[Federal Register: July 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 133)]
[Notices]
[Page 40026-40027]
[DOCID:fr13jy10-137]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance from certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

City of Mishawaka, Indiana

[Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-2010-0110]

    The City of Mishawaka, IN (City), and the Norfolk Southern
Corporation (NS) jointly seek a temporary waiver of compliance from
certain provisions of the Use of Locomotive Horns at Highway-Rail Grade
Crossings, 49 CFR part 222. The City intends to establish a Pre-Rule
Quiet Zone that it had previously continued under the provisions of 49
CFR 222.41(c)(1). The City is seeking a waiver for the requirement to
construct and complete a Pre-Rule Quiet Zone by June 24, 2010, as
required by 49 CFR 222.41(c)(2), and for an extension of such date to
October 31, 2010.
    There are 19 crossings in the existing Pre-Rule Quiet Zone
extending from Elder Road (MP 429.21) to Russell Avenue (MP 434.21) on
the NS Dearborn Division, Chicago Line Subdivision. 3 of these
crossings will be treated with Supplementary Safety Measures (SSM) and
Alternative Safety Measures (ASM) as follows: 1 crossing closure (SSM),
1 crossing with gates and traffic channelization devices (SSM), and 1
crossing with a modified SSM consisting of gates and channelization
(ASM). The 2 SSMs will be completed by June 24, 2010, and the ASM will
be completed within 45 working days of receipt of the ASM approval from
FRA. In the future, 2 other crossings will be modified as part of an
Indiana Department of Transportation project resulting in 1 grade
separation and 1 closure. The City requests that the existing Pre-Rule
Quiet Zone be allowed to continue until October 31, 2010, by which time
the 2 SSMs and 1 ASM improvements will have been completed.
    The City states that it has had its pre-rule quiet zone since 1974,
and that its residents and others have become accustomed to its
existence. It asserts

that the proposed extension would not pose any additional risk to
public health or safety. There have been only 2 crossing collisions
involving property damage at the Russell Avenue crossing over the past
11 years. The City also notes that it has worked diligently since the
final rule was released in 2005, to take the necessary steps to retain
its pre-rule quiet zone. This includes the retaining of a consulting
firm to assist with the project and to ensure compliance with all
regulatory requirements. Throughout the process, the City and NS have
worked diligently and cooperatively to implement this project. The City
and NS are requesting that the June 24, 2010, deadline be extended to
October 31, 2010, so that the Pre-Rule Quiet Zone can remain
consistently active.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
2010-0110) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington DC. 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the
document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in
the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70;
Page 19477) or at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 7, 2010.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2010-17026 Filed 7-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 14, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56259-56264]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19778]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0398; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-00881-T;
Amendment 39-22085; AD 2022-12-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-1A11 (600), CL-600-2A12 (601),
and CL-600-2B16 (601-3A and 601-3R Variants) airplanes. This AD was
prompted by reports that during certain operating modes, the flight
guidance/autopilot does not account for engine failure while capturing
an altitude. This AD requires revising the existing airplane flight
manual (AFM) to provide the flightcrew with a new limitation and
procedure for operation during certain

flight modes. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective October 19, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 19,
2022.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400
C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email bombardier.com">[email protected]bombardier.com; internet
bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the
internet at regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2022-0398.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0398; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations is
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: Steven Dzierzynski, Aerospace
Engineer, Avionics and Electrical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO
Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone
516-228-7367; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued TCCA AD CF-2020-02, dated February 13,
2020 (TCCA AD CF-2020-02), to correct an unsafe condition for certain
Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-1A11 (600), CL-600-2A12 (601), and CL-
600-2B16 (601-3A, 601-3R, and 604 Variants) airplanes.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier,
Inc., Model CL-600-1A11 (600), CL-600-2A12 (601), and CL-600-2B16 (601-
3A, 601-3R, and 604 Variants) airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on April 11, 2022 (87 FR 21037). The NPRM was prompted
by reports that during certain operating modes, the flight guidance/
autopilot does not account for engine failure while capturing an
altitude. The NPRM proposed to require revising the existing AFM to
provide the flightcrew with a new limitation and procedure for
operation during certain flight modes. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address a possible engine failure during or before a climb while in
ALTSEL, ASEL or ALTS CAP mode, which could cause the airspeed to drop
significantly below the safe operating speed. Prompt crew intervention
may be required to maintain a safe operating speed.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Change to the Applicability

