[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 3, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60285-60288]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23790]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 3, 2012 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0424; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-004-AD;
Amendment 39-17205; AD 2012-19-10]
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
of The Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes. This AD was prompted by heat
damage and cracks at the pivot joint location of the main landing gear
(MLG) inner cylinder/truck beam. This AD requires repetitive
lubrication of the MLG pivot joints; repetitive detailed inspections of
the outer diameter chrome on the center axles of the MLG for chicken-
wire cracks, corrosion, and chrome plate distress; repetitive magnetic
particle inspections of the outer diameter chrome on the center axles
of the MLG for cracks; and related investigative and corrective actions
if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking in
the MLG center axle and shock strut inner cylinder lugs (pivot joint),
which could result in fracture of the MLG pivot joint components and
consequent collapse of the MLG.

DATES: This AD is effective November 7, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of November 7,
2012.

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; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may review copies of the 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 425-
227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; 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:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document 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: Melanie Violette, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6422; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 1, 2012 (77 FR
25647). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive lubrication of the MLG
pivot joints; repetitive detailed inspections of the outer diameter
chrome on the center axles of the MLG for chicken-wire cracks,
corrosion, and chrome plate distress; repetitive magnetic particle
inspections of the outer diameter chrome on the center axles of the MLG
for cracks; and related investigative and corrective actions if
necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(77 FR 24647, May 1, 2012), and the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012)

    United Airlines agrees with the intent of the NPRM (77 FR 24647,
May 1, 2012).

Requests to Extend Compliance Time

    FedEx and Air France requested that we revise the compliance time
for the inspection specified in paragraph (g) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647,
May 1, 2012) to coincide with the time between overhaul (TBO) of the
MLG for their respective fleets. The applicable compliance time
specified in the NPRM for the FedEx fleet would be 3,000 days; the TBO
for the FedEx fleet is 3,650 days. The applicable compliance time
specified in the NPRM for the Air France fleet would be 3,750 days; the
TBO for the Air France fleet is 4,015 days. FedEx noted that, of the 28
cracked axles found during overhaul, none was fractured.
    We disagree to revise the compliance time. In developing an
appropriate compliance time for this AD, we considered not only the
safety implications, but the manufacturer's recommendations and the
practical aspect of accomplishing the required actions within an
interval of time that corresponds to typical scheduled maintenance for
affected operators. Under the provisions of paragraph (l) of this final
rule, however, we might consider requests for adjustments to the
compliance time if data is submitted to substantiate that such an
adjustment would provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not
changed the final rule regarding this issue.

Requests for Alternative Provisions

    Boeing, FedEx, and All Nippon Airways requested that we revise
paragraph (i) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012) to include an
additional exception to the service information. The commenters
requested that we allow the use of MIL-PRF-32014 grease as an
alternative to the Royco 11MS grease for the lubrications specified in
paragraph (g) of the NPRM. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32-0082,
dated December 9, 2010 (referenced in the NPRM as the appropriate
source of service information for this lubrication), replaces the Royco
11MS grease with

MIL-PRF-32014 grease for lubricating and installing the MLG pivot joint
components.
    Boeing asserted that MIL-PRF-32014 grease provides the same
lubricating properties as Royco 11MS grease. Boeing and FedEx noted
that use of MIL-PRF-32014 grease across the fleet will avoid
intermixing grease types and prevent the need to track which grease has
been applied on each airplane. FedEx reported it has already
standardized to MIL-PRF-32014 grease to ensure that there is no
intermixing of greases. Boeing reported that Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated December 9, 2010, will be revised to allow
use of MIL-PRF-32014 grease as an optional grease type, but this
revision will not be available when the AD is issued.
    We agree with the request. Both greases have the same lubricating
properties and will work with the original and new bushing materials.
We have added new paragraph (i)(2) in this final rule (and redesignated
paragraph (i) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012) as paragraph
(i)(1) of this final rule) to allow the use of either MIL-PRF-32014 or
Royco 11MS grease for the lubrications required by paragraph (g) of
this AD.

Requests To Include Terminating Action

    FedEx, Air France, United Airlines, and All Nippon Airways
requested that we revise paragraph (j) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1,
2012) to provide terminating action for the repetitive inspections
specified in paragraph (g) of the NPRM. FedEx stated that airplanes
after incorporation of Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April
14, 2011, have the same configuration as new production airplanes. Air
France stated that incorporation of Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-
0085, dated April 14, 2011, and the incorporation of Item 32-CMR-01 of
Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations of the Boeing 777 Maintenance
Planning Document (MPD) into the airplane maintenance program
terminates the repetitive inspections specified in paragraph (g) of the
NPRM by modifying the MLG and including the repetitive lubrication in
the airplane maintenance program.
    We agree that accomplishment of the actions specified in Boeing
Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011, involves a final
inspection, modification to the MLG, and modification of the airplane
maintenance program to terminate the repetitive inspections of
paragraph (g) of this AD. Paragraph (j)(2) of this AD provides the
optional terminating action. It is, therefore, unnecessary to revise
that paragraph. We have made no changes to the AD in this regard.

Request To Clarify Specific Terminating Actions

    Air France noted that the optional terminating action specified in
paragraph (j)(2) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012) does not
specify the inner cylinder assembly upgrade with bushing replacement,
as specified in Part 2, Option 2, of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011.
    We agree to revise the AD. Instead of identifying every action,
however, we have revised paragraph (j)(2) in this final rule to require
all applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011.

Request for Warranty Support

    Air France expressed concern regarding the cost of the inspection
and modification program, with no industry support from Boeing. Air
France noted that an unsafe condition due to normal operation would be
considered a major design defect. Air France requested that Boeing
propose industry support to cover the maintenance burden of the design
defect.
    Air France did not request any change to the AD. Further, we do not
control warranty coverage for affected individuals. We have, therefore,
not changed the AD regarding the estimated costs.

Request To Extend Compliance Time for On-Condition Action

    Air France reported that it found the service information
instructions to be complex, with a high risk of grounding airplanes due
to on-condition findings and a lack of Boeing support regarding the
inner cylinder assembly. Air France requested that Boeing add service
extension limits in case of on-condition findings.
    Air France did not specifically request a change to the AD. We
cannot allow continued operation if cracking is detected, due to the
safety implications and consequences of such cracking. We have not
changed the final rule regarding this issue.

Request To Clarify On-Condition Actions

    Boeing requested that we revise the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012)
to clarify the related investigative and corrective actions for the
inner cylinder. Boeing noted minor differences between the wording of
the NPRM and the wording of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082,
dated December 9, 2010. Boeing requested that we revise the NPRM to
more closely align with the Accomplishment Instructions of that service
bulletin.
    We partially agree. We agree that Boeing's proposed changes are
consistent with the procedures provided in the service information
specified in the preamble of the NPRM (77 FR 24647, May 1, 2012). But
this level of detail is not provided in the regulatory language of this
AD. Instead, the AD refers to the service information for the required
procedures. It is not necessary to revise the final rule to account for
this request.

Request To Correct Service Bulletin Reference

    Boeing noted an incorrect reference to service information
specified in the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012). Where the NPRM
referred to ``Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32A0085,'' the correct
service bulletin number is ``777-32-0085.'' We have revised paragraph
(j)(2) of this AD accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the 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 (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 160 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Parts                              Cost on U.S.
              Action                      Labor cost          cost      Cost per product          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lubrication of MLG pivot joints...  4 work-hours x $85            $0  $340 per lubrication  $54,400 per
                                     per hour = $340 per               cycle.                lubrication cycle.
                                     lubrication cycle.
Detailed and magnetic particle      39 work-hours x $85            0  $3,315 per            $530,400 per
 inspections.                        per hour = $3,315                 inspection cycle.     inspection cycle.
                                     per inspection cycle.
Inner cylinder lug bore inspection  6 work-hours x $85             0  $510 per inspection   $81,600 per
                                     per hour = $510 per               cycle.                inspection cycle.
                                     inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs or
replacements that would be required based on the results of the
inspections. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need these repairs or replacements.

