38653 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2002 / Notices requirements. As noted above, CARB has submitted a letter to EPA on May 21, 2002 which requests that EPA confirm that its 2001 ZEV amendments are within the scope of waivers previously granted by EPA.

( B) Background and Discussion Section 209( a) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (`` Act''), 42 U. S. C. 7543( a), provides:

No State or any political subdivision thereof shall adopt or attempt to enforce any standard relating to the control of emissions from new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines subject to this part. No state shall require certification, inspection or any other approval relating to the control of emission from any new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine as condition precedent to the initial retail sale, titling ( if any), or registration of such motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, or equipment.

Section 209( b)( 1) of the Act requires the Administrator, after notice and opportunity for public hearing, to waive application of the prohibitions of section 209( a) for any state that has adopted standards ( other than crankcase emission standards) for the control of emissions from new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines prior to March 30, 1966, if the state determines that the state standards will be, in the aggregate, at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards. California is the only state that is qualified to seek and receive a waiver under section 209( b). The Administrator must grant a waiver unless she finds that ( A) the determination of the state is arbitrary and capricious, ( B) the state does not need the state standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions, or ( C) the state standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are not consistent with section 202( a) of the Act. CARB's May 21, 2002 letter to the Administrator notified EPA that it had adopted amendments to its ZEV program. The regulatory amendments covered by CARB's request are amendments to title 13, California Code of Regulations ( CCR), section 1962 and the incorporated `` California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2003 and Subsequent Model Zero Emission Vehicles, and 2001 and Subsequent Model Hybrid Electric vehicles, in the Passenger Car, Light Duty Truck, and Medium Duty Vehicle Classes,'' and amendments to section 1900( b)( 19)( 21), section 1960.1( k) and section 1961( a)( 8)( A) and ( d), title 13 CCR. When EPA receives new waiver requests from CARB, EPA traditionally publishes a notice of opportunity for public hearing and comment and then publishes a decision in the Federal Register following the public comment period. In contrast, when EPA receives within the scope waiver requests from CARB, EPA traditionally publishes a decision in the Federal Register and concurrently invites public comment if an interested part is opposed to EPA's decision. Because EPA has already received written comment on CARB's within the scope request for its 1999 ZEV amendments and because EPA anticipates a similar level of interest in CARB's 2001 ZEV amendments, EPA invites comment on the following issues: ( 1) Whether California's 1999 and 2001 ZEV amendments should be considered together or separately; ( 2) whether California's 2001 ZEV amendments ( a) undermine California's previous determination that its standards, in the aggregate, are at least as protective of public health and welfare as comparable Federal standards, ( b) affect the consistency of California's requirements with section 202( a) of the Act, and ( c) raise new issues affecting EPA's previous waiver determinations; and ( 3) whether ( a) California's determination that its 2001 ZEV amendments, to the extent they are not within the scope of previous waivers, are at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards is arbitrary and capricious, ( b) California needs separate standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions, and ( c) California's standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are consistent with section 202( a) of the Act?

Procedures for Public Participation In recognition that public hearings are designed to give interested parties an opportunity to participate in this proceeding, there are no adverse parties as such. Statements by participants will not be subject to cross examination by other participants without special approval by the presiding officer. The presiding officer is authorized to strike from the record statements that he or she deems irrelevant or repetitious and to impose reasonable time limits on the duration of the statement of any participant. If hearing( s) are held, the Agency will make a verbatim record of the proceedings. Interested parties may arrange with the reporter at the hearing( s) to obtain a copy of the transcript at their own expense. Regardless of whether public hearing( s) are held, EPA will keep the record open until July 22, 2002. Upon expiration of the comment period, the Administrator will render a decision on CARB's request based on the record of the public hearing( s), if any, relevant written submissions, and other information that she deems pertinent. All information will be available for inspection at EPA Air Docket. ( Docket No. A   2002   11). EPA requests that parties wishing to submit comments specify which issue, noted above, they are addressing. Commenters may submit one document which addresses several issues but they should separate, to the extent possible, those comments that relate to the 1999 ZEV amendments, those that relate to the 2001 ZEV amendments, and those that relate to the LEVII amendments. Persons with comments containing proprietary information must distinguish such information from other comments to the greatest possible extent and label it as `` Confidential Business Information'' ( CBI). If a person making comments wants EPA to base its decision in part on a submission labeled CBI, then a nonconfidential version of the document that summarizes the key data or information should be submitted for the public docket. To ensure that proprietary information is not inadvertently placed in the docket, submissions containing such information should be sent directly to the contact person listed above and not to the public docket. Information covered by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed by EPA only to the extent allowed and by the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the submission when EPA receives it, EPA will make it available to the public without further notice to the person making comments.

Dated: May 30, 2002. Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. [ FR Doc. 02   14041 Filed 6   4   02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPP   2002   0033; FRL   7179   4]

Propanil; Notice of Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment Decision and Availability of Risk Assessments AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice represents the Agency's tolerance reassessment VerDate May< 23> 2002 20: 45 Jun 04, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM pfrm12 PsN: 05JNN1 38654 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2002 / Notices decision for propanil. It announces the Agency's tolerance reassessment decision and releases the human health and ecological effects risk assessments and related documents supporting this decision to the public. The Agency's reassessment of dietary risk, including public exposure through food and drinking water as required by the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act ( FFDCA) indicates that propanil poses no risk concerns; therefore, no risk mitigation is needed and no further actions related to dietary risk are warranted at this time. The Agency will complete a Reregistration Eligibility Decision ( RED) document for propanil later in 2002, which will address any possible risk to workers and the environment and any confirmatory data needs. DATES: Public comments on the tolerance reassessment decision for propanil are requested on or before July 5, 2002. In the absence of substantive comments, the tolerance reassessment decision will be considered final. Comments on the human health and ecological effects risk assessments must be submitted on or before August 5, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments, may be submitted by mail, electronically, or in person. Please follow the detailed instructions for each method as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number OPP   2002   0033 in the subject line on the first page of your response. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carmen Rodia, Chemical Review Manager, Special Review and Reregistration Division ( 7508C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: ( 703) 306   0327; email address: rodia. carmen@ epa. gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

This action is directed to the public in general, nevertheless, a wide range of stakeholders will be interested in obtaining information on propanil, including environmental, human health and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the use of pesticides on food. Since other entities 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 person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Additional Information, Including Copies of this Document and Other Related Documents?

