[Federal Register: October 19, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 202)]
[Notices]
[Page 61740]
[DOCID:fr19oc06-45]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER06-931-000, ER06-931-001, ER06-932-000, ER06-932-001]

Black River Macro Discretionary Fund, Ltd.; Black River Commodity
Energy Fund LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

October 13, 2006.
    Black River Macro Discretionary Fund Ltd. and Black River Commodity
Energy Fund LLC (Applicants) filed an application for market-based rate
authority, each with an accompanying tariff. The proposed market-based
rate tariffs provides for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary
services at market-based rates. The Applicants also requested waivers
of various Commission regulations. In particular, the Applicants
requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part
34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability
by the Applicants.
    On July 19, 2006, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated
that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the Federal
Register establishing a period of time for the filing of protests.
Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket
approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by the
Applicants should file a motion to intervene or protest with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214
(2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is November 13, 2006.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
the Applicants are authorized to issue securities and assume
obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or
otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that
such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the
corporate purposes of the Applicants, compatible with the public
interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of the Applicants' issuance of securities or
assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-17500 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 167 (Tuesday, August 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 51985]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21082]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14432-000]

Archon Energy 1, Inc.; Notice of Intent To File License
Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, and Approving Use of
the Traditional Licensing Process

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and
Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 14432-000.
    c. Date Filed: July 9, 2012.
    d. Submitted By: Archon Energy 1, Inc. (Archon).
    e. Name of Project: 3-MW DaGuerre Point Dam Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: To be located at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers'
DaGuerre Point Dam, on the Yuba River, near the City of Marysville,
Yuba County, California.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Mr. Paul Grist, Archon Energy 1,
Inc., 101 E. Kennedy Blvd., Suite 2800, Tampa, Florida 33602. (403)
618-2018.
    i. FERC Contact: Kenneth Hogan at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Archon filed its request to use the Traditional Licensing
Process and provided public notice of its request on July 9, 2012. In a
letter dated August 21, 2012, the Director of the Division of
Hydropower Licensing approved Archon's request to use the Traditional
Licensing Process.
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency
regulations thereunder at 50 CFR part 402; (b) NOAA Fisheries under
section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920; and (c)
the Utah State Historic Preservation Officer, as required by section
106, National Historical Preservation Act, and the implementing
regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR
800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating Archon as the Commission's
non-federal representative for carrying out informal consultation,
pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
    m. Archon filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD) with the
Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    o. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.

    Dated: August 21, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-21082 Filed 8-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 166 (Monday, August 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52837-52840]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18528]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard; General Motors, LLC

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the General Motors, LLC's (GM)
petition for exemption from the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard (theft prevention standard) for its Buick Envision line
beginning in model year (MY) 2023. The petition is granted because the
agency has determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the
line as standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of the theft prevention standard.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2023 model year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carlita Ballard, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy, and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West
Building, W43-439, NRM-310, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. Ms. Ballard's phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is
(202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 49 U.S.C. chapter 331, the Secretary
of Transportation (and the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) by delegation) is required to promulgate a theft
prevention standard to provide for the identification of certain motor
vehicles and their major replacement parts to impede motor vehicle
theft. NHTSA promulgated regulations at 49 CFR part 541 (theft
prevention standard) to require parts-marking for specified passenger
motor vehicles and light trucks. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106,
manufacturers that are subject to the parts-marking requirements may
petition the Secretary of Transportation for an exemption for a line of
passenger motor vehicles equipped with an antitheft device as standard
equipment that the Secretary decides is likely to be as effective in

reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the
parts-marking requirements. In accordance with this statute, NHTSA
promulgated 49 CFR part 543, which establishes the process through
which manufacturers may seek an exemption from the theft prevention
standard.
    49 CFR 543.5 provides general submission requirements for petitions
and states that each manufacturer may petition NHTSA for an exemption
of one vehicle line per model year. Among other requirements,
manufacturers must identify whether the exemption is sought under
section 543.6 or section 543.7. Under section 543.6, a manufacturer may
request an exemption by providing specific information about the
antitheft device, its capabilities, and the reasons the petitioner
believes the device to be as effective at reducing and deterring theft
as compliance with the parts-marking requirements. Section 543.7
permits a manufacturer to request an exemption under a more streamlined
process if the vehicle line is equipped with an antitheft device (an
``immobilizer'') as standard equipment that complies with one of the
standards specified in that section.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 49 CFR 543.7 specifies that the manufacturer must include a
statement that their entire vehicle line is equipped with an
immobilizer that meets one of the flowing standards:
    (1) The performance criteria (subsections 8 through 21) of
C.R.C, c. 1038.114, Theft Protection and Rollaway Prevention (in
effect March 30, 2011), as excerpted in appendix A of [part 543];
    (2) National Standard of Canada CAN/ULC-S338-98, Automobile
Theft Deterrent Equipment and Systems: Electronic Immobilization
(May 1998);
    (3) United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE)
Regulation No. 97 (ECE R97), Uniform Provisions Concerning Approval
of Vehicle Alarm System (VAS) and Motor Vehicles with Regard to
Their Alarm System (AS) in effect August 8, 2007; or
    (4) UN/ECE Regulation No. 116 (ECE R116), Uniform Technical
Prescriptions Concerning the Protection of Motor Vehicles Against
Unauthorized Use in effect on February 10, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 543.8 establishes requirements for processing petitions for
exemption from the theft prevention standard. As stated in section
543.8(a), NHTSA processes any complete exemption petition. If NHTSA
receives an incomplete petition, NHTSA will notify the petitioner of
the deficiencies. Once NHTSA receives a complete petition the agency
will process it and, in accordance with section 543.8(b), will grant
the petition if it determines that, based upon substantial evidence,
the standard equipment antitheft device is likely to be as effective in
reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of Part 541.
    Section 543.8(c) requires NHTSA to issue its decision either to
grant or to deny an exemption petition not later than 120 days after
the date on which a complete petition is filed. If NHTSA does not make
a decision within the 120-day period, the petition shall be deemed to
be approved and the manufacturer shall be exempt from the standard for
the line covered by the petition for the subsequent model year.\2\
Exemptions granted under part 543 apply only to the vehicle line or
lines that are subject to the grant and that are equipped with the
antitheft device on which the line's exemption was based, and are
effective for the model year beginning after the model year in which
NHTSA issues the notice of exemption, unless the notice of exemption
specifies a later year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 49 U.S.C. 33106(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sections 543.8(f) and (g) apply to the manner in which NHTSA's
decisions on petitions are to be made known. Under section 543.8(f), if
the petition is sought under section 543.6, NHTSA publishes a notice of
its decision to grant or deny the exemption petition in the Federal
Register and notifies the petitioner in writing. Under section
543.8(g), if the petition is sought under section 543.7, NHTSA notifies
the petitioner in writing of the agency's decision to grant or deny the
exemption petition.
    This grant of petition for exemption considers General Motors,
LLC's (GM) petition for its Buick Envision vehicle line beginning in MY
2023.

