[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 102 (Thursday, May 26, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32021-32024]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10976]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R10-OW-2022-0418; FRL-9860-01-R10]

Proposed Determination To Prohibit and Restrict the Use of
Certain Waters Within Defined Areas as Disposal Sites; Pebble Deposit
Area, Southwest Alaska

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability and public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10 is requesting public
comments on its 2022 Proposed Determination to prohibit and restrict
the use of certain waters in the South Fork Koktuli River (SFK), North
Fork Koktuli River (NFK), and Upper Talarik Creek (UTC) watersheds as
disposal sites for the discharge of dredged or fill material associated
with mining the Pebble deposit, a copper-, gold-, and molybdenum-
bearing ore body located in Southwest, Alaska. EPA Region 10 also is
announcing public hearings on this proposed determination.

DATES: Submit comments on the proposed determination on or before July
5, 2022. See PUBLIC HEARING section below for public hearing dates and
related information.

ADDRESSES:
    I. How to Obtain a Copy of the Proposed Determination: The proposed
determination is available primarily via the internet on the EPA Region
10 Bristol Bay site at www.epa.gov/bristolbay.
    II. How to Submit Comments to the Docket at www.regulations.gov:
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OW-2022-0418,
by one of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal (recommended method of comment
submission): Follow the online instructions at http://www.regulations.gov for submitting comments.
    Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number EPA-R10-OW-
2022-0418 in the subject line of the message.
    Mail and Hand Delivery/Courier: Send your original comments and
three copies to: Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460,
Attention: Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OW-2022-0418.
    Hand Delivery/Courier: Deliver your comments to EPA Docket Center,
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460,
Attention: Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OW-2022-0418. Such deliveries are
accepted only during the Docket's normal hours of operation, 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday (excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The telephone number for the Water Docket is (202) 566-
2426.
    Submit at Public Hearing: see PUBLIC HEARINGS section below.
    Instructions: EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and will be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected information through
http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov
website is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA
without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address
will be captured automatically and included as part of the comment that
is placed in the public docket and made publicly available on the
internet. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish
to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents
located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    III. Public Hearings: In accordance with EPA regulations at 40 CFR
231.4, the Regional Administrator determined that public hearings on
this CWA Section 404(c) proposed determination are in the public
interest. Give the continued uncertainty related to COVID, EPA intends
to host a virtual hearing in addition to in-person hearings. The
hearing dates and locations are as follows:

June 16, 2022--9am to 12pm, AKDT, Dillingham, Alaska
June 16, 2022--5pm to 8pm, AKDT, Virtual
June 17, 2022--2pm to 5pm, AKDT, Iliamna, Alaska

    Additional hearing details and any changes to the schedule are
available at www.epa.gov/bristolbay. The purpose of the public hearings
is to obtain public testimony and comment on EPA Region 10's CWA
Section 404(c) proposed determination to prohibit and restrict the use
of certain waters in the Bristol Bay watershed for disposal of dredged
or fill material associated with mining the Pebble deposit. The
Regional Administrator will designate the official who will preside at
the public hearing (the Presiding Officer). Any person may appear at
the hearing and submit oral and/or written statements or data and may
be represented by counsel or other authorized representatives. If you
would like to submit written comments, you may do so at the public
hearings or by one of the methods described in the section of this
public notice entitled: How to Submit Comments to the Docket at
www.regulations.gov.
    Registration is required to participate in the public hearings.
Please visit www.epa.gov/bristolbay for information on how to register.
Online preregistration is available and includes an option to register
to speak during the public hearing. The last day to preregister is June
13, 2022.
    Members of the public can also sign up to make a comment at the
venue on the day of the meeting. The following information will be
requested for each commenter: First name, last name, organization and
title (if applicable), city, state, email address, and phone number.
Tribal elders and elected officials will be invited to comment first.
The facilitator will then use a random number system to select
individuals who signed up to determine speaking order. Audio-visual
equipment will not be provided.
    To maximize the number of individuals who are able to speak at the
hearing, oral statements may be limited to three minutes per person.
EPA encourages commenters to provide the agency with a copy of their
oral testimony electronically by emailing it to [email protected].
EPA also recommends submitting the text of your oral comments as
written comments to the docket.
    EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations but
there will be no cross examination of any hearing participant.