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Action                     Labor cost               Parts cost               Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacing center axle.............  25 work-hours x $85   $54,030...................  $56,155.
                                     per hour = $2,125.
Refinishing the lug bore and        12 work-hours x $85   Up to $3,526..............  Up to $4,546.
 faces, and installing new           per hour = $1,020.
 bushings.
Replacing the inner cylinder        46 work-hours x $85   Up to $254,847............  Up to $258,757.
 assembly cylinder assembly.         per hour = $3,910.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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):

2012-19-10 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17205; Docket No. FAA-
2012-0424; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-004-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective November 7, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR, -
300, -300ER, and 777F series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-
32A0082, dated December 9, 2010.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by heat damage and cracks at the pivot
joint location of the main landing gear (MLG) cylinder/truck beam.
We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking in the MLG
center axle and shock strut inner cylinder lugs (pivot joint), which
could result in fracture of the MLG pivot joint components and
consequent collapse of the MLG.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Lubrication and Inspections

    At the applicable compliance times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010, except as provided by paragraph (i) of this AD:
Lubricate the MLG pivot joints; do a detailed inspection of the
outer diameter chrome on the center axles of the MLG for chicken-
wire cracks, corrosion, and chrome plate distress; do a magnetic
particle inspection of the outer diameter chrome on the center axles
of the MLG for cracks; and do all applicable related investigative
and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010, except as provided by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD.
Repeat the lubrication and inspections thereafter at the applicable
interval specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated December 9, 2010. Do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions before
further flight.

(h) Definition

    For the purposes of this AD, chicken-wire cracks are defined as
cracks that occur when stress created in the chrome deposit during
plating are relieved. The cracks are evident in the deposited chrome
when viewed from a perpendicular plane as a pattern similar to
chicken wire. Crack size can vary with plating conditions.

(i) Exceptions to Service Information

    (1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010, specifies a compliance time after the original
issue date of that service bulletin, this AD requires compliance
within the specified compliance time after the effective date of
this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010, specifies use of Royco 11MS grease for the
lubrication required by paragraph (g) of this AD, this AD also
allows use of MIL-PRF-32014 grease.

(j) Optional Actions for Compliance With Paragraph (g) of This AD

    (1) Doing the detailed and magnetic particle inspections in
accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0080, dated July 10, 2008;
or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0080, Revision
1, dated April 16, 2009; is considered acceptable for compliance
with the inspections of the center axle of the MLG required by
paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (2) Accomplishment of all applicable actions specified in and in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service
Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011, is considered acceptable
for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.

(k) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with sections
21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197
and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where the airplane
can be modified (if the operator elects to do so), if the flight is
operated as a non-revenue flight.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle 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 the Related Information
section 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, Seattle 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

    For more information about this AD, contact Melanie Violette,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(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 the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated December 9,
2010.
    (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011.
    (iii) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0080,
dated July 10, 2008.
    (iv) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0080,
Revision 1, dated April 16, 2009.
    (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; phone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may review copies of the 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>.
    (5) You may also review copies of the 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 September 19, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-23790 Filed 10-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 21, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 29647]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12028]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0375]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway
(NJICW), Atlantic City, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedules that govern the Route 30/Absecon Boulevard Bridge
across Beach Thorofare, NJICW mile 67.2 and the US40-322 (Albany
Avenue) across Inside Thorofare, NJICW mile 70.0, both at Atlantic
City, NJ. This deviation allows the drawbridges to remain closed-to-
navigation to accommodate the free movement of vehicles during the re-
scheduled 2013 Atlantic City Air Show.

DATES: This deviation is effective on Wednesday June 26, 2013, from 9
a.m. until 12 noon and again from 3 p.m. until 6 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, USCG-2013-0375, is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH''. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Terrance Knowles, Environmental Protection Specialist,
Fifth Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The New Jersey Department of Transportation
requested a temporary deviation from the current operating regulations
of the Route 30/Absecon Boulevard Bridge across Beach Thorofare, NJICW
mile 67.2 and the US40-322 (Albany Avenue) across Inside Thorofare,
NJICW mile 70.0, both at Atlantic City, NJ. The temporary deviation has
been requested to ensure the safety of the heavy numbers of pedestrians
and vehicular traffic that would be transiting over the bridges for the
re-scheduled air show at Bader Field located within the city limits.
Under this temporary deviation, both bridges will be closed, effective
on Wednesday June 26, 2013, from 9 a.m. until 12 noon and again from 3
p.m. until 6 p.m. Between 12 noon and 3 p.m. on Wednesday June 26, 2013
both bridges will return to their regular operating schedules.

Route 30/Absecon Boulevard Bridge

    The current operating regulation for the Route 30/Absecon Boulevard
Bridge across Beach Thorofare is outlined at 33 CFR 117.733(e) which
requires that the bridge shall open on signal if at least four hours of
notice is given; except that from April 1 through October 31, from 7
a.m. to 11 p.m., the draw need only open on the hour; on July 4, the
draw need not open from 9:40 p.m. until 11:15 p.m. to accommodate the
annual July 4th fireworks show. Should inclement weather prevent the
fireworks event from taking place as planned, the draw need not open
from 9:40 p.m. until 11:15 p.m. on July 5th to accommodate the annual
July 4th fireworks show; and on the third or fourth Wednesday of August
the draw will open every two hours on the hour from 10 a.m. until 4
p.m. and need not open from 4 p.m. until 8 p.m. to accommodate the
annual Air Show. In the closed position to vessels, the vertical
clearance for this bascule-type bridge is 20 feet, above mean high
water.

US40-322 (Albany Avenue) Bridge

    The current operating regulation for the US40-322 (Albany Avenue)
Bridge across Inside Thorofare is outlined at 33 CFR 117.733(f) shall
open on signal except that year-round, from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.; and from
November 1 through March 31 from 3 p.m. to 11 p.m., the draw need only
open if at least four hours notice is given; from June 1 through
September 30, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. and from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., the draw
need only open on the hour and half hour; and from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m.,
the draw need not open; on July 4, the draw need not open from 9:40
p.m. until 11:15 p.m., to accommodate the annual July 4th fireworks
show. Should inclement weather prevent the fireworks event from taking
place as planned, the draw need not open from 9:40 p.m. until 11:15
p.m. on July 5th to accommodate the annual July 4th fireworks show; and
on the third or fourth Wednesday of August, the draw will open every
two hours on the hour from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. and need not open from
4 p.m. until 8 p.m. to accommodate the annual Air Show. In the closed
position to vessels, the vertical clearance for this bascule-type
bridge is 10 feet, above mean high water.
    The majority of the vessels that transit the bridges this time of
the year are recreational boats. Vessels able to pass through the
bridges in the closed positions may do so at anytime. Both bridges will
be able to open for emergencies. The Atlantic Ocean is an alternate
route for vessels unable to pass through the bridges in closed
positions. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways
through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the closure
periods for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to
minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridges must return to
their regular operating schedules immediately at the end of the
designated time period. This deviation from the operating regulations
is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: May 10, 2013.
Waverly W. Gregory, Jr.,
Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2013-12028 Filed 5-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

OFFICE OF

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

MEMORANDUM

	Date:	11/5/2004

	Subject:	Acetamiprid.  Tolerance Petition Requesting Section 3 Registration for Food Use of the Insecticide Acetamiprid on Cucurbit Vegetables (Crop Group 9), Stone Fruits (Crop Group 12), and Tree Nuts (Crop Group 14).  Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data.  Petition Number 4F6833.

		DP Number:	303623	Decision Number:	342506

		PC Code:	099050	Trade Name:	Assail( 70WP

		40 CFR 180.	578	MRID Numbers:	46265701, 46265702, 46265703

	From:	William T. Drew, Chemist

		Registration Action Branch 2

		Health Effects Division (7509C)

	Through:	Michael Doherty, Acting Branch Senior Scientist

		Registration Action Branch 2

		Health Effects Division (7509C)

	To:	Akiva Abramovitch/John Hebert, PM Team 07

		Insecticide/Rodenticide Branch

		Registration Division (7505C)

This document was originally prepared under contract by Dynamac Corporation (20440 Century Boulevard, Suite 100; Germantown, MD 20874); it has been reviewed by the HED and revised to reflect current OPP policies.