1. Electronically. You may obtain electronic copies of this document, and certain other related documents that might be available electronically, from the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// www. epa. gov/. On the Home Page select `` Laws and Regulations,'' `` Regulations and Proposed Rules'' and then look up the entry for this document under the `` Federal Register   Environmental Documents.'' You can also go directly to the Federal Register listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. To access the OPPTS Harmonized Guideline referenced in this document, go directly to the guidelines at http:// www. epa. gov/ opptsfrs/ home/ guidelin. htm. In addition, copies of the documents related to the propanil risk assessments and tolerance reassessment decision released to the public may be accessed at http:// www. epa. gov/ pesticides/ reregistration/ status. htm. 2. In person. The Agency has established an official record for this action under docket ID number OPP   2002   0033. The official record consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action and other information related to this action, including any information claimed as Confidential Business Information ( CBI). This official record includes the documents that are physically located in the docket, as well as the documents that are referenced in those documents. The public version of the official record does not include any information claimed as CBI. The public version of the official record, which includes printed, paper versions of any electronic comments submitted during an applicable comment period, is available for inspection in the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Room 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?

You may submit comments through the mail, in person, or electronically. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number OPP   2002   0033 in the subject line on the first page of your response. 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs ( OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 2. In person or by courier. Deliver your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs ( OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 3. Electronically. You may submit your comments electronically by e mail to: opp docket@ epa. gov, or you can submit a computer disk as described in this unit. Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding use of special characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on standard disks in WordPerfect 6.1/ 8.0 or ASCII file format. All comments in electronic form must be identified by docket ID number OPP   2002   0033. Electronic comments may also be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.

D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want to Submit to the Agency?

Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. You may claim information that you submit to EPA in response to this document as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any 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 version of the official record. Information not marked confidential will be included in the public version of the official record without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

VerDate May< 23> 2002 20: 45 Jun 04, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM pfrm12 PsN: 05JNN1 38655 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2002 / Notices E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/ or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the notice or collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this document. 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

II. Tolerance Reassessment and Risk Management Decision The Agency has completed its assessment of the dietary risk of propanil ( 3', 4' dichloropropionanilide) and its principle metabolic degradate 3,4 dichloroaniline ( 3,4 DCA), and has determined that the level of dietary risk from exposure as a result of currently registered uses of propanil is not of concern to the Agency. Therefore, no mitigation measures are needed and no further actions are warranted at this time. Tolerances for the registered uses of propanil are reassessed. The Agency is still reviewing any possible risk to workers and the environment and, if risk mitigation is necessary, the Agency will provide its risk management decision, as well as any confirmatory data requirements, in the RED scheduled for later in 2002. The Agency may determine that further action is necessary, once it is determined whether the anilides, such as propanil, share a common mechanism of toxicity as a group or with other neuroendocrine disrupting chemicals. Such an incremental approach to the tolerance reassessment process is consistent with the Agency's goal of improving transparency in implementing FFDCA. For propanil, the established tolerances remain in effect until such time as a full reassessment of the cumulative risk from all anilide pesticides, such as propanil, may be needed and is completed. III. Background This notice announces the tolerance reassessment decision for propanil. This decision has been developed as part of the public participation process that EPA and the United States Department of Agriculture ( USDA) are using to involve the public in the reassessment of pesticide tolerances under FFDCA. EPA must review tolerances and tolerance exemptions that were in effect when the Food Quality Protection Act ( FQPA) was enacted in August of 1996 to ensure that these existing pesticide residue limits for food and feed commodities meet the safety standard of the new law. Propanil was first registered in 1973 and is therefore subject to both reregistration and tolerance assessment under the FQPA amendments to FFDCA. The FQPA amendments to FFDCA requires EPA to review all the tolerances for registered chemicals in effect on or before the date of the enactment. In reviewing these tolerances, the Agency must consider, among other things, aggregate risks from nonoccupational sources of pesticide exposure, whether there is increased susceptibility to infants and children and the cumulative effects of pesticides with a common mechanism of toxicity. The tolerances are considered reassessed once the safety finding has been made or a revocation occurs. FFDCA requires that the Agency, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, consider `` available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and `` other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' The Agency does not have sufficient information at this time to determine whether the anilide pesticides, such as propanil, share a common mechanism of toxicity. The Agency's human health findings for the pesticide propanil, discussed in Unit IV., are presented fully in the document: `` Propanil HED Revised Human Health Risk Assessment, February 28, 2002.'' The risk assessments and other documents pertaining to the propanil tolerance reassessment decision are available for viewing in the public docket ( see Unit I. B. 2.) or on the Agency's website at http:// www. epa. gov/ pesticides/ reregistration/ status. htm.

IV. Use Summary Propanil is a selective post emergent herbicide registered on rice, barley, oats, and spring wheat to control broadleaf and grass weeds in commercial settings. Propanil is also registered ( but not currently marketed) for turf use at commercial sod farms. There are no existing or proposed residential uses of propanil products. Propanil is formulated as an emulsifiable concentrate liquid ( 16.6%   58% active ingredient), a water dispersable granule ( or dry flowable) ( 59.6%   81% active ingredient), a soluble concentrate liquid ( 41.2%   80.2% active ingredient), and a flowable concentrate ( 41.2% active ingredient). Propanil is typically applied as a broadcast treatment by groundboom sprayers and aerial equipment. The estimate for total domestic use ( annual average) is approximately 7 million pounds of active ingredient on a total of approximately 2 million acres treated. The crop with the highest use is rice, which accounts for approximately 99% of the annual average. Fifty to seventy percent of the U. S. rice crop is treated with propanil. Small grains comprise the remaining 1% of the annual average.