I. Specific Petition Content Requirements Under 49 CFR 543.6

    Pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft
Prevention, GM petitioned for an exemption for its specified vehicle
line from the parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention
standard, beginning in MY 2023. GM petitioned under 49 CFR 543.6,
Petition: Specific content requirements, which, as described above,
requires manufacturers to provide specific information about the
antitheft device installed as standard equipment on all vehicles in the
line for which an exemption is sought, the antitheft device's
capabilities, and the reasons the petitioner believes the device to be
as effective at reducing and deterring theft as compliance with the
parts-marking requirements.
    More specifically, section 543.6(a)(1) requires petitions to
include a statement that an antitheft device will be installed as
standard equipment on all vehicles in the line for which the exemption
is sought. Under section 543.6(a)(2), each petition must list each
component in the antitheft system, and include a diagram showing the
location of each of those components within the vehicle. As required by
section 543.6(a)(3), each petition must include an explanation of the
means and process by which the device is activated and functions,
including any aspect of the device designed to: (1) facilitate or
encourage its activation by motorists; (2) attract attention to the
efforts of an unauthorized person to enter or move a vehicle by means
other than a key; (3) prevent defeating or circumventing the device by
an unauthorized person attempting to enter a vehicle by means other
than a key; (4) prevent the operation of a vehicle which an
unauthorized person has entered using means other than a key; and (5)
ensure the reliability and durability of the device.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 49 CFR 543.6(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to providing information about the antitheft device and
its functionality, petitioners must also submit the reasons for their
belief that the antitheft device will be effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft, including any theft data and other data
that are available to the petitioner and form a basis for that
belief,\4\ and the reasons for their belief that the agency should
determine that the antitheft device is likely to be as effective as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of part 541 in reducing
and deterring motor vehicle theft. In support of this belief, the
petitioners should include any statistical data that are available to
the petitioner and form the basis for the petitioner's belief that a
line of passenger motor vehicles equipped with the antitheft device is
likely to have a theft rate equal to or less than that of passenger
motor vehicles of the same, or a similar, line which have parts marked
in compliance with Part 541.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 49 CFR 543.6(a)(4).
    \5\ 49 CFR 543.6(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following sections describe GM's petition information provided
pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention.
To the extent that specific information in GM's petition is subject to
a properly filed confidentiality request, that information was not
disclosed as part of this notice.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 49 CFR 512.20(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. GM's Petition for Exemption

    In a petition originally dated July 21, 2021 and re-submitted on
May 5, 2022, GM requested an exemption from the parts-marking
requirements of the theft prevention standard for the Buick

