[Federal Register: February 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 9529-9530]
[DOCID:fr24fe06-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC06-585-000; FERC-585]

Commission Information Collection Activities, Proposed
Collection; Comment Request; Extension

February 14, 2006.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of section 3506(c)(2)(a)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13), the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is soliciting public comment
on the specific aspects of the information collection described below.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due April 21,
2006.

ADDRESSES: Copies of sample filings of the proposed collection of
information can be obtained from the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filings/elibrary.asp
) or from the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, Attn: Michael Miller, Office of the Executive
Director, ED-34, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments
may be filed either in paper format or electronically. Those parties
filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing. For paper
filing, the original and 14 copies of such comments should be submitted
to the Secretary of the Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426 and refer to
Docket No. IC06-585-000.
    Documents filed electronically via the Internet must be prepared in
WordPerfect, MS Word, Portable Document Format, or ASCII format. To
file the document, access the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
 and click on ``Make an E-filing'', and then follow the

instructions for each screen. First time users will have to establish a
user name and password. The Commission will send an automatic
acknowledgement to the sender's e-mail address upon receipt of
comments.

    All comments may be viewed, printed or downloaded remotely via the
Internet through FERC's homepage using the eLibrary link. For user
assistance, contact<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at (866)
208-3676. or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Miller may be reached by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, by fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information collected under the
requirements of FERC-585 ``Reporting of Electric Energy Shortages and
Contingency Plans under PURPA'' (OMB No. 1902-0138) is used by the
Commission to implement the statutory provisions of section 206 of the
Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1979 (PURPA) Pub. L. 95-617,
92 Stat. 3117. Section 206 of PURPA amended the Federal Power Act (FPA)
by adding a new subsection (g) to section 202, under which the
Commission by rule, was to require each public utility to (1) report to
the Commission and appropriate state regulatory authorities of any
anticipated shortages of electric energy or capacity which would affect
the utility's capability to serve its wholesale customers; and (2)
report to the Commission and any appropriate state regulatory authority
contingency plan that would outline what circumstances might give rise
to for such occurrences.
    In FERC Order No. 575 (60 FR 4859, January 25, 1995) the Commission
modified the reporting requirements in 18 CFR 294.101(b) to provide
that if a public utility includes in its rates schedule provisions
that: (a) during electric energy and capacity shortages it will treat
firm power wholesale customers without undue discrimination or
preference; and (b) it will report any modifications to its contingency
plan for accommodating shortages within 15 days to the appropriate
state regulatory agency and to the affected wholesale customers, then
the utility need not file with the Commission an additional statement
of contingency plan for accommodating such shortages. This revision
merely changed the reporting mechanism; the public utility's
contingency plan would be located in its filed rate rather than in a
separate document.
    The Commission uses the information to evaluate and formulate
appropriate an option for action in the event an unanticipated shortage
is reported and/or materializes. Without this information, the
Commission and State agencies would be unable to: (1) Examine and
approve or modify utility actions, (2) prepare a response to
anticipated disruptions in electric energy and (3) ensure equitable
treatment of all public utility customers under the shortage
situations. The Commission implements these filing requirements in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) under 18 CFR part 294.
    Action: The Commission is requesting a three-year extension of the
current expiration date, with no changes to the existing collection of
data.
    Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this collection is
estimated as:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Number of
                                                                   responses per  Average burden   Total annual
               Number of respondents annually  (1)                  respondent       hours per     burden hours
                                                                        (2)        response  (3)    (1)x(2)x(3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7...............................................................               1              73       511 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated cost burden to respondents is $27,704. (511 hours/2080
hours per year times $112,767 per year average per employee = $
27,704). The cost per respondent is $3,958.
    The reporting burden includes the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide
the information including: (1) Reviewing instructions; (2) developing,
acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the
purposes of collecting, validating, verifying, processing, maintaining,
disclosing and providing information; (3) adjusting the existing ways
to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
(4) training personnel to respond to a collection of information; (5)
searching data sources; (6) completing and reviewing the collection of
information; and (7) transmitting, or otherwise disclosing the
information.
    The estimate of cost for respondents is based upon salaries for
professional and clerical support, as well as direct and indirect
overhead costs. Direct costs include all costs directly attributable to
providing this information, such as administrative costs and the cost
for information technology. Indirect or overhead costs are costs
incurred by an organization in support of its mission. These costs
apply to activities which benefit the whole organization rather than
any one particular function or activity.
    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology e.g. permitting electronic submission of
responses.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-2624 Filed 2-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14163-14165]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05279]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0941; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASO-31]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class D, Class E, and Establishment of Class E
Airspace; Atlanta, GA Area