    Since the FAA issued the NPRM, TCCA revised AD CF-2020-02 and
issued TCCA AD CF-2020-02R1, dated August 11, 2022 (TCCA AD CF-2020-
02R1) (also referred to as the MCAI). TCCA stated the applicability was
revised to remove Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variants) as it was determined
that these airplanes do not utilize ALTSEL, ASEL and ALTS CAP modes in
their configurations. TCCA also stated that the AFM references for
these airplanes were removed from the TCCA AD. You may examine the MCAI
in the AD docket on the internet at regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0398.
    The FAA concurs with the change to the applicability because Model
CL-600-2B16 (604 Variants) airplanes are not affected by the identified
unsafe condition. The FAA has revised the applicability of this AD
accordingly. The FAA has also removed the AFM references for these
airplanes from this final rule and revised the Costs of Compliance
paragraph in this final rule to specify there are 123 affected U.S.
airplanes.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
requires adopting this AD as proposed. Except for minor editorial
changes and the changes described previously, this AD is adopted as
proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic
burden on any operator. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued the following service information. This
service information contains a new AFM limitation and procedure for
operation during certain flight modes. These documents are distinct
since they apply to different airplane configurations. These
configurations may include the presence or absence of winglets,
incorporation of service bulletin 601-0300 which introduces an airspeed
limitation placard, and the type of engine installed on the airplane.
     Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Bombardier Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM,
Product Support Publication (PSP) No. 601-1B-1, Revision 85, dated June
16, 2021.
     Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Bombardier
Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1B-1, Revision
85, dated June 16, 2021.
     Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Bombardier Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2B16, AFM, PSP
No. 601A-1-1, Revision 96, dated June 16, 2021.
     Engine Failure in Climb During ASEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Bombardier
Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2B16, AFM, PSP No. 601A-1-1, Revision
96, dated June 16, 2021.
     Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-1A11, AFM, Product
Publication No. 600, Revision A115, dated June 16, 2021.
     Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Normal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-1A11, AFM, Product Publication No. 600,
Revision A115, dated June 16, 2021.
     Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-1A11, AFM, PSP No. 600-1,
Revision 107, dated June 16, 2021.
     Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model

CL-600-1A11, AFM, PSP No. 600-1, Revision 107, dated June 16, 2021.
     Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-
1A, Revision 129, dated June 16, 2021.
     Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1A, Revision 129, dated
June 16, 2021.
     Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-
1A-1, Revision 83, dated June 16, 2021.
     Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1A-1, Revision 83, dated
June 16, 2021.
     Automatic Flight Control System Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-
1B, Revision 87, dated June 16, 2021.
     Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1B, Revision 87, dated
June 16, 2021.
     Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2B16, AFM, PSP No. 601A-
1, Revision 107, dated June 16, 2021.
     Engine Failure in Climb During ASEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-2B16, AFM, PSP No. 601A-1, Revision 107, dated
June 16, 2021.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 123 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85.............................              $0              $85          $10,455
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2022-12-13 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-22085; Docket No. FAA-
2022-0398; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-00881-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective October 19, 2022.

(b) Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs)

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Bombardier, Inc., airplanes, certificated
in any category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this
AD.
    (1) Model CL-600-1A11 (600), serial numbers 1001 through 1085
inclusive.
    (2) Model CL-600-2A12 (601), serial numbers 3001 through 3066
inclusive.
    (3) Model CL-600-2B16 (601-3A and 601-3R Variants), serial
numbers 5001 through 5194 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 22, Auto flight.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports that during certain operating
modes, the flight guidance/autopilot does not account for engine
failure while capturing an altitude. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address a possible engine failure during or before a climb while in
ALTSEL, ASEL or ALTS CAP mode, which could cause the airspeed to
drop significantly below the safe operating speed. Prompt crew
intervention may be required to maintain a safe operating speed.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Revision of the Existing Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the
existing AFM to incorporate the information specified in the
limitation and procedure specified in the applicable AFM specified
in figure 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR14SE22.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR14SE22.004

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight
Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) TCCA AD CF-2020-02R1, dated August 11, 2022, for