Envision vehicle line beginning with MY 2023.
    In its petition, GM provided a detailed description and diagram of
the identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
device for its Buick Envision vehicle line. Key components of the
antitheft device include a PASS-Key III+ controller, integrated within
the body control module (BCM), engine control module (ECM), an
electronically-coded ignition key, a radio frequency (RF) receiver,
three passive low frequency antennas, and a diagram of the locations of
the components. GM stated that the PASS-Key III+ immobilizer device is
designed to be active at all times without direct intervention by the
vehicle operator.
    Pursuant to Section 543.6(a)(3), GM explained that its PASS-Key
III+ system is activated immediately after the ignition has been turned
off and the key has been removed and deactivation of the antitheft
device occurs automatically when the engine is started.
    GM stated that the Buick Envision vehicle line will be installed
with the PASS-Key III+ as standard equipment on its entire vehicle
line. GM stated that with its ``keyless'' ignition system, an
electronic key fob performs normal remote keyless entry functions and
communicates with the vehicle without direct owner intervention.
Specifically, during operation of the vehicle, when the owner presses
the engine start/stop switch, the vehicle transmits a randomly
generated challenge and vehicle identifier within the passenger
compartment of the vehicle via three low-frequency antennas, controlled
by the passive antenna module. The electronic key receives the data and
if the vehicle identifier matches that of the vehicle, the electronic
key will calculate the response to the vehicle using the challenge and
secret information shared between the key and the vehicle. The
electronic key then transmits the response via a radio frequency
channel to a vehicle mounted receiver, conveying the information to the
PASS-Key III+ control module. The PASS-Key III+ control module compares
the received response with an internally calculated response. If the
values match, the device will allow the vehicle to enter functional
modes and transmit a fixed code pre-release password to the engine
controller over the serial data bus, and enable computation and
communication of a response to any valid challenge received from the
engine controller. If a valid key is not detected, the system will not
transmit a fixed code pre-release password to the engine controller and
fuel will not be delivered to the engine and the starter will not be
enabled, so the vehicle will be immobilized.
    As required in section 543.6(a)(3)(v), GM provided information on
the reliability and durability of its proposed device as required by
section. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, GM
followed its own standards in assessing reliability and conducted tests
to validate the integrity, durability and reliability of the PASS-Key
III+ device, including tests for high temperature storage, low
temperature storage, thermal shock, humidity, frost, salt fog,
flammability and others. GM further stated that the design and assembly
processes of the PASS-Key III+ subsystem and components are validated
for 10 years of vehicle life and 150,000 miles of performance.
    GM believes that its antitheft device will be as effective as or
more effective than the parts-marking requirement in reducing and
deterring vehicle theft, and in accordance with 49 CFR 543.6(a)(5), GM
referenced data provided by the American Automobile Manufacturers
Association (AAMA) in support of the effectiveness of GM's PASS-Key
devices in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft, and stated that
the PASS-Key III+ device has been designed to enhance the functionality
and theft protection provided by its first, second and third generation
PASS-Key, PASS-Key II, and PASS-Key III devices. Specifically, GM
stated that data which provide the basis for GM's confidence that the
PASS-Key III+ system will be effective in reducing and deterring motor
vehicle theft are contained in the response of the American Automobile
Manufacturers Association (AAMA) to Docket 97-042; Notice I (NHTSA
Request for Comments on its preliminary Report to Congress on the
effects of the Anti Car Theft Act of 1992 and the Motor Vehicle Theft
Law Enforcement Act of 1984). In the Report to Congress, AAMA stated
the more recent antitheft systems are more effective in reducing auto
theft.
    GM also stated that theft rate data have indicated a decline in
theft rates for vehicle lines equipped with comparable devices that
have received full exemptions from the parts-marking requirements. GM
stated that the theft rate data, as provided by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation's National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and compiled
by the agency, show that theft rates are lower for exempted GM models
equipped with the PASS-Key-like systems than the theft rates for
earlier models with similar appearance and construction that were
parts-marked.
    GM stated that the theft rate data from NHTSA's vehicle theft rate
search were used to plot the Chevrolet Equinox theft rate for the
available years 2005-2014. GM stated that the Equinox is an SUV of
similar size which is equipped with the PASS-Key III+ system. GM also
stated that the theft rate dropped after the parts-marking exemption
was granted in 2009.
    GM believes that the agency should find that inclusion of PASS-Key
III+ as standard equipment on the 2023 Buick Envision vehicle line is
sufficient to qualify this vehicle line for full exemption from 49 CFR
part 541 requirements. This belief is supported not only by GM's proven
success in reducing the theft rates of its carlines, but also by the
high value the agency itself places on ``passive activation'' as a
functional dimension of theft deterrent systems.
    Based on the performance of the PASS-Key, PASS-Key II, and PASS-Key
III devices on other GM models, and the advanced technology utilized in
PASS-Key III+, GM believes that the PASS-Key III+ device will be more
effective in deterring theft than the parts-marking requirements of 49
CFR part 541.

III. Decision to Grant the Petition

    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.8(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541, either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds GM has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for its vehicle line is likely to be as effective in
reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention standard. This
conclusion is based on the information GM provided about its antitheft
device. NHTSA believes, based on GM's supporting evidence, the
antitheft device described for its vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention standard.
    The agency concludes that GM's antitheft device will provide four
of the five types of performance features listed in section
543.6(a)(3): \7\ promoting