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D airspace, Class E surface airspace,
and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface,
and establishes Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class
D Surface Area in the Atlanta, GA area. This action replaces the
Atlanta Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range Collocated Tactical
Air Navigation (VORTAC) with the term Point of Origin. This action
updates several airport names and geographic coordinates. This action
also makes an editorial change replacing the term Airport/Facility
Directory with the term Chart Supplement in the legal descriptions of
associated Class D and E airspaces. Controlled airspace is necessary
for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR)
operations in the area.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, May 19, 2022. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR
part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Telephone: (202) 267-
8783. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is also available for inspection at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of FAA Order JO 7400.11F at NARA, email
[email protected] or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Goodson, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority,
as it would amend airspace in the Atlanta, GA area, to support IFR
operations in the area.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (86 FR 71597, December 17, 2021) for Docket No. FAA-2021-0941
to amend Class D airspace, Class E surface airspace, and Class E
airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, and
establish Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D
Surface Area in the Atlanta, GA area.
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in
Paragraphs 5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order JO
7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
listed in this document will be published subsequently in FAA Order JO
7400.11.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic routes, and reporting
points.

The Rule

    The FAA amends 14 CFR part 71 to amend Class D airspace, Class E
surface airspace, and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface, and establish Class E Airspace Designated as an
Extension to Class D airspace at the following airports:
    The Dekalb-Peachtree Airport Class D airspace is amended by
removing unnecessary verbiage from the descriptor header, updating the
geographical coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
database, and replacing the outdated term Airport/Facility Directory
with the term Chart Supplement in the airport description. In addition,
the language in the legal description is amended to include, excluding
the airspace that borders the Dobbins Air Reserve Base (ARB) Class D
airspace extension to the southeast.
    The Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field (formerly
Atlanta, Fulton County Airport-Brown Field) Class D airspace is amended
by removing unnecessary verbiage from the descriptor header and
updating the airport's name. Dobbins ARB Class D airspace is amended by
updating the geographical coordinates of the ARB to coincide with the
FAA's database.
    The Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field (formerly Cobb
County/McCollum Field) Class D airspace is amended by removing
unnecessary verbiage from the descriptor header, updating the airport's
name, and updating the geographical coordinates of the airport to
coincide with the FAA's database. Dobbins ARB (formerly Dobbins ARB/NAS
Atlanta) Class D airspace is amended by updating the ARB's name and
updating the geographical coordinates of the ARB to coincide with the
FAA's database. This action also replaces the outdated term Airport/
Facility Directory with the term Chart Supplement in the airport
description.
    The Dobbins ARB (formerly Dobbins ARB/NAS Atlanta) Class D airspace
would be amended by removing unnecessary verbiage from the descriptor
header, updating the ARB's name, and updating the geographical
coordinates of the ARB to coincide with the FAA's database. Cobb County
International Airport/McCollum Field (formerly Cobb County--McCollum
Field) Class D airspace is amended by updating the airport's name and
updating the geographical coordinates of the airport to coincide with
the FAA's database. Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field
(formerly Fulton County Airport--Brown Field) Class D airspace is
amended by updating the airport's name. This action also replaces the
outdated term Airport/

Facility Directory with the term Chart Supplement in the airport
description.
    The Dekalb-Peachtree Airport Class E surface airspace is amended by
removing unnecessary verbiage from the descriptor header, updating the
geographical coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
database, and removing unnecessary verbiage in the description.
    The Dekalb-Peachtree Airport Class E Airspace Designated as an
Extension to a Class D Surface Area is established by adding that
airspace extending upward from the surface within 1 mile each side of
the Dekalb-Peachtree Airport 206[deg] and 021[deg] bearings from the
airport, extending from the 4-mile radius of Dekalb-Peachtree Airport
to 7.7 miles southwest and northeast of the airport respectively.
    The Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field Class E
Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area is
established by adding that airspace extending upward from the surface
within 1 mile each side of the Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie
Brown Field 260[deg] and 080[deg] bearings from the airport, extending
from the 4-mile radius of Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown
Field to 7.2 miles west and east of the airport respectively.
    The Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field Class E
Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area is
established by adding that airspace extending upward from the surface
from the 4-mile radius of the Cobb County International Airport/
McCollum Field to the 8.4-mile radius of the airport; clockwise from
the 255[deg] bearing to the 303[deg] bearing from the airport and
within 1 mile each side of the Cobb County International Airport/
McCollum Field 089[deg] bearing extending from the 4-mile radius to 8.4
miles east of the airport excluding that portion within the Dobbins
ARB, Class D airspace area.
    The Atlanta, GA Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface is amended by updating the name of Hartsfield-Jackson
Atlanta International Airport (formerly Atlanta, The William B.
Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport) and updating the geographical
coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's database. Dobbins
ARB Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
is amended by updating the ARB's name (formerly Dobbins AFB) and
updating the geographical coordinates of the airport to coincide with
the FAA's database. Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface is
amended by updating the airport's name (formerly Fulton County Airport-
Brown Field) and increasing the radius to 9.7 miles (formerly 5 miles).
Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface is amended by updating
the airport's name (formerly Cobb County-McCollum Field), updating the
geographical coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
database, and increasing the radius to 10.9 miles (formerly 7 miles).
Dekalb-Peachtree Airport Class E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface is amended by updating the geographical
coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's database and
increasing the radius to 10.2 miles (formerly 7 miles). The Atlanta
VORTAC is replaced by the term Point of Origin and the geographical
coordinates are updated to coincide with the FAA's database.
    Subsequent to publication of the Notice of Proposed Rule Making
(NPRM), the FAA found that the updated geographical coordinates of
Dobbins ARB created a shift to the southeast of Class D airspace, which
created a Class D airspace overlap with the Dobbins ARB's extension to
the southeast and Dekalb-Peachtree Airport Class D airspace. Also,
subsequent to publication of the NPRM, it was discovered that the name
of Cobb County International Airport-McCollum Field required updating.
The correct name is Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field.
This action resolves both issues.
    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in
Paragraphs 5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order JO
7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and
Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (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) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only
affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that
this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order JO 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO GA D Atlanta, GA [Amended]