    EPA Region 10 will not respond to questions/comments during the
hearing. EPA Region 10 will consider the oral and written statements
received at the public hearings and other written comments submitted
pursuant to the instructions set forth in the section of this public
notice entitled: How to Submit Comments to the Docket at
www.regulations.gov. Any person may present written statements for the
hearing file, including rebuttals to other commenter statements, prior
to the time the hearing file is closed to public submissions.
    Please note that any updates made to any aspect of the hearing will
be posted online at www.epa.gov/bristolbay. While the agency expects
the hearing to go forward as set forth above, please monitor our
website to determine if there are any updates. EPA does not intend to
publish a document in the Federal Register announcing updates.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the public comment
period, contact the Water Docket; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or email:
[email protected]. For information concerning the proposed
determination, contact Erin Seyfried; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email: [email protected]. For more information about EPA's efforts
in Bristol Bay, copies of the Section 404(c) proposed determination,
see http://www.epa.gov/bristolbay.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Clean Water Act Section 404(c) Review Process

    EPA's mission is to protect human health and the environment. The
CWA, the objective of which is to ``restore and maintain the chemical,
physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters,'' 33 U.S.C.
1251(a), is essential to EPA's mission and establishes the basic
structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into waters of the
United States. To advance this overall objective, Section 301(a) of the
CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1311(a), prohibits the discharge of any pollutant by any
person into waters of the United States except as authorized by
specific provisions of the Act, including a permit issued pursuant to
Sections 402 or 404, 33 U.S.C. 1342; 33 U.S.C. 1344. Section 404(a) of
the CWA authorizes the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to
issue permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters
of the United States. 33 U.S.C. 1344(a). Section 404(c) of the CWA
authorizes EPA to prohibit the specification (including the withdrawal
of specification) of any defined area as a disposal site, and to deny
or restrict the use of any defined area for specification (including
the withdrawal of specification) as a disposal site, ``whenever'' it
determines, after notice and opportunity for public hearings, that the
discharge of such materials into such area will have an unacceptable
adverse effect on municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery
areas (including spawning and breeding areas), wildlife, or
recreational areas. 33 U.S.C. 1344(c). EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part
231 govern the Agency's exercise of its CWA Section 404(c) authority.

II. 2014 Proposed Determination

    In July 2014, after careful consideration of available information,
including the findings of EPA's Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment and
consultation with PLP and the State of Alaska, EPA Region 10 published
a Proposed Determination under Section 404(c) of the CWA to restrict
the use of certain waters in the SFK, NFK, and UTC watersheds as
disposal sites for dredged or fill material associated with mining the
Pebble deposit (2014 Proposed Determination) for public comment.
    On November 25, 2014, the U.S. District Court for the District of
Alaska, in litigation brought by PLP, issued a preliminary injunction
against EPA that halted EPA Region 10's CWA Section 404(c) review
process until the case was resolved. Order Granting Preliminary
Injunction at 1-2, Pebble Limited Partnership v. EPA, No. 3:14-cv-00171
(D. Alaska Nov. 25, 2014). On May 11, 2017, EPA and PLP settled that
lawsuit and the court subsequently dissolved the injunction and
dismissed the case with prejudice. As part of that settlement
agreement, EPA Region 10 agreed to ``initiate a process to propose to
withdraw the [2014] Proposed Determination'' and ultimately withdrew it
in August 2019.\1\ In October 2019, twenty tribal, fishing,
environmental, and conservation groups challenged EPA's withdrawal of
the 2014 Proposed Determination in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Alaska. This litigation ultimately resulted in an October
29, 2021 District Court decision to vacate EPA's 2019 decision to
withdraw the 2014 Proposed Determination and remand the action to the
Agency for reconsideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On January 26, 2018, EPA Region 10 announced a
``suspension'' of the proceeding to withdraw the 2014 Proposed
Determination at that time. This action was published in the Federal
Register on February 28, 2018 (83 FR 8668, February 28, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The District Court's vacatur of EPA's 2019 decision to withdraw the
2014 Proposed Determination had the effect of reinstating the 2014
Proposed Determination and reinitiating EPA's CWA Section 404(c) review
process. The next step in the CWA Section 404(c) review process
required the Region 10 Regional Administrator to decide whether to
withdraw the 2014 Proposed Determination or prepare a recommended
determination within 30 days. On November 23, 2021, EPA Region 10
published in the Federal Register a notice extending the applicable
time requirements through May 31, 2022, to provide sufficient time for
the Agency to consider information that has become available since EPA
issued the 2014 Proposed Determination and determine the appropriate
next step in the CWA Section 404(c) review process.