related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the
internet at regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2022-0398.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Steven
Dzierzynski, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Electrical Systems
Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Bombardier Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12,
Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), Product Support Publication (PSP) No.
601-1B-1, Revision 85, dated June 16, 2021.
    (ii) Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Bombardier
Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1B-1,
Revision 85, dated June 16, 2021.
    (iii) Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Bombardier Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2B16, AFM,
PSP No. 601A-1-1, Revision 96, dated June 16, 2021.
    (iv) Engine Failure in Climb During ASEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Bombardier
Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2B16, AFM, PSP No. 601A-1-1,
Revision 96, dated June16, 2021.
    (v) Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-1A11, AFM, Product
Publication No. 600, Revision A115, dated June 16, 2021.
    (vi) Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Normal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-1A11, AFM, Product Publication No. 600,
Revision A115, dated June 16, 2021.
    (vii) Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-1A11, AFM, PSP No.
600-1, Revision 107, dated June 16, 2021.
    (viii) Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-1A11, AFM, PSP No. 600-1, Revision 107,
dated June 16, 2021.
    (ix) Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No.
601-1A, Revision 129, dated June 16, 2021.
    Note 1 to paragraph (ix): The page date for page i of the
Limitations Contents specified in the List of Effective Pages of the
Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1A, Revision
129, dated June 16, 2021, is incorrect; the correct page date is
April 16, 2020.
    (x) Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1A, Revision 129,
dated June 16, 2021.
    (xi) Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No.
601-1A-1, Revision 83, dated June 16, 2021.
    Note 2 to paragraph (xi): The page date for page i of the
Limitations Contents specified in the List of Effective Pages of the
Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1A-1,
Revision 83, dated June 16, 2021, is incorrect; the correct page
date is April 16, 2020.
    (xii) Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1A-1, Revision 83,
dated June 16, 2021.
    (xiii) Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No.
601-1B, Revision 87, dated June 16, 2021.
    Note 3 to paragraph (xiii): Page iii of the Limitations Contents
specified in the List of Effective Pages of the Canadair Challenger
Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1B, Revision 87, dated June 16,
2021, does not exist.
    (xiv) Engine Failure in Climb During ALTSEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-2A12, AFM, PSP No. 601-1B, Revision 87,
dated June 16, 2021.
    (xv) Automatic Flight Control System, Systems Limitations,
Limitations, Canadair Challenger Model CL-600-2B16, AFM, PSP No.
601A-1, Revision 107, dated June 16, 2021.
    (xvi) Engine Failure in Climb During ASEL, Airplane Handling
Procedures Following Engine Failure, Abnormal Procedures, Canadair
Challenger Model CL-600-2B16, AFM, PSP No. 601A-1, Revision 107,
dated June 16, 2021.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400
C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email bombardier.com">[email protected]bombardier.com; internet
bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email [email protected], or go to: archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on August 16, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-19778 Filed 9-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 26, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30058-30060]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13627]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0431]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Roy Webster Cross Channel Swim,
Columbia River, Cascade Locks, OR

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary
regulated area for certain waters of the Columbia River. This action is
necessary to provide for the safety of participants and the maritime
public during a cross-channel swim. This proposed rulemaking would
prohibit non-participant persons and vessels from being in the
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Columbia
River or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this
proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before July 26, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2019-0431 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email LCDR Dixon Whitley, Waterways
Management Division, Marine Safety Unit Portland, Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The Roy Webster Cross-Channel Swim is an annual event that has been
running for the last 74 years on the Columbia River in the vicinity of
Hood River, OR occurring on or around Labor Day. Participants are
ferried across the Columbia River from the Hood River Marina to the
Washington shore at the start of the event. Once on the other side, the
participants jump off the ferry and swim back across the river
following a swim lane that is lined with volunteers in sailboats,
kayaks and paddleboards. Approximately 300 swimmers participate in this
event annually. On April 4, 2019, the Hood River Chamber of Commerce
notified the Coast Guard that it will be moving the swim location from
Hood River, OR, to Cascade Locks, OR.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to relocate the regulated area
from Hood River, OR to Cascade Locks, OR to ensure the safety of event
participants, the marine environment and the protection of the
navigable waterway during the scheduled event for 2019. The Coast Guard
is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70041
(previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Thirteenth Coast Guard District Commander is proposing to
establish a regulated area from 5:30 a.m. to noon on September 2, 2019.
As the event consists of participants swimming across the navigable
channel, the Coast Guard feels that it would be necessary to establish
a regulated area that would cover all navigable waters of the Columbia
River between river mile 149 and river mile 151 during the event.
    Since 2017, a regulated area between River Mile 169 and River Mile
170 has been established for this event under 33 CFR 100.1302. Because
the location of the event has been changed for 2019, we will not be
enforcing the Sec.  100.1302 regulations for the Roy Webster Cross
Channel Swim event this year, and instead are issuing this notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish a temporary rule for 2019.
    This NPRM proposes to create a temporary regulated area in the
vicinity of Cascade Locks, OR, rather than Hood River, OR, for this
year's event in accordance with the request of the organizers. The
regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory

alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs
agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This
NPRM has not been designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance
it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, short duration, and the event's long history. Commercial
vessel traffic would be able to transit the area with permission from
the COTP or a designated representative. Moreover, the Coast Guard
would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16
about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to
enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a
regulated area lasting approximately six hours that would prohibit
entry within a specified section of the Columbia River in the vicinity
of Cascade Locks, OR. We seek any comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, visit https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.T13-0431 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T13-0431  Special Local Regulation; Roy Webster Cross Channel
Swim, Columbia River, Cascade Locks, OR.