activation; preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by
unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by
unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and durability of
the device.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, e.g., 70 FR 74107 (Dec. 14, 2005). NHTSA has previously
concluded that the lack of a visual or audio alarm has not prevented
some antitheft devices from being effective protection against
theft, where the theft data indicate a decline in theft rates for
vehicle lines that have been equipped with devices similar to that
what the petitioner is proposing to use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, Appendix A-1, identifies
those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention Standard for a
given model year. 49 CFR 543.8(f) contains publication requirements
incident to the disposition of all Part 543 petitions. Advanced
listing, including the release of future product nameplates, the
beginning model year for which the petition is granted and a general
description of the antitheft device is necessary in order to notify law
enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from the parts-
marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    If GM decides not to use the exemption for its requested vehicle
line, the manufacturer must formally notify the agency. If such a
decision is made, the line must be fully marked as required by 49 CFR
541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement
parts).
    NHTSA notes that if GM wishes in the future to modify the device on
which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a
petition to modify the exemption. Section 543.8(d) states that a part
543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted
under this part and equipped with the antitheft device on which the
line's exemption is based. Further, section 543.10(c)(2) provides for
the submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use
of an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified
in the exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that
section 543.10(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and
itself. The agency did not intend in drafting part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if GM
contemplates making any changes, the effects of which might be
characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency before
preparing and submitting a petition to modify.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full GM's
petition for exemption for the Buick Envision vehicle line from the
parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, beginning with its MY
2023 vehicles.

    Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.95, 501.5 and
501.8.
Milton E. Cooper,
Director, Rulemaking Operations.
[FR Doc. 2022-18528 Filed 8-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 144 (Friday, July 26, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 45059]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18033]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-1084]

Safety Zones; Annual Fireworks Events in the Captain of the Port
Buffalo Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: At various times throughout the month of July, the Coast Guard
will enforce certain safety zones located in 33 CFR 165.939. This
action is necessary and intended for the safety of life and property on
navigable waters during this event. During each enforcement period, no
person or vessel may enter the respective safety zone without the
permission of the Captain of the Port Buffalo.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.939(a)(4) will be enforced on July
27, 2013, from 9 p.m. to 10:15 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector
Buffalo, 1 Fuhrmann Blvd., Buffalo, NY 14203; Coast Guard telephone
716-843-9343, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The Coast Guard will enforce the Safety Zones; Annual Fireworks
Events in the Captain of the Port Buffalo Zone listed in 33 CFR 165.939
for the following events:
    (1) Lyme Community Days Fireworks, Chaumont, NY; The safety zone
listed in 33 CFR 165.939(a)(4) will be enforced from 9 p.m. to 10:15
p.m. on July 27, 2013.
    Pursuant to 33 CFR 165.23(a)(4), entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within these safety zones during an enforcement period is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated representative. Those seeking permission to enter one of
these safety zones may request permission from the Captain of Port
Buffalo via channel 16, VHF-FM. Vessels and persons granted permission
to enter one of these safety zones shall obey the directions of the
Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated representative. While
within a safety zone, all vessels shall operate at the minimum speed
necessary to maintain a safe course.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.939 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the
Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with advance
notification of these enforcement periods via Broadcast Notice to
Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners. If the Captain of the Port
Buffalo determines that one of these safety zones need not be enforced
for the full duration stated in this notice he or she may use a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners to grant general permission to enter the
respective safety zone.

    Dated: July 23, 2013.
B. W. Roche,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2013-18033 Filed 7-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26475-26476]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11761]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 77-285]

Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Intent to File
License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (Pad),
Commencement of Pre-Filing Process, Prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement, and Scoping; Request for Comments on the Pad and Scoping
Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study Requests