Executive Summary

The petitioner, Nisso America Incorporated (representing Nippon Soda Company Limited, which acquired the registrations for acetamiprid from Aventis CropScience), has requested a Section 3 registration and proposed, in PP#4F6833, the establishment of permanent tolerances for residues of the insecticide acetamiprid arising from its use on cucurbit vegetables, stone fruits, and tree nuts.  Nisso has proposed permanent tolerances, as listed below, in/on the following raw agricultural and processed commodities:

cucurbit vegetables (Crop Group 9)	0.5 ppm,

stone fruits (Crop Group 12), except prune plum	1.2 ppm,

prune plum, fresh and dried	0.3 ppm,

tree nuts (Crop Group 14)	0.1 ppm,

almond hulls	5.0 ppm.

Acetamiprid, a selective insecticide with CAS registry number 135410-20-7 and the CAS name (1E)-N-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N '-cyano-N-methylethanimidamide, belongs to the chloronicotinyl (neonicotinoid) class of chemical compounds.  In conjunction with the subject petition, Nisso has submitted an application for an amended Section 3 registration on a wettable powder (WP) formulation of acetamiprid (Assail( 70WP, EPA Registration Number 8033-23) comprised of 70% active ingredient (ai) to control aphids, leafhoppers, and other sucking/chewing pests on cucurbits, stone fruits, and tree nuts.  The proposed maximum seasonal rates are 0.50 to 0.72 pound active ingredient per acre (lb ai/A) when applied as a foliar broadcast spray using aerial or ground equipment.  The proposed pre-harvest intervals (PHIs) are 0 days for cucurbit vegetables, 7 days for stone fruits, and 14 days for tree nuts.  The product is currently registered for foliar application to cotton, leafy vegetables, cole vegetables, fruiting vegetables, citrus fruits, pome fruits, and grapes, and for seed treatment of canola and mustard seed.  Pending applications to include the use of acetamiprid on tuberous and corm vegetables (Crop Subgroup 1C) and tobacco are under separate review (PP#3F6575).  This previous acetamiprid petition was submitted by Aventis CropScience; since that time, Nippon Soda Company Limited has taken over ownership of acetamiprid registrations.

Tolerances for acetamiprid are listed below as seen in 40 CFR §180.578 (utilizing IUPAC nomenclature).

(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide acetamiprid, N1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]-N2-cyano-N1-methylacetamidine, in or on the following commodities:

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

Commodity				Parts per million

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

 ADVANCE \d4 Canola, seed.............................................. 0.010 Citrus, dried pulp........................................ 1.20 Cotton, gin byproducts.................................... 20.0 Cotton, undelinted seed................................... 0.60 Fruit, citrus group....................................... 0.50 Fruit, pome group......................................... 1.0 Grape..................................................... 0.20 Mustard, seed............................................. 0.010 Tomato, paste............................................. 0.40 Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 5....................... 1.20 Vegetable, fruiting, group 8.............................. 0.20 Vegetable, leafy, except brassica, group 4................ 3.00

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

 ADVANCE \d4 (2) Tolerances are established for the combined residues of the insecticide acetamiprid, N1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]-N2-cyano-N1-methylacetamidine, and metabolite, N1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]-N2-cyano-acetamidine, in or on the following commodities:

-----------------------------------------------------------------  ADVANCE \d4 			Commodity 				Parts per million

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

 ADVANCE \d4 Cattle, fat.............................................. 0.10 Cattle, meat............................................. 0.10 Cattle, meat byproducts.................................. 0.20 Egg...................................................... 0.010 Goat, fat................................................ 0.10 Goat, meat............................................... 0.10 Goat, meat byproducts.................................... 0.20 Hog, fat................................................. 0.10 Hog, meat................................................ 0.10 Hog, meat byproducts..................................... 0.20 Horse, fat............................................... 0.10 Horse, meat.............................................. 0.10 Horse, meat byproducts................................... 0.20 Milk..................................................... 0.10 Poultry, fat............................................. 0.010 Poultry, liver........................................... 0.050 Poultry, meat............................................ 0.010 Sheep, fat............................................... 0.10 Sheep, meat.............................................. 0.10 Sheep, meat byproducts................................... 0.20

----------------------------------------------------------------- 	The HED Metabolism Assessment Review Committee (MARC) has determined that the nature of the residue in plants and animals is adequately understood.  It was concluded that the tolerance expression should include acetamiprid per se for plant commodities and combined residues of acetamiprid and IM-2-1 for livestock commodities.  In addition, residues of IM-2-1-amide, with IUPAC name N 2-aminocarbonyl-N 1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]acetamidine, in ruminant muscle tissue should be included in the risk assessment for acetamiprid.  Residues of IM-2-1-amide were not measured as part of the ruminant feeding study; however, data indicate that residues of IM-2-1-amide in ruminant muscle tissue can be estimated by applying a 10-fold factor to residues of IM-2-1 in muscle.  In the original petition, HED suggested to the petitioner that a hydrolysis step be included in the method to convert IM-2-1-amide to IM-2-1.

Adequate crop field trial data have been submitted reflecting the proposed uses on cucurbit vegetables, stone fruits, and tree nuts.  The studies are supported by adequate storage stability data.  Adequate processing data have been submitted for plum which indicate that a separate tolerance is needed for dried prune plum.  Adequate residue analytical methods are available for the enforcement of established and proposed tolerances for plant commodities (GC/ECD and HPLC/UV) and animal commodities (HPLC/UV).  These methods were submitted to the Analytical Chemistry Branch of the Biological and Economic Analysis Division (ACB/BEAD) for petition method validation (PMV) and were ultimately validated.  However, the registrant has subsequently proposed that the HPLC/MS/MS method utilized for data collection (in PP#3F6575 and PP#4F6833) replace the current tolerance enforcement method (GC/ECD) for those plant commodities proposed in PP#4F6833.  An independent laboratory validation (ILV) for this method has not been submitted and so, as a condition of registration, the proposed enforcement method must undergo ILV, and possibly be submitted to ACB/BEAD for PMV (it should be noted that the HPLC/MS/MS method must analyze a minimum of two daughter ions specific to acetamiprid if it is to be considered acceptable as both a tolerance enforcement and confirmatory method).  Adequate cattle feeding study data are available to support the proposed uses of acetamiprid.  No poultry feed items are associated with this petition.  There are currently no established Codex or Canadian MRLs for acetamiprid.  One Mexican MRL is established for acetamiprid on cotton seed at 0.01 mg/kg.

Regulatory Recommendations and Residue Chemistry Deficiencies

HED has examined the residue chemistry database for acetamiprid.  A human health risk assessment is being prepared as a separate document.  Pending resolution of the deficiencies noted below, and provided the proposed HPLC/MS/MS enforcement analytical method receives a satisfactory ILV, there are no residue chemistry issues that would preclude granting a conditional registration for this insecticide on the proposed uses or establishment of tolerances for acetamiprid per se as follows:

cucurbit vegetables (Crop Group 9)	0.50 ppm,

stone fruits (Crop Group 12), except prune plum	1.20 ppm,

fresh prune plum	0.20 ppm,

dried prune plum	0.40 ppm,

tree nuts (Crop Group 14)	0.10 ppm,

pistachio	0.10 ppm,

almond hulls	5.0 ppm.

860.1340 Residue Analytical Method - Plant Commodities

The proposed  HPLC/MS/MS enforcement method for plant commodities must undergo ILV as a condition of registration, and possibly PMV (it should be noted that the HPLC/MS/MS method must analyze a minimum of two daughter ions specific to acetamiprid if it is to be considered acceptable as both a tolerance enforcement and confirmatory method).

860.1850 Confined Rotational Crops

The available rotational crop data, submitted in conjunction with the original petition (PP#0F6082, DP Barcode D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty), are adequate to support the uses requested in this petition.  However, submission of the outstanding rotational crop supporting storage stability data, which were required as a  condition of registration in the original petition, should be a condition of the registration requested in this review.