    (a) Regulated area. These waters are in the in the vicinity of
Cascade Locks, OR on the Columbia River between River Mile 149 and
River Mile 151.
    (b) Effective period. This regulation will be in effect from 5:30
a.m. to noon on September 2, 2019.
    (c) Special Local regulations. (1) Non-participant personnel and
vessels are prohibited from entering the regulated area unless
authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander (PATCOM).
    (2) The Coast Guard may patrol regulated area under the direction
of a designated PATCOM. The PATCOM may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-
FM (156.8 MHz) by the call sign ``PATCOM.'' Official patrol vessels may
consist of any Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or local law
enforcement vessels assigned or approved by the Captain of the Port,
Sector Columbia River.
    (3) PATCOM may control the movement of all vessels in the regulated
area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol vessel, a vessel
shall come to an immediate stop and comply with the lawful directions
issued. Failure to comply with a lawful direction may result in
expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
    (4) PATCOM may delay or terminate the event at any time it is
deemed necessary to ensure the safety of life or property. Such action
may be justified as a result of weather, traffic density, spectator
operation or participant behavior.
    (5) Vessels may not transit the regulated areas without PATCOM
approval. Vessels permitted to transit must operate at a no wake speed,
in a manner which will not endanger participants or other crafts in the
event.
    (6) Spectators or other vessels shall not anchor, block, loiter, or
impede the transit of event participants or official patrol vessels in
the regulated areas during the effective date and time.

D.G. Throop,
RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2019-13627 Filed 6-25-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 126 (Thursday, June 30, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42585-42587]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15474]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 177

[Docket No. FDA-2016-F-1805]

Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc.; Filing of Food Additive
Petition

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of petition.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing
that we have filed a petition, submitted by Keller and Heckman LLP on
behalf of the Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc. (Petitioner or
SPI), requesting that we amend our food additive regulations to no
longer provide for the use of potassium perchlorate as an additive in
closure-sealing gaskets for food containers because this use has been
abandoned.

DATES: The food additive petition was filed on May 11, 2016. Submit
either electronic or written comments by August 29, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2016-F-1805 for ``Filing of Food Additive Petition: Society of the
Plastics Industry, Inc.'' Received comments will be placed in the
docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of
Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions: To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not
wish your name and contact information to be

made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover
sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this
information as ``confidential.'' Any information marked as
``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR
10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about
FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September
18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas C. Zebovitz, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-275), Food and Drug Administration,
5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740-3835,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under section 409(b)(5) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5)), we are giving notice that we have
filed a food additive petition (FAP 6B4816) submitted on behalf of the
Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc. (Petitioner or SPI) by Keller
and Heckman LLP, 1001 G Street NW., Suite 500 West, Washington, DC
20001. The petition proposes that we amend 21 CFR 177.1210 to no longer
provide for the use of potassium perchlorate as an additive in closure-
sealing gaskets for food containers because the use has been
intentionally and permanently abandoned.