DeKalb-Peachtree Airport, GA
    (Lat. 33[deg]52'34'' N, long. 84[deg]18'07'' W)
Dobbins ARB
    (Lat. 33[deg]54'52'' N, long. 84[deg]30'51'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,500 feet MSL within a 4-mile radius of DeKalb-Peachtree Airport,
excluding the airspace that borders the Dobbins ARB Class D airspace
extension to the southeast. This Class D airspace area is effective
during the specific dates and times established in advance by a
Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will

thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

ASO GA D Atlanta, GA [Amended]

Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field, GA
    (Lat. 33[deg]46'45'' N, long. 84[deg]31'17'' W)
Dobbins ARB
    (Lat. 33[deg]54'52'' N, long. 84[deg]30'51'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,300 feet MSL within a 4-mile radius of Fulton County Executive
Airport/Charlie Brown Field; excluding the portion north of a line
connecting the 2 points of intersection with a 5.5-mile radius
circle centered on Dobbins ARB.

ASO GA D Marietta, GA [Amended]

Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field, GA
    (Lat. 34[deg]00'47'' N, long. 84[deg]35'49'' W)
Dobbins ARB
    (Lat. 33[deg]54'52'' N, long. 84[deg]30'51'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,500 feet MSL within a 4-mile radius of Cobb County International
Airport/McCollum Field, GA, excluding that airspace southeast of a
line connecting the 2 points of intersection with a 5.5-mile radius
centered on Dobbins ARB. This Class D airspace area is effective
during the specific dates and times established in advance by a
Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be
continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

ASO GA D Marietta, GA [Amended]

Dobbins ARB, GA
    (Lat. 33[deg]54'52'' N, long. 84[deg]30'51'' W)
Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field
    (Lat. 34[deg]00'47'' N, long. 84[deg]35'49'' W)
Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field
    (Lat. 33[deg]46'45'' N, long. 84[deg]31'17'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,600 feet MSL within a 5.5-mile radius of Dobbins ARB and within
1.7 miles each side of the 289[deg] bearing and the 109[deg] bearing
from the Dobbins ARB, extending from the 5.5-mile radius to 6.9
miles east and west of the airport; excluding that airspace
northwest of a line connecting the 2 points of intersection with a
4-mile radius centered on Cobb County International Airport/McCollum
Field, and the 5.5-mile radius of Dobbins ARB, and also excluding
that airspace south of a line connecting the 2 points of
intersection with the 4-mile radius centered on Fulton County
Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field. This Class D airspace area is
effective during the specific dates and times established in advance
by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter
be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Surface Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO GA E2 Atlanta [Amended]

Dekalb-Peachtree Airport, GA
    (Lat. 33[deg]52'34'' N, long. 84[deg]18'07'' W)

    That airspace within a 4-mile radius of the Dekalb-Peachtree
Airport.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to Class
D.

* * * * *

ASO GA E4 Atlanta [New]

Dekalb-Peachtree Airport, GA
    (Lat. 33[deg]52'34'' N, long. 84[deg]18'07'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1 mile
each side of the Dekalb-Peachtree Airport 206[deg] and 021[deg]
bearings from the airport, extending from the 4-mile radius of
Dekalb-Peachtree Airport to 7.7 miles southwest and northeast of the
airport.

