[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 168 (Thursday, August 29, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 45484]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18674]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC19-124-000.
    Applicants: Wessington Wind Energy Center, LLC, Wessington Springs
Wind, LLC, Wilton Wind II, LLC, Wilton Wind Energy II, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of Wessington Wind Energy Center, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 8/22/19.
    Accession Number: 20190822-5151.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/19.

    Docket Numbers: EC19-125-000.
    Applicants: Brea Generation LLC, Brea Power II, LLC, Rhode Island
Engine Genco, LLC, Rhode Island LFG Genco, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of Brea Generation LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 8/23/19.
    Accession Number: 20190823-5062.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/19.

    Docket Numbers: EC19-126-000.
    Applicants: Carville Energy LLC, Oneta Power, LLC, AMF Florence
LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of Carville Energy LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 8/23/19.
    Accession Number: 20190823-5076.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/19.

    Docket Numbers: EC19-127-000.
    Applicants: Birchwood Power Partners, L.P., Virginia Electric and
Power Company.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act, et al. of Birchwood Power Partners, L.P., et
al.
    Filed Date: 8/23/19.
    Accession Number: 20190823-5136.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/19.

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

    Docket Numbers: EG19-169-000.
    Applicants: SR Arlington II, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of SR Arlington II, LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/16/19.
    Accession Number: 20190816-5192.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/6/19.

    Docket Numbers: EG19-170-000.
    Applicants: South Peak Wind LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of South Peak Wind LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/22/19.
    Accession Number: 20190822-5183.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/19.

    Docket Numbers: EG19-171-000.
    Applicants: PGR Lessee L, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator
Status of PGR Lessee L, LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/23/19.
    Accession Number: 20190823-5152.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/19.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER18-554-004.
    Applicants: Carville Energy LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational Filing Regarding
Upstream Change in Control to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 8/23/19.
    Accession Number: 20190823-5065.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-455-003.
    Applicants: Stoneray Power Partners, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Stoneray Revised Rate Schedule
Compliance Filing Effective February 1 2019 to be effective 2/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 8/22/19.
    Accession Number: 20190822-5079.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-2677-000.
    Applicants: Hampshire Council of Governments.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Market-Based Rate Tariff of
New Hampshire Council of Governments.
    Filed Date: 8/22/19.
    Accession Number: 20190823-0001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-2678-000.
    Applicants: American Transmission Systems, Incorporated, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: ATSI submits 6 ECSAs,
Service Agreement Nos. 5165, 5338, 5340, 5391, et al to be effective
10/22/2019.
    Filed Date: 8/23/19.
    Accession Number: 20190823-5030.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-2679-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2019-08-23 2018
Interconnection Process Enhancements Tariff Amendment to be effective
10/23/2019.
    Filed Date: 8/23/19.
    Accession Number: 20190823-5055.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or 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: August 23, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-18674 Filed 8-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 7, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48068-48075]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18975]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0262; FRL-9388-9]

Topramezone; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
topramezone in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. BASF Corporation requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective August 7, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 7, 2013,
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-2012-0262, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West Bldg., 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 (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-
5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois Rossi, Registration Division
(7505P), 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.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers

determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/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-2012-0262 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 7, 2013. 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 (excluding any Confidential Business Information (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 the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0262, 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 CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (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. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of May 23, 2012 (77 FR 30481) (FRL-9347-8),
EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 2F7997)
by BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.612 be amended
by establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide topramezone
([3-(4,5-dihydro-3-isoxazolyl)-2-methyl-4-(methylsulfonyl)phenyl](5-
hydroxy-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)methanone), in or on fish and
shellfish at 0.05 parts per million (ppm). That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by BASF Corporation, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the proposed commodity definitions and established tolerances
for livestock meat by-products, which are needed as a result of the
increased livestock dietary burden associated with the proposed use for
topramezone. 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 FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), 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 topramezone including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with topramezone follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Topramezone is a member of the class of herbicides known as
HPPD inhibitors. Inhibition of the enzyme 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate
dioxygenase (HPPD) results in decreased carotenoid synthesis and
ultimately bleaching of target plants. In mammals, HPPD is involved in
the catabolism of the amino acid tyrosine, and its inhibition causes
blood levels of tyrosine to rise; a condition known as tyrosinemia.
Some of the toxicities resulting from tyrosinemia in laboratory animals
include ocular, developmental, liver, and kidney effects. Topramezone
exhibits a mammalian toxicity profile that is consistent with HPPD
inhibition.
    The primary target organs affected following oral administration of
topramezone in animal toxicity studies were the eyes, thyroid,
pancreas, and liver. The most sensitive species was the rat, and in
rats and dogs, males were more sensitive than females. The effects on
the eyes in chronic toxicity studies consisted of pannus
(vascularization) and keratitis (cloudiness) of the cornea in both
sexes. Hypertrophy and hyperplasia of the thyroid, hypertrophy and
focal necrosis in the liver, and degeneration of the pancreas were
among the histopathology findings reported across different subchronic
and chronic studies in rats and dogs. Results of chronic toxicity
studies in dogs, mice, and rats also suggest decrements in body
weights, body-weight gains, and food utilization (dogs only).
    There was evidence for increased susceptibility following in utero
exposure to topramezone in rats and rabbits. In rabbits, fetal
abnormalities

