[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 114 (Thursday, June 13, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27670-27671]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12515]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Ombudsman Matter Management System
    OMB Control No. 3235-0748, SEC File No. 270-797

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of

information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
renewal request for the collection of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for approval.
    In 2016, at the time of the original request for the collection of
information, members of the public who contacted the Ombudsman for
assistance did so by traditional mail, electronic mail, telephone, and
facsimile. To make it easier for retail investors and others to contact
the Ombudsman electronically, the Commission developed the Ombudsman
Matter Management System (``OMMS''), a new, electronic data collection
system for the receipt, collection and analysis of inquiries,
complaints, and recommendations from retail investors directed to the
SEC Ombudsman and the Office of the Investor Advocate. The Commission
invites comment on OMMS.
    OMMS was launched for internal use by SEC staff in 2017. Through
OMMS, members of the public may request assistance from the Ombudsman
and staff using a web-based form (the ``OMMS Form'') tailored to gather
information about matters within the scope of the Ombudsman's function
and streamline the inquiry and response process. The OMMS Form, which
was made available to the public for use in September 2017, facilitates
communication with the Ombudsman via an electronic series of basic
questions with user-friendly and mobile-friendly response features such
as radio buttons, drop-down menu responses, pop-up explanation bubbles,
web page links, fillable narrative text fields, and document upload
options. In addition, the OMMS Form incorporates functionality that,
depending upon certain responses, pre-populates specific fields, and
prompts the user to provide additional information. By eliciting
specific information from the user, the OMMS Form facilitates
communication between the user and the Ombudsman, reduces response and
resolution times, and maximizes Ombudsman staff resources available for
recording, processing, and responding to matters. The requested
information collection is voluntary and does not change the contact
methods currently available.
    The OMMS Form is publicly available through the Commission's
website, https://www.sec.gov.
    The Commission estimates that the total reporting burden for using
the OMMS Form will be 275 hours. The calculation of this estimate
depends on how many members of the public use the form each year and
the estimated time it takes to complete the form: 550 respondents x 30
minutes per submission = 275 burden hours. The estimates of average
burden hours are made solely for the purposes of the Paperwork
Reduction Act and are not derived from a comprehensive or even
representative survey or study of the cost of Commission rules and
forms.
    The total estimated one-time cost to the federal government of
creating OMMS and the OMMS Form was $400,000. During the three-year
period covered by our prior Paperwork Reduction Act submission in 2016,
the startup costs were fully expensed and are therefore not included in
the calculation for this renewal.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be
subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of
information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of
Management and Budget control number.
    Written comments are invited on all aspects of this proposed
information collection renewal request, in particular: (a) Whether this
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
users, including through the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
    Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted
in writing within 60 days of this publication. Please direct your
written comments to Charles Riddle, Acting Chief Information Officer,
Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Candace Kenner, 100 F Street
NE, Washington, DC 20549; or send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 10, 2019.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-12515 Filed 6-12-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44296-44297]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14760]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings # 1

    Docket Numbers: EG23-220-000.
    Applicants: PGR 2022 Lessee 8, LLC.
    Description: PGR 2022 Lessee 8, LLC submits Notice of Self-
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 7/5/23.
    Accession Number: 20230705-5118.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/26/23.

    Docket Numbers: EG23-221-000.
    Applicants: Porter Solar, LLC.
    Description: Porter Solar, LLC submits Notice of Self-Certification
of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 7/5/23.
    Accession Number: 20230705-5127.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/26/23.

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

     Docket Numbers: ER10-1547-015; ER10-1975-031; ER10-2421-011; ER10-
2585-010; ER10-2613-010; ER10-2616-025; ER10-2617-012; ER10-2619-013;
ER21-2346-002; ER21-2347-002; ER10-2674-015; ER10-2677-016; ER11-2457-
011; ER11-3857-017; ER11-3867-017; ER11-4266-018; ER11-4400-022; ER12-
75-014; ER12-192-017; ER12-1769-013; ER12-2250-012; ER12-2251-012;
ER12-2252-013; ER12-2253-012; ER13-2475-014; ER14-883-017; ER14-1569-
018; ER14-2245-012; ER15-1596-018; ER15-1598-009; ER15-1599-018; ER15-
1600-008; ER15-1602-008; ER15-1605-008; ER15-1607-008; ER17-1906-005;
ER19-102-011; ER19-158-013; ER19-2803-010; ER19-2806-010; ER19-2807-
010; ER19-2809-010; ER19-2810-010; ER19-2811-010.
    Applicants: Viridian Energy, LLC, Viridian Energy PA, LLC, Viridian
Energy NY, LLC, Energy Rewards, LLC, Connecticut Gas & Electric, Inc.,
Cincinnati Bell Energy LLC, Ambit Northeast, LLC, Luminant Energy
Company LLC, Lake Road Generating Company, LLC, Washington Power
Generation LLC, Miami Fort Power Company LLC, Hanging Rock Power
Company LLC, Fayette Power Company LLC, Dynegy Energy Services (East),
LLC, Dicks Creek Power Company LLC, Luminant Commercial Asset
Management LLC, TriEagle Energy, LP, Dynegy Energy Services, LLC,
Illinois Power Marketing Company, Kincaid Generation, L.L.C., Public
Power & Utility of Maryland, LLC, Public Power (PA), LLC, Public Power
& Utility of NY, Inc, Everyday Energy NJ, LLC, Everyday Energy, LLC,
Liberty Electric Power, LLC, Public Power. LLC, Dynegy Power Marketing,
LLC, Richland-Stryker Generation LLC, Masspower, LLC, Milford Power
Company, LLC, Massachusetts Gas & Electric, Inc., Pleasants Energy,
LLC, Calumet Energy Team, LLC, Blackstone Power Generation LLC,
Bellingham Power Generation LLC, Kendall Power Company LLC, Ontelaunee
Power Operating Company LLC, LLC, Dynegy Marketing and Trade, LLC,
Sithe/Independence Power Partners, L.P., Casco Bay Energy Company, LLC,
Energy Services Providers, LLC, Sayreville Power Generation LP,
Hopewell Power Generation, LLC
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Hopewell Power Generation, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5199.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2487-007; ER15-2380-005.
    Applicants: Willey Battery Utility, LLC, Pacific Summit Energy LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Pacific Summit Energy LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5206.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2924-016.
    Applicants: Kleen Energy Systems, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Kleen Energy Systems, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5204.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2534-010; ER16-2234-006.
    Applicants: EF Kenilworth LLC, Morris Cogeneration, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Morris Cogeneration, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5205.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3861-016.
    Applicants: Empire Generating Co, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Empire Generating Co, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5200.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2498-013; ER14-2500-013.
    Applicants: Newark Energy Center, LLC,EIF Newark, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of EIF Newark, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5201.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1905-013.
    Applicants: Amazon Energy LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Amazon Energy LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5203.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2340-001.
    Applicants: Basin Electric Power Cooperative.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Basin Electric Power Cooperative
Amendment to Order No. 881 Compliance Filing to be effective 7/12/2025.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230706-5061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2337-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Initial Filing of Service
Agreement No. 914 to be effective 6/13/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/5/23.
    Accession Number: 20230705-5112.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/26/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2338-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Section 1/Attach. O Section
8--Assistance Energy and Measured Demand Definition to be effective 7/
1/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/5/23.
    Accession Number: 20230705-5115.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/26/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2339-000.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Formula Rate Update Filing
for 2022 Rate Year to be effective 9/4/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/5/23.
    Accession Number: 20230705-5119.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/26/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2340-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Service Agreement No. 412,
LGIA with 302PN 8me, LLC to be effective 6/5/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/5/23.
    Accession Number: 20230705-5121.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/26/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2341-000.
    Applicants: CORE Electric Cooperative.
    Description: Petition of CORE Electric Cooperative for Limited
Waiver, or in the Alternative for Remedial Relief, Shortened Comment
Period, and Expedited Action.
    Filed Date: 7/3/23.
    Accession Number: 20230703-5286.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2342-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 4089 Sholes Wind II GIA to
be effective 6/14/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230706-5040.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2343-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 4096 Southwestern Power
Admin/City of Sikeston MO Int Agr to be effective 8/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230706-5043.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2344-000.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Concurrence in ITC CSA to be
effective 9/4/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230706-5046.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2345-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2023-07-06_SA 2838 METC-AEP
IA Certificate of Concurrence to be effective 6/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230706-5049.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2346-000.
    Applicants: Oak Ridge Solar, LLC
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Oak Ridge Solar MBR Tariff to
be effective 7/7/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230706-5052.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2347-000.
    Applicants: American Electric Power Service Corporation.
    Description: American Electric Power Service Corporation submits
for Indiana Michigan Power Company terminating the Facilities Agreement
between Indiana Michigan Power Co. and Covert Generating Company,
L.L.C.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230706-5062.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2348-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule No. 217,
Exhibit B.LIB to be effective 9/7/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230706-5075.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2349-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Notice of Cancellation of ISA, SA
No. 6824; Queue No. AE2-120 re: deadline to be effective 9/5/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230706-5085.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2350-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original NSA, Service
Agreement No. 6998; Queue No. T127 to be effective 9/5/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/6/23
    Accession Number: 20230706-5087.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/23.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: July 6, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-14760 Filed 7-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 243 (Monday, December 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 78644]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32380]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13244-001]