860.1550 Proposed Tolerances

The available stone fruit group crop field trial data indicate that the proposed tolerance for fresh prune plum is too high, while that for dried prune plum is too low; a tolerance of 0.20 ppm would be appropriate for fresh prune plum and 0.40 ppm would be appropriate for dried prune plum.  The tolerance for stone fruits (Crop Group 12), except prune plum, should be stated as 1.20 ppm rather than 1.2 ppm.  A separate tolerance for pistachio must be proposed at the same level as the tree nut group tolerance.  The proposed tolerances should be revised to reflect the correct commodity definitions as specified in Table 6; a revised Section F should be submitted to incorporate all of these changes.

Background

Nisso has petitioned the Agency to register the Assail( 70WP formulation of the insecticide acetamiprid, with CAS name (1E)-N-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N '-cyano-N-methylethanimidamide, on members of the cucurbit vegetable crop group, the stone fruit crop group, the tree nut crop group (including pistachio), and almond hulls.  Acetamiprid is currently registered for foliar application to cotton, leafy vegetables, cole vegetables, fruiting vegetables, citrus fruits, pome fruits, and grapes, and for seed treatment of canola and mustard seed.  The existing registrations were reviewed by HED under the original petition (PP#0F6082, DP Barcode D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty).  Pending applications to include the use of acetamiprid on tuberous and corm vegetables (Crop Subgroup 1C) and tobacco are under separate review (PP#3F6575).

Acetamiprid is an insecticide intended for use against various insect pests that feed upon fruit and vegetable crops.  It is a member of the chloronicotinyl (neonicotinoid) class of insecticides, which function by binding to nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in the post-synaptic neurons of the insect’s central nervous system.  This binding results in the opening of ion pores, causing a subsequent overload of sodium ions in the neurons which leads to nervous system hyper-excitation and eventual death of the insect.  For use on the crops requested, acetamiprid is formulated as Assail( 70WP (EPA Registration Number 8033-23), a wettable powder comprised of 70% ai by weight.

The chemical structure and nomenclature of acetamiprid and its metabolites, and the physicochemical properties of the technical grade of acetamiprid are presented in Tables 1 and 2, below.

TABLE 1.	Test Compound Nomenclature

Compound

Chemical Structure

Common Name

Acetamiprid

Company Experimental Name

EXP-61842A, AEF124370, NI-25

IUPAC Name

(E)-N 1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]-N 2-cyano-N 1-methylacetamidine

CAS Name

(1E)-N-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N'-cyano-N-methylethanimidamide

CAS #

135410-20-7

End-Use Product

Assail( 70WP

Chemical structure of acetamiprid metabolite IM-2-1

N 1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]-N 2-cyano-acetamidine

Chemical structure of acetamiprid metabolite IM-2-1-amide

(also referred to as IM-2-2)

N 2-aminocarbonyl-N 1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]acetamidine

TABLE 2.	Physicochemical Properties of Technical Grade Acetamiprid.

Parameter

Value

Reference

Melting Point ((C)

98.9

D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty

pH (20(C)

6.08 (Aqueous Solution)

Section A of PP#4F6833

Density (20(C)

1.33 g/cm3

D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty

Water Solubility (25(C)

4.25 g/L (4250 ppm)

D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty

Solvent Solubility (25(C)

Acetone	>20 g/100 g

Methanol	>20 g/100 g

Ethanol	>20 g/100 g

Dichloromethane	>20 g/100 g

Chloroform	>20 g/100 g

Acetonitrile	>20 g/100 g

Tetrahydrofuran	>20 g/100 g

Benzene	2.44 g/100 g

Xylene	4.01 g/100 g

n-Hexane	6.54 ppm

Carbon Disulfide	507 ppm

Section A of PP#4F6833

Vapor Pressure (25(C)

7.5 x 10-9 mm Hg

D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty

Dissociation Constant, pKa (25(C)

0.7

Section A of PP#4F6833

Octanol/Water Partition Coefficient,

Log KOW (25(C)

0.8

Section A of PP#4F6833

UV/Visible Absorption Spectrum

(Not available)

860.1200  Directions for Use

The use directions for the crops requested in PP#4F6833 are summarized in Table 3, below.

Table 3.	Summary of Directions for Use of Acetamiprid.

Trade Name

Application Timing; Type; and Equipment

Application Rate

Maximum Number of Applications/ Season

Maximum Seasonal Application Rate

(lb ai/A)

PHI1 (Days)

Use Directions and Limitations

Cucurbits crop group including chayote (fruit), Chinese waxgourd (Chinese preserving melon), citron melon, cucumber, gherkin, gourd (edible), Mormordica spp., muskmelon (hybrid and/or cultivars of Cucumis melo), pumpkin, squash (summer and winter), and watermelon.

Assail( 70WP Insecticide

Pest-dependent; broadcast foliar;

ground or aerial

0.05-0.10

5

0.50

0

Applications made in minimum spray volume of 5 gallons per acre (GPA) for aerial equipment or 20 GPA for ground equipment; 5-day minimum RTI2.

Stone fruit crop group including apricot, cherry (sweet and tart), nectarine, peach, plum (chickasaw, damson, Japanese), plumcot, and prune (fresh).

Assail( 70WP Insecticide

Pest-dependent; broadcast foliar;

ground or aerial

0.05-0.15

4

0.60

7

Applications made in minimum spray volume of 10 GPA for aerial equipment or 50 GPA for ground equipment; 10-day minimum RTI.

Tree nuts crop group including almond, beech nut, Brazil nut, butternut, cashew, chestnut, chinquapin, filbert (hazelnut), hickory nut, macadamia (bush nut), pecan, pistachio, and walnut (black and English [Persian]).

Assail( 70WP Insecticide

Pest-dependent; broadcast foliar;

ground or aerial

0.05-0.18

4

0.72

14

Applications made in minimum spray volume of 10 GPA for aerial equipment or 50 GPA for ground equipment; 7-day minimum RTI.

1. PHI = Pre-Harvest Interval.

2. RTI = Re-Treatment Interval.

Application through any type of irrigation system is prohibited.  The proposed label recommends that applications of different chemical classes should be alternated to reduce the potential for pest resistance development.  No rotational crop restrictions have been proposed.  For orchard and vineyard crops, the proposed label states that the use of high quality non-ionic surfactants or horticultural oils may improve pest control; this statement is also included in the specific use directions for cotton, citrus fruits, pome fruits, stone fruits, and tree nuts.  The proposed label was adequate to allow evaluation of the residue data submitted in support of this petition, relative to the proposed uses.

860.1300 Nature of the Residue - Plants

MARC Decision Memorandum, D278652, Michael Doherty, 11/13/2001

DERs: Apple, MRID 44988520; Cabbage, MRID 44988522; Carrot, MRID 44988519; Cotton, MRID 44988518; Eggplant, MRID 44988521

No plant metabolism studies were submitted with the subject petition.  Acceptable plant metabolism studies with acetamiprid on apple, cabbage, carrot, cotton, and eggplant were submitted as part of the data package for the original acetamiprid petition (PP#0F6082, D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty).  It was found that in most plants, acetamiprid is demethylated at the N1 amine to form IM-2-1 which may then be further metabolized to form IM-0 and IC-0.  IM-0 is then metabolized to form the glucose conjugate IM-0-Glc.  HED concluded that the submitted studies were adequate to delineate the qualitative nature of the residue in the crops proposed for use in that petition.  The MARC determined that for both tolerance expression and risk assessment purposes, the residue of concern was acetamiprid per se.

The available plant metabolism data are adequate to support the proposed uses on cucurbit vegetables, stone fruits, and tree nuts.  The residue of concern in these commodities is acetamiprid per se.

860.1300 Nature of the Residue - Livestock

MARC Decision Memorandum, D278652, Michael Doherty, 11/13/2001

DERs: Lactating Goat, MRID 44988524; Laying Hen, MRID 44988523

No animal metabolism studies were submitted with the current petition.  Adequate metabolism studies with acetamiprid in ruminants and laying hens were submitted in conjunction with the original petition (PP#0F6082, D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty).  It was found that acetamiprid is metabolized in goats via loss of an amine methyl group, forming IM-2-1, which can be further hydrolyzed to form IM-2-3 and IM-2-4.  IM-2-1-amide (IM-2-2) can be formed as an intermediate in the metabolism of IM-2-1 to IM-2-4.  In poultry, IM-2-1-amide can be converted to IM-2-5 through loss of the acetamide group.