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for
a New License and Commencing Pre-filing Process.
    b. Project No.: 77-285.
    c. Dated Filed: April 6, 2017.
    d. Submitted By: Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E).
    e. Name of Project: Potter Valley Project.
    f. Location: On the Eel and East Fork Russian Rivers in Lake and
Mendocino Counties, California, about 15 miles northeast of the City of
Ukiah. The majority of the project is located on lands owned by PG&E
and National Forest System Lands administered by the U.S. Forest
Service, Mendocino National Forest.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Debbie Powell, Senior Director,
Power Generation--Operations, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, P.O.
Box 770000, MCN11D-1138, San Francisco, CA 94177-0001
    i. FERC Contact: John Mudre at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item o below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency
regulations thereunder at 50 CFR, Part 402, (b) NOAA Fisheries under
section 305(b)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and
Management Act; and (c) the State Historic Preservation Officer, as
required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the
implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating PG&E as the Commission's
non-federal representatives for carrying out informal consultation,
pursuant to: section 7 of the Endangered Species Act; section 305(b)(2)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act; and
section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
    m. On April 6, 2017, PG&E filed with the Commission a Pre-
Application Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and
schedule), pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at
the address in paragraph h.
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    o. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and
Commission's staff Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests.
All comments on the PAD and SD1, and study requests should be sent to
the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on the PAD
and SD1, study requests, requests for cooperating agency status, and
all communications to and from Commission staff related to the merits
of the potential application must be filed with the Commission.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
all documents 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/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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-77-285.
    All filings with the Commission must bear the appropriate heading:
``Comments on Pre-Application Document,'' ``Study Requests,''
``Comments on Scoping Document 1,'' ``Request for Cooperating Agency
Status,'' or ``Communications to and from Commission Staff.'' Any
individual or entity interested in submitting study requests,
commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating
status must do so by August 4, 2017.

Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of
the project at the times and places noted below. The daytime meeting
will focus on resource agency, Indian tribes, and non-governmental
organization concerns, while the evening meeting is primarily for
receiving input from the public. We invite all interested individuals,
organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of the meetings, and
to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as well as the
scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the environmental
document. The times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

Daytime Scoping Meeting

Date: Wednesday, June 28, 2017
Time: 9:00 a.m.

Location: Ukiah Valley Conference Center, 200 South School Street,
Ukiah, CA.
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Evening Scoping Meeting

Date: Wednesday, June 28, 2017
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Location: Ukiah Valley Conference Center, 200 South School Street,
Ukiah, CA.
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

    SD1, which outlines the subject areas to be addressed in the
environmental document, was mailed to the individuals and entities on
the Commission's mailing list. Copies of SD1 will be available at the
scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov,
using the ``eLibrary'' link. Follow the directions for accessing
information in paragraph n. Based on all oral and written comments, a
Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may include a revised
process plan and schedule, as well as a list of issues, identified
through the scoping process.

Environmental Site Review

    The potential applicant and Commission staff will conduct an
Environmental Site Review (site visit) of the project on Tuesday, June
27, 2017. Participants are responsible for their own transportation.
Persons planning on participating in the site visit must RSVP to Ms.
Susan Kester of PG&E at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(preferably) or<PHONE_NUMBER>, on
or before June 13, 2017. Additional details concerning the site visit
are provided in SD1.

Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the
issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource
management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and
identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and
discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that
incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's
regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of
federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes; and
(5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or
Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an
environmental document.
    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues
and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping
meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1 are
provided in item n. of this document.

Meeting Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will be placed
in the public record for this project.

    Dated: June 1, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-11761 Filed 6-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 9)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 2195-2197]
[DOCID:fr14ja08-18]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0011; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-203-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 757 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 757 airplanes. This proposed AD would require
an inspection to determine the manufacturer and manufacture date of the
oxygen masks in the passenger service units and the lavatory and
attendant box assemblies, and corrective action if necessary. This
proposed AD results from a report that several passenger masks with
broken in-line flow indicators were found following a mask deployment.
We are proposing this AD to prevent the in-line flow indicators of the
passenger oxygen masks from fracturing and separating, which could
inhibit oxygen flow to the masks and consequently result in exposure of
the passengers and cabin attendants to hypoxia following a
depressurization event.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 28,
2008.