including supernumerary thoracic vertebrae and supernumerary 13th rib
were observed in the presence of maternal toxicity in six of eight
developmental toxicity studies conducted in two different strains. In
rats, developmental effects consisting of skeletal variations occurred
in the presence of maternal toxicity. Increased maternal serum levels
of tyrosine were reported in several developmental toxicity studies
(several in rabbits and one in mice), consistent with the proposed mode
of action for topramezone involving HPPD inhibition. In the rat 2-
generation reproductive toxicity study, there was no evidence of
increased pre- or post-natal susceptibility; offspring effects occurred
in the presence of maternal effects. The offspring effects consisted of
decreased pup body weight/body-weight gain in F2 (both
sexes) and increased time to preputial separation (F1
males). Maternal effects were consistent with HPPD inhibition
(decreased body weights, decreased body-weight gains, increased thyroid
and kidney weights, and microscopic findings in the eyes, kidneys, and
thyroid). No reproductive effects were reported.
    Topramezone did not show any evidence of neurotoxicity in the acute
(ACN) or subchronic (SCN) neurotoxicity studies, but in a rat
developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) study, where dosing with topramezone
took place during the prenatal as well as postnatal time periods, there
was evidence for increased qualitative susceptibility. In the maternal
animals, toxicity was limited to corneal opacity, whereas effects in
the offspring included neurobehavioral and neuropathological changes.
Offspring neurobehavioral effects consisted of a decreased auditory
startle reflex at postnatal day 24 in both sexes (20-30%) and at
postnatal day 60 for males (55%). There were also mild decreases in
offspring absolute brain weights and neuropathological effects
involving decreased brain morphometric measurements (e.g., hippocampus,
and parietal cortex).
    Topramezone is classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans at doses that do not alter rat thyroid hormone homeostasis.''
EPA has determined that the thyroid tumors arise through a non-linear
mode of action, and the chronic reference dose (cRfD) is expected to be
protective of alterations in hormone homeostasis that may result in
thyroid tumor formation. Mutagenicity studies conducted on technical
topramezone and its major metabolites did not demonstrate any mutagenic
potential.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by topramezone as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document ``Topramezone: Human-Health Risk
Assessment for (1) New Uses in Non-Crop Aquatic Sites and (2) Increased
Maximum Application Rate for Currently Registered Terrestrial Uses in
the Maintenance of Bare Grounds (Roadsides, Utility and Railroad
Rights-of-Ways, Industrial Sites, and Tank Farms),'' pages 36-39 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0262.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for topramezone used for
human risk assessment is shown in the Table of this unit.

      Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Topramezone for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Point of departure
        Exposure/scenario            and uncertainty/     RfD, PAD, LOC for     Study and toxicological effects
                                      safety factors       risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (General population  LOAEL = 8 mg/kg bw..  UF = 100X (for       Developmental Neurotoxicity Study
 including infants and children).                         inter- and intra-    in Rats.
                                                          species             Offspring LOAEL = 8 mg/kg bw based
                                                          extrapolation).      on decreased maximum auditory
                                                         FQPA SF = 10X......   startle reflex response,
                                                         aRfD = 0.008 mg/kg    decreased brain weights, and
                                                          bw.                  changes in brain morphology.
                                                         aPAD = 0.008 mg/kg
                                                          bw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (Females 13-49       NOAEL = 0.5 mg/kg/    UF = 100X (for       Developmental Toxicity Study in
 years old).                        day.                  inter- and intra-    Rabbits.
                                                          species             Developmental LOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day
                                                          extrapolation).      based on alterations in skeletal
                                                         FQPA SF = 1X.......   ossification sites and increased
                                                         aRfD = 0.005 mg/kg/   number of pairs of ribs.
                                                          day.
                                                         aPAD = 0.005 mg/kg/
                                                          day.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chronic Dietary (All populations)  NOAEL= 0.4 mg/kg/day  UF = 100X (for       Chronic toxicity/Carcinogenicity
                                                          inter- and intra-    Study in Rats.
                                                          species              LOAEL = 3.6 mg/kg/day based on
                                                          extrapolation).      increased incidences of corneal
                                                         FQPA SF = 1X.......   opacity, decreased body weight
                                                         cRfD = 0.004 mg/kg/   and body-weight gains in males
                                                          day.                 and histopathological evaluations
                                                         cPAD = 0.004 mg/kg/   in the eyes, thyroid and pancreas
                                                          day.                 of both sexes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental Oral (Short- and        NOAEL = 0.4 mg/kg/    Residential LOC for  Two-Generation Reproduction Study
 Intermediate-Term).                day.                  MOE = 100.           in Rats.
                                                                              Offspring LOAEL = 4.2 mg/kg/day
                                                                               based decreases in body weights
                                                                               and body-weight gains in the F2
                                                                               generation offspring and
                                                                               increased time to preputial
                                                                               separation in the F1 male
                                                                               offspring.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short- and Intermediate-Term,      Oral NOAEL = 0.4 mg/  Residential LOC for  Two-Generation Reproduction Study
 Dermal.                            kg/day.               MOE = 100.           in Rats.
                                   (DAF = 2.6%)........                       Parental LOAEL = 4.2 mg/kg/day
                                                                               based on decreased body weight,
                                                                               body-weight gain in males,
                                                                               increased thyroid and kidney
                                                                               weights of both sexes, and
                                                                               microscopic findings in eyes,
                                                                               kidney and thyroid of both sexes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short- and Intermediate-Term       Oral NOAEL= 0.4 mg/   Residential LOC for  Two Generation Reproduction Study
 Inhalation.                        kg/day (inhalation    MOE = 100.           in Rats.
                                    absorption = 100%).                       Parental LOAEL = 4.2 mg/kg/day
                                                                               based on decreased body weight,
                                                                               body-weight gain in males,
                                                                               increased thyroid and kidney
                                                                               weights of both sexes, and
                                                                               microscopic findings in eyes,
                                                                               kidney and thyroid of both sexes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)    In accordance with the 2005 EPA Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk assessment,
                                     topramezone was classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at
                                         doses that do not alter rat thyroid hormone homeostasis.'' EPA has
                                    determined that the thyroid tumors arise through a non-linear mode of action
                                     and that the NOAEL (0.4 mg/kg/day) for deriving the cRfD will be protective
                                            of thyroid hormone alterations and thyroid tumor formation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
  of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-
  level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to topramezone, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing topramezone tolerances in 40 CFR
180.612. EPA assessed dietary exposures from topramezone in food as
follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified
for topramezone.
    In estimating acute dietary exposure for both the general U.S.
population (including infants and children) and for females 13-49 years
of age, EPA used food consumption information from the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What
We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed 100 percent crop treated (PCT), Dietary Exposure Evaluation
Model (DEEM) 7.81 default processing factors, and tolerance-level
residues.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the same food consumption data and assumptions of
tolerance-level residues, 100 PCT and DEEM 7.81 default processing
factors.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that topramezone does not pose a cancer risk to humans at
levels that do not alter rat thyroid hormone homeostasis, and doses at
or below the cRfD are not expected to alter thyroid homeostasis.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment beyond the chronic assessment
for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.
    iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary assessment for
topramezone. Tolerance-level residues and 100 PCT were assumed for all
food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The highest drinking water
concentrations are expected to result from the direct aquatic
applications. Estimates of drinking water exposure levels were based on
label instructions (i.e., proposed application rates, duration, and
water concentration of direct aquatic applications at potable surface
water intakes). For acute and chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 45 parts per billion (ppb) was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Topramezone is
currently registered for turf and golf course uses that could result in
residential exposures. Topramezone is also proposed for use in direct
aquatic applications that could result in exposure during recreational
swimming activities. EPA assessed