Whitman River Dam, Inc.; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

    On November 1, 2011, Whitman River Dam, Inc., filed an application
for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power
Act, proposing to study the feasibility of the Wampanoag Dam
Hydroelectric Project (Wampanoag Project or project) to be located on
the Whitman River, near Ashburnham, Worcester County, Massachusetts.
The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the
permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit
term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to
perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or
waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) An earthen dam, 22-foot-
high and 660-foot-long, (2) a head pond with storage of 1420.0 acre-
feet, (3) one existing 24-inch diameter discharge pipe, and (4) a new
powerhouse located in the vicinity of the discharge pipe containing one
generating unit having a capacity of 10 kilowatts. The estimated annual
generation of the Wampanoag Project would be 53,000 kilowatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Robert Francis, President, Whitman River
Dam, Inc., P.O. Box 145, 10 Tommy Francis Road, Westminster, MA 01473.
    FERC Contact: Jeff Browning; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-(866) 208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13244-001) in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: December 9, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-32380 Filed 12-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Meeting Record Regarding: The Contaminant Candidate List 4 (CCL 4) Date: July 25, 2013 Location: American Water Works Association Offices; Washington, DC Participants: Meredith Russell (EPA), Lisa Christ (EPA), Alan Roberson (AWWA), Adam Carpenter (AWWA), Steve Via (AWWA), Jeanne Eckhart (AWWA Intern), Austa Parker (AWWA Intern), Clay Cope (AWWA Intern), Andy Eaton (Eurofin Eaton Analytical), Rick Sakaji (East Bay MUD), Gary Lynch (Park Water), Craig Adams (Utah State University), Cynthia Garcia (City of Peoria, AZ), Theresa Slifko (Metropolitan Water District of Southern California), Keith Cartnick (United Water), Ruth Marfil-Vega (American Water), Djanette Khiari (Water Research Foundation), Dave Cornwell (EE&T, Inc.), Jeff Rosen (Clancy Environmental), Michelle Frey (PureSense), Chuck Hertz (Aqua America), Chad Seidel (Jacobs Engineering), Joe Cotruvo (Cotruvo and Associates) EPA met with representatives from the American Water Works Association (AWWA) to discuss the CCL 4 nominated contaminants.  EPA gave a brief summary of the request for nominations from the public in the Federal Register on May 8, 2012, and of the contaminant nominations received from the public.  EPA told the AWWA members that it had received nominations for 59 unique contaminants (54 chemicals and 5 microbial contaminants or groups of contaminants) to be considered for inclusion in the CCL 4.  Eight of those 59 contaminants were nominated by more than one nominator.  Nominations were received from 10 different organizations or individuals.  EPA stated that all of the original nomination submissions could be found in the CCL 4 docket at www.regulations.gov (Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0217).  EPA also said that we are evaluating the nominated contaminants using the same process that was used in CCL 3, and that we are working hard to release a Draft CCL 4 for public comment and to meet our statutory deadline for the Final CCL 4 of October, 2014.   AWWA members asked how many of the nominated chemicals were previously considered in CCL 3, and EPA responded that 44 of the nominated chemicals were considered in the CCL 3 Universe and that most of the nominated chemicals not in the CCL 3 Universe were previously evaluated by EPA in response to CCL 3 public comments.  EPA also clarified that all of the nominated contaminants that have new data available since the development of the CCL 3 are being evaluated for potential inclusion in the CCL 4.  AWWA members also asked EPA to clarify how contaminants were considered in the CCL 3 process, and EPA gave a brief explanation of the CCL 3 process, which included narrowing of a broad Universe of potential drinking water contaminants to a Preliminary CCL (PCCL) using screening criteria based on the contaminant's potential to occur in public water systems, and the potential for public health concern, and then a more detailed evaluation of the PCCL contaminants using  a scoring and classification system to select contaminants from the PCCL for the CCL.  Members also asked if the Draft CCL 4 would undergo SAB review, and EPA responded that we will consult with the SAB on the Draft list.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 213 (Wednesday, November 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 68319]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28085]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER16-141-000]