III. Proposed Mine at the Pebble Deposit

    The Pebble deposit is a large, low-grade copper-, gold-, and
molybdenum-bearing ore body deposit located at the headwaters of the
pristine Bristol Bay watershed that underlies portions of the SFK, NFK,
and UTC watersheds. The SFK, NFK, and UTC watersheds drain to two of
the largest rivers in the Bristol Bay watershed, the Nushagak and
Kvichak Rivers.
    In December 2017, the PLP submitted a CWA Section 404 permit
application to USACE to develop a mine at the Pebble deposit that
triggered the development of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In response
to the CWA Section 404 permit review and NEPA processes, PLP submitted
a revised permit application to USACE in June 2020 (i.e., the 2020 Mine
Plan).
    On July 24, 2020, USACE published a Notice of Availability for the
Final EIS (FEIS) in the Federal Register and on November 20, 2020,
USACE issued its Record of Decision (ROD) denying PLP's CWA Section 404
permit application on the basis that the 2020 Mine Plan would not
comply with the CWA Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines and would be contrary
to the public interest. By letter dated November 25, 2020, USACE
notified PLP that the proposed project failed to comply with the CWA
Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines because ``the proposed project would cause
unavoidable adverse impacts to aquatic resources which would result in
Significant Degradation to aquatic resources.''