residential exposure using the following assumptions: For adults,
short-term aggregate assessment considered the post-application
exposure resulting from the physical activities on turf. For children,
short-term aggregate assessment considered combined dermal and
incidental oral (hand-to-mouth) post-application exposures to children
1 < 2 years old resulting from the registered turf use. These post-
application exposure estimates from the turf use are protective of
post-application exposure for older children more likely to engage in
recreational swimming activities. Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may
be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
    4. 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.''
    Topramezone belongs to a class of herbicides that inhibit the liver
enzyme HPPD, which is involved in the catabolism (metabolic breakdown)
of tyrosine (an amino acid derived from proteins in the diet).
Inhibition of HPPD can result in elevated tyrosine levels in the blood,
a condition known as tyrosinemia. HPPD-inhibiting herbicides have been
found to cause a number of toxicities in laboratory animal studies
including ocular, developmental, liver, and kidney effects. Of these
toxicities, the ocular effect (corneal opacity) is highly correlated
with the elevated blood tyrosine levels. In fact, rats dosed with
tyrosine alone show ocular opacities similar to those seen with HPPD
inhibitors. Although the other toxicities may be associated with
chemically induced tyrosinemia, other mechanisms may also be involved.
There are marked differences among species in the ocular toxicity
associated with HPPD inhibition. For example, treatments with HPPD
inhibitor herbicides result in ocular effects in the rat, but not the
mouse or monkey. The explanation of this species-specific response is
related to the species differences in the clearance of tyrosine. Some
species (such as the mouse and monkey) have a metabolic pathway that
exists to remove tyrosine from the blood. This pathway involves a liver
enzyme called tyrosine aminotransferase (TAT). Unlike rats, mice and
humans have a highly effective metabolic process for handling excess
tyrosine and are unlikely to achieve the levels necessary to produce
ocular opacities. In fact, HPPD inhibitors (e.g. nitisinone) are used
as an effective therapeutic agent to treat human patients suffering
from rare genetic diseases of tyrosine catabolism. The human experience
indicates that a therapeutic dose (1 mg/kg/day dose) has an excellent
safety record in infants, children, and adults and that serious adverse
health outcomes have not been observed in a population followed for
approximately a decade. Rarely, ocular effects are seen in patients
with high plasma tyrosine levels; however, these effects are transient
and can be readily reversed upon adherence to a restricted protein
diet. This indicates that HPPD inhibitor in it of itself cannot easily
overwhelm the tyrosine-clearance mechanism in humans.
    Therefore, exposure to environmental residues of HPPD-inhibiting
herbicides are unlikely to result in the high blood levels of tyrosine
and ocular toxicity in humans due to an efficient metabolic process to
handle excess tyrosine. EPA has therefore not conducted cumulative risk
assessment with other HPPD inhibitors for purposes of this assessment
of topramezone for aquatic uses.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) 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 database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA SF. In
applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X,
or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable data
available to EPA support the choice of a different factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. In the prenatal
developmental toxicity study with rats, there was evidence for
increased qualitative, but not quantitative, susceptibility in the
offspring. Qualitative susceptibility was demonstrated by the
occurrence of decreased fetal body weight and increased incidences of
skeletal variations in the presence of decreased body weight gain in
the maternal animals.
    In six of eight rabbit studies, there was evidence for increased
qualitative susceptibility. In the does, maternal toxicity was
characterized as decreases in body weight, body weight gain, and food
consumption, all in the presence of increased serum levels of tyrosine.
In the fetuses, developmental toxicity was manifested as increased
incidences of visceral findings (i.e., absent kidney and ureter) and/or
multiple skeletal variations (i.e., delayed ossification, supernumerary
13th rib and/or 27th presacral vertebrae). In two studies, skeletal
variations were observed at high doses in the absence of any maternal
toxicity.
    In the 2-generation reproduction study with rats, there was no
evidence of increased susceptibility. Offspring toxicity was
characterized as decreased pup weight and weight gain in F2
male and female pups and increased time to preputial separation in the
F1 males. These effects were observed in the presence of
parental/systemic toxicity that included: Decreased body weight,
decreased body-weight gain in males, increased thyroid and kidney
weights of both sexes, and microscopic findings in the eyes, kidney,
and thyroid of both sexes.
    In the developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) study, there was evidence
for qualitative susceptibility. In the maternal animals, toxicity was
limited to corneal opacity whereas effects in the offspring manifested
as: Neurobehavioral changes (decreased auditory startle reflex),
decreases in absolute brain weight, and decreases in brain morphometric
measurements (e.g., hippocampus, and parietal cortex).
    3. Conclusion. While EPA is retaining the 10X FQPA safety factor
for the acute dietary risk assessment for the U.S. general population
including infants and children, EPA has determined that reliable data
show the safety of infants and children would be adequately protected
if the FQPA SF were reduced to 1X for the acute dietary risk assessment
for females of child-bearing age (i.e., 13-49 years old), the chronic
dietary risk assessment for the U.S. general population, and all non-
dietary exposure scenarios. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for topramezone is complete, except for an
immunotoxicity study. A database uncertainty factor (UFDB)
is not required for the lack of an immunotoxicity study since the PODs
used for overall risk assessments are based on effects seen in target
organs (e.g., eyes, thyroid, and liver) consistent with the actions of
this chemical as an HPPD inhibitor. An immunotoxicity study is not
likely to