ASO GA E4 Atlanta, GA [New]

Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field, GA
    (Lat. 33[deg]46'45'' N, long. 84[deg]31'17'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1 mile
each side of the Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field
260[deg] and 080[deg] bearings from the airport, extending from the
4-mile radius of Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field
to 7.2 miles west and east of the airport.

ASO GA E4 Marietta, GA [New]

Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field, GA
    (Lat. 34[deg]00'47'' N, long. 84[deg]35'49'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface from the 4-mile
radius of the Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field to
the 8.4-mile radius of the airport; clockwise from the 255[deg]
bearing to the 303[deg] bearing from the airport and within 1 mile
each side of the Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field
089[deg] bearing extending from the 4-mile radius to 8.4 miles east
of the airport excluding that portion within the Dobbins ARB, GA
Class D airspace area.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASO GA E5 Atlanta, GA [Amended]

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, GA
    (Lat. 33[deg]38'12'' N, long. 84[deg]25'40'' W)
Dobbins ARB
    (Lat. 33[deg]54'52'' N, long. 84[deg]30'51'' W)
Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field
    (Lat. 33[deg]46'45'' N, long. 84[deg]31'17'' W)
Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field
    (Lat. 34[deg]00'47'' N, long. 84[deg]35'49'' W)
Dekalb-Peachtree Airport
    (Lat. 33[deg]52'34'' N, long. 84[deg]18'07'' W)
Point of Origin
    (Lat. 33[deg]37'45'' N, long. 84[deg]26'06'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 12-mile radius of the Point of Origin and within a 9.7-mile
radius of Fulton County Executive Airport/Charlie Brown Field and
within an 8-mile radius of Dobbins ARB and within a 10.9-mile radius
of Cobb County International Airport/McCollum Field, and within a
10.2-mile radius of Dekalb-Peachtree Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on March 9, 2022.
Matthew N. Cathcart,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, AJV-E2.
[FR Doc. 2022-05279 Filed 3-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: February 24, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 36)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 8261-8266]
[DOCID:fr24fe10-10]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0885; FRL-8810-3]

Flumioxazin; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
flumioxazin in or on vegetable, cucurbit, group 9; leaf petioles
subgroup 4B; and hop, dried cones. This regulation additionally deletes
the existing tolerances on almond and melon, subgroup 9A, as they will
be superseded by inclusion in tree nut group 14 and cucurbit vegetable
group 9, respectively. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4)
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective February 24, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 26, 2010, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0885. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at http://
www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (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 in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Nollen, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those
engaged in the following activities:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by
this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. 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 Electronic Access to Other Related Information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR cite at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr. To
access the OPPTS harmonized test guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go to http://www.epa.gov/oppts and select ``Test
Methods and Guidelines.''

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0885 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be
mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk as required by 40 CFR part 178
on or before April 26, 2010.
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit this copy, identified by docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0885, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Petition for Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of April 13, 2009 (74 FR 16866) (FRL-8396-
6), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
8E7462) by IR-4, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ
08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.568 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide flumioxazin, 2-
[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2 H -1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-
4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1 H -isoindole-1,3(2 H )-dione, in or on vegetable,
cucurbit, group 9 at 0.03 parts per million (ppm); leaf petioles,
subgroup 4B at 0.02 ppm; and hop, dried cones at 0.07 ppm. The petition
additionally requested that EPA revoke the existing tolerance on
almonds, as a tolerance on nut, tree, group 14 has been established;
and requested that EPA delete the existing tolerance for melon subgroup
9A,

because it will be replaced by the proposed tolerance for vegetable,
cucurbit, group 9. That notice referenced a summary of the petition
prepared on behalf of IR-4 by Valent U.S.A. Corporation, the
registrant, which is available to the public in the docket, http://
www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the proposed tolerance on hop, dried cones. The reason for this
change is explained in Unit IV.C.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.''
    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for
tolerances for residues of flumioxazin on vegetable, cucurbit, group 9
at 0.03 ppm; leaf petioles subgroup 4B at 0.02 ppm; and hop, dried
cones at 0.05 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated
with establishing tolerances follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    Flumioxazin has mild or no acute toxicity when administered via the
oral, dermal and inhalation routes of exposure. It has little or no
toxicity with respect to eye or skin irritation and is not a dermal
sensitizer. Subchronic and chronic toxicity studies demonstrated that
the key toxic effects associated with flumioxazin include anemia and
impacts on the liver and the cardiovascular system. Hematologic
(hematopoietic) effects of anemia were noted in rats, including
alterations in hemoglobin parameters. Increased absolute and relative
liver weights and/or increased alkaline phosphatase values were
observed in dogs.
    There was no evidence (quantitative or qualitative) of
susceptibility following in-utero oral exposure in rabbits.
Developmental studies in the rat resulted in cardiovascular anomalies,
including ventricular septal defects. In the two-generation
reproduction study, systemic effects (clinical signs and mortality as
well as a decrease in body weight/gain and food consumption) were noted
in males and females; more severe offspring effects (decrease in the
number of live born and decreased pup body weights) were noted at lower
doses than that which resulted in parental effects.
    None of the acute, subchronic, chronic, developmental or
reproduction studies indicated an effect on the nervous systems. Based
on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in mice and rats,
flumioxazin is classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans.'' Flumioxazin did not induce significant increases in any tumor
type in either rats or mice under the conditions of the studies, and it
did not induce any mutagenic activity in the required battery of
mutgenicity studies.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by flumioxazin as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://
www.regulations.gov in the document ``Flumioxazin. Human Health Risk
Assessment for the Proposed Aquatic Use and Proposed Food Uses on
Cucurbit Vegetables, Leaf Petioles, and Hops,'' at pages 58-62 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0885.