V. Dietary Food Risks EPA has not assessed acute dietary risk for propanil since no appropriate endpoint attributable to a single exposure ( dose) could be identified. An acute dietary reference dose was not established. Chronic dietary risk is calculated by using the average consumption value for food and average residue values on those foods. A risk estimate that is less than 100% of the chronic population adjusted dose ( cPAD), the dose at which an individual could be exposed over the course of a lifetime and no adverse health effects would be expected, does not exceed the Agency's level of concern. The cPAD is the chronic dietary reference dose ( RfD) adjusted for the FQPA safety factor. Chronic risk estimates from exposures to propanil in food do not exceed the Agency's level of concern ( i. e., they are less than 100% of the cPAD). The chronic dietary ( food only) risk estimate is 13% of the cPAD, for the most highly exposed population subgroup, all infants (< 1 year). The toxicity endpoint for the chronic dietary assessment is decreased hemoglobin, red blood cell count and/ or packed cell volumes and is calculated using the lowest observed adverse effect level ( LOAEL) ( 9 milligrams/ kilogram/ day ( mg/ kg/ day)) from the chronic/ carcinogenicity study in the rat ( no observed adverse effect level ( NOAEL)) was identified). The FQPA safety factor of 10x was retained for chronic exposures based on increased susceptibility following prenatal and postnatal exposure, the VerDate May< 23> 2002 20: 45 Jun 04, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM pfrm12 PsN: 05JNN1 38656 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2002 / Notices lack of a developmental neurotoxicity study; and neuroendocrine disruption in the rat. The uncertainty factor ( UF) used in the RfD derivation is 300x. The UF is 100x ( 10x for interspecies extrapolation and 10x for intraspecies variability). An additional UF of 3x is applied for the use of a LOAEL instead of a NOAEL for an overall UF of 3,000x. Thus, the chronic RfD is 0.03 mg/ kg/ day and the cPAD is 0.003 mg/ kg/ day. The propanil chronic dietary exposure assessment was conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model ( DEEMTM) Software Version 7.73. The DEEMTM analysis evaluated the individual food consumption as reported by respondents in the USDA's Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals ( CSFII), 1989   1992, and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. To calculate chronic dietary risk from propanil use on food, EPA used the DEEMTM, along with average residue estimated from field trial data, and assumed 70% of the rice crop was treated with propanil. Field trial data are generally considered to be an upper bound estimate of actual residues, and 70% is also a high end estimate of the percent of the present rice crop treated. Thus, actual dietary risk is likely to be less than indicated by EPA's assessment. Food and Drug Administration ( FDA) monitoring data were available, but not sufficient, due to lack of analysis for 3,4 DCA.

VI. Dietary Drinking Water Risks Drinking water exposure to pesticides can occur through ground water and surface water contamination. EPA considers both acute ( 1 day) and chronic ( lifetime) drinking water risks and uses either modeling or actual monitoring data, if available, to estimate those risks. To determine the maximum allowable contribution of water allowed in the diet, EPA first looks at how much of the overall allowable risk is contributed by food, then calculates a `` drinking water level of comparison'' ( DWLOC) to determine whether modeled or monitoring estimates exceed this level. In the case of propanil, no acute drinking water assessment has been conducted, because no acute endpoint was identified. The calculated chronic DWLOCs for propanil are 26 parts per billion ( ppb) for children, 86 ppb for adult females, and 100 ppb for adult males. Available data indicate that propanil will not persist in the environment and is in the medium mobility class for sand, sandy loam and clay loam soils, based on available mobility studies. Due to its mobility, propanil could possibly reach ground water but due to its rapid metabolism in a water/ soil matrix, it is unlikely to persist for a sufficient amount of time to leach in significant quantities. ( The possible exception are sites of extreme vulnerability and low metabolic capacity which would most likely occur only for terrestrial uses. However, if propanil does reach ground water in these vulnerable areas, it is expected to be stable). Propanil and its principle metabolic degradate, 3,4 DCA, and residues convertible to 3,4 DCA are the residues of concern for the drinking water risk assessment. Monitoring data for propanil residues in ground water and surface water are available but not adequate to develop estimated environmental concentrations ( EECs) for the aggregate dietary ( food and water) risk assessment. Although not targeted to specific propanil use areas, United States Geological Survey ( USGS) monitoring data do provide some information on the magnitude and frequency of propanil and 3,4 DCA detections. Propanil was found in about 3% of the 1,560 surface water samples analyzed with a maximum concentration of 2 parts per billion ( ppb). 3,4 DCA was found in about 50% of the 68 samples with a maximum concentration of 8.9 ppb. All detects are well below the DWLOCs. Models have been used to estimate ground water and surface water concentrations expected from normal agricultural use. Estimated surface water EECs, a range of 6   72 ppb, are below the DWLOC for all population subgroups except for children at the upper bound EEC of 72 ppb. This subpopulation of children could be an area of concern because exposure estimates for this group exceed the DWLOC; however, the Agency believes that the concerns have been addressed by the conservative assumptions ( field trial residue levels and 70% crop treated) used in the chronic dietary calculation. In this case, the Agency concludes that actual residues of propanil per se and 3,4 dichloroaniline ( 3,4 DCA combined) are likely to be less than the estimated DWLOC; and a conclusion can be drawn that no adverse toxicological effect will occur due to aggregate chronic exposure. Estimated drinking water concentrations are based on EPA's Pesticide Root Zone Model/ Exposure Analysis Modeling System ( PRZM/ EXAMS) screening model, which is a Tier II assessment that provides more refined, less upper bound assumptions. The range of EECs represents different rice growing areas and normal versus overflow release. Estimated ground water concentrations are based on the Screening Concentration in Ground Water ( SCI GROW) model, which is a Tier I assessment that provides a highend estimate. The drinking water EEC for ground water ( 0.35 ppb) is below the DWLOC for all population subgroups.

VII. Aggregate Risks The aggregate risk assessment for propanil examines the combined risk from exposure through food and drinking water only. Chronic residential exposures are not expected because there are no residential uses for propanil and, thus, are not included in the aggregate risk assessment. As detailed above, for propanil the only interval of exposure to be assessed is chronic ( 1 year or more), and the only route of exposure to be assessed is oral ( food and water). Generally, combined risks from these exposures that are less than 100% of the cPAD, are not considered to be a risk concern. EPA has also evaluated the potential aggregate exposure to 3,4 DCA. Available data indicates that 3,4 DCA is a major metabolic degradate of propanil. 3,4 DCA is also a metabolite of linuron and diuron, but to a lesser extent. The Agency's Metabolism Assessment Review Committee does not recommend aggregating residues of 3,4 DCA for the propanil, linuron, and diuron risk assessments. 3,4 DCA is a significant residue of concern for propanil, but is not a residue of concern per se for linuron or diuron. Submitted data indicate that the maximum amount of 3,4 DCA formed from propanil is approximately 50% of propanil initially applied, based on results from the aerobic soil metabolism study. Neither diuron nor linuron metabolize to 3,4 DCA in appreciable amounts ( less than 1% detection rate) of the parent compound in animal, plant, or water metabolism studies. The registered uses for propanil, linuron, and diuron result in minimal co occurrence of use. That is, there is very little overlap of use patterns and the use patterns are geographically limited for each chemical. Therefore, the risk assessments for each individual chemical fully assess the risks posed by the parent chemical and the metabolite, 3,4 DCA, individually.