IV. Summary of Factual Basis for the 2022 Proposed Determination

    The Bristol Bay watershed is an area of unparalleled ecological
value,

boasting salmon diversity and productivity unrivaled anywhere in North
America. The watershed provides intact, connected habitats--from
headwaters to ocean--that support abundant, genetically diverse wild
Pacific salmon populations. The Bristol Bay watershed supports the
world's largest runs of Sockeye Salmon, producing approximately half of
the world's Sockeye Salmon, as well as significant Chinook, Coho, Chum,
and Pink salmon populations. Bristol Bay's salmon populations support
world-class, economically important commercial and sport fisheries, as
well as a more than 4,000-year-old subsistence-based way of life for
Alaska Natives.
    EPA Region 10 has considered the information that has become
available since EPA issued the 2014 Proposed Determination, including
the more than 670,000 public comments EPA received on the 2014 Proposed
Determination; technical information contained in PLP's CWA Section 404
permit application and updated mine plan; analysis developed during the
NEPA process and contained in USACE's FEIS and its permit denial; as
well as new and potentially relevant science and technical information
produced through other contemporaneous efforts. As a result of its
review, EPA Region 10 has determined that the appropriate next step in
this CWA Section 404(c) review process is to revise the 2014 Proposed
Determination.
    Construction and routine operation of the mine proposed in the 2020
Mine Plan would result in discharge of dredged or fill material into
waters of the United States, including streams, wetlands, lakes, and
ponds overlying the Pebble deposit and within adjacent watersheds. The
direct and certain secondary effects of such discharges would result in
the total loss of aquatic habitats important to anadromous fishes.
These losses are the result of the construction and routine operation
of the various components of the mine site, including the open pit,
bulk tailings storage facility, pyritic tailings storage facility,
power plant, water management ponds, water treatment plants, milling/
processing facilities, and supporting infrastructure. According to the
FEIS and ROD, discharges of dredged or fill material to construct and
operate the mine site proposed in the 2020 Mine Plan would result in
the total loss of approximately 99.7 miles (160.5 km) of stream
habitat, representing approximately 8.5 miles (13.7 km) of streams with
documented anadromous fish occurrence and 91.2 miles (146.8 km) of
additional stream habitat. Such discharges of dredged or fill material
would also result in the total loss of approximately 2,113 acres (8.6
km\2\) of wetlands and other waters at the mine site.
    Additional secondary effects of the proposed discharges of dredged
or fill material at the mine site would degrade anadromous fishery
areas downstream of the mine site. Specifically, the stream, wetland,
and other aquatic resource losses from the footprint of the 2020 Mine
Plan would reverberate downstream, depriving downstream anadromous fish
habitats of nutrients, groundwater inputs, and other ecological
subsidies from lost upstream aquatic resources. Further, streamflow
alterations from water capture, withdrawal, storage, treatment, or
release at the mine site are another secondary effect of the discharge
of dredged or fill material associated with the construction and
routine operation of the 2020 Mine Plan. Such streamflow alterations
would adversely impact at least 29 miles (46.7 km) of anadromous fish
streams downstream of the mine site due to greater than 20 percent
changes in average monthly streamflows. These streamflow alterations
would result in major changes in ecosystem structure and function and
would reduce both the extent and quality of anadromous fish habitat
downstream of the mine. All instances of complete loss of aquatic
habitat and most impairment to fish habitat function would be
permanent.
    EPA Region 10 believes that the discharge of dredged or fill
material associated with mining the Pebble deposit within the mine site
footprint for the 2020 Mine Plan could result in unacceptable adverse
effects on anadromous fishery areas in the SFK and NFK watersheds due
to losses of documented anadromous fish habitat and degradation of
downstream anadromous fish habitat.
    Based on the same record, including information about the pristine
condition and productivity of the SFK, NFK, and UTC watersheds and the
documented anadromous fish habitat throughout the watersheds, EPA
Region 10 has reason to believe that discharges of dredged or fill
material for the construction and routine operation of a mine at the
Pebble deposit anywhere in the SFK, NFK, and UTC watersheds could
result in unacceptable adverse effects on anadromous fishery areas in
these watersheds if the effects of such discharges are similar or
greater in nature and magnitude to the adverse effects of the 2020 Mine
Plan.
    Accordingly, consistent with 40 CFR 231.3(a)(2), EPA Region 10 is
providing public notice of and requesting public comment on the 2022
Proposed Determination to prohibit and restrict the use of certain
waters in the NFK, SFK, and UTC watersheds for disposal of dredged or
fill material associated with mining the Pebble deposit. The Defined
Area for Prohibition is the mine site footprint for the 2020 Mine Plan.
The Defined Area for Restriction encompasses certain headwaters of the
SFK, NFK, and UTC watersheds where discharges associated with mining
the Pebble deposit are likely.

V. Solicitation of Comments on the 2022 Proposed Determination

    EPA Region 10 is soliciting comments on all matters and issues
discussed in the 2022 Proposed Determination. Please see the section
entitled ADDRESSES (above) for information about how to obtain a copy
of the 2022 Proposed Determination and how to submit comments.
    Any interested persons may submit written comments on the proposed
determination. All relevant data, studies, or informal observations are
appropriate. The Regional Administrator will fully consider all such
comments as she decides whether to withdraw the proposed determination
or forward to EPA Headquarters a recommended determination to prohibit/
restrict the use of certain waters in the SFK, NFK, and UTC watersheds
in southwest Alaska as disposal sites for the discharge of dredged or
fill material associated with mining the Pebble deposit.

VI. Additional Background on EPA's CWA Section 404(c) Review Process
for the Pebble Deposit Area

    A. How to Obtain a Copy of the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment:
The Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment is available via the internet on
the EPA Region 10 Bristol Bay site at www.epa.gov/bristolbay.
    B. How to Obtain a Copy of the 2014 Proposed Determination: The
July 2014 Proposed Determination is available via the internet on the
EPA Region 10 Bristol Bay site at www.epa.gov/bristolbay.
    C. How to Obtain a Copy of the Settlement Agreement: The May 11,
2017 settlement agreement is available via the internet on the EPA
Region 10 Bristol Bay site at www.epa.gov/bristolbay.
    D. How to Obtain a Copy of the Proposal to Withdraw the 2014
Proposed Determination: The July 2017 proposal to withdraw the 2014
Proposed Determination is available via the internet on the EPA Region
10 Bristol