Conetoe II Solar, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding
Conetoe II Solar, LLC.'s application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is November 17, 2015.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 28, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-28085 Filed 11-3-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 236)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 69604-69606]
[DOCID:fr10de07-16]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-28448; Directorate Identifier 2006-SW-24-AD;
Amendment 39-15290; AD 2007-25-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France Model SA-365 N1, AS-
365 N2, AS-365 N3, SA-366G1, EC 155B, and EC155B1 Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) for the specified Eurocopter France (ECF) model helicopters. That
AD currently requires a onetime inspection for end play in the pitch
control rod assembly double bearing (bearing) using the tail rotor (T/
R) hub control plate, and before further flight, replacing the bearing
if end play is present. This amendment requires checking the T/R
gearbox (TGB) oil level before the first flight of the day and
maintaining the oil at the maximum level for certain helicopters. Also,
this action requires, during each required inspection or at certain
specified intervals, ensuring the oil is at the maximum level for
certain other model helicopters. This action also requires inspecting
the magnetic plug for chips at specified intervals. Depending on the
quantity of chips found, this action requires either replacing the TGB
before further flight or further inspecting for axial play in the T/R
hub pitch change control spider (spider). If axial play is found in the
spider, before further flight, this AD requires replacing the bearing.
This amendment is prompted by the finding that metal chips were not
detected on the magnetic plug due to insufficient oil flow because the
oil in the TGB was being maintained at the minimum level. The actions
specified by this AD are intended to detect metal chips on the magnetic
plug, to prevent damage to the bearing resulting in end play, loss of
T/R pitch control, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: Effective January 14, 2008.

    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of January 14, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may get the service information identified in this AD
from American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie,
Texas 75053-4005, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Examining the Docket: You may examine the docket that contains this
AD, any comments, and other information on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
, or at the Docket Operations office, West Building

Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Uday Garadi, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Guidance Group, Fort
Worth, Texas 76193-0110, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend 14 CFR part 39 by
superseding AD 2006-09-10, Amendment 39-14581 (71 FR 25930), for the
specified ECF model helicopters was published in the Federal Register
on June 13, 2007 (72 FR 32565). The action proposed to require checking
the T/R gearbox (TGB) oil level before the first flight of the day and
maintaining the oil at the maximum level for certain helicopters. Also,
the action proposed during each required inspection or at certain
specified intervals, ensuring the oil is at the maximum level for
certain other model helicopters. Also, proposed was inspecting the
magnetic plug for chips at specified intervals. Depending on the
quantity of chips found, either replacing the TGB before further flight
or further inspecting for axial play in the T/R hub pitch change
control spider (spider) was proposed. If axial play is found in the
spider, before further flight, the action proposed replacing the
bearing.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) notified the FAA that an
unsafe condition may exist on the specified ECF helicopters. EASA
advises of a loss of tail rotor pitch control on a helicopter during a
landing phase due to significant damage to the bearing of the control
rod in the tail gear box. EASA advises that the loss of tail rotor
pitch control can lead to the loss of yaw control of the helicopter.
    Since issuing AD 2006-09-10, ECF has issued Alert Service Bulletin
(ASB) 05.00.54, dated August 25, 2006, for Model SA-365 N1, AS-365 N2,
AS 365 N3, to replace ASB 05.00.52, dated February 15, 2006. ECF has
also issued ASB 05.37 for Model SA 366G1, dated August 25, 2006, to
replace ASB 05.36, dated February 15, 2006. Also, ECF has issued ASB
05A015 for Model EC155B and EC155B1, dated August 25, 2006, to replace
ASB 05A013, dated February 15, 2005. ASBs 05.00.52, 05.36, and 05A013
introduced a periodic check for absence of end play in the bearing.
These ASBs were revised following the loss of yaw control on an AS365
MB helicopter due to progressive deterioration of the bearing. The
metal chips resulting from this deterioration remained trapped in the
area around the bearing and were not detected by the magnetic plug of
the TGB. Further investigation and analyses revealed that the
nondetection of the chips resulting from this deterioration was due to
insufficient oil flow. This occurs when the oil level in the TGB is
continuously maintained at the ``min'' level. Therefore, the ASBs
specify keeping the TGB oil level at maximum level to ensure that any
chips resulting from possible deterioration of the bearing are detected
by the magnetic plug. Also, the ASBs specify checking for absence of
play in the bearing should chips be detected at the magnetic plug of
the TGB.
    EASA classified these ASBs as mandatory and issued Emergency AD
(EAD) No. 2006-0258 R1-E on August 29, 2006. This EAD replaced EAD No.
2006-0051-E, dated February 20, 2006, to ensure the continued
airworthiness of these helicopters in France.
    These helicopter models are manufactured in France and are type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
14 CFR 21.29 and the applicable bilateral agreement. Under this
agreement, EASA has kept the FAA informed of the situation described
above. We have examined EASA's findings, evaluated all pertinent
information, and determined that AD action is necessary for products of
this type design that are certificated for operation in the United
States.
    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. No comments were received on the
proposal or the FAA's determination of the cost to the public. The FAA
has determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the rule

as proposed except we are correcting various typographical errors. The
Federal Register citation for the superseded AD was referred to in two
places as 85 FR 25930, and it should have been referred to as 71 FR
25930. Additionally, the paragraph designations of the incorporated ASB
paragraphs contained 3 small errors. These have been corrected in this
final rule. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of
the AD.
    The FAA estimates that this AD will affect 133 helicopters of U.S.
registry, and the actions will require about:
     \1/2\ hour to check the oil level, fill the oil to maximum
level, and inspect the magnetic plug for metal chips;
     \1/2 \hour to inspect for end play in the bearing;
     8 hours to remove and replace the bearing (if necessary)
at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour; and
     $2,026 for required parts per helicopter.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost impact of the AD
on U.S. operators to be $365,218, assuming the bearing is replaced on
the entire fleet after 1 oil level check, 1 magnetic plug inspection,
and 1 end play inspection.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that 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 the regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. 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.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD. See the AD docket to examine the economic evaluation.