yield a lower POD and the preliminary results of the retrospective
analyses provide strong support for not retaining the UFDB
as no immunotoxicity study available thus far has provided sensitive
endpoints for use in deriving points of departure.
    ii. There is some indication that topramezone is a neurotoxic
chemical for developing animals. While there was no evidence of
neurotoxicity or neuropathology to the adult nervous system following a
single oral administration to rats at the limit dose in the ACN study
or following repeated dietary administration to rats in the SCN study
or in the maternal animals of the DNT study, there were neurobehavioral
as well as neuropathological effects observed in the offspring of the
DNT study as described above.
    The LOAEL of 8 mg/kg/day of the DNT study is based on decreased
auditory startle reflex, decreases in brain weight, and brain
morphometric parameters at the lowest dose tested. A NOAEL was not
established. Nevertheless, the LOAEL (8 mg/kg/day) was employed as the
point of departure in assessing the risk for the general U.S.
population, including infants and children, since the offspring were
exposed to topramezone both in utero and during the lactation period.
The 10X FQPA safety factor is retained as a UFL (i.e., use
of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL.)
    iii. As discussed in Unit III.D.2., there is evidence that
topramezone results in increased susceptibility in the prenatal
developmental studies in rats and rabbits. But the degree of concern
for the effects seen in those studies is low because there were clear
NOAELs for the offspring effects and EPA selected points of departure
that are protective of those effects. As explained in Unit III.D.3.ii.,
EPA is retaining the 10X FQPA safety factor for the lack of a NOAEL in
the DNT study and believes that doing so will be protective of infants
and children.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties in the exposure database.
The dietary and residential exposure analyses are conservative in
nature. The dietary exposure assessment uses tolerance-level residues
and assumes 100 PCT. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to
assess post-application exposure to children/adults. The residential
exposure assessment uses chemical-specific turf transferable residue
data and the 2012 Residential Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and
is considered health-protective. These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks posed by topramezone.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. Acute aggregate risk is made up only of dietary
sources; therefore, the acute exposure estimates provided in the acute
dietary exposure analysis represent acute aggregate exposures. EPA has
concluded that acute exposure to topramezone from food and drinking
water will utilize 98% of the aPAD for the most highly exposed
population subgroup (all infants <1 year old) and 50% of the aPAD for
females 13-49 years of age. The acute dietary assessment did not result
in exposure estimates above EPA's level of concern.
    2. Chronic risk: Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
topramezone from food and water will utilize 62% of the cPAD for all
infants (<1 year old), the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
topramezone is not expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Topramezone
is currently registered for residential turf uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it
is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water
with short-term residential exposures to topramezone.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 220 for the
general U.S. population and 120 for children 1-2 years old (a subgroup
predicted to have the highest dietary burden as well as the highest
residential exposure. Because EPA's level of concern for topramezone is
a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). Topramezone is currently registered for turf uses that could
result in intermediate-term residential exposure, and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through
food and water with intermediate-term residential exposures to
topramezone for children that are 1-2 years old that may ingest soil on
treated turf.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for
intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded that the combined
intermediate-term food, water, and residential exposures result in an
aggregate MOE of 270. Because EPA's level of concern for topramezone is
a MOE of 100 or below, this MOE is not of concern.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As noted in Unit
III.C.1.iii., EPA has concluded that topramezone does not pose a cancer
risk of concern at exposure levels that do not alter thyroid hormone
homeostasis. The chronic aggregate assessment, which utilized a cRfD
that is protective of those effects did not indicate a chronic risk
above the Agency's level of concern; therefore, topramezone is not
expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to topramezone residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (BASF method D0104) is available
to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email 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 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 departing from the Codex level. There are no Codex
maximum residue limits (MRLs) in/on fish/shellfish.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    The proposed tolerance definition, ``fish'' is being revised to
``fish-freshwater finfish'' and ``fish-saltwater finfish.'' The
proposed tolerance definition, ``shellfish'' is being revised to
``fish-shellfish, crustacean'' and ``fish-shellfish, mollusk.'' EPA is
also establishing meat byproduct tolerances for cattle, goat, horse,
sheep (0.80 ppm), hog (0.40 ppm), and poultry (0.02 ppm) as a result of
the additional dietary burden resulting from the consumption of treated
water by livestock since consumption of treated water by livestock is
not restricted on the proposed labeling for aquatic uses. With the
establishment of these tolerances, the currently established kidney
(cattle, goat, horse, and sheep) and liver (cattle, goat, horse, and
sheep) tolerances are being removed as it is now general policy to
establish meat byproduct tolerances rather than separate liver and
kidney tolerances (Chemistry Science Advisory Council (ChemSAC); min--
494.12-Jan-2011).
    Finally, EPA has revised the tolerance expression to clarify that,
as provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the tolerance covers
metabolites and degradates of topramezone not specifically mentioned;
and that compliance with the specified tolerance levels is to be
determined by measuring only the specific compounds mentioned in the
tolerance expression.

 V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of topramezone,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on fish-freshwater,
finfish; fish-saltwater, finfish; fish-shellfish, crustacean; and fish-
shellfish, mollusk at 0.05 ppm. To account for additional dietary
burden to livestock from residues in drinking water for the proposed
aquatic use, tolerances are being established for cattle, goat, horse,
and sheep meat byproducts at 0.80 ppm; hog meat byproducts at 0.40 ppm
and poultry meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm. Compliance with the following
tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only topramezone ([3-
(4,5-dihydro-3-isoxazolyl)-2-methyl-4-(methylsulfonyl)phenyl](5-
hydroxy-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)methanone) in or on the commodities.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d)
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 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 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) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    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) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
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
the rule in the Federal Register. This action 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: July 29, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
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 180.612 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  180.612  Topramezone; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
herbicide topramezone, including its metabolites and degradates, in or
on the following commodities. Compliance with the following tolerance
levels is to be determined by measuring only topramezone ([3-(4,5-
dihydro-3-isoxazolyl)-2-methyl-4-(methylsulfonyl)phenyl](5-hydroxy-1-

methyl-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)methanone) in or on the following commodities:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, meat byproducts.....................................        0.80
Corn, field, forage.........................................        0.05
Corn, field, grain..........................................        0.01
Corn, field, stover.........................................        0.05
Corn, pop, grain............................................        0.01
Corn, pop, stover...........................................        0.05
Corn, sweet, forage.........................................        0.05
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed.............        0.01
Corn, sweet, stover.........................................        0.05
Fish-freshwater finfish.....................................        0.05
Fish-saltwater finfish......................................        0.05
Fish-shellfish, crustacean..................................        0.05
Fish-shellfish, mollusk.....................................        0.05
Goat, meat byproducts.......................................        0.80
Hog, meat byproducts........................................        0.40
Horse, meat byproducts......................................        0.80
Poultry, meat byproducts....................................        0.02
Sheep, meat byproducts......................................        0.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
    (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
    (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 2013-18975 Filed 8-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 58 (Monday, March 27, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18050-18051]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06177]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0191]