Bay site at www.epa.gov/bristolbay. Information regarding the proposal
to withdraw can also be found in the docket for this effort at
www.regulations.gov, see docket ID No. EPA-R10-OW-2017-0369 or via the
following website located at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-R10-OW-2017-0369.
    E. How to Obtain a Copy of Notification of Suspension: The February
2018 notice announcing EPA's decision to suspend the proceeding to
withdraw the 2014 Proposed Determination at that time is available via
the internet on the EPA Region 10 Bristol Bay site at www.epa.gov/bristolbay. Information regarding the suspension can also be found in
the docket for this effort at www.regulations.gov, see docket ID No.
EPA-R10-OW-2017-0369 or via the following website located at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-R10-OW-2017-0369.
    F. How to Obtain a Copy of the Notice of Withdrawal of the 2014
Proposed Determination: The August 2019 notice of withdrawal of the
2014 Proposed Determination is available via the internet on the EPA
Region 10 Bristol Bay site at www.epa.gov/bristolbay. Information
regarding the proposal to withdraw can also be found in the docket for
this effort at www.regulations.gov, see docket ID No. EPA-R10-OW-2017-
0369 or via the following website located at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-R10-OW-2017-0369.

    Dated: May 17, 2022.
Casey Sixkiller,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2022-10976 Filed 5-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 60 (Monday, March 30, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16558-16561]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06753]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0284; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-011-AD;
Amendment 39-18125; AD 2015-06-07]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 737-100, 737-200, 737-200C, 737-300, 737-400,
and 737-500 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of
cracking in the lower corners of the forward entry doorway and the
upper corners of the airstairs cutout. This AD requires inspections for
cracking of the forward entry doorway and airstairs cutout, and
corrective actions if necessary. This AD also provides terminating
action for the repetitive inspections. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracks in the lower corners of the forward entry door
cutout and the upper corners of the airstairs cutout, which could
progress and result in an inability to maintain cabin pressurization.

DATES: This AD is effective May 4, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 4, 2015.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0284.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0284; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nenita Odesa, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-
627-5234; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company
Model 737-100, 737-200, 737-200C, 737-300, 737-400, and 737-500 series
airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 28, 2014
(79 FR 30500). The NPRM was prompted by reports of cracking in the
lower corners of the forward entry doorway and the upper corners of the
airstairs cutout. The NPRM proposed to require inspections for cracking
of the forward entry doorway and airstairs cutout, and corrective
actions if necessary. The NPRM also proposed to provide terminating
action for the repetitive inspections. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracks in the lower corners of the forward entry door
cutout and the upper corners of the airstairs cutout, which could
progress and result in an inability to maintain cabin pressurization.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (79
FR 30500, May 28, 2014) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions

    Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the installation
of winglets per supplemental type certificate (STC) ST01219SE (http://
rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/
082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/$FILE/ST01219SE.pdf) does not affect
the actions specified in the NPRM (79 FR 30500, May 28, 2014).
    We concur with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of
the proposed AD (79 FR 30500, May 28, 2014) as paragraph (c)(1) in this
AD and added new paragraph (c)(2) to this AD to state that installation
of STC ST01219SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/
rgstc.nsf/0/082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/$FILE/ST01219SE.pdf) does
not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this final
rule. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is installed, a
``change in product'' alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval
request is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR
39.17.

Request to Clarify That Certain Inspections Are Not Required for Areas
With Existing Repairs

    Southwest Airlines (SWA) requested that the NPRM (79 FR 30500, May
28, 2014) be revised to clarify that the initial and repetitive
inspections specified in paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD would not
be required for locations that are common to existing repairs that were
installed using the Boeing Model 737 structural repair manual (SRM)
repairs identified in Part 3, ``Permanent Repair,'' of Paragraph 3.B.,
``Work Instructions,'' of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 4, dated
December 18, 2013. As an alternative to this clarification, SWA
suggested that guidance be provided on how to address the existing
repairs since the inspections proposed in paragraph (g)(1) of the
proposed AD cannot be accomplished in the repaired areas.
    SWA observed that the applicability blocks in Repair 12 and Repair
13 of Boeing 737-300/400/500 SRM 53-10-01 state that the inspections
identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083,
Revision 4, dated December 18, 2013, are not necessary for the repaired
areas.
    We agree that the inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this
AD cannot be accomplished at locations where certain repairs have been
installed. We have added a new paragraph (g)(3) to this AD and
redesignated the subsequent paragraph as (g)(4). Paragraph (g)(3) of
this AD clarifies that accomplishment of a permanent repair terminates
the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD for
the repaired area only.

