-trifluoro-2-nitro-p-
toluidino)-3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl) pyridine), DAPA (3-chloro-2-
(2,6-diamino-3-chloro-[alpha],[alpha],[alpha].-trifluoro-p-toluidino)-
5-(trifluoromethyl)pyridine), and their sulfamate conjugates.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, fat.................................................        0.05
Cattle, meat byproducts.....................................        0.05
Goat, fat...................................................        0.05
Goat, meat byproducts.......................................        0.05
Horse, fat..................................................        0.05
Horse, meat byproducts......................................        0.05
Sheep, fat..................................................        0.05
Sheep, meat byproducts......................................        0.05
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-1019 Filed 1-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P