HED has concluded that the qualitative nature of acetamiprid residues in livestock is adequately understood.  The MARC determined that the tolerance expression for livestock commodities should be acetamiprid plus its IM-2-1 metabolite.  For purposes of risk assessment, the residues of concern in livestock tissue (except ruminant muscle) are acetamiprid plus its IM-2-1 metabolite.  In ruminant muscle, the residues of concern for risk assessment are acetamiprid plus IM-2-1 plus IM-2-1-amide.  Residues of IM-2-1-amide in ruminant muscle tissue can be estimated by applying a 10-fold factor to residues of IM-2-1 in muscle

860.1340 Residue Analytical Methods

DERs: Cucurbits, MRID 46265701; Stone Fruits, MRID 46265702; Tree Nuts, MRID 46265703

Enforcement methods  The petitioner submitted three analytical methods for acetamiprid in conjunction with the original petition (PP#0F6082, D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty).  The methods and their performance are summarized in Table 4, below.  Adequate ILV data were submitted.  The citrus and livestock methods were successfully radiovalidated for acetamiprid (minimum 85% recovery) using samples from the metabolism studies.  Because the methods include instructions for confirmation of residues of acetamiprid and IM-2-1 using HPLC/MS/MS determination, interference testing was not required.  The methods were submitted to the ACB/BEAD for PMV; the GC/ECD method (with spinach) and the HPLC/UV method (with milk) were ultimately validated.

The petitioner originally stated that the enforcement method for vegetables and non-citrus fruits (GC/ECD method) was to be used for enforcement of the proposed tolerances for acetamiprid residues in/on cucurbit vegetables, stone fruits, and tree nuts, but has subsequently proposed that the HPLC/MS/MS method that was used for data collection in the current petition be adopted as the tolerance enforcement method for the requested crops (and apparently for vegetables and non-citrus fruits, as well).  Therefore, as a condition of registration, this method must undergo successful ILV to be adopted as the tolerance enforcement method (it should be noted that the HPLC/MS/MS method must analyze a minimum of two daughter ions specific to acetamiprid if it is to be considered acceptable as both a tolerance enforcement and confirmatory method).

Table 4.	Summary of Validated Analytical Methods for Acetamiprid.

Target Matrices

Method Description

LOQ (ppm)

Method Validation

Fortification Levels, ppm

Recovery Range, %

Vegetables and Non-Citrus Fruits

Methanol extraction, residues partitioned into dichloromethane, Florisil/silica gel column cleanup, and GC/ECD determination.

0.010

0.010, 0.050

68-112

Citrus Fruits

Acetonitrile extraction, coextractives partitioned into hexane, residues partitioned into dichloromethane, Florisil/C18 column cleanup, and HPLC/UV determination.

0.050

0.050, 0.250

77-100

Eggs, Milk, and Ruminant and Poultry Tissues

Acetonitrile extraction, residues partitioned into dichloromethane, Florisil/C18 column cleanup, and HPLC/UV determination.  The method determines both acetamiprid and IM-2-1.

0.010 ppm (muscle, fat, milk, and eggs)

0.010, 0.100

78-103 (acetamiprid)

81-109 (IM-2-1)

0.050 ppm

(liver and kidney)

0.050, 0.500

Data collection methods  Samples from the crop field trial and processing studies submitted in conjunction with this petition were analyzed for residues of acetamiprid using HPLC/MS/MS method KP-216R0, entitled Preliminary LC/MS/MS Analytical Method for Determination of ASSAIL( 70WP Insecticide (Acetamiprid) in Crop Matrices or its modified version, KP-216R1.  Briefly, homogenized samples were extracted with methanol:water (1:1 vol/vol), centrifuged, and filtered.  The extracts were combined, the volume was adjusted with methanol:water (25:75 vol/vol), and the extract was cleaned up by solid phase extraction (Oasis HLB column); residues were eluted with acetonitrile.  Following purification, the extract was filtered for HPLC/MS/MS analysis.  HPLC/MS/MS analysis was conducted using a C8 column, a gradient mobile phase of methanol and 1% formic acid in water, and MS/MS detection in the positive-ion mode; only one daughter ion was analyzed.  The limit of quantitation (LOQ) was 0.010 ppm in cucurbit vegetables, stone fruits, and almond and pecan nutmeat, and 0.020 ppm in almond hulls.  Adequate concurrent method recovery data were submitted for cucurbit vegetables (cucumbers, muskmelons, and summer squash), stone fruits (sweet and tart cherry, peach, and plum), and tree nuts (almond and pecan nutmeat, and almond hulls).

Although the method used for data collection (HPLC/MS/MS) differs from the proposed enforcement method (GC/ECD), HED concludes that the method is adequate for the purposes of data collection to support the proposed tolerances.  The solvent extraction steps are similar in both methods (methanol extraction in GC/ECD method; methanol/water extraction in HPLC/MS/MS method), and the results of concurrent method recovery analyses indicate that residues of acetamiprid are not lost during the cleanup steps of the HPLC/MS/MS method.

860.1360 Multiresidue Methods

DER: MRID 44988534

The petitioner submitted data concerning the recovery of residues of acetamiprid using FDA multiresidue method protocols (PAM Volume I) in conjunction with the original petition (PP#0F6082, D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty).  These data have been forwarded to FDA for evaluation.  Based on the results of the testing, the multiresidue methods are not appropriate for determining acetamiprid residues of concern.  BEAD is currently working on a multi-residue method for the neonicitinoids.

860.1380 Storage Stability

DERs: Various Commodities, MRID 44988535; Cucurbits, MRID 46265701; Stone Fruits, MRID 46265702; Tree Nuts, MRID 46265703

The petitioner did not conduct storage stability studies in conjunction with the submitted field trial and processing studies.  Instead, storage stability data generated in conjunction with PP#0F6082 (MRID 44988535; D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty) were referenced.  These data demonstrated that residues of acetamiprid were relatively stable under frozen storage conditions in/on fortified samples of whole apple, apple juice, wet apple pomace, cabbage, cotton seed, cotton gin byproducts, cotton seed hulls, cotton seed meal, cotton seed oil, cucumber, head lettuce, whole orange, orange juice, orange oil, and orange dried pulp for up to 12 months (up to 15 months for head lettuce).

In addition, the stability of acetamiprid during short-term storage at ambient temperatures was evaluated.  Samples of cotton seed, cotton gin trash, cotton seed oil, whole grapes, grape juice, raisins, whole oranges, whole tomatoes, and tomato paste spiked with acetamiprid at 0.10 and 0.25 ppm were stored at ambient temperatures for a duration of 7 days (15 days for raisins).  Under these conditions, residues of acetamiprid were stable in all commodities.

The maximum storage durations of residue study crop samples from harvest to analysis were 137 days (4.5 months) for cucurbit vegetables, 116 days (3.8 months) for stone fruits, 161 days (5.3 months) for tree nut nutmeat, 139 days (4.6 months) for almond hulls, and 62 days (2.0 months) for dried prunes.

The available storage stability data are sufficient to be representative of the current and proposed uses of acetamiprid.  The data represent an oilseed (cotton seed), a leafy vegetable (head lettuce), a Brassica leafy vegetable (cabbage), a cucurbit vegetable (cucumber), and fruits (apple and orange), as well as the processed commodities of apple, cotton, and orange.  The available storage stability data are adequate and may be translated to support the storage conditions and durations for all samples from the submitted cucurbit vegetable, stone fruit, and tree nut field trials and plum processing study.