VIII. Residential Risk Propanil is not registered for residential ( home) use, nor is it used in or around public buildings, schools, or recreational areas where children might be exposed. Thus, there is no residential exposure to aggregate with the dietary exposure. The use of propanil on turf is restricted to commercial sod farms only. Although propanil treated sod may VerDate May< 23> 2002 20: 45 Jun 04, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM pfrm12 PsN: 05JNN1 38657 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2002 / Notices eventually be used in residential settings ( i. e., residential lawns), propanil residues are not expected to exceed levels of concern for residential post application risk. Since the proposed use of propanil on turf is postemergent applied at sod farms early in the turf growing season ( well before harvest), the Agency concludes that the amount of time is adequate to allow residue dissipation to a level that would not pose any significant exposure to residents.

IX. Occupational Risk and Ecological Risk The Agency will assess occupational and ecological risks, any necessary mitigation as well as the need for confirmatory data in the forthcoming RED.

X. Tolerance Reassessment Summary The existing tolerances for residues of propanil in/ on plant, animal and processed commodities are established under 40 CFR 180.274( a)( 1) and ( a)( 2). These tolerances are currently expressed as the combined residues of propanil ( 3', 4' dichloropropionanilide) and its metabolites ( calculated as propanil). The Agency is now recommending that the propanil tolerance expression for plant and animal commodities be revised to specify that the residues of concern are propanil and its related compounds convertible to 3,4 DCA. To eliminate redundancy, the propanil tolerances separately listed under 40 CFR 180.274( a)( 2) should be removed and 40 CFR 180.274( a)( 1) should be redesignated as 40 CFR 180.274( a). The Agency has updated the list of raw agricultural and processed commodities and feedstuffs derived from crops ( Table 1, OPPTS GLN 860.1000). As a result of these changes, propanil tolerances for certain raw agricultural commodities that have been removed from the livestock feed table need to be revoked. A number of tolerances are being revised ( increased or decreased) to reflect updates to the propanil data base based on the submission of new livestock feeding studies, analytical methods, processing data, recovery methods, and/ or field trial residue data. Additionally, some commodity definitions must be updated and/ or corrected. A summary of propanil tolerance reassessments is presented below in Table 1. Adequate residue data have been submitted to support the established tolerances for barley, grain; cattle, fat; goat, fat; hog, fat; horse, fat; milk; oat, grain; poultry, meat; rice, straw; sheep, fat; and wheat, straw. For these commodities, the established tolerances were found to be appropriate and will not change as part of this tolerance reassessment. The established tolerance levels for barley, straw; oat, straw, and wheat, straw must be increased to reflect new recovery procedures. The established tolerance levels for cattle, meat byproducts; egg; goat, meat byproducts; hog, meat byproducts; horse, meat byproducts; poultry, meat byproducts, and sheep, meat byproducts have been increased based on the results of livestock feeding studies and revised dietary burden ( exposure) to propanil. For rice, grain; rice, bran, and rice, hull, the existing tolerance levels were increased since data demonstrate that residues concentrate in bran and hulls when rice is processed, based on a reevaluation of crop field trial data. The available data indicate that the tolerance levels can be decreased for cattle, meat; goat, meat; hog, meat; horse, meat; poultry, fat; and sheep, meat based on the results of a ruminant feeding study and a revised dietary burden. Group commodity definitions will be revised as noted in Table 1. The established tolerances for rice mill fractions and rice polishings should be revoked according to Table 1 of OPPTS GLN 860.1000, since these commodities are no longer considered to be significant livestock feed items. As a result, the tolerances are no longer needed.

Tolerances To Be Proposed Under 40 CFR 180.274( a)

Adequate residue data have been submitted for the establishment of propanil tolerances for crayfish; oat, forage, and wheat, forage based on the crayfish metabolism study and wheat forage data. Inadequate residue data are available for the establishment of propanil tolerances for barley, hay; oat, hay, and wheat, hay. The requested data for wheat, hay will be translated to barley, hay, and oat, hay.

Tolerances Currently Listed Under 40 CFR 180.274( a)( 2)

The tolerances currently listed in 40 CFR 180.274( a)( 2) are inadvertent duplicates of the tolerances established for the same commodities listed in 40 CFR 180.274( a)( 1). The tolerances listed in 40 CFR 180.274( a)( 2) should be removed because the duplicate tolerances found there are not needed.

TABLE 1.   TOLERANCE REASSESSMENT SUMMARY FOR PROPANILTOLERANCES CURRENTLY LISTED UNDER 40 CFR 180.247( A)( 1)

Commodity Current Tolerance ( ppm) Reassessed Tolerance ( ppm) Comment ( Corrected Commodity Definition)

Barley, grain .2 0.20 Barley, straw .75 1.5 Increased residues reflect new recovery procedures.

Cattle, fat 0.1( N) 1 0.10 Cattle, mbyp 0.1( N) 1.0 ( Cattle, meat byproducts) Increased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Cattle, meat 0.1( N) 0.05 Decreased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

VerDate May< 23> 2002 20: 45 Jun 04, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM pfrm12 PsN: 05JNN1 38658 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2002 / Notices TABLE 1.   TOLERANCE REASSESSMENT SUMMARY FOR PROPANILTOLERANCES CURRENTLY LISTED UNDER 40 CFR 180.247( A)( 1)   Continued Commodity Current Tolerance ( ppm) Reassessed Tolerance ( ppm) Comment ( Corrected Commodity Definition)

Eggs 0.05( N) 0.30 ( Egg) Increased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Goats, fat 0.1( N) 0.10 ( Goat, fat)

Goats, mbyp 0.1( N) 0.80 ( Goat, meat byproducts) Increased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Goats, meat 0.1( N) 0.05 ( Goat, meat) Decreased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Hogs, fat 0.1( N) 0.10 ( Hog, fat)

Hogs, mbyp 0.1( N) 0.80 ( Hog, meat byproducts) Increased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Hogs, meat 0.1( N) 0.05 ( Hog, meat) Decreased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Horses, fat 0.1( N) 0.10 ( Horse, fat)

Horses, mbyp 0.1( N) 0.80 ( Horse, meat byproducts) Increased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Horses, meat 0.1( N) 0.05 ( Horse, meat) Decreased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Milk 0.05( N) 0.05 Oat, grain .2 0.20 Oat, straw .75 1.5 Increased residues reflect new recovery procedures.