Safety Zone; Annual Fireworks Displays Within the Sector Columbia
River Captain of the Port Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce safety zone regulations at
various locations in the Sector Columbia River Captain of the Port Zone
from May 26, 2023 to July 08, 2023, to provide for the safety of life
on navigable waters during these fireworks displays. Our regulation for
fireworks displays within the Thirteenth Coast Guard District
designates the regulated areas and identifies the approximate dates for
these events. The specific dates and times are identified in this
notice. These regulations prohibit persons and vessels from being in
the regulated areas unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector
Columbia River or a designated representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1315 will be enforced for the
safety zones identified in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below
for the dates and times specified.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, call or email LT Carlie Gilligan, Waterways
Management Division, Marine Safety Unit Portland, Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce safety zones
found in 33 CFR 165.1315 for the events specified below, during the
designated enforcement periods, and within a 450-yard radius of the
launch site and the listed locations. This action is being taken to
provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during these
events.
    Our regulation for fireworks displays within the Thirteenth Coast
Guard District designates the regulated areas and identifies the
approximate dates for these events. The specific dates and times are
specified below. During the enforcement periods, as reflected in Sec.
165.1315, persons and vessels are prohibited from being in the
regulated areas unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector
Columbia River or a designated representative. These safety zones are
subject to enforcement at least 1 hour prior to the start and 1 hour
after the conclusion of the events.

  Table--Dates and Durations of Enforcement for 33 CFR 165.1315 Safety Zones at Various Locations Within the Sector Columbia River Captain of the Port
                                                                      Zone in 2023
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Event name                          Event location                  Date of event               Latitude                  Longitude
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portland Rose Festival Fireworks...  Portland, OR.........................  May 26, 2023; 8:30      45[deg]30'58'' N           122[deg]40'12'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
IIwaco July 4th Committee Fireworks/ IIwaco, WA...........................  July 1, 2023; 9:30      46[deg]18'17'' N           124[deg]02'00'' W
 Independence Day at the Port.                                               p.m. to 11:00 p.m.
Yachats 4th of July................  Yachats, OR..........................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      44[deg]18'38'' N           124[deg]06'27'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 12 a.m.
Cedco Inc./The Mill Casino           North Bend, OR.......................  July 3, 2023; 9:30      43[deg]23'42'' N           124[deg]12'55'' W
 Independence Day.                                                           p.m. to 11 p.m.
Waldport 4th of July...............  Waldport, OR.........................  July 3, 2023; 9:30      44[deg]25'31'' N           124[deg]04'44'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
City of Coos Bay July 4th            Coos Bay, OR.........................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      43[deg]22'06'' N           124[deg]12'24'' W
 Celebration/Fireworks Over the Bay.                                         p.m. to 11 p.m.
The Dalles Area Fourth of July.....  The Dalles, OR.......................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      45[deg]36'18'' N           121[deg]10'23'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
Clatskanie Heritage Days Fireworks.  Clatskanie, OR.......................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      46[deg]13'37'' N           119[deg]08'47'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11:30 p.m.
Astoria-Warrenton 4th of July        Astoria, OR..........................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      46[deg]11'34'' N           123[deg]49'28'' W
 Fireworks.                                                                  p.m. to 11 p.m.
Washougal 4th of July..............  Washougal, WA........................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      45[deg]34'32'' N           122[deg]22'53'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
Port of Cascade Locks 4th of July    Cascade; Locks, OR...................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      45[deg]50'15'' N           121[deg]53'43'' W
 Fireworks.                                                                  p.m. to 11 p.m.
Lincoln City 4th of July...........  Lincoln City, OR.....................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      44[deg]55'28'' N           124[deg]01'31'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
Florence Independence Day            Florence, OR.........................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      43[deg]58'09'' N           124[deg]05'50'' W
 Celebration.                                                                p.m. to 11 p.m.
Bandon 4th of July.................  Bandon, OR...........................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      43[deg]07'29'' N           124[deg]25'05'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
July 4th Party at the Port of Gold   Gold Beach, OR.......................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      42[deg]25'30'' N           124[deg]25'03'' W
 Beach.                                                                      p.m. to 11 p.m.
Waverly Country Club 4th of July     Milwaukie, OR........................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      45[deg]27'03'' N           122[deg]39'18'' W
 Fireworks.                                                                  p.m. to 11 p.m.
Port Orford 4th of July............  Port Orford, OR......................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      42[deg]44'31'' N           124[deg]29'30'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
Brookings, OR July 4th Fireworks...  Brookings, OR........................  July 4, 2023; 9 p.m.    42[deg]02'39'' N           124[deg]16'14'' W
                                                                             to 10:30 p.m.
Waterfront Blues Festival Fireworks  Portland, OR.........................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      45[deg]30'42'' N           122[deg]40'14'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m..
Hood River 4th of July.............  Hood River. OR.......................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      45[deg]42'58'' N           121[deg]30'32'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
City of Rainier/Rainier Days.......  Rainier, OR..........................  July 8, 2023; 9:30      46[deg]05'46'' N           122[deg]56'18'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
Oaks Park Association 4th of July..  Portland, OR.........................  July 4, 2023; 9:30      45[deg]28'22'' N           122[deg]39'59'' W
                                                                             p.m. to 11 p.m.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All coordinates are listed in reference Datum NAD 1983.