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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by removing Amendment 39-14581 (71 FR
25930, May 3, 2006), and by adding a new airworthiness directive (AD),
Amendment 39-15290, to read as follows:

2007-25-08 Eurocopter France: Amendment 39-15290. Docket No. FAA-
2007-28448; Directorate Identifier 2006-SW-24-AD. Supersedes AD
2006-09-10, Amendment 39-14581, Docket No. FAA-2006-24588,
Directorate Identifier 2006-SW-07-AD.

Applicability

    Model SA-365N1, AS-365N2, AS 365 N3, SA-366G1, EC 155B, and
EC155B1 helicopters, with a tail rotor (T/R) pitch control rod
assembly double bearing (bearing) installed, certificated in any
category.

Compliance

    Required as indicated.
    To detect metal chips on the magnetic plug to prevent damage to
the bearing resulting in end play, loss of T/R pitch control, and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter, do the following:
    (a) Before the first flight of each day for Model SA-365N1, AS-
365N2, AS 365 N3, and SA-366G1 helicopters, check the T/R gearbox
(TGB) oil level. An owner/operator (pilot) holding at least a
private pilot certificate may perform the visual check of the oil
level but must enter compliance into the aircraft maintenance
records in accordance with 14 CFR 43.11 and 91.417(a)(2)(v).
    (b) If the oil level is not at maximum during the check in
paragraph (a) of this AD, before further flight, a qualified
mechanic must fill it to the maximum level.
    (c) During each required inspection not to exceed 15 hours time-
in-service (TIS) or 7 days, whichever occurs first, if the oil level
is not at the maximum level, fill it to the maximum level for Model
EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters.
    (d) Inspect the magnetic plug of the TGB for any chips as
follows:
    (1) At intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS for helicopters with
a magnetic plug without a chip electrical indication in the cockpit,
or
    (2) At intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS and after any
illumination of the TGB ``CHIP'' warning light for helicopters with
a chip electrical indication in the cockpit.
    (e) If you find any chips during the inspection in paragraph (d)
of this AD, before further flight, follow the Accomplishment
Instructions, paragraph 2.B.2.b), of Eurocopter Alert Service
Bulletin No. 05.00.54 for Model SA-365N1, AS-365N2, AS 365 N3; No.
05A015 for Model EC 155B and EC155B1; or No. 05.37 for Model SA-
366G1, all dated August 25, 2006 (ASBs), as appropriate for your
model helicopter.
    (1) If the quantity of chips on the magnetic plug, as referenced
in the Operational Procedures, paragraph 2.B.2.b)1) of the ASBs is
at or above the removal criteria, before further flight, replace the
TGB with an airworthy TGB.
    (2) If the quantity of chips on the magnetic plug is below the
removal criteria, as referenced in the Operational Procedure,
paragraph 2.B.2.b)2) of the ASBs.
    (i) Inspect for axial play in the T/R hub pitch control change
spider (spider) by following the additional steps in the Operational
Procedure, paragraph 2.B.2.b)2) of the ASBs.
    (ii) If there is axial play in the spider, before further
flight, replace the bearing with an airworthy bearing.
    (f) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Contact the Manager, Safety Management Group, ATTN: Uday Garadi,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations
and Guidance Group, Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0110, telephone (817)
222-5123, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (g) Special flight permits will not be issued.
    (h) Do the inspections by following the specified portions of
Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin No. 05.00.54 for Model SA-365N1,
AS-365N2, AS 365 N3; No. 05A015 for Model EC 155B and EC155B1; or
No. 05.37 for Model SA-366G1 helicopters, all dated August 25, 2006,
as applicable. The Director of the Federal Register approved this
incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from American Eurocopter
Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas 75053-4005,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Copies

may be inspected at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas or
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-
741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html
.

    (i) This amendment becomes effective on January 14, 2008.

    Note: The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency Revised Emergency AD No. 2006-0258 R1-E on August 29,
2006, which replaced AD No. 2006-0051-E, dated February 20, 2006.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 27, 2007.
Mark R. Schilling,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7-23605 Filed 12-7-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: May 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 94)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 27424-27427]
[DOCID:fr17my10-11]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1066; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-028-AD;
Amendment 39-16284; AD 2010-10-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-
100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP Series
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD), which applies to certain Model 747 airplanes. That AD currently
requires repetitive inspections to detect cracking in certain fuselage
skin lap joints, and repair if necessary. This new AD expands the
inspection area in the existing AD, adds a modification of certain lap
joints, and adds certain post-repair inspections of the lap joints.
Accomplishing the modification ends the repetitive inspections required
by the existing AD for the length of lap joint that is modified. This
AD results from a structural review of affected skin lap joints for
widespread fatigue damage. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue
cracking in certain lap joints, which could result in rapid
depressurization of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective June 21, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of June 21, 2010.
    On July 13, 1994 (59 FR 30277, June 13, 1994), the Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain
other publications listed in the AD.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

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 (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the 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: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to include an AD that supersedes AD 94-12-04, Amendment 39-
8932 (59 FR 30277, June 13, 1994). The existing AD applies to certain
Model 747 airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on
November 18, 2009 (74 FR 59488). That NPRM proposed to continue to
require repetitive inspections to detect cracking in certain fuselage
skin lap joints, and repair if necessary. That NPRM also proposed to
expand the inspection area in the existing AD, add a modification of
certain lap joints, and add certain post-repair inspections of the lap
joints. That NPRM specified that accomplishing the modification would
end the repetitive inspections required by the existing AD for the
length of lap joint that is modified.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have considered the comments that have been
received on the NPRM.

Request for Certain Clarifications

    Boeing asks that we provide the following clarifications:
     Include language in paragraph (c) of the NPRM which
specifies that airplanes having line number 629, 635, 637, 650, 666,
667, 673, 675, 683, 713, 750, or 810 are Group 5 airplanes. Boeing
states that after Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3,
dated January 15, 2009, was released, it was determined that these
airplanes do not have a lower lobe air stair door and should have been
included in Group 5, not Group 10.
    We agree with Boeing's request for the reason provided. The
airplane grouping is incorrect in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2367, Revision 2, dated October 30, 2008, and Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3, dated January 15, 2009. Therefore, we
have added a new Note 1 after paragraph (c) of this AD to clarify the
correct airplane grouping for airplanes having the identified line
numbers.
     Change the term ``Delegation Option Authorization'' (DOA)
to ``Organization Designation Authorization'' (ODA) throughout the
NPRM.
    We agree. Boeing Commercial Airplanes has received an Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA), which replaces the previous
designation as a Delegation Option Authorization (DOA) holder. We have
changed paragraph (m)(3) of this AD to add delegation of authority to
Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA to approve an alternative method of
compliance for any repair required by this AD.
     Change the Discussion section of the NPRM to note that AD
2009-04-16, Amendment 39-15822 (74 FR 8737, February 26, 2009),
supersedes AD 2008-10-15, Amendment 39-15522 (73 FR 29042, May 20,
2008). Although we agree that AD 2009-04-16 superseded AD 2008-10-15,
the discussion section of the NPRM is not carried over to this final
rule. Therefore, we have made no change to the AD in this regard.