Request for Alternative Inspection Methods

    SWA requested that the NPRM (79 FR 30500, May 28, 2014) be revised
to

provide operators the option to request alternative inspection
instructions from Boeing for areas with existing repairs that were
approved by a Boeing Authorized Representative (AR). The inspections
proposed in paragraph (g)(1) of the NPRM cannot be accomplished in
areas with existing repairs.
    We do not agree to revise this AD to include a provision to provide
operators the option to request alternative inspection instructions
from Boeing. If there are existing repairs that were approved by a
Boeing AR, and those existing repairs prevent accomplishment of the
inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, 14 CFR 39.17 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations requires an affected operator to
obtain an AMOC from the FAA. Upon publication of this AD, the Manager
of the Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office will consider granting
AMOC authority for this AD to the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Organization Designation Authorization (ODA).

Request To Clarify That Inspections Are Not Required for Previously
Repaired Areas

    Boeing requested that paragraph (g)(2) of the NPRM (79 FR 30500,
May 28, 2014) be revised to specify that the inspections required by
paragraph (g)(1) of the NPRM are not required for Groups 1 and 2
airplanes that have been repaired using the service information
identified in paragraph (g)(2)(i), (g)(2)(ii), or (g)(2)(iii) of the
NPRM. Boeing noted that, as currently written, paragraph (g)(2) of the
NPRM would not require inspection of the unrepaired lower entry door
and upper airstair corners and would contradict the inspections in the
service information, which could lead to an unsafe condition. Boeing
also pointed out that the inspection zones specified in the following
service information do not include the repaired area(s).
     Boeing Service Bulletin 737-531083, Revision 1, dated
October 25, 1985.
     Boeing Service Bulletin 737-531083, Revision 2, dated
March 17, 1988.
     Boeing Service Bulletin 737-531083, Revision 3, dated
December 7, 1989.
    For the reasons provided by the commenter we agree to revise
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD to specify that ``[T]he inspections
required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD are not required in the
repaired area.''

Request To Specify Inspection Locations

    Boeing requested that paragraph (g)(1) of the NPRM (79 FR 30500,
May 28, 2014) be revised to specify the locations that need to be
inspected. The commenter stated that, as currently written, the
inspection methods are specified but not the inspection locations.
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 4,
dated December 18, 2013, provides different inspection methods based on
the location of the inspection. Boeing suggested that the revision to
paragraph (g)(1) state ``[D]o the inspections specified in paragraphs
(g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), (g)(1)(iii), and (g)(1)(iv) of this AD and in
accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 4. . . .''
    We do not agree it is necessary to specify inspection locations
because paragraph (g)(1) of this AD already requires operators to do
the inspections in accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083,
Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014. These accomplishment instructions
include the specific inspection methods and the inspection locations.
No change has been made to this AD in this regard.

Request To Refer to Revised Service Information

    ANA and Europe Airpost requested that the material in Boeing
Information Notice 737-53-1083 R04 IN 03 to Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53-1083 be included in the final rule. The commenters
noted that, based on the material in Boeing Information Notice 737-53-
1083 R04 IN 03 to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, the inspection
of the skin doubler required by paragraph (g)(1)(iii) of the NPRM (79
FR 30500, May 28, 2014) would no longer be applicable to Group 4
airplanes. The commenters explained that Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014, would
incorporate the material in Boeing Information Notice 737-53-1083 R04
IN 03. The commenters pointed out that operators might have to request
AMOCs from the FAA if the final rule did not include this material and
was issued prior to Boeing's release of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014.
    We agree that the material in Information Notice 737-53-1083 R04 IN
03 to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1083 is incorporated in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July
22, 2014. Since the NPRM (79 FR 30500, May 28, 2014) was published,
Boeing has issued and we have reviewed Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014. We have revised
this AD to include Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-
1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014, as an additional source of
service information. We have also included a new paragraph (k) in this
AD, and redesignated the subsequent paragraphs accordingly, to provide
credit for accomplishment of certain actions before the effective date
of this AD using Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083,
Revision 4, dated December 18, 2013.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     [Agr]re consistent with the intent that was proposed in
the NPRM (79 FR 30500, May 28, 2014) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 30500, May 28, 2014).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083,
Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014. The service information describes
procedures for inspection of the forward entry doorway and airstairs
doorway, modification, and repair. This service information is
reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for ways to access this service
information.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 132 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                     Labor cost       Parts cost    Cost per product          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection (Groups 1 through 4      9 work-hours x $85           $0   $765 per inspection   $100,980 per
 airplanes). \1\                     per hour = $765 per               cycle.                inspection cycle.
                                     inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the inspection of
  Group 5 airplanes.