    In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal Register,
the Coast Guard will provide notification of these enforcement periods
via the Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast notice to mariners.

    Dated: March 20, 2023.
M. Scott Jackson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Columbia River.
[FR Doc. 2023-06177 Filed 3-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 138)]
[Notices]
[Page 41154-41156]
[DOCID:fr17jy08-143]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Approval of Noise Compatibility Program; Ocala International
Airport; Ocala, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its
findings on the Noise Compatibility Program submitted by the City of
Ocala under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. (the Aviation Safety and Noise
Abatement Act, hereinafter referred to as ``the Act'') and 14 CFR part
150. These findings are made in recognition of the description of
Federal and nonfederal responsibilities in Senate Report No. 96-52
(1980). On December 28, 2008, the FAA determined that the noise
exposure maps submitted by the City of Ocala under part 150 were in
compliance with applicable requirements. On June 23, 2008, the FAA
approved the Ocala International Airport noise compatibility program.
All of the recommendations of the program were approved. No program
elements relating to new or revised flight procedures for noise
abatement were proposed by the airport operator.

DATES: Effective Date: The effective date of the FAA's approval of the
Ocala International Airport Noise Compatibility Program is June 23,
2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lindy McDowell, Federal Aviation
Administration, Orlando Airports District Office, 5950 Hazeltine
National Drive, Suite 400, Orlando, Florida 32822, phone number: 407-
812-6331. Documents reflecting this FAA action may be reviewed at this
same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that the FAA has given
its overall approval to the Noise Compatibility Program for Ocala
International Airport, effective June 23, 2008.
    Under Section 47504 of the Act, an airport operator who has
previously submitted a Noise Exposure Map may submit to the FAA a Noise
Compatibility Program which sets forth the measures taken or proposed
by the

airport operator for the reduction of existing non-compatible land uses
and prevention of additional non-compatible land uses within the area
covered by the Noise Exposure Maps. The Act requires such programs to
be developed in consultation with interested and affected parties
including local communities, government agencies, airport users, and
FAA personnel.
    Each airport noise compatibility program developed in accordance
with Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) part 150 is a local program,
not a Federal Program. The FAA does not substitute its judgment for
that of the airport operator with respect to which measure should be
recommended for action. The FAA's approval or disapproval of FAR part
150 program recommendations is measured according to the standards
expressed in FAR part 150 and the Act, and is limited to the following
determinations:
    a. The Noise Compatibility Program was developed in accordance with
the provisions and procedures of FAR Part 150;
    b. Program measures are reasonably consistent with achieving the
goals of reducing existing non-compatible land uses around the airport
and preventing the introduction of additional non-compatible land uses;
    c. Program measures would not create an undue burden on interstate
or foreign commerce, unjustly discriminate against types or classes of
aeronautical uses, violate the terms of airport grant agreements, or
intrude into areas preempted by the Federal government; and
    d. Program measures relating to the use of flight procedures can be
implemented within the period covered by the program without derogating
safety, adversely affecting the efficient use and management of the
navigable airspace and air traffic control systems, or adversely
affecting other powers and responsibilities of the Administrator
prescribed by law.
    Specific limitations with respect to FAA's approval of an airport
Noise Compatibility Program are delineated in FAR Part 150, Section
1505. Approval is not a determination concerning the acceptability of
land uses under Federal, state, or local law. Approval does not by
itself constitute an FAA implementing action. A request for Federal
action or approval to implement specific noise compatibility measures
may be required, and an FAA decision on the request may require an
environmental assessment of the proposed action. Approval does not
constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially assist in the
implementation of the program nor a determination that all measures
covered by the program are eligible for grant-in-aid funding from the
FAA. Where Federal funding is sought, requests for project grants must
be submitted to the FAA Airports District Office in Orlando, Florida.
    City of Ocala submitted to the FAA on October 2, 2007, the Noise
Exposure Maps, descriptions, and other documentation produced during
the noise compatibility planning study conducted from August, 2004,
through October, 2005. The Ocala International Airport Noise Exposure
Maps were determined by FAA to be in compliance with applicable
requirements on December 28, 2007. Notice of this determination was
published in the Federal Register on December 28, 2007.
    The Ocala International Airport study contains a proposed Noise
Compatibility Program comprised of actions designed for phased
implementation by airport management and adjacent jurisdictions from
the year 2007 to the year 2012. It was requested that FAA evaluate and
approve this material as a Noise Compatibility Program as described in
Section 47504 of the Act. The FAA began its review of the Program on
December 28, 2007, and was required by a provisions of the Act to
approve or disapprove the program within 180-days (other than the use
of new or modified flight procedures for noise control). Failure to
approve or disapprove such program within the 180-day period shall be
deemed to be an approval of such program.
    The submitted program contained seven (7) proposed actions for
noise mitigation on and off the airport. The FAA completed its review
and determined that the procedural and substantive requirements of the
Act and FAR part 150 have been satisfied. The overall program,
therefore, was approved by the FAA effective June 23, 2008.
    Outright approval was granted for all of the specific program
elements. Mitigation measures approved include:

Land Use Measures

1. Update City of Ocala Land Development Regulations

    Prevent future development of noise sensitive uses within the 60
DNL and greater noise contours. (NCP, pages ES-4, 96, 97; and Table ES-
1.)
    FAA Action: Approved. This is within the authority of the local
land use jurisdictions; the Federal government does not control local
land use. Outside the DNL 65 dB noise contour, FAA as a matter of
policy encourages local efforts to prevent new noncompatible
development immediately abutting the DNL 65 dB contour and to provide a
buffer for possible growth in noise contours beyond the forecast
period.

2. Land Use Mitigation Program

    Purchase developed and undeveloped land within the DNL 65dB and
greater noise contours. (NCP, pages ES-4, 65, 66, 97; Figures 11.4,
11.5; and Tables ES-1, 9.2, 9.3, 11.4.)
    FAA Action: Approved. Acquisitions are limited to existing non-
compatible land uses located with in the 65 DNL noise contour of the
approved NEMs, and are consistent with FAA's 1998 remedial mitigation
policy (63 FR 16409). The specific identification of structures
recommended for inclusion in the program and specific definition of the
scope of the program will be required prior to approval for Federal
funding. Approval of this measure does not commit the FAA to future
Federal funding assistance.

3. Redevelopment Program

    Redevelop land purchases as part of the Land Use Mitigation
Program. (NCP, pages ES-4, 101, 107; and Table ES-1.) Ensures that any
re-development or re-use of land purchased as part of the Land Use
Mitigation Program will be compatible with airport operations.
    FAA Action: Approved. Eligibility for Federal funding of any re-
use/re-development program will be determined at the time of
application.

4. Public Notification

    Advertise noise exposure contours and availability of Part 150
documents local newspapers 3 times each year. (NCP, pages ES-4, 101,
102; and Table ES-1.)
    FAA Action: Approved.

Program Management Measures

1. Pilot Education Program

    Development, publication and distribution of informational
materials for pilots outlining noise abatement policies. (NCP, pages
ES-4, 104; and Table ES-1.)
    FAA Action: Approved. Inserts or other information must not be
construed as mandatory air traffic procedures. Prior to release,
language in the brochure shall be reviewed for wording and content by
the appropriate FAA office. The content of the brochure is subject to
specific approval by appropriate FAA officials outside of the FAR Part
150 process and is not approved in advance by this determination.

2. Community Information Program

    Development, publication and distribution of informational
materials for residents and businesses outlining airport noise
abatement efforts. (NCP, pages ES-4, 104, 105; and Table ES-1.)
    FAA Action: Approved.

3. Periodic NCP Review

    Review of operational activity and NCP implementation to assist in
determining future NEM/NCP update timing. (NCP, pages ES-4, 105; and
Table ES-1.)
    FAA Action: Approved. If made necessary by NEM changes, an update
to the NCP would address requirements of 150.23(e)(9). Section
150.21(d), as amended, states that the NEM should be updated if there
is either a substantial new noncompatible use within the DNL 65 dB
contour, or if there is a significant reduction in noise over existing
noncompatible land uses [69 FR 57622, dated 9/24/04].
    These determinations are set forth in detail in a Record of
Approval signed by the FAA on June 23, 2008. The Record of Approval, as
well as other evaluation materials and the documents comprising the
submittal, are available for review at the FAA office listed above and
at the administrative office of the City of Ocala. The Record of
Approval also will be available on-line at: http://www.faa.qov/
airports_airtraffic/airports/environmental/airport_noise/part_150/
states/ .

    Issued in Orlando, Florida on June 27, 2008.
W. Dean Stringer,
Manager, Orlando Airports District Office.
 [FR Doc. E8-15954 Filed 7-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 64341]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26863]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER12-32-000]

Silver State Solar Power North LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Silver State Solar Power North, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization under 18
CFR part 34 of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is October 31, 2011.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 11, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-26863 Filed 10-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P