     Change the terminating action language specified in
paragraph (j) of the NPRM to add the following at the end of the last
sentence in that paragraph: ``* * * for a period of 15,000 flight
cycles. Additional work is required for continued operation beyond
15,000 flight-cycles after the modification.'' Boeing states that a
post-modification inspection is specified in a note following Table 2
of paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3,
dated January 15, 2009.
    We do not agree with Boeing's request. The note following Table 2
of paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin specifies that additional
work is required for continued operation beyond 15,000 flight cycles
after the modification, and that Boeing must be contacted for
instructions. Considering the compliance time of 30,000 total flight
cycles for the modification, and the compliance time for additional
work, we have determined that rulemaking on the undefined additional
work is not necessary at this time. We will consider future rulemaking
once the additional work is defined. We have made no change to the AD
in this regard.
     Add a new paragraph (j)(1) to the NPRM to state that at
all lap joint areas not covered by the modification required by
paragraph (j) of this AD, a lap joint modification must be installed at
35,000 total flight cycles. Boeing states that the NPRM should reflect
the structural modification point (SMP) for all lap splices not
modified by Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3, dated
January 15, 2009, as stated on page 26, section 1.D., Note 7, of that
service bulletin.
    We do not agree with Boeing's request. Notes in the Description
section of a service bulletin are considered informational only. In
addition, the subject note specifies modification of all lap joints not
covered by the modification specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
53A2367. The compliance time specified in that note in Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3, dated January 15, 2009, is 35,000
total flight cycles, and Boeing is not planning to provide engineering
drawings for that modification. Modification of those lap joints is not
included in this AD. We will consider future rulemaking when
modification procedures are available. We have made no change to the AD
in this regard.

Explanation of Change Made to This AD

    We have changed this AD to identify the legal name of the
manufacturer as published in the most recent type certificate data
sheet for the affected airplane models.

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. We also determined that
these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance

    After the NPRM was issued, we reviewed the figures we have used
over the past several years to calculate AD costs to operators. To
account for various inflationary costs in the airline industry, we find
it necessary to increase the labor rate used in these calculations from
$80 per work hour to $85 per work hour. The cost impact information,
below, reflects this increase in the specified hourly rate.

Costs of Compliance

    There are 209 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide
fleet. This AD affects about 69 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 94-12-04 and retained in this
AD take about 14 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of
$85 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the
currently required actions is $1,190 per airplane, per inspection
cycle.
    The new Area 2 inspections take up to 477 work hours per airplane,
depending on airplane configuration, at an average labor rate of $85
per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the new
inspections specified in this AD for U.S. operators is up to
$2,797,605, or up to $40,545 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    The new modification takes about 171 work hours per airplane, at an
average labor rate of $85 per work hour. Required parts cost per
airplane will be minimal. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of
the new actions specified in this AD for U.S. operators is $1,002,915,
or $14,535, per airplane.

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

    We have determined that 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); and
    (3) 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing Amendment 39-8932 (59 FR 30277, June 13, 1994) and by adding
the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2010-10-05 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-16284. Docket No. FAA-
2009-1066; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-028-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective June 21, 2010.

Affected AD

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 94-12-04, Amendment 39-8932.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-
100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP series
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing
Service Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3, dated January 15, 2009.

    Note 1:  Airplanes having line number 629, 635, 637, 650, 666,
667, 673, 675, 683, 713, 750, or 810 are Group 5 airplanes.

Subject

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

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a structural review of affected skin
lap joints for widespread fatigue damage. The Federal Aviation
Administration is issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in
certain lap joints, which could result in rapid depressurization of
the airplane.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Restatement of Requirements of AD 94-12-04, With Revised Service
Information

Repetitive Inspections

    (g) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-
2367, dated December 18, 1991: Prior to the accumulation of 22,000
full pressure flight cycles (or, if the external skin panel of an
affected lap joint has been replaced, prior to the accumulation of
22,000 full pressure flight cycles since skin replacement), or
within 1,000 landings after July 13, 1994 (the effective date of AD
94-12-04), whichever occurs later, perform an external surface high
frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection of the skin around the
upper row of fasteners, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2367, dated December
18, 1991; Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2367, Revision 1, dated
January 27, 1994; Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2367,
Revision 2, dated October 30, 2008; or Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
53A2367, Revision 3, dated January 15, 2009. As of the effective
date of this AD, only Revision 3 may be used.
    (1) If no crack is found, repeat the inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 3,000 full pressure flight cycles until the
inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD are done.
    (2) If any crack is found, accomplish paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and
(g)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Prior to further flight, perform an open hole HFEC
inspection to detect cracking in the upper row fastener holes
between the adjacent frames, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2367, dated December
18, 1991; Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2367, Revision 1, dated
January 27, 1994; Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2367,
Revision 2, dated October 30, 2008; or Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
53A2367, Revision 3, dated January 15, 2009. Prior to further
flight, repair any crack found, in accordance with a method approved
by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.
    Note 2: Guidance on repairing cracking can be found in Chapter
53-30-03 of the Boeing 747 Structural Repair Manual.
    (ii) Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 full pressure flight
cycles until the inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD
are done.

New Requirements of This AD

Repetitive Inspections/Investigative and Corrective Actions

    (h) For all airplanes: Do initial and repetitive HFEC
inspections for cracks of lap joints in Sections 41, 42, 44, and 46,
by doing all the actions, including all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions, specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367,
Revision 3, dated January 15, 2009, except as provided by paragraph
(l) of this AD. Do the inspections at the applicable times specified
in paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision
3, dated January 15, 2009, except as required by paragraph (k) of
this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective
actions before further flight. Accomplishing the inspections
required by this paragraph ends the repetitive inspections required
by paragraph (g) of this AD. Do the actions required by paragraph
(h) of this AD until the modification required by paragraph (j) of
this AD is done.
    (i) For areas on which a lap joint repair was installed and the
repair doubler is greater than or equal to 40 inches long: Do
initial and repetitive internal HFEC inspections for cracks, as
required by paragraph (h) of this AD, by doing all the applicable
actions, including applicable corrective actions, specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367,
Revision 3, dated January 15, 2009, except as provided by paragraph
(l) of this AD. Do the inspection and corrective actions at the
times specified in paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
53A2367, Revision 3, dated January 15, 2009, except as required by
paragraph (k) of this AD.