B. Toxicological Endpoints

    For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, a toxicological point of departure (POD) is
identified as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk
assessment. The POD may be defined as the highest dose at which no
adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) in the toxicology study
identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment. However, if a
NOAEL cannot be determined, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of
concern are identified (the LOAEL) or a benchmark dose (BMD) approach
is sometimes used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs)
are used in conjunction with the POD to take into account uncertainties
inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and
in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population
as well as other unknowns. Safety is assessed for acute and chronic
dietary risks by comparing aggregate food and water exposure to the
pesticide to the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic
population adjusted dose (cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are calculated by
dividing the POD by all applicable UFs. Aggregate short-, intermediate-
, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing food, water, and
residential exposure to the POD to ensure that the margin of exposure
(MOE) called for by the product of all applicable UFs is not exceeded.
This latter value is referred to as the level of concern (LOC).
    For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of
exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates
risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect
greater than that expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/
pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for flumioxazin used for
human risk assessment can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in the
document ``Flumioxazin. Human Health Risk Assessment for the Proposed
Aquatic Use and Proposed Food Uses on Cucurbit Vegetables, Leaf
Petioles, and Hops,'' at pages 26-28 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2008-0885.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to flumioxazin, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing flumioxazin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.568. EPA assessed dietary exposures from flumioxazin in food as
follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments

are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has
indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result
of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effect was identified for the
general population. However, EPA identified potential acute effects
(cardiovascular effects in offspring) for the population subgroup,
females 13 to 49 years old.
    In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996
and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals
(CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA used tolerance-level
residues, Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM) default processing
factors for all processed commodities (with the exception of tomato,
which used the empirical processing factor of 1x), and assumed 100
percent crop treated (PCT) for all proposed commodities.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA used tolerance-level
residues, DEEM default processing factors for all processed commodities
(with the exception of tomato, which used the empirical processing
factor of 1x), and assumed 100 PCT for all proposed commodities.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in
two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies, EPA has classified
flumioxazin as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.'' Therefore,
a quantitative exposure assessment to evaluate cancer risk is
unnecessary.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary
assessment for flumioxazin. Tolerance level residues or 100 PCT were
assumed for all food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. A hydrolysis study for
flumioxazin indicates that flumioxazin forms the metabolite 482-HA,
which can further hydrolyze into the metabolites APF and THPA. The
rates of the two hydrolytic reactions are very pH dependent, but
flumioxaxin is not very stable at any likely environmental pH. Data
also indicates that THPA and APF are likely to be very mobile. Although
THPA can comprise a major portion of the total residue in water, it
does not possess a phenyl ring and is thus considered significantly
less toxic than flumioxazin, APF, and 482-HA. For this reason, THPA has
not been included as a residue of concern in drinking water. Therefore,
the residues of concern in drinking water are flumioxazin and its 482-
HA and APF degradates. The Agency used screening level water exposure
models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for
flumioxazin and its degradates of concern in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and
fate/transport characteristics of flumioxazin and its degradates of
concern. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used
in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) model,
the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of flumioxazin,
482-HA and APF for acute exposures are estimated to be 1.03 parts per
billion (ppb), 6.87 ppb, and 26.46 ppb, respectively, for surface
water. For chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments, the EDWCs of
482-HA and APF are estimated to be 4.84 ppb and 12.85 ppb,
respectively, for surface water. Based on the Screening Concentration
in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) model, for both acute and chronic (non-
cancer) exposures, the EDWCs of 482-HA and APF are estimated to be
45.27 ppb and 2.66 ppb, respectively, for ground water. EDWCs of
flumioxazin are estimated to be negligible in ground water for acute
exposures and in both surface and ground water for chronic exposures.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. The EDWC of 48 ppb (0.048
ppm), the total EDWC for flumioxazin residues in groundwater (including
flumioxazin, 482-HA, and APF), was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water for both the acute and chronic dietary risk assessments.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
    Flumioxazin is currently registered for use in the following areas
that could result in residential exposures: Walkways, parking lots and
non-grassy areas around residential dwellings. EPA assessed residential
exposure using the following assumptions: Short-term dermal and
inhalation exposure to adult handlers resulting from the use of
flumioxazin within residential settings. For the above use sites, no
postapplication exposure to adults or children from flumioxazin is
expected.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found flumioxazin to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and flumioxazin does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
flumioxazin does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at http://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA SF. In
applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X,
or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable data
available to EPA support the choice of a different factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal
toxicology database for flumioxazin includes rat and rabbit prenatal
developmental toxicity studies and a two-generation reproduction
toxicity study in rats. There is no evidence of increased
susceptibility following in-utero oral exposure in rabbits; however,
there is evidence of increased quantitative susceptibility of rat
fetuses to in utero exposure to flumioxazin in the oral and dermal
developmental studies. In both studies, there was an increased
incidence in fetal cardiovascular anomalies (including ventricular
septal defects) in the absence of maternal toxicity. Additionally,
quantitative susceptibility was observed in the two-