860.1480 Meat, Milk, Poultry, and Eggs

DERs: Cattle, MRID 44988601; Poultry, MRID 44988602; Tree Nuts, MRID 46265703

No new animal feeding studies were submitted with this petition.  The only cattle feedstuff associated with this petition is almond hulls.  Previously (PP#0F6082, D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty), the maximum theoretical dietary burden of acetamiprid to beef and dairy cattle was estimated to be 4.5 ppm, based on a diet consisting of cotton gin byproducts (20% in diet, 90% dry matter, 20 ppm tolerance) and cotton seed meal (15% in diet, 89% dry matter, cotton seed tolerance of 0.6 ppm).  The proposed use of acetamiprid on almonds is not likely to increase the dietary burden, considering that cotton gin byproducts are the major contributor to the dietary burden and that cattle are not likely to be fed a diet consisting of both cotton commodities and almond hulls.  The tolerances established in 40 CFR §180.578(a)(2) for milk and the fat, meat, and meat byproducts of cattle, goat, hog, horse, and sheep are adequate to cover any secondary transfer of the residues of concern as a result of the proposed new uses.

There are no poultry feedstuffs associated with this petition; therefore, the potential for residues in poultry commodities does not need to be addressed.

860.1500 Crop Field Trials

DERs: Cucurbits, MRID 46265701; Stone Fruits, MRID 46265702; Tree Nuts, MRID 46265703

Table 5.	Summary of Residues from Crop Field Trials with Acetamiprid.

Crop Matrix

Total Application Rate

(lb ai/A)

PHI (Days)

Spray Volume 1

Residues of Acetamiprid (ppm) 2

n

Min.

Max.

HAFT

Median

Mean

Std. Dev.

Cucurbit Vegetable Group 9 (proposed use = 0.50 lb ai/A total application rate, 0-day PHI)

Cucumber

0.496-0.508

0

--

12

0.015

0.091

0.086

0.028

0.037

0.025

Muskmelon

0.500-0.502

0

--

12

0.011

0.142

0.103

0.036

0.051

0.039

Summer Squash

0.502-0.508

0

--

10

0.004

0.221

0.194

0.083

0.098

0.062

Stone Fruit Group 12 (proposed use = 0.6 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

Cherry

0.591-0.606

7

dilute

12

0.251

0.932

0.878

0.448

0.528

0.213

0.590-0.595

7

concentrate

8

0.079

0.767

0.708

0.491

0.444

0.238

Peach

0.585-0.596

7-8

dilute

16

0.093

0.387

0.335

0.196

0.214

0.081

0.589-0.600

7

concentrate

10

0.153

0.565

0.438

0.208

0.244

0.122

Plum

0.591-0.592

7

dilute

8

0.014

0.116

0.112

0.046

0.057

0.038

0.588-0.597

7

concentrate

8

0.010

0.119

0.092

0.039

0.045

0.035

Tree Nut Group 14 (proposed use = 0.72 lb ai/A total application rate, 14-day PHI)

Almond Hulls

0.713-0.720

14

dilute

6

1.45

4.03

3.83

2.355

2.573

1.055

14

concentrate

6

0.175

0.835

0.779

0.732

0.593

0.292

Almond Nutmeat

0.713-0.720

14

dilute

6

<0.010

0.024

0.023

0.013

0.015

0.007

14

concentrate

6

<0.010

<0.010

<0.010

0.005

0.005

0.0

Pecan Nutmeat

0.710-0.725

14

dilute

8

<0.010

0.013

0.011

0.005

0.007

0.003

14

concentrate

4

<0.010

0.050

0.047

0.024

0.026

0.024

1. For orchard crops, broadcast foliar applications were made in either dilute (100-400 GPA) or concentrate (20-100 GPA) spray volumes.

2. For the determination of minimum, maximum, and HAFT values, the LOQ (0.010 ppm for almond and pecan nutmeat) was used for residues reported as nondetectable (ND) or at/below the LOQ.  For the determination of the median, mean, and standard deviation values, half the LOQ (0.005 ppm) was used for residues reported as ND or below half the LOQ.

Cucurbit Vegetables (Crop Group 9)  Nisso has submitted field trial data on cucumber, muskmelon, and summer squash, the representative commodities of the cucurbit vegetables group (Crop Group 9).  A total of 17 cucurbit vegetable field trials were conducted during the 2003 growing season.  Six trials were conducted on cucumber in Regions 2 (SC, 2 trials), 3 (FL, 1 trial), 5 (MI, 2 trials), and 6 (TX, 1 trial); six trials were conducted on muskmelon in Regions 2 (SC, 1 trial), 5 (MI, 1 trial), 6 (TX, 1 trial), and 10 (CA, 3 trials); and five trials were conducted on summer squash in Regions 1 (PA, 1 trial), 2 (SC, 1 trial), 3 (FL, 1 trial), 5 (MI, 1 trial), and 10 (CA, 1 trial).  The number and locations of field trials are in accordance with OPPTS Residue Chemistry Test Guideline 860.1500 for cucumber, muskmelon, and summer squash as the representative crops of the cucurbit vegetables crop group.

At each test location, a total of five foliar broadcast applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation were made to cucurbit vegetables at a nominal rate of 0.10 lb ai/A per application, with 4- to 7-day RTIs, for a nominal total seasonal application rate of 0.50 lb ai/A (the proposed maximum seasonal rate).  Applications were made using ground equipment; no adjuvants were added to the spray mixtures.  Samples of mature cucumber, muskmelon, and summer squash were collected on the day of last application (0-day PHI).

Samples of cucurbit vegetables were analyzed for residues of acetamiprid using HPLC/MS/MS method KP-216R0.  The validated LOQ was 0.010 ppm for all cucurbit vegetable matrices.  This method is adequate for data collection based on acceptable concurrent method recovery data.  Adequate storage stability data are available to support sample storage durations and conditions.

The results from the cucurbit vegetable crop field trials are presented in Table 5.  The maximum residues of acetamiprid were 0.091 ppm in/on cucumber, 0.142 ppm in/on melon, and 0.221 ppm in/on summer squash harvested on the day of the last of five foliar broadcast applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation at the proposed maximum seasonal rate.

Stone Fruits (Crop Group 12)  Nisso has submitted field trial data on cherry (sweet and tart), peach, and plum, the representative commodities of the stone fruits group (Crop Group 12).  A total of 24 stone fruit field trials were conducted during the 2003 growing season.  Eight trials were conducted on cherries in Regions 1 (PA, 1 trial), 5 (MI, 2 trials), 9 (CO, 1 trial), 10 (CA, 2 trials), and 11 (OR, 2 trials); ten trials were conducted on peaches in Regions 1 (PA, 1 trial), 2 (SC, 3 trials), 5 (MI, 1 trial), 6 (TX, 2 trials), and 10 (CA, 3 trials); and six trials were conducted on plums in Regions 5 (MI, 1 trial), 10 (CA, 4 trials), and 12 (OR, 1 trial).  The number and locations of field trials are in accordance with OPPTS Residue Chemistry Test Guideline 860.1500 for cherry (sweet and tart), peach, and plum as the representative crops of the stone fruits crop group.  In addition, the petitioner adequately addressed geographic representation requirements in the number of trials conducted using dilute and concentrate spray volumes.

At each test location, a total of four broadcast foliar applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation were made to stone fruits (cherry, peach, and plum) at a nominal rate of 0.15 lb ai/A per application with a 10- to 14-day RTIs, for a nominal total seasonal rate of 0.59 lb ai/A (the proposed maximum seasonal rate).  Applications were made using ground equipment in either dilute spray volumes (100 to 400 GPA at 4 cherry trials, 5 peach trials, and 2 plum trials) or concentrate spray volumes (20 to 100 GPA at 2 trials each for cherry, peach, and plum).  No adjuvants were added to the spray mixtures.  In addition, at 7 field trial sites (2 cherry, 3 peach, and 2 plum), applications using dilute and concentrate spray volumes were made to side-by-side plots.  Samples of mature cherries (sweet and tart), peaches, and plums were collected 7-8 days following the last application.

Samples of stone fruits (cherry, peach, and plum) were analyzed for residues of acetamiprid using HPLC/MS/MS method KP-216R1.  The validated LOQ was 0.010 ppm.  This method is adequate for data collection based on acceptable concurrent method recovery data.  Adequate storage stability data are available to support sample storage durations and conditions.