Terminating Action

    (j) Before the accumulation of 30,000 total flight cycles or
within 3,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later: Modify the applicable lap joints in Sections
41 and 42 by doing all the actions specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3,
dated January 15, 2009, except as required by paragraph (l) of this
AD. Accomplishing this modification terminates the repetitive
inspection requirements of this AD for the length of lap joint that
is modified.

Exceptions to Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3, Dated
January 15, 2009

    (k) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3, dated
January 15, 2009, specifies compliance times ``from the date on the
original issue of this service bulletin [12/18/91],'' this AD
requires compliance within the specified compliance time after July
13, 1994 (the effective date of AD 94-12-04). Where Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3, dated January 15, 2009, specifies
compliance times ``after the date on Revision 2 of this service
bulletin [10/30/08],'' this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
    (l) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367, Revision 3, dated
January 15, 2009, specifies to contact Boeing for repair or
modification instructions: Before further flight, repair or modify
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (m) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (m)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. Send information to ATTN: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (425)
917-6590. Or, e-mail information to 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (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.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 94-12-04 are
approved as alternative methods of compliance with the corresponding
requirements of this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (n) You must use the service information specified in Table 1 of
this AD, as applicable, to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise.

                                 Table 1--All Material Incorporated by Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Document                               Revision                               Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-      2..................................  October 30, 2008.
 53A2367.
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2367...  Original...........................  December 18, 1991.
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2367...  1..................................  January 27, 1994.
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2367...  3..................................  January 15, 2009.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the Boeing service information
specified in Table 2 of this AD under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51.

             Table 2--New Material Incorporated by Reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Document               Revision               Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin             2  October 30, 2008.
 747-53A2367.
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-              3  January 15, 2009.
 53A2367.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) The Director of the Federal Register previously approved the
incorporation by reference of the Boeing service information
contained in Table 3 of this AD on July 13, 1994 (59 FR 30277, June
13, 1994).

                             Table 3--Material Previously Incorporated by Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Document                               Revision                               Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2367...  Original...........................  December 18, 1991.
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2367...  1..................................  January 27, 1994.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. 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/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 27, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-10875 Filed 5-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 63 (Tuesday, April 2, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 19636]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07403]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 70

[EPA-R07-OAR-2012-0749; FRL-9795-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Operating
Permits Program; State of Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) and Operating Permits Program to amend the
definitions provisions of the rules. This SIP revision and revision to
the Missouri operating permits program proposes to add the compounds
propylene carbonate and dimethyl carbonate to the list of compounds
which are excluded from the definition of Volatile Organic Compound
(VOC) for consistency with the Federal definition of VOC. The SIP
revision also proposes to correct two asbestos method subpart
references. This revision also proposes approval of Missouri's request
to amend the SIP to meet the 2008 fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards
implementation requirements of the May 16, 2008, New Source Review
(NSR) PM2.5 Rule. In this SIP revision, Missouri adopted
rule revisions to establish the requirement for NSR permits to address
directly emitted PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; and
significant emission rates for direct PM2.5 and precursor
pollutants (sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen dioxide
(NOX)).

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
May 2, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2012-0749, by mail to: Craig Bernstein, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Comments may also be submitted electronically or
through hand delivery/courier by following the detailed instructions in
the ADDRESSES section of the direct final rule located in the rules
section of this Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Bernstein at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of the Federal
Register, EPA is approving the state's SIP revision as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial revision amendment and anticipates no relevant adverse
comments to this action. A detailed rationale for the approval is set
forth in the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are
received in response to this action, no further activity is
contemplated in relation to this action. If EPA receives relevant
adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this
action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives
adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those parts of
the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional
information, see the direct final rule which is located in the rules
section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: March 20, 2013.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2013-07403 Filed 4-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


COMPANY FEDERAL REGISTER DOCUMENT SUBMISSION TEMPLATE

(7/1/2006)

EPA Registration Division contact: [insert name and telephone number
with area code]

INSTRUCTIONS:  Please utilize this outline in preparing tolerance
petition documents.  In cases where the outline element does not apply
please insert “NA-Remove” and maintain the outline.  The comment
notes that appear on the left margin represent hidden typesetting codes
designed to expedite the processing of the Federal Register document.
Please do not remove or alter these comment notes or change the margins,
font, or format in your document. Simply replace the instructions that
appear in italics and brackets, i.e., “[insert company name],” with
the information specific to your action.]

TEMPLATE:

Bayer CropScience

[Insert petition number]

	EPA has received a pesticide petition [insert petition number] from
[Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research
Triangle Park, NC  27709] proposing, pursuant to section 408(d) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to
amend 40 CFR part 180 by establishing a tolerance for residues of    SEQ
CHAPTER \h \r 1 cyfluthrin; cyano
(4-fluoro-3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl-3-(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethyl-cy
clopropanecarboxylate in or on the raw agricultural commodity [beet,
sugar, roots] at [0.09] parts per million (ppm) and in [beet, sugar,
dried pulp] at [11] ppm.  EPA has determined that the petition contains
data or information regarding the elements set forth in section 408
(d)(2) of the FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully evaluated the
sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data
supports granting of the petition.  Additional data may be needed before
EPA rules on the petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

	1. Plant metabolism.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1   The metabolism of
cyfluthrin in plants is adequately understood.  Studies have been
conducted to delineate the metabolism of radiolabeled cyfluthrin in
various crops all showing similar results.  The residue of concern is
cyfluthrin.

	2. Analytical method.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Adequate analytical
methodology using GC/EC detection is available for enforcement purposes.

	3. Magnitude of residues.  A total of 12 field trials were conducted to
measure the magnitude of cyfluthrin residues in sugar beet following the
planting of sugar beet seeds treated with CLOTHIANIDIN + CYFLUTHRIN 600
SE at a target rate of 60 g clothianidin/100,000 seeds and 16 g
cyfluthrin/100,000 seeds.  CLOTHIANIDIN + CYFLUTHRIN 600 SE is an
emulsifiable concentrate containing clothianidin and cyfluthrin.
Following treatment, the seeds were planted at seeding rates ranging
from 52,870 to 71,320 seeds/A.  The resulting soil application rates for
cyfluthrin were 0.019 to 0.025 lb ai/A (0.021 to 0.028 kg ai/ha).  In
all trials, duplicate composite samples of sugar beet roots and tops
were collected at crop maturity.  Cyfluthrin residue was quantitated in
sugar beet roots and tops by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry.  The
LOQ for cyfluthrin was 0.01 ppm in sugar beet roots and tops.  The
highest average field trial (HAFT) cyfluthrin residue was 0.049 ppm
(maximum residue = 0.088 ppm) in sugar beet roots and <0.01 ppm (maximum
residue = <0.01 ppm) in sugar beet tops at commercial harvest.  A
processing study showed concentration of cyfluthrin residues in dried
pulp, but no concentration of residues in molasses or refined sugar.