generation rat reproduction study, in which offspring effects (decrease
in the number of live born and decreased pup body weights) were
observed at lower doses than those which caused parental/systemic
toxicity (red substance in vagina and increased mortality in females as
well as decreases in male and female body weights, body weight gains
and food consumption).
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for flumioxazin is complete except for
immunotoxicity, acute neurotoxicity, and subchronic neurotoxicity
testing. Recent changes to 40 CFR part 158 make acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity testing (OPPTS Guideline 870.6200), and immunotoxicity
testing (OPPTS Guideline 870.7800) required for pesticide registration;
however, the existing data are sufficient for endpoint selection for
exposure/risk assessment scenarios, and for evaluation of the
requirements under the FQPA.
    The available data for flumioxazin do not show the potential for
neurotoxic effects. In the subchronic and chronic toxicity studies,
signs of anemia (a potential immunotoxic effect) were observed. In the
rat, hematologic (hematopoietic) effects of anemia were noted,
including alterations in hemoglobin parameters. Flumioxazin is a
protporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) inhibitor, which inhibits the
biosynthesis of chlorophyll in plants (giving flumioxazin its weed-
control properties). In animals, PPO is responsible for one of the
later steps in heme synthesis; therefore, the inhibition of PPO results
in anemia. Although anemia can potentially be considered an immunotoxic
effect, in this case it's likely the anemia is due to the inhibited
heme formation (which can interfere with the porphyrin component of
heme, a hematopoietic effect resulting in anemia), and the blood
effects are not considered to be the result of potential immunotoxicity
in this case. Thus, EPA has concluded that flumioxazin does not
directly impact the nervous system or directly target the immune
system. The Agency does not believe that conducting a functional
immunotoxicity study will result in a NOAEL lower than the regulatory
dose for risk assessment; therefore, an additional database uncertainty
factor is not needed to account for potential immunotoxicity or
neurotoxicity.
    ii. There is no indication that flumioxazin is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is evidence of increased quantitative susceptibility of
the young following exposure to flumioxazin in the oral and dermal
developmental toxicity studies in the rat and in the two-generation rat
reproduction study; therefore, a degree of concern analysis was
performed to determine the level of concern for the effects observed
when considered in the context of all available toxicity data and to
identify any residual concerns after establishing toxicity endpoints
and traditional UFs to be used in the flumioxazin risk assessment. In
considering the overall toxicity profile and the endpoints and doses
selected for the flumioxazin risk assessment, EPA characterized the
degree of concern for the susceptibility observed in the rat
developmental and two-generation reproductive studies as low and
determined that there are no residual uncertainties for prenatal and/or
postnatal toxicity because:
    a. The only missing toxicity data for flumioxazin are the newly
required neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies; however, no
additional UF is needed in the absence of these studies because there
is no evidence to indicate that flumioxazin targets the nervous system
or the immune system. Further, EPA has concluded that a developmental
neurotoxicity study is not required.
    b. There are clear NOAELs and LOAELs for the developmental and
offspring effects noted in the rat developmental toxicity and two-
generation reproductive toxicity studies, and the doses and endpoints
have been selected from these studies for risk assessment for the
relevant exposed populations, i.e., pregnant females and children (with
the exception of the chronic dietary endpoint, for which a chronic
study was chosen for endpoint selection).
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on conservative assumptions, including 100 PCT data and tolerance-level
residues. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground
and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to flumioxazin in
drinking water. Postapplication exposure to children is not expected.
These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed
by flumioxazin.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the aPAD and cPAD.
The aPAD and cPAD represent the highest safe exposures, taking into
account all appropriate SFs. EPA calculates the aPAD and cPAD by
dividing the POD by all applicable UFs. For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the probability of additional cancer cases given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the POD to ensure that the MOE called for
by the product of all applicable UFs is not exceeded.
    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to flumioxazin will occupy 9% of the aPAD for females 13 to 49 years
old, the population subgroup where a potential acute risk was
identified.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
flumioxazin from food and water will utilize 19% of the cPAD for
children less than 1 year old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
flumioxazin is not expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
    Flumioxazin is currently registered for uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure and the Agency has determined that it
is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water
with short-term residential exposures to flumioxazin. Using the
exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-term exposures,
EPA has concluded that the combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of 2,400 or
greater. As the aggregate MOEs for short-term exposure are greater than
100 (the LOC) for all exposure scenarios, short-term aggregate
exposures to flumioxazin are not of concern to EPA.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic

exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). Flumioxazin is not registered for any use patterns that would
result in intermediate-term residential exposure. Therefore, the
intermediate-term aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from exposure
to flumioxazin through food and water, which has already been
addressed, and will not be greater than the chronic aggregate risk.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, flumioxazin is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to flumioxazin residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    The following adequate enforcement methodology is available to
enforce the tolerance expression: A gas chromatography/nitrogen-
phosphorus detection (GC/NPD) method. The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    There are no Codex, Canadian or Mexican maximum residue limits
established for residues of flumioxazin on commodities associated with
this petition.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    Based on analysis of the residue field trial data supporting the
petition, EPA revised the proposed tolerance on hop, dried cones from
0.07 ppm to 0.05 ppm. EPA revised this tolerance level based on
analysis of the residue field trial data using the Agency's Tolerance
Spreadsheet in accordance with the Agency's Guidance for Setting
Pesticide Tolerances Based on Field Trial Data. EPA has also revised
the introductory text in Sec.  180.568 to clarify in the tolerance
expression: (1) That, as provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the
tolerance covers metabolites and degradates of flumioxazin not
specifically mentioned; and (2) that compliance with the specified
tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only the specific
compounds mentioned in the tolerance expression.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of flumioxazin,
2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H -1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-
4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione, in or on vegetable,
cucurbit, group 9 at 0.03 ppm; leaf petioles subgroup 4B at 0.02 ppm;
and hop, dried cones at 0.05 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 1, 2010.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. Section 180.568 is amended in paragraph (a) by revising the
introductory text, removing the entries for ``Almond'' and ``Melon,
subgroup 9A'' from the table; and by alphabetically adding ``Hop, dried
cones''; ``Leaf petioles subgroup 4B''; and ``Vegetable, cucurbit,
group 9'' to the table to read as follows:

Sec.  180.568  Flumioxazin; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * * Tolerances are established for residues of flumioxazin,
2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-
4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table
below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is to be
determined by measuring only flumioxazin.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Parts per
                        Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
Hop, dried cones........................................            0.05
Leaf petioles subgroup 4B...............................            0.02
                                * * * * *
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9............................            0.03
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2010-3166 Filed 2-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register: December 18, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 242)]
[Notices]
[Page 71735-71736]
[DOCID:fr18de07-94]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Office of Hazardous Materials Safety; Notice of Application for
Special Permits

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: List of Applications for Special Permits.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations (49 CFR part 107,
subpart B), notice is hereby given that the Office of Hazardous
Materials Safety has received the application described herein. Each
mode of transportation for which a particular special permit is
requested is indicated by a number in the ``Nature of Application''
portion of the table below as follows: 1--Motor vehicle, 2--Rail
freight, 3--Cargo vessel, 4--Cargo aircraft only, 5--Passenger-carrying
aircraft.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 17, 2008.
    Address Comments To: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC 20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copies of the applications are
available for inspection in the Records Center, East Building, PHH-30,
1200 New Jersey Avenue Southeast, Washington, DC or at http://dms.dot.gov
.

    This notice of receipt of applications for special permit is
published in accordance with Part 107 of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 12, 2007.
Delmer F. Billings,
Director, Office of Hazardous Materials, Special Permits and Approvals.