The results from the stone fruit crop field trials are presented in Table 5.  The maximum residues of acetamiprid were 0.932 ppm in/on cherries, 0.387 ppm in/on peaches, and 0.116 ppm in/on plums harvested 7 to 8 days following the last of four foliar broadcast applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation made in dilute spray volumes (100 to 400 GPA) at the proposed maximum seasonal rate.  Maximum residues were 0.767 ppm in/on cherries, 0.565 ppm in/on peaches, and 0.119 ppm in/on plums harvested 7 days following the last of four foliar broadcast applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation made in concentrate spray volumes (20 to 100 GPA) at the proposed maximum seasonal rate.

Tree Nuts (Crop Group 14)  Nisso has submitted field trial data on almond and pecan, the representative commodities of the tree nuts group (Crop Group 14).  A total of 12 tree nut field trials were conducted during the 2003 growing season.  Six trials were conducted on almonds in Region 10 (CA) and six trials were conducted on pecans in Regions 2 (GA, 3 trials), 4 (AR, 1 trial), 6 (TX, 1 trial), and 8 (AZ, 1 trial).  The number and locations of field trials are in accordance with OPPTS Residue Chemistry Test Guideline 860.1500 for almond and pecan as the representative crops of the tree nuts crop group.  The petitioner adequately addressed geographic representation requirements in the number of trials conducted using dilute and concentrate spray volumes for almonds but not for pecans.

At each test location, a total of four foliar broadcast applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation were made to almond and pecan at a nominal rate of 0.18 lb ai/A per application, at RTIs of approximately 14 days, for a nominal total seasonal application rate of 0.72 lb ai/A (the proposed maximum seasonal rate).  Applications were made using ground equipment in either dilute spray volumes (100 to 400 GPA) or concentrate spray volumes (20 to 100 GPA).  No adjuvants were added to the spray mixtures.  Samples of mature almonds and pecans were collected 14 days following the last application.

Samples of almond nutmeat and hulls and pecan nutmeat were analyzed for residues of acetamiprid using HPLC/MS/MS method KP-216R1.  The LOQ was 0.010 ppm for almond and pecan nutmeat and 0.020 ppm for almond hulls.  This method is adequate for data collection based on acceptable concurrent method recovery data.  Adequate storage stability data are available to support sample storage durations and conditions.

The results from the tree nut crop field trials are presented in Table 5.  The maximum residues of acetamiprid were 0.024 ppm in/on almond nutmeat, 4.03 ppm in/on almond hulls, and 0.013 ppm in/on pecan nutmeat harvested 14 days following the last of four foliar broadcast applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation made in dilute spray volumes (100 to 400 GPA) at the proposed maximum seasonal rate.  Maximum residues were less than 0.010 ppm in/on almond nutmeat, 0.835 ppm in/on almond hulls, and 0.050 ppm in/on pecan nutmeat harvested 14 days following the last of four foliar broadcast applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation made in concentrate spray volumes (20 to 100 GPA) at the proposed maximum seasonal rate.

Conclusions  The submitted crop field trial residue data are adequate to satisfy data requirements for the proposed uses on the cucurbit vegetables crop group, the stone fruits crop group, and the tree nuts crop group.  Although the petitioner did not satisfy geographic representation requirements for both dilute and concentrate spray volumes for pecan field trials, HED will not consider that to be a deficiency for this petition because the test substance is not applied directly to the RAC of pecans (nutmeat), and residue levels were low in pecan nutmeats from both types of application.

The maximum residues in plums and cherries differ by significantly more than 5X, so HED has determined that a crop group tolerance is inappropriate for the entire stone fruits group.  A group tolerance can be established for the stone fruits group, except prune plum, with a separate tolerance for prune plum.  In addition, although the submitted almond and pecan field trial data may be used to support use on pistachios, a separate tolerance must be established for pistachios.

No residue decline studies were included in the submitted crop field trials.  Residue decline studies on cotton, head lettuce, oranges, pears, and peppers were submitted in conjunction with the original petition (PP#0F6082, DP Barcode D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty).  These studies indicated that residues of acetamiprid did not increase in the subject crops with increasing harvest intervals.  Therefore, residue decline data will not be required to support the cucurbit vegetable, stone fruit, or tree nut crop field trials.

The submitted data support the following tolerances for residues of acetamiprid per se:  almond hulls at 5.0 ppm; cucurbit vegetable, group 9, at 0.50 ppm; pistachio at 0.10 ppm; stone fruits, group 12 (except prune plum) at 1.20 ppm; fresh prune plume at 0.20 ppm; and tree nuts, group 14, at 0.10 ppm.

860.1520 Processed Food and Feed

DERs: Stone Fruits, MRID 46265702

Nisso has submitted a processing study for plum.  Two trials were conducted in CA, one reflecting application in dilute spray volumes, and one reflecting application in concentrate spray volumes.  At each trial site, two treatment plots were established.  At one plot, plums were harvested 7 days following the last of four foliar broadcast applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation at approximately 0.150 lb ai/A per application, with 10- to 12-day RTIs, for a nominal total seasonal application rate of 0.60 lb ai/A (the proposed maximum seasonal rate).  At the second plot, plums were harvested 7 days following the last of four foliar broadcast applications of the Assail( 70WP formulation at approximately 0.60 lb ai/A per application, with 10- to 12-day RTIs, for a nominal total seasonal application rate of 2.4 lb ai/A (4X the proposed maximum seasonal rate).  Fresh plums from each trial site were collected at normal maturity, de-pitted, and dried in a greenhouse for 7 days to produce dried prunes, the processed commodity of plums.

Residues of acetamiprid in/on plums and its processed commodity dried prunes were quantitated using HPLC/MS/MS method KP-216R1.  The validated LOQ was 0.010 ppm.  This method is adequate for data collection based on acceptable concurrent method recovery data.  Adequate storage stability data are available to support sample storage durations and conditions.

The petitioner analyzed samples of plums and dried prunes from the 1X application rate and samples of dried prunes from the 4X application rate, but samples of plum RAC from the 4X rate field trials were not analyzed.  Therefore, processing factors for dried prunes from the exaggerated rate study could not be determined.

Residues of acetamiprid were 0.0401 to 0.0624 ppm in/on plums treated at 1X.  The processing data indicate that the residues of acetamiprid may concentrate in dried prunes (2.9X average processing factor) processed from plums bearing quantifiable residues.  The processing factors did not differ significantly between plums receiving applications in dilute spray volumes and plums receiving applications in concentrate spray volumes.

Conclusions  The submitted processing data for plum are adequate to satisfy data requirements.  The reported processing factor for prunes does not exceed the theoretical concentration factor of 3.4x for prune (Table 2 of OPPTS Residue Chemistry Test Guideline 860.1520, based on loss of water).  Because processing factors could be calculated from the samples from the 1X rate trials, the lack of residue data for plum RAC samples from the exaggerated rate study will not be considered a deficiency for the submitted plum processing study.

The processing data indicate that the residues of acetamiprid may concentrate in dried prunes (2.9X average processing factor).  Based on the average processing factor of 2.9X and a HAFT residue of 0.112 ppm for plum, the expected residue in dried prune following treatment at 1X would be 0.33 ppm.  Because the expected residues exceed the recommended tolerance of 0.20 ppm for fresh prune plum, a recommended separate tolerance for dried prune plum of 0.40 ppm is required.

860.1650 Submittal of Analytical Reference Standards

As of 7/24/04, analytical reference standards are available for acetamiprid and three metabolites at the EPA National Pesticide Standards Repository.

860.1850 Confined Accumulation in Rotational Crops

Cucurbit vegetables are the only annual crop included in the subject petition, with a proposed maximum seasonal rate of 0.5 lb ai/A.  No new confined rotational crop data were submitted with this petition.