Poultry, fat 0.1( N) 0.05 Decreased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Poultry, mbyp 0.1( N) 0.50 ( Poultry, meat byproducts) Increased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Poultry, meat 0.1( N) 0.10 Rice 2 10 ( Rice, grain) Tolerances were increased since residues were found to concentrate when rice is processed.

Rice bran 10 40 ( Rice, bran) Tolerances were increased since residues were found to concentrate when rice is processed.

Rice hulls 10 30 ( Rice, hull) Tolerances were increased since residues were found to concentrate when rice is processed.

VerDate May< 23> 2002 20: 45 Jun 04, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM pfrm12 PsN: 05JNN1 38659 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2002 / Notices TABLE 1.   TOLERANCE REASSESSMENT SUMMARY FOR PROPANILTOLERANCES CURRENTLY LISTED UNDER 40 CFR 180.247( A)( 1)   Continued Commodity Current Tolerance ( ppm) Reassessed Tolerance ( ppm) Comment ( Corrected Commodity Definition)

Rice mill fractions 10 Revoke These items have been deleted from Table 1 of OPPTS GLN 860.1000.

Rice polishings 10 Revoke Rice, straw 75( N) 75 Sheep, fat 0.1( N) 0.10 Sheep, mbyp 0.1( N) 0.80 ( Sheep, meat byproducts) Increased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Sheep, meat 0.1( N) 0.05 Decreased residues based on ruminant feeding studies and a revised dietary burden from residues in rice.

Wheat, grain 0.2 0.20 Wheat, straw 0.75 1.5 Increased residues reflect new recovery procedures.

1( N) = negligible residues; however, the Agency is removing the ``( N)'' designation from all entries to conform to current Agency administrative practice.

TABLE 2.   TOLERANCE REASSESSMENT SUMMARY FOR PROPANILTOLERANCES TO BE PROPOSED UNDER 40 CFR 180.274( A)

Commodity Current Tolerance ( ppm) Reassessed Tolerance ( ppm) Comment ( Corrected Commodity Definition)

Barley, hay None To be determined1 The requested data for wheat, hay will be translated to barley, hay.

Crayfish None 0.05 Oat, forage None 0.20 The available data for wheat, forage will be translated to oat, forage.

Oat, hay None To be determined1 The requested data for wheat, hay will be translated to oat, hay.

Wheat, forage None 0.20 Wheat, hay None To be determined1 Additional data are required.

1The establishment of these tolerance( s) cannot be made at this time because additional data are required.

TABLE 3.   TOLERANCE REASSESSMENT SUMMARY FOR PROPANIL TOLERANCES CURRENTLY LISTED UNDER 40 CFR 180.274( A)( 2)

Commodity Current Tolerance ( ppm) Reassessed Tolerance ( ppm) Comment ( Corrected Commodity Definition)

Rice bran 10 Remove These tolerances are not needed because they are inadvertent duplicate tolerances for rice commodities that already exist in 40 CFR 180.274( a)( 1).

Rice hulls 10 Remove Rice mill fractions 10 Remove Rice polishings 10 Remove VerDate May< 23> 2002 20: 45 Jun 04, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM pfrm12 PsN: 05JNN1 38660 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2002 / Notices XI. Codex Harmonization No Codex maximum residue levels ( MRLs) have been established for propanil; therefore, issues of compatibility between Codex MRLs and U. S. tolerances do not exist.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests, Risk assessment and tolerance reassessment.

Dated: May 20, 2002. Lois A. Rossi, Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [ FR Doc. 02   13809 Filed 6   4   02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPP   2002   0065; FRL   7177   4]

Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition to Establish a Tolerance for a Certain Pesticide Chemical in or on Food AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide petition proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of a certain pesticide chemical in or on various food commodities. DATES: Comments, identified by docket control number OPP   2002   0065, must be received on or before July 5, 2002. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by mail, electronically, or in person. Please follow the detailed instructions for each method as provided in Unit I. C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket control number OPP   2002   0065 in the subject line on the first page of your response.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Sidney Jackson, Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: ( 703) 305   7610; e mail address: jackson. Sidney@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected categories and entities may include, but are not limited to:

Categories NAICS codes Examples of potentially affected entities Industry 111 Crop production 112 Animal production 311 Food manufacturing 32532 Pesticide manufacturing This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System ( NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether or not this action might apply to certain entities. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Additional Information, Including Copies of this Document and Other Related Documents? 1. Electronically. You may obtain electronic copies of this document, and certain other related documents that might be available electronically, from the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// www. epa. gov/. To access this document, on the Home Page select `` Laws and Regulations,'' `` Regulations and Proposed Rules,'' and then look up the entry for this document under the `` Federal Register   Environmental Documents.'' You can also go directly to the Federal Register listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. 2. In person. The Agency has established an official record for this action under docket control number OPP   2002   0065. The official record consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received during an applicable comment period, and other information related to this action, including any information claimed as confidential business information ( CBI). This official record includes the documents that are physically located in the docket, as well as the documents that are referenced in those documents. The public version of the official record does not include any information claimed as CBI. The public version of the official record, which includes printed, paper versions of any electronic comments submitted during an applicable comment period, is available for inspection in the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA, from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments? You may submit comments through the mail, in person, or electronically. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket control number OPP   2002   0065 in the subject line on the first page of your response. 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs ( OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 2. In person or by courier. Deliver your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs ( OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 3. Electronically. You may submit your comments electronically by e mail to: opp docket@ epa. gov, or you can submit a computer disk as described above. Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Electronic submissions will be accepted in Wordperfect 6.1/ 8.0 or ASCII file format. All comments in electronic form must be identified by docket control number OPP   2002   0065. Electronic comments may also be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.