II. Abandonment

    Under section 409(i) of the FD&C Act, we ``shall by regulation
prescribe the procedure by which regulations under the foregoing
provisions of this section may be amended or repealed, and such
procedure shall conform to the procedure provided in this section for
the promulgation of such regulations.'' Our regulations specific to
administrative actions for food additives provide that the
Commissioner, on his own initiative or on the petition of any
interested person, under 21 CFR part 10, may propose the issuance of a
regulation amending or repealing a regulation pertaining to a food
additive or granting or repealing an exception for such additive (21
CFR 171.130(a)). These regulations further provide that any such
petition shall include an assertion of facts, supported by data,
showing that new information exists with respect to the food additive
or that new uses have been developed or old uses abandoned, that new
data are available as to toxicity of the chemical, or that experience
with the existing regulation or exemption may justify its amendment or
repeal. New data must be furnished in the form specified in 21 CFR
171.1 and 171.100 for submitting petitions (21 CFR 171.130(b)). Under
these regulations, a petitioner may propose that we amend a food
additive regulation if the petitioner can demonstrate that there are
``old uses abandoned'' for the relevant food additive. Such abandonment
must be complete for any intended uses in the U.S. market. While
section 409 of the FD&C Act and Sec.  171.130 also provide for amending
or revoking a food additive regulation based on safety, an amendment or
revocation based on abandonment is not based on safety, but is based on
the fact that regulatory authorization is no longer necessary because
the use of the food additive has been abandoned.
    Abandonment may be based on the abandonment of certain authorized
food additive uses for a substance (e.g., if a substance is no longer
used in certain product categories), or on the abandonment of all
authorized food additive uses of a substance (e.g., if a substance is
no longer being manufactured). If a petition seeks an amendment to a
food additive regulation based on the abandonment of certain uses of
the food additive, such uses must be adequately defined so that both
the scope of the abandonment and any amendment to the food additive
regulation are clear.
    The SPI petition includes the following information to support the
claim that the use of potassium perchlorate as an additive in closure-
sealing gaskets for food containers has been abandoned in the U.S.
market. The petition states that three of the four companies that filed
the food additive petitions that resulted in the listing for potassium
perchlorate in 21 CFR 177.1210 are still operating, and that the fourth
company is no longer in business. The Petitioner polled the three
companies about their use of potassium perchlorate in closure-sealing
gaskets for food containers asking them to verify that they do not: (1)
Currently manufacture potassium perchlorate for use as a component of
closures with sealing gaskets for food containers in the United States;
(2) currently import potassium perchlorate for use as a component of
closures with sealing gaskets for food containers in the United States;
(3) intend to manufacture or import potassium perchlorate for use as a
component of closures with sealing gaskets for food containers in the
United States in the future; or (4) currently maintain any inventory of
potassium perchlorate for sale or distribution into commerce that is
intended to be marketed for use as a component of closures with sealing
gaskets for food containers in the United States. The petition includes
signed letters from the three companies confirming agreement to these
four points.
    The petition also includes a signed letter from American Pacific
Corporation, Western Electrochemical Company (AMPAC), which the
Petitioner states is the sole domestic manufacturer of potassium
perchlorate in the United States. The letter states that AMPAC does not
manufacture, import, or maintain any inventory of potassium perchlorate
for sale or distribution into commerce into the food-contact market for
use in closure-sealing gaskets for food containers in the United
States.
    The petition also asserts that SPI surveyed the member companies
that make up SPI's Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Packaging Materials
Committee (FDCPMC). According to the petition, no FDCPMC member company
responded that it had any knowledge or reason to believe that potassium
perchlorate was being manufactured, used, distributed, or imported into
the United States for use in the manufacture of closures with sealing
gaskets for food-contact applications. The petition also states that
SPI has been unable to identify any company with records indicating
that potassium perchlorate was actually used as a component of closure-
sealing gaskets for food containers.
    A supplement to the petition, dated May 16, 2016, asserts that SPI
contacted all known U.S.-based manufacturers of gaskets for food-
contact applications, which the Petitioner asserts constitute the
substantial majority, if not all of such manufacturers. The supplement
asserts that each company indicated to SPI that it does not continue to
use potassium perchlorate in the manufacture of gaskets for food-
contact materials.
    We expressly request comments on the Petitioner's request to amend
21 CFR 177.1210 of the food additive regulations to no longer permit
the use

of potassium perchlorate in closure-sealing gaskets used for food
containers. As noted, the basis for the proposed amendment is that the
use of potassium perchlorate in closure-sealing gaskets for food
containers has been permanently and completely abandoned. Accordingly,
we request comments that address whether this use of potassium
perchlorate has been completely abandoned, such as information on
whether closure-sealing gaskets containing potassium perchlorate are
currently being introduced or delivered for introduction into the U.S.
market. We are not aware of information that suggests continued use of
potassium perchlorate as a component of closure-sealing gaskets in
contact with food.
    We are providing the public with 60 days to submit comments. We
anticipate that some interested persons may wish to provide FDA with
certain information they consider to be trade secret or confidential
commercial information (CCI) that would be exempt under Exemption 4 of
the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Interested persons may
claim information that is submitted to FDA as CCI or trade secret by
clearly marking both the document and the specific information as
``confidential.'' Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and our
disclosure regulations (21 CFR part 20). For electronic submissions to
http://www.regulations.gov, indicate in the ``comments'' box of the
appropriate docket that your submission contains confidential
information. Interested persons must also submit a copy of the comment
that does not contain the information claimed as confidential for
inclusion in the public version of the official record. Information not
marked confidential will be included in the public version of the
official record without prior notice.
    We are not requesting comments on the safety of the use of
potassium perchlorate in closure-sealing gaskets for food containers
because such information is not relevant to abandonment, which is the
basis of the proposed action. We will not consider any comments
addressing the safety of potassium perchlorate or containing safety
information on this substance in our evaluation of this petition. In
addition to our consideration of this petition, we are considering
information on the safety of potassium perchlorate as an additive in
closure-sealing gaskets for food containers as part of our
consideration of a petition designated for reference as FAP 4B4808 (see
80 FR 13508 (March 16, 2015)). We have determined under 21 CFR 25.32(m)
that this action is of a type that does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental
impact statement is required.