A confined rotational crop study was reviewed in conjunction with PP#0F6082 (D264154, 12/31/01, M. Doherty).  In that study, [pyridine-2,6-14C]acetamiprid was applied to sandy loam soil at 0.66 lb ai/A (1.3X the proposed maximum seasonal rate to cucurbits), and leafy vegetable (mustard or lettuce), root (radish), and grain (sorghum or wheat) crops were planted at 30, 58, 120, and 365 days after treatment.  14C-Residues accumulated at >0.010 ppm in the commodities of  leafy vegetable (mustard), root (radish), and grain (sorghum) crops at plantback intervals of 30 and 58 days.  At the 120-DAT plantback interval, TRR were >0.010 ppm in mustard greens, radish root and tops, and wheat forage and straw; residues in wheat grain were <0.010 ppm.  At the 365-day plantback interval, TRR were >0.010 ppm in lettuce, radish tops, and sorghum forage and fodder.  In general, residues in rotational crops decreased with increasing plantback interval.

Acetamiprid was not detected in any rotational crop matrix at any plantback interval.  The major metabolite identified in rotational crops was IM-1-4, at 2.94-56.65% TRR (<0.001-0.040 ppm).  IM-1-4 was identified in the following crops at >10% TRR:  30-, 58- and 120-DAT mustard; 30-, 58-, 120-, and 365-DAT radish tops; 30- and 120-DAT radish root; 30-, 58-, 120-, and 365-DAT grain crop forage and fodder/straw; and 58-DAT sorghum grain.  Two other metabolites were identified in most rotational crops:  IM-0-Glc, at 1.11-15.23% TRR (<0.001-0.010 ppm) and IC-0, at 2.75-24.19% TRR (<0.001-0.014 ppm).  Metabolite IM-0 was identified in 30-DAT sorghum forage and 58-DAT sorghum fodder at <10% TRR; this metabolite was not identified in any other rotational crop matrix.

The confined crop rotational crop study was classified as unacceptable to satisfy the guideline requirements because insufficient supporting storage stability data were submitted to support the storage durations of the rotational crop samples prior to analysis.  Additional data were required demonstrating the stability of the metabolite profile in various rotational crop commodities (including radish root and sorghum/wheat grain, as well as a leafy vegetable) for up to 11 months, the maximum storage duration for these commodities.  It was concluded that the storage stability data gap was not sufficient to warrant rejection of the original petition; however, HED believed that fulfillment of this data gap should be made a condition of registration.  The outstanding rotational crop supporting storage stability data have not yet been submitted.

Based on the available rotational crop data, the MARC determined that the residue of concern in rotational crops is parent only and that tolerances would not be needed in rotational crops.  The available rotational crop data are adequate to support the uses proposed in this petition.  However, submission of the outstanding rotational crop supporting storage stability data, which were required as a condition of registration in the original petition, should be a condition of the registration requested in this review.

860.1900 Field Accumulation in Rotational Crops

No field rotational crop data have been submitted and no rotational crop restrictions have been proposed.  The available confined rotational crop data indicate that no field rotational crop studies are required to support the proposed uses; no rotational crop restrictions or tolerances are needed.

860.1550 Proposed Tolerances

The MARC has determined that the nature of the residue in plants and animals is adequately understood and that the tolerance expression should include acetamiprid per se for plant commodities and combined residues of acetamiprid and IM-2-1 [N1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]-N2-cyano-acetamidine] for livestock commodities.

There are currently no established Codex or Canadian MRLs for acetamiprid.  One Mexican MRL is established for acetamiprid on cotton seed at 0.01 mg/kg.  An International Residue Limit Status sheet is attached to this review.

The available crop field trial data support tolerances for residues of acetamiprid per se in/on almond hulls, pistachios, the cucurbit vegetables group, the stone fruits group, fresh and dried prune plums, and the tree nuts group.  The available stone fruits group crop field trial and processed food/feed data indicate that separate tolerances for fresh plum and dried prune are needed.  Also, the petitioner has proposed use on pistachio as part of the proposed uses on tree nuts.  HED has approved modification of the crop group definition for tree nuts to add pistachio (see memo of 6/14/02 from B. Schneider to H. Jamerson); however, 40 CFR §180.41 has not yet been revised to include this modification.  HED has concluded that until 40 CFR is modified, residue data for almonds and pecans are sufficient to support uses on tree nuts including pistachios; however, a separate tolerance for pistachio must be proposed at the same level as the tree nuts group tolerance.

The proposed tolerances should be revised to reflect the tolerances as recommended by HED and the correct commodity definitions as specified in Table 6, below.

Table 6.	Tolerance Summary for Acetamiprid.

Commodity

Proposed Tolerance (ppm)

Recommended Tolerance (ppm)

Comments

Correct Commodity Definition

Almond hulls

5.0

5.0

Almond, hulls

Stone fruit group, except prune plum

1.2

1.20

Fruit, stone, group 12 (except plum, prune)

Fresh prune plum

0.30

0.20

Proposed tolerance was too high.

Plum, prune, fresh

Dried prune plum

0.30

0.40

Proposed tolerance was too low.

Plum, prune, dried

Tree nut group

0.10

0.10

Nut, tree, group 14

Pistachio

None proposed

0.10

Although tree nut field trial data may be used to support use on pistachio, a separate tolerance is needed for pistachio.

Pistachio

Cucurbit vegetable group

0.50

0.50

Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9

Attachments:  International Residue Limit Status sheet.

INTERNATIONAL RESIDUE LIMIT STATUS

Chemical Name: N1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]-N2-cyano-N1-methylacetamidine

Common Name:

Acetamiprid

X Proposed tolerance

( Reevaluated tolerance

( Other

Date:  07/28/04

Codex Status (Maximum Residue Limits)

U. S. Tolerances

X No Codex proposal step 6 or above

( No Codex proposal step 6 or above for the crops requested

Petition Number:  PP#4F6833

DP Barcode:  303623

Other Identifier:

Residue definition (step 8/CXL): N/A

Reviewer/Branch: William T. Drew, RAB2

Residue definition:  Acetamiprid

Crop(s)

MRL (mg/kg)

Crops

Tolerance (ppm)

Almond, hulls

5.0

Fruit, stone, group 12 (except plum, prune)

1.20

Plum, prune, fresh

0.20

Plum, prune, dried

0.40

Nut, tree, group 14

0.10

Pistachio

0.10

Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9

0.50

Limits for Canada

Limits for Mexico

X No Limits

( No Limits for the crops requested

( No Limits

( No Limits for the crops requested

Residue definition:  N/A

Residue definition:  Acetamiprid

Crop(s)

MRL (mg/kg)

Crop

MRL (mg/kg)

Cotton Seed

0.01

Notes/Special Instructions: Stephen Funk, 07/28/04.

Acetamiprid	Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data	DP Barcode: 303623

 PAGE  21


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 13, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 15879]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05713]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0038]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Sacramento River, Sacramento,
CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating regulation that governs the Tower Drawbridge across the
Sacramento River, mile 59.0, at Sacramento, CA. The deviation is
necessary to allow the community to participate in the First Annual
``Biggest Loser'' 5K walk and run event. This deviation allows the
bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during the event.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. on March
16, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2013-0038], is
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the
``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the
line associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast
Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Barbara Hairston,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The California Department of Transportation
has requested a temporary change to the operation of the Tower
Drawbridge, mile 59.0, over Sacramento River, at Sacramento, CA. The
Tower Drawbridge navigation span provides a vertical clearance of 30
feet above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. As
required by 33 CFR 117.189(a), the draw opens on signal from May 1
through October 31 from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., and from November 1 through
April 30 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. At all other times the draw shall open
on signal if at least four hours notice is given. Navigation on the
waterway is commercial and recreational.
    The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position
from 7:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. on March 16, 2013, to allow the community
to participate in the First Annual ``Biggest Loser'' 5K walk and run
event. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with waterway
users. There are no scheduled river boat cruises or anticipated levee
maintenance during this deviation period. No objections to the proposed
temporary deviation were raised. Vessels that can transit the bridge,
while in the closed-to-navigation position, may continue to do so at
any time. In the event of an emergency the drawspan can be opened
without delay.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: February 25, 2013.
D.H. Sulouff,
District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2013-05713 Filed 3-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P