B. Toxicological Profile

	1. Acute toxicity.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 There is a full battery of
acute toxicity studies for cyfluthrin supporting an overall toxicity
Category II for the active ingredient.

	2. Genotoxicty.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Based on the results of a
complete genotoxicity database, there is no evidence of mutagenicity
activity in a battery of studies, including several gene mutation assays
(reverse mutation and recombination assays in bacteria and a Chinese
hamster ovary(CHO)/HGPRT assay), a structural chromosome aberration
assay (CHO/sister chromatid exchange assay), and an unscheduled DNA
synthesis assay in rat hepatocytes.  All tests were negative for
genotoxicity.

	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 A
developmental toxicity study in rats indicated a maternal NOAEL of 3
mg/kg bw/day based on reduced body weight gain and food consumption at
10 mg/kg bw/day.  The developmental NOAEL was 10 mg/kg bw/day, based on
reduced fetal body weights and increased skeletal variations at the
maternally toxic dose of 40 mg/kg bw/day.   An oral developmental
toxicity study in rabbits with a maternal NOAEL of 20 mg/kg bw/day and
a maternal LOAEL of 60 mg/kg bw/day, based on decreased body weight gain
and decreased food consumption during the dosing period.  A fetal NOAEL
of greater than 180 mg/kg bw/day was also observed in this study.  A
two-generation  reproduction study in rats indicated parental and
offspring NOAELs of 3.0 mg/kg bw/day, based on reductions in body weight
and food consumption in the parents and course tremors and decreased
mean litter weights in the offspring at 9.0 mg/kg bw/day.  The NOAELs
were confirmed in a supplemental two-generation study.

	4. Subchronic toxicity.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 In a 28-day oral gavage
study in rats, cyfluthrin demonstrated a NOAEL of 20 mg/kg bw/day, based
on clinical signs of neurotoxicity, decreased body weight gain and
changes in liver and adrenal weights at 80 and 40 mg/kg bw/day,
respectively.  In a 90-day feeding study in rats the resulting NOAEL was
9.5 mg/kg bw/day, based on decreased body weight gain, gait
abnormalities, skin lesions and mortality seen at 37.5 mg/kg bw/day.   A
six-month toxicity feeding study in dogs established a NOAEL of 5 mg/kg
bw/day.  The LOAEL was 15 mg/kg bw/day based on clinical signs of
neurotoxicity and gastrointestinal disturbances.

Two subchronic inhalation studies were conducted with cyfluthrin.  In
the first study cyfluthrin was administered via inhalation for five days
per week for 3 weeks.  The resulting NOAEL was 1.4 mg/m3, based on
treatment-related behavioral effects, body weight decreases and organ
weight changes at 10.5 mg/m3.  In the second study cyfluthrin was
administered via inhalation for 13 weeks.  The resulting NOAEL was 0.09
mg/m3, based treatment-related behavioral effects in females and
increased urinary protein in males at 0.71 mg/m3.

	5. Neurotoxicity.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 An acute neurotoxicity study
in rats was conducted using beta-cyfluthrin.  The NOAEL for this study
is 2 mg/kg, based on clinical signs, changes in FOB parameters and
decreases in motor activity noted at 10 mg/kg.  In a subchronic
neurotoxicity study with beta-cyfluthrin the resulting NOAEL was
8 mg/kg, based on clinical signs, changes in FOB parameters, and
slightly decreased body weight gain and food consumption.  In a
Developmental neurotoxicity study with beta-cyfluthrin the resulting
maternal and offspring NOAEL was 11.0 mg/kg body weight/day based on
decreased body weight and a change in startle response in PND 22 male
pups.  The database for cyfluthrin is complete and there is no
indication of pre- or post-natal susceptibility.  There is no indication
of delayed neurotoxicity as a result of exposure to cyfluthrin.

	6. Chronic toxicity.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 A 12-month chronic feeding
study in dogs established a no-observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of
2.4 mg/kg bw/day (males) and 3.6 mg/kg bw/day (females).  The lowest
effect level (LOAEL) for this study is established at 11 mg/kg bw/day,
clinical signs, gait abnormalities and abnormal postural reactions in
males and females.  A 24-month chronic feeding/ carcinogenicity study in
rats demonstrated a NOAEL of 2.6 mg/kg bw/day and LOAEL of 11.6 mg/kg
bw/day, based on decreased body weights.  A 24-month carcinogenicity
study in mice was conducted.  The NOAEL was 31.9 (males) and 140.6
(females) mg/kg/bw/day.  The LOAEL was 114.8 mg/kg bw/day (males) based
on ear skin lesions and reduced body weight gains, and 309.7 mg/kg
bw/day (females) based on clinical signs, macroscopic and microscopic
pathology findings and reduced body weights, body weight gains, and food
consumption.  Under the conditions of these studies, there was no
evidence of carcinogenic potential.

	7. Animal metabolism.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 A metabolism study in rats
showed that cyfluthrin is rapidly absorbed and excreted, mostly as
conjugated metabolites in the urine, within 48 hours.  An enterohepatic
circulation was observed.

	8. Metabolite toxicology.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The residue of concern
is cyfluthrin.  No toxicology data have been required for cyfluthrin
metabolites.  Available data indicate that the metabolites are much less
toxic than the parent and are not of concern.

	9. Endocrine disruption.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 There is no evidence of
endocrine effects in any of the studies conducted with cyfluthrin, thus,
there is no indication at this time that cyfluthrin causes endocrine
effects.

C. Aggregate Exposure

	1. Dietary exposure.     SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The insecticide cyfluthrin
has uses on food crops in agriculture and also non-dietary uses for
homeowners.  Aggregate exposure for cyfluthrin should consider dietary
exposure, both food and drinking water and non-dietary exposure both
applicator and post application exposure.  For the dietary exposure an
acute Population Adjusted Dose (aPAD) of 0.02 mg/kg bw/day was selected
using an uncertainty factor of 100 based on the acute neurotoxicity
study.  A chronic Population Adjusted Dose (cPAD) of 0.024 mg/kg bw/day
was based on the chronic toxicity test in dogs with an uncertainty
factor of 100.