D. How Should I Handle CBI That I Want to Submit to the Agency? Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. You may claim information that you submit to EPA in response to this document as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the VerDate May< 23> 2002 20: 45 Jun 04, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM pfrm12 PsN: 05JNN1


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 172 (Friday, September 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53612-53613]
[FR Doc No: 2015-22008]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Public Notice for Waiver of Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land; Akron Fulton
International Airport, Akron, OH.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is considering a
proposal to change approximately 7.9510 acres of airport land from
aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use and to authorize the sale of
airport property at Akron Fulton International Airport, Akron, OH.
    The property is located at 1353 Exeter Road. The aforementioned
land is surplus airport property and is not needed for aeronautical
use. The land is currently developed and leased for light industrial
purposes. Upon release the land will be sold at fair market value to a
business the currently leasing the property.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 5, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review by appointment at the FAA
Airports District Office, Alex Erskine,

Program Manager, 11677 South Wayne Road, Suite 107, Romulus, Michigan
48174 Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>/Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> and City of Akron,
Engineering Bureau, 166 South High Street, Akron, Ohio 44308 Telephone
(330) 375-2865.
    Written comments on the Sponsor's request must be delivered or
mailed to: Alex Erskine, Program Manager, Federal Aviation
Administration, Airports District Office, 11677 South Wayne Road, Suite
107, Romulus, Michigan 48174, Telephone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>/FAX
Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex Erskine, Program Manager, Federal
Aviation Administration, Airports District Office, 11677 South Wayne
Road, Suite 107, Romulus, Michigan 48174. Telephone Number: (734) 229-
2900/FAX Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with section 47107(h) of Title
49, United States Code, this notice is required to be published in the
Federal Register 30 days before modifying the land-use assurance that
requires the property to be used for an aeronautical purpose.
    The property is currently leased and is not needed for current or
future aeronautical purposes. All of the subject property was
transferred to the City of Akron under the provisions of the Surplus
Property Act of 1944. The airport plans to sell the property at fair
market value upon release.
    The disposition of the proceeds from the sale of the airport
property will be in accordance with FAA's Policy and Procedures
Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue, published in the Federal
Register on February 16, 1999 (64 FR 7696).
    This notice announces that the FAA is considering the release of
the subject airport property at the Akron Fulton International Airport,
Akron, Ohio, from federal land covenants, subject to a reservation for
continuing right of flight as well as restrictions on the released
property as required in FAA Order 5190.6B section 22.16.
    Approval does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially
assist in the disposal of the subject airport property nor a
determination of eligibility for grant-in-aid funding from the FAA.
    Description for This Survey: Situated in the City of Akron, County
of Summit, State of Ohio and being known as part of Original Lot 3,
Tract 2, formerly Springfield Township, said parcel being all of 12L
and part of additional airport property as referenced in the Akron
Fulton International Airport Layout Plan A.I.P. 3-39-0002-04 approved
by the FAA August 1992, further bounded and described as follows;
    Beginning at an iron pin found in a monument box at the
intersection of the centerlines of Kelly Avenue (80' R/W) and Exeter
Road (R/W Varies), thence North 00[deg]31'31'' East, a distance of
40.07 feet to a point, thence South 89[deg]28'29'' East, a distance of
40.00 feet to an iron pin set (capped City of Akron) in the east R/W
line of said road thence South 87[deg]51'35'' East, a distance of 99.20
feet to an iron pin set (capped City of Akron) and known as the True
Place of Beginning for the following described parcel of land; thence
North 61[deg]17'26'' East, a distance of 53.97 feet to an iron pin set
(capped City of Akron); thence North 52[deg]40'53'' East, a distance of
1049.19 feet, to an iron pin set (capped City of Akron) in the westerly
R/W line of the Metro Regional Transit Authority (60' R/W); thence,
419.35 feet, along said R/W line and arc of a curve to the left, to an
iron pin set (capped City of Akron) at the Point of Tangency, said
curve has a radius of 2887.93 feet, a central angle of 08[deg]19'11'',
a chord of 418.98 feet and bearing of South 07[deg]33'02'' East; thence
South 11[deg]42'28'' East, a distance of 301.41 feet, continuing along
said R/W line, to an iron pin set (capped City of Akron) in the north
R/W line of Exeter Road; thence North 87[deg]51'35'' West, a distance
of 999.06 feet, along said R/W line, to an iron pin set (capped City of
Akron); thence North 02[deg]08'08'' East, a distance of 11.19 feet, to
the Place of Beginning, containing 7.9510 Acres of land, more or less,
but subject to all legal highways and easements of record.
    As determined from a survey made by Paul R. Couch, Registered
Surveyor No. 7824 on behalf of the City of Akron Engineering Bureau,
June 2014.
    The basis of bearings is referenced to the Ohio State Plane
Coordinate System, North Zone.

    Issued in Romulus, Michigan, on August 17, 2015.
John L. Mayfield, Jr.,
Manager, Detroit Airports District Office, FAA, Great Lakes Region.
[FR Doc. 2015-22008 Filed 9-3-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 28 (Monday, February 11, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9648-9650]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02920]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0965; FRL-9778-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
District of Columbia; Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions Reductions
Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the District of
Columbia (District) State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the
District Department of the Environment (DDOE) on March 15, 2012. These
SIP revisions consist of amendments to Chapters 1 and 7 of Title 20
(Environment) of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR)
for the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) to meet the
requirement to adopt reasonably available control technology (RACT) for
sources as recommended by the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) model
rules and EPA's Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) standards. On
January 26, 2010 and March 24, 2011, DDOE submitted negative
declarations to EPA for the following VOC source categories: Auto and
Light-duty Truck Assembly Coatings, Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing
Materials, Paper, Film and Foil Coatings, and Flatwood Paneling. EPA
also proposes to approve the negative declarations. This action is
being taken under the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 13, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0965 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0965, Donna Mastro, Acting Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2012-0965. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web

site 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 www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the District. Department of the Environment, Air
Quality Division, 1200 1st Street NE., 5th floor, Washington, DC 20002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. EPA Action
II. Background and Description of the District's SIP Revision
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Review

I. EPA Action

    EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the District's SIP which
were submitted by DDOE on January 26, 2010, March 24, 2011 and March
15, 2012. The SIP revision submittals consist of amendments to the
District's regulations to impose the VOC RACT requirements as
recommended by OTC's model rules for consumer products, adhesives and
sealants, architectural and industrial maintenance, portable fuel
containers and spouts, and solvent cleaning and also include VOC RACT
requirements consistent with EPA's CTGs for flexible packaging and
printing, large appliance coatings, metal furniture coatings, and
miscellaneous metal products and plastic parts coatings, lithographic
and letterpress printing, miscellaneous industrial adhesives, and
industrial cleaning solvents. Specifically, DDOE has amended 20 DCMR
Chapters 1 and 7 to impost RACT and reduce further VOC emissions in the
District. These amendments reflect technology developments and expand
VOC emission controls, as well as reflect the RACT requirements in
EPA's CTGs and the recommended control requirements of the OTC model
rules. EPA is also proposing to approve the negative declarations
submitted for Auto and Light-duty Truck Assembly Coatings, Fiberglass
Boat Manufacturing Materials, Paper, Film and Foil Coatings, and
Flatwood Paneling because EPA agrees with the DDOE's declaration that
no sources for these categories are located in the District.