                                                 Optional Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                         Labor cost                Parts cost          Cost per  product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preventive modification............  Up to 2 work-hours x $85     Up to $3,927.........  Up to $4,097.
                                      per hour = $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                         Labor cost                Parts cost          Cost per  product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair.............................  25 work-hours x $85 per      Up to $5,342.........  Up to $7,467.
                                      hour = $2,125.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2015-06-07 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18125; Docket No. FAA-
2014-0284; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-011-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective May 4, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014.
    (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01219SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/
rgstc.nsf/0/082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/$FILE/ST01219SE.pdf)
does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. For airplanes on which STC ST01219SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/
Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/
ebd1cec7b301293e86257cb30045557a/$FILE/ST01219SE.pdf) is installed,
therefore, a ``change in product'' alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the lower corners
of the forward entry doorway and the upper corners of the airstairs
cutout. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks in the
lower corners of the forward entry door cutout and the upper corners
of the airstairs cutout, which could progress and result in an
inability to maintain cabin pressurization.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspections and Corrective Actions

    (1) For airplane Groups 1 through 4, as identified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated
July 22, 2014: Except as required by paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, at
the applicable

time specified in table 1, 2, or 3, as applicable, of paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
737 53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014, do the inspections
specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), (g)(1)(iii), and
(g)(1)(iv) of this AD for cracks at the forward entry doorway and
airstairs cutout, and do all applicable corrective actions, in
accordance with Parts 1 and 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5,
dated July 22, 2014, except as required by paragraph (j)(2) of this
AD. Repeat the inspections, thereafter, at the interval specified in
table 1, 2, or 3, as applicable, of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision
5, dated July 22, 2014. Do all applicable corrective actions before
further flight. Any repair done in accordance with Part 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014, terminates
the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD
for the repaired area only.
    (i) An external detailed and high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspection of the skin.
    (ii) An internal detailed and HFEC inspection of exposed parts
of the bear strap.
    (iii) A detailed and HFEC inspection along the edge of the
cutout in the skin, skin doubler, and bear strap.
    (iv) An external low frequency eddy current inspection (LFEC) of
the skin and bearstrap.
    (2) For Groups 1 and 2 airplanes that have been repaired using
any of the service information identified in paragraph (g)(2)(i),
(g)(2)(ii), or (g)(2)(iii) of this AD, the inspections required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD are not required for the repaired area.
    (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 1, dated
October 25, 1985.
    (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 2, dated
March 25, 1988.
    (iii) Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 3, dated
December 7, 1989.
    (3) For Groups 3 and 4 airplanes, as identified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated
July 22, 2014: Accomplishment of a repair specified in Part 3,
``Permanent Repair,'' of Paragraph 3.B., ``Work Instructions,'' of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014, except as
required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, terminates the inspections
required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD for the repaired area(s)
only.
    (4) For Group 5 airplanes, as identified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22,
2014: Within 120 days after the effective date of this AD, inspect
the forward entry door cutout and airstairs cutout for cracks, and
repair any crack, using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD.

(h) Optional Preventive Modification

    For Groups 1 and 2, Configurations 5 and 6 airplanes; and Groups
3 and 4 airplanes; as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014: Except as
required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, accomplishment of the
preventive modification in accordance with Part 2 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014, terminates
the inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

(i) Post-Modification and Post-Repair Repetitive Inspections

    The post-modification and post-repair repetitive inspections
specified in table 4 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated
July 22, 2014, are not required by this AD.