    Dated: June 24, 2016.
Dennis M. Keefe,
Director, Office of Food Additive Safety, Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 2016-15474 Filed 6-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 10668]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03697]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 349-207]

Alabama Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing
and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Non-capacity amendment to replace turbine
runner.
    b. Project No.: 349-207.
    c. Date Filed: December 17, 2019.
    d. Applicant: Alabama Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Martin Dam Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Tallapoosa River in
Tallapoosa, Elmore, and Coosa counties, Alabama.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. James F. Crew, 600 North 18th Street,
Birmingham, AL 35203,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Steven Sachs,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests
is 30 days from the issuance of this notice by the Commission. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments,
motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's eFiling
system at 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/doc-sfiling/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>(866) 208-3676 (toll
free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please
send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing
should include docket number P-349-207.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person on the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: The applicant proposes to install a new
turbine runner, wicket gate assembly, and related components at unit
no. 4. The new equipment would not increase the hydraulic capacity of
the project but would increase the installed capacity by approximately
5 megawatts.
    l. Locations of the Applications: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. The filing may also be viewed on
the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Motions to Intervene, or Protests: Anyone may submit
comments, a motion to intervene, or a protest in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, motions to
intervene, or protests must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``MOTION TO
INTERVENE'', or ``PROTEST'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading
the name of the applicant and the project number(s) of the application
to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and
telephone number of the person intervening or protesting; and (4)
otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through
385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set
forth their evidentiary basis. A copy of all other filings in reference
to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all
persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2010.

    Dated: February 19, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-03697 Filed 2-24-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 11, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75291-75293]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29513]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-1025; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-096-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC-8-102, -103, and -106 airplanes;
and DHC-8-200 and DHC-8-300 series airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by a report of a beta warning horn (BWH) system failing to
activate when the beta mode was triggered. This proposed AD would
require modifying the BWH microswitch installation. We are proposing
this AD to prevent the inadvertent activation of ground beta mode
during flight, which could lead to engine overspeed, engine damage or
failure, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 27,
2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard,
Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 416-375-
4539; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent Fredrickson, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion and Flight Test Branch, ANE-173, FAA; New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2013-1025;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-096-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2012-01R1, dated March 6, 2013 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:
* * * * *
    During an on-ground Beta Warning Horn (BWH) system check
conducted in the wake of an in-flight Beta range operation incident
on a DHC-8 Series 200 aeroplane, it was discovered that the BWH
system failed to activate when the Beta mode was triggered.
    An investigation by Bombardier had determined that the
deformation of the flexible center console cover could cause the BWH
system triggering microswitch to malfunction, resulting in dormant
failure of the BWH system. To mitigate the safety risk by minimizing
the risk exposure period, [TCCA] * * * mandate[d] a 50 hours
periodic operational test of the BWH system functionality.
    To address the root cause of the subject problem, Bombardier has
issued Service Bulletin (SB) 8-76-33 that modifies the BWH
microswitch installation by replacing the BWH microswitch attachment
bracket with a new, more robust bracket that is not affected by
deformation of the center console cover. [TCCA] AD CF-2012-01 is
therefore revised to mandate compliance with SB 8-76-33 as
terminating action for the 50 hours periodic operational test
requirement.

The unsafe condition is the inadvertent activation of ground beta mode
during flight, which could lead to engine overspeed, engine damage or
failure, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane. You
may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-
2013-1025.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier, Inc., has issued Service Bulletin 8-76-33, dated
December 13, 2012. The actions described in this service information
are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information

    Although the MCAI includes an operational test of the BWH system,
this proposed AD does not require that action. Once the actions
required by this AD are done, the modification of the BWH microswitch
installation adequately addresses the identified unsafe condition.
Also, AD 2005-13-35, Amendment 39-14172 (70 FR 48854, August 22, 2005),
for all Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC-8-100, DHC-8-200, and DHC-8-300
series airplanes, includes a requirement for certain airplanes to
perform operational checks of the beta lockout system. This difference
has been coordinated with TCCA.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 94 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
              Action                        Labor cost            Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification......................  7 work-hours x $85 per               $117             $712          $66,928
                                     hour = $595.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this proposed
AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