                                               New Special Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Regulation(s)         Nature of special
   Application No.          Docket No.             Applicant             affected            permits thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14613-N.............  ......................  Valero St. Charles,  49 CFR Subpart C of  To authorize the
                                               Norco, LA.           Part 172.            transportation in
                                                                                commerce of certain
                                                                                hazardous materials
                                                                                without shipping paper
                                                                                documentation when
                                                                                transported across
                                                                                public roads within the
                                                                                Valero facility. (mode
                                                                                1)
14614-N.............  ......................  Great Lakes          49 CFR.............  To authorize the
                                               Chemicals                                 transportation in
                                               Corporation, West                         commerce of non-DOT
                                               Lafayette, IN.                            specification cylinders
                                                                                manufactured in the
                                                                                U.S. for export with
                                                                                valving and relief
                                                                                device requirements of
                                                                                the country that the
                                                                                cylinders will be
                                                                                exported to for use in
                                                                                transporting various
                                                                                compressed gases.
                                                                                (modes 1, 3)

14615-N.............  ......................  SET Environmental    49 CFR 173.244.....  To authorize the one-
                                               Inc., Houston, TX.                        time, one-way
                                                                                transportation in
                                                                                commerce of three
                                                                                irregularly shaped
                                                                                sodium dispersion
                                                                                vessels in alternative
                                                                                packaging. (mode 1)
14616-N.............  ......................  Chlorine Service     49 CFR 178.245-1(a)  To authorize the
                                               Company, Kingwood,                        manufacture, marking,
                                               TX.                                       sale and use of certain
                                                                                DOT Specification 51
                                                                                steel portable tanks or
                                                                                UN steel portable tanks
                                                                                conforming with Section
                                                                                VIII, Division 2 of the
                                                                                ASME Code instead of
                                                                                Section VIII, Division
                                                                                1, for the
                                                                                transportation in
                                                                                commerce of Division
                                                                                2.1 and 2.2 materials.
                                                                                (modes 1, 2, 3)
14617-N.............  ......................  Western              49 CFR 172.203(a),   To authorize the
                                               International Gas    172.301(c),          transportation in
                                               & Cylinders, Inc.,   180.205(f)(4),       commerce of certain
                                               Bellville, TX.       180.205(g),          compressed gases in DOT
                                                                    180.209(a).          specification 3A and
                                                                                3AA cylinders when
                                                                                retested by 100 percent
                                                                                ultrasonic examination
                                                                                and external visual
                                                                                inspection in lieu of
                                                                                internal visual
                                                                                inspection and the
                                                                                hydrostatic retest.
                                                                                (modes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
14618-N.............  ......................  Carrier Transicold,  49 CFR               To authorize the use
                                               Athens, GA.          177.834(1)(2)(i).    cargo heaters in a
                                                                                motor vehicle when
                                                                                transporting flammable
                                                                                liquids or flammable
                                                                                gases in commerce.
                                                                                (mode 1)
14619-N.............  ......................  EXEA Corporation,    49 CFR 179.13......  To authorize the
                                               Dallas, TX.                               transportation in
                                                                                commerce of DOT
                                                                                Specification 105S100W
                                                                                tank cars having a
                                                                                maximum gross weight on
                                                                                rail of 286,000 pounds.
                                                                                (mode 2)
14620-N.............  ......................  Air Products and     49 CFR 177.834(h)..  To authorize filling and
                                               Chemicals, Inc.,                          discharging of a DOT
                                               Allentown, PA.                            Specification 4L
                                                                                cylinder with certain
                                                                                Division 2.2 compressed
                                                                                gases without removal
                                                                                from the transport
                                                                                vehicle. (mode 1)
14621-N.............  ......................  Beijing Tianhai      49 CFR 173.302a and  To authorize the
                                               Industry Co.,        180.205.             manufacture, mark,
                                               Ltd., Beijing.                            sale, and use of non-
                                                                                DOT specification fully
                                                                                wrapped carbon-fiber
                                                                                reinforced aluminum
                                                                                lined cylinders. (modes
                                                                                1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
14622-N.............  ......................  Occidental Chemical  49 CFR 179.15(e)...  To authorize the
                                               Corporation,                              transportation in
                                               Dallas, TX.                               commerce of certain DOT
                                                                                specification 105J500W
                                                                                tank cars containing
                                                                                Chlorine that do not
                                                                                meet the start-to-
                                                                                discharge requirements
                                                                                for pressure relief
                                                                                devices. (mode 2)
14623-N.............  ......................  Formulated           49 CFR               To authorize the
                                               Solutions,           173.306(a)(3)(v).    manufacture, marking,
                                               Clearwater, FL.                           sale and use of a bag-
                                                                                on-valve container for
                                                                                the transportation of
                                                                                non-flammable aerosols
                                                                                which have been tested
                                                                                by an alternative
                                                                                method in lieu of the
                                                                                hot water bath test.
                                                                                (modes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 07-6078 Filed 12-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4909-60-M


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 34886]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11517]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4682-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

Washington; 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 State of Washington (FEMA-4682-DR), dated January 12, 2023, and
related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on March 27, 2023.

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 Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Andrew P.
Meyer, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer
for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of David R. Gervino as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    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.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-11517 Filed 5-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P