II. Background and Description of the District's SIP Revision

    The Washington Metropolitan Area, which includes the District, is
designated nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone. As a result, the District is
required to adopt measures to reduce ozone levels, including precursor
emissions of VOCs. The standards and requirements contained in the
District's regulations to reduce VOCs and precursors of ozone
incorporate the level of control recommended in the OTC model rules.
The OTC model rules are based on the existing rules developed by the
1998 California Air Resources Board (CARB) RACT determination.
Implementing the model rules will result in VOC emission reductions in
VOC at least as stringent as any applicable CTGs and will support
attainment demonstrations and reductions in ground-level ozone.
    In addition to adopting RACT regulations consistent with the level
of control recommended by the OTC model rules, the District also
adopted VOC RACT regulations consistent with the requirements of
several CTGs published by EPA. Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides
that SIPs for nonattainment areas must include reasonably available
control measures (RACM), including RACT, for sources of emissions.
Section 182(b)(2)(A) provides that for certain nonattainment areas,
states must revise their SIP to include RACT for sources of VOC
emissions covered by a CTG document issued after November 15, 1990 and
prior to the area's date of attainment. EPA defines RACT as ``the
lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of
meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably
available considering technological and economic feasibility.'' 44 FR
53761 (Sept. 17, 1979). In subsequent Federal Register notices, EPA has
addressed how states can meet the RACT requirements of the CAA.
    CTGs are documents issued by EPA intended to provide state and
local air pollution control authorities information that should assist
them in determining RACT for VOC from various sources. In either case,
states must submit their RACT rules to EPA for review and approval as
SIP revisions. Implementing EPA's CTGs will reduce emissions of VOC
from source categories and help the District attain and maintain the
NAAQS for ozone.
    On January 26, 2010, March 24, 2011 and March 15, 2012, DDOE
submitted SIP revisions consisting of negative declarations for certain
VOC source categories and VOC RACT regulations consistent with the
recommendations contained in the OTC's model rules and EPA's CTGs for
the control of VOC from various VOC source categories. The District has
revised the following sections of 20 DCMR Chapters 1 and 7 to impose
RACT: section 100, ``Purpose, Scope, And Construction,'' section 199,
``Definitions and Abbreviations,'' section 700, ``Miscellaneous
Volatile Organic Compounds,'' section 707, ``Perchloroethylene Dry
Cleaning,'' section 708, ``Solvent Cleaning,'' section 710, ``Intaglio,
Flexographic, And Rotogravure Printing,'' section 714, ``Controls And
Prohibitions on Gasoline Volatility,'' section 715, ``Reasonably
Available Control Technology,'' section 716, ``Offset Lithography,''
sections 719 to 737, ``Consumer Products,'' sections 743 to 749,
``Adhesives and Sealants,'' sections 751 to 758, ``Portable Fuel
Containers And Spouts (currently SIP sections 735 through 741),''
sections 763 to 769, ``Solvent Cleaning (currently SIP sections 742
through 748),'' section 770, ``Miscellaneous Industrial Solvent
Cleaning Operations,'' section 771, ``Miscellaneous Cleaning And VOC
Materials Handling Standards,'' sections 773 to 778, ``Architectural
And Industrial Maintenance Coating (currently SIP sections 749 through
754),'' and section 799, ``Definitions.'' A more complete explanation
of the changes and EPA's analysis of the changes, are contained in the
technical

support document (TSD) prepared in support of this proposed rulemaking.
A copy of this TSD is located in the docket of this proposed
rulemaking.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the District of Columbia's SIP
revisions submitted on January 26, 2010, March 24, 2011 and March 15,
2012, adopting VOC RACT requirements for various source categories. EPA
is also proposing to approve the District's negative declarations
pursuant to section 182(b)(2)(A) of the CAA for those CTG categories
where no sources are located in the District. EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will
be considered before taking final action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule, pertaining to District's
amendments to regulations for the control of VOCs, does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian
country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: January 29, 2013.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013-02920 Filed 2-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 18, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28315-28316]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12861]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4428-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2019-0001]

Kentucky; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Kentucky (FEMA-4428-DR), dated April 17, 2019,
and related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued May 8, 2019.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the

Commonwealth of Kentucky is hereby amended to include the following
area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of April 17, 2019.

    Fulton County for Public Assistance.

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

Pete Gaynor,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2019-12861 Filed 6-17-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 223 (Monday, November 21, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70816-70817]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25282]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0631; FRL-10433-01-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazards
Disclosure Requirements (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Residential Lead-Based Paint
Hazards Disclosure Requirements (EPA ICR Number 1710.09, OMB Control
Number 2070-0151) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act.
This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved
through November 30, 2022. Public comments were previously requested
via the Federal Register on March 1, 2022, during a 60-day comment
period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public
comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its
estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments must be received on or before December 21,
2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to EPA, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OPPT-2017-0631, online www.regulations.gov (our preferred method),
by email to www.epa.gov/dockets, or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection

Agency, Mail Code 2821T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Sleasman, Regulatory Support
Branch (7101M), Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at https://www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's dockets, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: This ICR covers the information collection activities
associated with the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for
sellers, lessors, and their agents' disclosure activities in target
housing including the allowance of up to ten days for an optional risk
assessment or inspection before being obligated under a purchase or
lease contract.
    Form Numbers: 9600-040 and 9600-041.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Persons engaged in selling or
leasing certain residential dwellings built before 1978. The North
American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes associated with
industries most likely affected by the paperwork requirements are
provided in the ICR.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory, 40 CFR part 745.
    Estimated number of respondents: 16,793,558 (total).
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 5,481,069 hours (per year). Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $133,320,708 (per year), includes $0
annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 471,275 hours in
the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in
the ICR currently approved by OMB. As explained in more detail in the
ICR, this decrease reflects revisions to the estimated number of
respondents based on updates to data sources, revisions to time burden
estimates due to technological change (e.g., widespread use of
electronic real estate transacting and documentation), and revisions
based on market factors (e.g., declines in the numbers of rentals and
declines in the amount of owner-occupied target housing in the market).