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 determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 this proposed
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);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2013-1025; Directorate Identifier
2013-NM-096-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 27, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC-8-102, -103, -
106, -201, -202, -301, -311, and -315 airplanes; certificated in any
category; serial numbers 003 through 672 inclusive with a beta
warning horn (BWH) (Mod 8/2852) incorporated; except for airplanes
that have incorporated Bombardier option CR873CH00003, CR873CH00005,
CR873SOO8112, or MS8Q902206.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 31, Instruments;
Code 76, Engine Controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of a BWH system failing to
activate when the beta mode was triggered. We are issuing this AD to
prevent the inadvertent activation of ground beta mode during
flight, which could lead to engine overspeed, engine damage or
failure, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Terminating Modification

    Within 6,000 flight hours or 36 months, whichever occurs first,
after the effective date of this AD: Modify the BWH microswitch
installation by replacing the existing BWH microswitch installation
bracket with a new bracket having part number 87610164-003, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 8-76-33, dated December 13, 2012.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing
Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite
410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer, use these actions if they
are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if
they were approved by the State of Design Authority (or its
delegated agent, or by the Design Approval Holder with a State of
Design Authority's design organization approval). For a repair
method to be approved, the repair approval must specifically refer
to this AD. You are required to ensure the product is airworthy
before it is returned to service.

(i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2012-01R1, dated March 6,
2013, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-2013-1025.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt
Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.bombardier.com. You may view copies of this referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 29, 2013.
Johm P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-29513 Filed 12-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 19, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57753-57757]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22707]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0347; FRL-8871-01-OCSPP]

Propamocarb; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of
propamocarb in or on Vegetable, Brassica, head and stem, group 5-16.
The Interregional Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested this tolerance
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective October 19, 2021. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before December 20, 2021,
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: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0347, is available at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg.,
Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Due to the public health emergency, the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC)
and

Reading Room is closed to visitors with limited exceptions. The staff
continues to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and
webform. For the latest status information on EPA/DC services and
docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marietta Echeverria, Acting Director,
Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

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.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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 Office of the
Federal Register's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 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-2020-0347 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
December 20, 2021. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    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 (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0347, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of September 10, 2020 (85 FR 55810) (FRL-
10013-78), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3),
21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
0E8832) by Interregional Project Number 4 (IR-4), Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton,
NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.499 be amended by
establishing a tolerance for residues of the fungicide propamocarb,
(propyl N-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl]carbamate), in or on Vegetable,
Brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 at 15 parts per million (ppm). That
document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by IR-4, the
petitioner, which is available in docket for this action, Docket ID
EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0347, at https://www.regulations.gov. Two comments were
received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments is
discussed 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 FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), 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 propamocarb including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with propamocarb follows.
    In an effort to streamline its publications in the Federal
Register, EPA is not reprinting sections of the rule that would repeat
what has been previously published in tolerance rulemakings for the
same pesticide chemical. Where scientific information concerning a
particular pesticide chemical remains unchanged, the content of those
sections would not vary between tolerance rulemakings and republishing
the same sections is unnecessary and duplicative. EPA considers
referral back to those sections as sufficient to provide an explanation
of the information EPA considered in making its safety determination
for the new rulemaking.
    EPA has previously published a number of tolerance rulemakings for
propamocarb, in which EPA concluded, based on the available
information, that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm would
result from aggregate exposure to propamocarb and established
tolerances for residues of that chemical. EPA is incorporating
previously published sections from

those rulemakings as described further in this rulemaking, as they
remain unchanged.

A. Toxicological Profile

    For a summary of the Toxicological Profile of propamocarb, see Unit
III.A. of the December 5, 2019 rulemaking (84 FR 66616) (FRL-10000-33).

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    For a summary of the Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of
Concern used for the risk assessment, see Unit III.B. of the February
7, 2017 rulemaking (82 FR 9519) (FRL-9957-68).