    Note 1 to paragraph (i) of this AD:  The inspections specified
in table 4 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated July 22,
2014, may be used in support of compliance with Section
121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(b)(2) of the Federal Aviation Regulations
(14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or 14 CFR 129.109(b)(2)). The corresponding
actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 5, dated
July 22, 2014, are not required by this AD.

(j) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083,
Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014, specifies a compliance time ``after
the Revision 4 date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083,
Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014, specifies to contact Boeing for
repair instructions, this AD requires repair before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (l) of this AD.

(k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions specified in
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 737-53-1083, Revision 4, dated December 18, 2013,
which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance
with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or
local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Nenita Odesa,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (n)(3) and (n)(4) of this AD.

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1083,
Revision 5, dated July 22, 2014.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 13, 2015.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-06753 Filed 3-27-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22202-22204]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08674]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0720; FRL-10022-66]

Pesticide Registration Review; Pesticide Dockets Opened for
Review and Comment; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of the EPA's
preliminary work plan for the following chemical: Metrafenone. With
this document, the EPA is opening the public comment period for
registration review for this chemical.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 28, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, to the docket identification (ID)
number for the specific pesticide of interest provided in the Table in
Unit IV, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (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.html. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, are available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For pesticide specific information,
contact: The Chemical Review Manager for the pesticide of interest
identified in the Table in Unit IV.
    For general questions on the registration review program, contact:
Melanie Biscoe, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P), 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?

    This action is directed to the public in general and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the Chemical Review Manager identified in the Table in Unit IV.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA
through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. Background

    Registration review is the EPA's periodic review of pesticide
registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the
statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform
its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human
health or the environment. Registration review dockets contain
information that will assist the public in understanding the types of
information and issues that the agency may consider during the course
of registration reviews. As part of the registration review process,
the Agency has completed preliminary workplans for all pesticides
listed in the Table in Unit IV. Through this program, the EPA is
ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current
scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health
and the environment.

III. Authority

    The EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals
listed in the Table in Unit IV pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural
Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C.
Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the
registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under
FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only
if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA
section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with
widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must
perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on
the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the
environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the
use of a pesticide in or on food.

IV. Registration Reviews

A. What action is the Agency taking?

    A pesticide's registration review begins when the agency
establishes a docket for the pesticide's registration review case and
opens the docket for public review and comment. Pursuant to 40 CFR
155.50, this notice announces the availability of the EPA's preliminary
work plan for the pesticide shown in the following table and opens a
60-day public comment period on the work plan.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Chemical review
 Registration review case name    Docket ID No.     manager and contact
            and No.                                     information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metrafenone; Case Number 7052.  EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0  Srijana Shrestha,
                                 032<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(703) 305-
                                                    6471.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Docket Content

    The registration review docket contains information that the agency
may consider in the course of the registration review. The agency may
include information from its files including, but not limited to, the
following information:
     An overview of the registration review case status.
     A list of current product registrations and registrants.
     Federal Register notices regarding any pending
registration actions.
     Federal Register notices regarding current or pending
tolerances.
     Risk assessments.
     Bibliographies concerning current registrations.
     Summaries of incident data.
     Any other pertinent data or information.
    Each docket contains a document summarizing what the agency
currently knows about the pesticide case and a preliminary work plan
for anticipated data and assessment needs. Additional documents provide
more detailed information. During this public comment period, the
agency is asking that interested persons identify any additional
information they believe the agency should consider during the
registration reviews of these pesticides. The agency identifies in each
docket the areas where public comment is specifically requested, though
comment in any area is welcome.
    The registration review final rule at 40 CFR 155.50(b) provides for
a minimum 60-day public comment period on all preliminary registration
review work plans. This comment period is intended to provide an
opportunity for public input and a mechanism for initiating any
necessary changes to a pesticide's workplan. All comments should be
submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES and must be received by the
EPA on or before the closing date. These comments will become part of
the docket for the pesticides included in the Table in Unit IV.
Comments received

after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.'' The EPA
is not required to consider these late comments.
    The agency will carefully consider all comments received by the
closing date and may provide a ``Response to Comments Memorandum'' in
the docket. The final registration review work plan will explain the
effect that any comments had on the final work plan and provide the
agency's response to significant comments.
    Background on the registration review program is provided at:
http://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: April 15, 2021.
Mary Reaves,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2021-08674 Filed 4-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P