™ software system (Exponent, Inc.) and the 1994-96 and 1998 USDA
consumption data.  For the chronic analysis, mean residue values were
calculated from the appropriate field trial studies conducted for
cyfluthrin and submitted as part of the cyfluthrin petitions.  For the
acute analysis, the entire distribution of field trial residue values
was used for non-blended and partially blended commodities and the mean
value used for blended commodities.  Processing factors were obtained
from GLP processing studies for the appropriate commodities.  Percent
crop treated values were obtained from Doane Market Research Data for
registered crops, using the mean value for the chronic analysis and the
maximum value of the last three years for the acute analysis.  Percent
crop treated values for the proposed use were based on Bayer CropScience
market projections at market maturity.  Using these data and assumptions
for the acute analysis the most highly exposed sub-population was All
Infants at 85 % (0.00467 mg/kg bw/day) of the acute PAD with the US
Population at 42 % (0.008475 mg/kg bw/day) of the acute PAD.  For the
chronic analysis, the most highly exposed sub-population was
Children 1-2 utilizing 5.8 % (0.001386 mg/kg bw/day) of the chronic
PAD.  The US Population utilized 1.5 % (0.00105 mg/kg bw/day) of the
chronic PAD.  Actual exposures are likely to be much less because of the
many conservative assumptions incorporated in this analysis.

	ii. Drinking Water.  The estimated drinking water concentration was
taken form   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 US EPA’s calculation of the drinking
water estimated environmental concentrations (EEC) for cyfluthrin
published in the Federal Register (FR Vol. 70, no. 176, 13-Sep-05).
These EECs were directly incorporated into the calculation of the
dietary exposure.

	2. Non-dietary exposure.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Non-occupational
exposure to cyfluthrin may occur as a result of inhalation or contact
from indoor residential, indoor commercial and outdoor residential uses.
 Pursuant to the requirements of FIFRA as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act of 1996 non-dietary and aggregate risk analyses for
cyfluthrin were conducted.  The analyses include evaluation of potential
non-dietary acute application and post-application exposures.
Non-occupational, non-dietary exposure was assessed based on the
assumption that a flea infestation control scenario represents a
“worst case” scenario.  For the flea control infestation scenario
indoor fogger, and professional residential turf same day treatments
were included for cyfluthrin.  Deterministic (point values) were used to
present a worse case upper-bound estimate of non-dietary exposure.  The
non-dietary exposure estimates were expressed as systemic absorbed doses
for a summation of inhalation, dermal and incidental ingestion
exposures.  These worst-case non-dietary exposures were aggregated with
chronic dietary exposures to evaluate potential health risks that might
be associated with cyfluthrin products.  The chronic dietary exposures
were expressed as an oral absorbed dose to combine with the non-dietary
systemic absorbed doses for comparison to a systemic absorbed dose
no-observed-effect-level (NOEL).  Results for each potential exposed
subpopulation (of adults, children 1-6 years, and infants <1 year) were
compared to the systemic absorbed dose NOEL for cyfluthrin to provide
estimates of margins of exposure (MOE).  The large MOEs for cyfluthrin
clearly demonstrate a substantial degree of safety.  The total
non-dietary MOEs are 3800, 2700, and 2500 for adults, children (1-6
years), and infants (<1 year), respectively.  The aggregate MOE for
adults is approximately 2400 and the MOEs for infants and children
exceed 1000.  The non-dietary methods used in the analyses can be
characterized as highly conservative due to the conservatism inherent in
the calculation procedures and input assumptions.  An example of this is
the conservatism inherent in the jazzercise methodology’s
over-representation of residential post-application exposures.
Therefore, it can be concluded that large MOEs associated with potential
non-dietary and aggregate exposures to cyfluthrin will result in little
or no health risks to exposed persons.  The aggregate risk analysis
demonstrates compliance with the health-based requirements of the Food
Quality Protection Act of 1996 for the current label uses.  The
additional proposed new use will have no impact on the analysis for
non-dietary exposure.

D. Cumulative Effects

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Cyfluthrin is a member of the pyrethroid class of
pesticides. EPA is not currently following a cumulative risk approach
based on a common mechanism of toxicity for the pyrethroids while
research on this subject is still ongoing (FR Vol. 70, No. 176,
13-Sep-05).

E. Safety Determination

	1. U.S. population.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Using the assumptions and
data described above, based on the completeness and reliability of the
toxicity data, it is concluded that chronic dietary exposure to the
registered and proposed uses of cyfluthrin will utilize at most 1.5 % of
the chronic PAD for the US Population.  The acute dietary exposure to
cyfluthrin will utilize at most 42 % of the acute PAD.  The actual
exposure both acute and chronic is likely to be much less as more
realistic data and models are developed.  EPA generally has no concern
for exposures below 100% of the PAD because the PAD represents the level
at or below which daily aggregate exposure over a lifetime will not pose
appreciable risk to human health.   Potential exposure from drinking
water was included in the calculations.  Large margins of safety exist
for the non-dietary and aggregate exposure.  Therefore, there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will occur to the US Population from
aggregate exposure (food, drinking water and non-dietary) to residues of
cyfluthrin.

	2. Infants and children.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The relevant toxicity
studies as discussed in the toxicology section above show no extra
sensitivity of infants and children to cyfluthrin, therefore the FQPA
safety factor can be removed. Using the assumptions and data described
in the exposure section above, the percent of the chronic PAD that will
be used for exposure to residues of cyfluthrin in food for Children 1-2
(the most highly exposed sub-population) is 5.8 %.  Infants utilize 2.5
% of the chronic PAD.  For the acute assessment children 1-2 utilize 76
% of the acute PAD and Infants utilize 85 % of the acute PAD.  As in
the adult situation, drinking water exposure was included in the
calculation of the PAD.  As with adults, large margins of safety exist
for the non-dietary and aggregate exposure for infants and children.
Therefore, there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will occur to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to residues of cyfluthrin.

F. International Tolerances

	Cyfluthrin is a broad spectrum insecticide used throughout the world to
control pests in crop and non-crop use areas.  CODEX MRL exist for
cyfluthrin for apples at 0.5 ppm, cattle milk at 0.01 ppm, cotton seed
at 0.05 ppm, maize at 0.05 ppm, peppers, sweet at 0.2 ppm, rape seed at
0.05 ppm and tomatoes at 0.5 ppm.  There is no existing international
tolerance for the proposed new use.

 PAGE

 PAGE   1