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-25282 Filed 11-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 26, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74348-74350]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25809]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2016-4158; Notice No. 25-16-06-SC]

Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-
2A13 Airplanes; Fuselage In-Flight Fire Safety and Flammability
Resistance of Aluminum-Lithium Material

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes special conditions for the Bombardier
Inc. (Bombardier) Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. These
airplanes will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to
the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for
transport-category airplanes. This design feature is a fuselage
fabricated using aluminum-lithium materials instead of conventional
aluminum. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain
adequate or appropriate fire-safety standards for this design feature.
These proposed special conditions contain the additional fire-safety
standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing
airworthiness standards.

DATES: Send your comments on or before December 12, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2016-4158
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search

function of the docket Web site, anyone can find and read the
electronic form of all comments received into any FAA docket, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete
Privacy Act Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Sinclair, FAA, Airframe and Cabin
Safety Branch, ANM-115, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington, 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for
comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments
we receive.

Background

    On May 30, 2012, Bombardier applied for an amendment to type
certificate no. T00003NY to include the new Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-
700-2A13 airplanes. These airplanes are derivatives of the Model BD-700
series of airplanes and are marketed as the Bombardier Global 7000
(Model BD-700-2A12) and Global 8000 (Model BD-700-2A13). These
airplanes are twin-engine, transport-category, executive-interior
business jets. The maximum passenger capacity is 19 and the maximum
takeoff weights are 106,250 lb. (Model BD-700-2A12) and 104,800 lb.
(Model BD-700-2A13).

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, Bombardier must show that the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-
700-2A13 airplanes meet the applicable provisions of the regulations
listed in Type Certificate no. T00003NY, or the applicable regulations
in effect on the date of application for the change, except for earlier
amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.
    In addition, the certification basis includes other regulations,
special conditions, and exemptions that are not relevant to these
proposed special conditions. Type Certificate no. T00003NY will be
updated to include a complete description of the certification basis
for these airplane models.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13
airplanes because of a novel or unusual design feature, special
conditions are prescribed under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or
unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on
the same type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or
unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to
the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes must comply
with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34,
and the noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type-
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes will
incorporate the following novel or unusual design feature: The fuselage
will be fabricated using aluminum-lithium materials instead of
conventional aluminum.

Discussion

    The Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes will be
fabricated using aluminum-lithium materials. The performance of
airplanes consisting of a conventional aluminum fuselage, in an in-
flight, inaccessible-fire scenario, is understood based on service
history, and extensive intermediate- and large-scale fire testing.
Experience has shown that eliminating fire propagation of the interior
and insulation materials tends to increase survivability because other
aspects of in-flight fire safety (e.g., toxic-gas emission and smoke
obscuration) are typically byproducts of the propagating fire. The
fuselage itself does not contribute to in-flight fire propagation. This
may not be the case for a fuselage fabricated from aluminum-lithium
materials. Therefore, a special condition is necessary so that the
Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes provide protection against
in-flight fires propagating along the surface of the fuselage.
    In the past, fatal in-flight fires have originated in inaccessible
areas of airplanes where thermal or acoustic insulation was located
adjacent to the airplane's aluminum fuselage skin. Research revealed
that this area has been the path for flame propagation and fire growth.
The FAA determined, in five incidents in the 1990s, that unexpected
flame spread along thermal and acoustic insulation-film covering
material, raising concerns about the fire performance of this material.
In all cases, the ignition source was relatively modest and, in most
cases, was electrical in origin (e.g., electrical short circuit, arcing
caused by chafed wiring, ruptured ballast case, etc.).
    In 1996, the FAA Technical Center began a program to develop new
fire-test criteria for insulation films directly relating to in-flight
fire resistance. This development program resulted in a new test
method--the radiant-panel test--and also resulted in test criteria
specifically established for improving the in-flight fire ignition and
flame propagation of thermal and acoustic insulation materials based on
actual, on-board fire scenarios.
    The FAA determined that a test similar to the test for the
measurement of insulation burnthrough resistance (14 CFR part 25,
Appendix F, Part VII, ``Test Method to Determine the Burnthrough
Resistance of Thermal/Acoustic Insulation Materials'') could be used to
assess the flammability characteristics of the proposed fuselage
aluminum-lithium material. The only change to the test is the size of
the sample and the sample holder, to accommodate panels of the fuselage
material.
    Bombardier must use the test method contained in Part VII of
Appendix F, Test Method, to determine the burnthrough resistance of
thermal-acoustic insulation materials, with the slight changes to the
sample size and sample holder, as described in these

special conditions, to show compliance with applicable requirements.
    These proposed special conditions contain the additional safety
standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing
airworthiness standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to
Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. Should
Bombardier apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate
to include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design
feature, these special conditions would apply to the other model as
well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. It is not a
rule of general applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Proposed Special Conditions

    Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of the type certification basis
for Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes.
    1. Bombardier Inc. must demonstrate that the aluminum-lithium
material has equal or better flammability-resistance characteristics
than the aluminum-alloy sheet material typically used as skin material
on similar airplanes.
    2. The test set-up and methodology must be in accordance with the
tests described in 14 CFR part 25, Appendix F, Part VII, except for the
following.
    a. Each test sample must consist of a flat test specimen. A set of
three samples of aluminum-lithium sheet material must be tested. The
size of each sample must be 16 inches wide by 24 inches long by 0.063
inch thick.
    b. The test samples must be installed into a steel-sheet subframe
with outside dimensions of 18 inches by 32 inches. The subframe must
have a 14.5-inch by 22.5-inch opening cut into it. The tests samples
must be mounted onto the subframe using 0.250-20 UNC threaded bolts.
    c. Test specimens must be conditioned at 70 [deg]F  5
[deg]F, and 55%  5% humidity, for at least 24 hours before
testing.
    3. The aluminum-lithium material must not ignite during any of the
tests.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 14, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-25809 Filed 10-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P