C. Exposure Assessment

    Much of the exposure assessment remains the same, although the
dietary exposure and risk assessments for propamocarb were updated.
These updates are discussed in this section; for a description of the
rest of EPA's approach to and assumptions for the exposure assessment,
see Unit III.C. of the December 5, 2019 rulemaking.
    EPA's dietary exposure assessments have been updated to include the
additional exposures for the new use of propamocarb on the commodities
in crop group 5-16. The assessment used the same assumptions as the
December 5, 2019 rule concerning tolerance-level residues, default and
empirical processing factors and 100% crop treated (PCT) for all
commodities in both the acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments.
    Drinking water, non-occupational, and cumulative exposures.
Drinking water and non-occupational exposures are not impacted by the
new use, and thus have not changed since the last assessment. For a
summary of the dietary exposures from drinking water, see Unit III.C.2.
of the December 5, 2019 rulemaking. Propamocarb is registered for use
on golf course turf resulting in potential residential post-application
dermal exposure. During Registration Review, a dermal endpoint was not
selected; therefore, a quantitative residential dermal exposure
assessment was not necessary and was not conducted. EPA's conclusions
concerning cumulative risk remain unchanged from Unit III.C.4. of the
December 5, 2019 rulemaking.
    Safety factor for infants and children. EPA continues to conclude
that there is reliable data showing that the safety of infants and
children would be adequately protected if the FQPA SF were reduced from
10X to 1X for all exposure scenarios. The reasons for that decision are
articulated in Unit III.D in the December 5, 2019 rulemaking.
    Aggregate risks and Determination of safety. EPA determines whether
acute and chronic dietary pesticide exposures are safe by comparing
dietary exposure estimates to the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD)
and the chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD). Short-, intermediate-,
and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated
aggregate food, water, and residential exposure to the appropriate
points of departure to ensure that an adequate margin of exposure (MOE)
exists. For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure.
    Acute dietary risks are below the Agency's level of concern of 100%
of the aPAD; they are 42% of the aPAD for all infants, the most highly
exposed subpopulation. Chronic dietary risks are below the Agency's
level of concern of 100% of the cPAD; they are 54% of the cPAD for
females 13 to 49 years old, the most highly exposed subpopulation.
    A short-and intermediate-term oral adverse effect was identified;
however, propamocarb is not registered for any use patterns that would
result in either short- or intermediate-term oral residential exposure.
Short- and intermediate-term risk is assessed based on short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure.
Because there is no short- or intermediate-term oral residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess short- or intermediate-term risk), no further
assessment of short- or intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA
relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short- and
intermediate-term risk for propamocarb. Additionally, based on the lack
of evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, propamocarb is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    Therefore, based on the risk assessments and information described
above, EPA concludes there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to the general population, or to infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to propamocarb residues. More detailed information
about the Agency's analysis can be found at https://www.regulations.gov
in the document titled ``Propamocarb Hydrochloride (HCl). Human Health
Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses in/on Vegetable, Brassica, Head and
Stem, group 5-16'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0347.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    For a discussion of the available analytical enforcement method,
see Unit IV.A. of the December 5, 2019 rulemaking.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    Codex MRLs for residues of propamocarb in/on cabbage, cauliflower,
and broccoli are 3 ppm, 2 ppm, and 1 ppm, respectively. As these levels
are significantly less than the recommended tolerance level of 15 ppm
for Vegetable, Brassica, head and stem, group 5-16, harmonization is
not possible because U.S. growers could have violative residues despite
legal use of propamocarb according to the label.

C. Response to Comments

    Two comments were submitted to the docket in response to the
September 10, 2020 Notice of Filing. The first commenter stated that
there need to be regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in/on
various commodities but expressed concern about the increasing use of
pesticides. The commenter urged EPA to fully evaluate the submitted
data as soon as possible to protect the U.S. public. Another commenter
expressed concerns regarding producers making products cheaper or using
pesticides for economic gain without considering human health. The
commenter stated that the government should have the ability to monitor
the chemicals put into food.
    The Agency appreciates these comments and believes that the laws
applicable to pesticide tolerances address these concerns.
Specifically, the existing legal framework provided by

section 408 of the FFDCA authorizes EPA to establish tolerances when it
determines that the tolerance is safe. As explained in this rule and in
the supporting human health risk assessment in docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2020-0347, EPA makes this determination based on an analysis of the
toxicology studies and then conducting detailed exposure and risk
assessments. The Agency's thorough process considers the validity,
completeness, and reliability of the available data as well as other
factors required by the FFDCA. For more information on the general
principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete description
of the risk assessment process, see https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticide.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of propamocarb,
(propyl N-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl]carbamate), in or on Vegetable,
Brassica, Head and Stem, Group 5-16 at 15 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to petitions 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 action has been exempted from
review under Executive Order 12866, this action 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 to Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action 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 FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance 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 action 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 FFDCA section 408(n)(4). 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 action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    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 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
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
the rule in the Federal Register. This action 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: October 8, 2021.
Marietta Echeverria,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR chapter I as follows:

PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD

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. In Sec.  180.499, amend table 1 to paragraph (a) by adding in
alphabetical order the entry ``Vegetable, Brassica, Head and Stem,
Group 5-16'' to read as follows:

Sec.  180.499   Propamocarb; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (a)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Vegetable, Brassica, Head and Stem, Group 5-16..............          15

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2021-22707 Filed 10-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P