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 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Management Facility

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the 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: Susan Letcher, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; 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-2008-0011;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-203-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 because of 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

    We have received a report indicating that several passenger masks
with broken in-line flow indicators were found following a mask
deployment on a Boeing Model 777-200 series airplane. Operators
subsequently found several more broken in-line flow indicators after
examining the oxygen mask assemblies on other Model 777 series
airplanes and on Model 747-400 series airplanes. Investigation revealed
that certain flow indicators are weaker and can fracture because of
internal residual stresses caused by the flow indicator joint

design and manufacturing processes. Fractures cause the in-line flow
indicator to separate and consequently prevent oxygen flow to the mask
during an emergency. This condition, if not corrected, could result in
exposure of the passengers and cabin attendants to hypoxia following a
depressurization event.
    The oxygen masks on certain Model 777 airplanes and Model 747-400
series airplanes have the same flow indicators as those installed on
certain Model 757 airplanes. Therefore, the Model 757 airplanes may be
subject to the identified unsafe condition.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-
0028, dated April 9, 2007. The service bulletin describes procedures
for doing a general visual inspection to determine the manufacturer and
manufacture date of the oxygen masks in the passenger service units
(PSUs) and the lavatory and attendant box assemblies. The service
bulletin also describes procedures for doing the corrective action if
necessary and other specified action. The corrective action is to
repair any B/E Aerospace oxygen mask assembly with a manufacturing date
after January 1, 2002, and before March 1, 2006. The service bulletin
also specifies that as an alternative to doing the repair (rework), the
oxygen mask assembly may be replaced with a new oxygen mask.
    Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-0028 refers to B/E
Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01, dated February 6, 2006; and
Revision 1, dated May 1, 2006; as additional sources of service
information for repairing the oxygen mask assembly. B/E Aerospace
Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 describes procedures for modifying the
oxygen mask assembly by replacing the flow indicator, part number (P/N)
118023-02, with an improved flow indicator, P/N 118023-12. B/E
Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 also specifies that, as an
alternative to modifying the oxygen mask, operators may replace the
oxygen mask with a new oxygen mask having the improved flow indicator.
    Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously.

Clarification Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin

    Although Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-0028
specifies to repair the oxygen mask assembly, the intent of the service
bulletin is to replace it with either a new or modified oxygen mask
assembly having an improved flow indicator. Therefore, this proposed AD
would require replacing the oxygen mask assembly with a new or modified
oxygen mask assembly having an improved flow indicator.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 1,035 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 640 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 20 work hours per
airplane, for an average of 240 oxygen masks per airplane, at an
average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the
estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $1,024,000, or
$1,600 per airplane.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this 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 that the 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); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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

    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]

    2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2008-0011; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
203-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by February
28, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 757-200, -200CB, -200PF, and
-300 series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified
in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-0028, dated
April 9, 2007.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report that several passenger masks
with broken in-line flow indicators were found following a mask
deployment. We are issuing this AD to prevent the in-line flow
indicators of the passenger oxygen masks from fracturing and
separating, which could inhibit oxygen flow to the masks and
consequently result in exposure of the passengers and cabin
attendants to hypoxia following a depressurization event.

Compliance

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

Inspection and Corrective/Other Specified Actions if Necessary

    (f) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, do a
general visual inspection to determine the manufacturer and
manufacture date of the oxygen masks in the passenger service units
and the lavatory and attendant box assemblies, and do the applicable
corrective action, by accomplishing all of the applicable actions
specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-0028, dated April 9, 2007; except
where the service bulletin specifies repairing the oxygen mask
assembly, replace it with a new or modified oxygen mask assembly
having an improved flow indicator. The corrective action and other
specified action must be done before further flight.

    Note 1: The service bulletin refers to B/E Aerospace Service
Bulletin 174080-35-01, dated February 6, 2006; and Revision 1, dated
May 1, 2006; as additional sources of service information for
modifying the oxygen mask assembly by replacing the flow indicator
with an improved flow indicator.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (g)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 21, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-376 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 250 (Thursday, December 29, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 95886-95890]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31211]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0007 and EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0008; FRL-9950-40]

Isobutyl Acetate and Isobutyric Acid; Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes exemptions from the requirement of
a tolerance for residues of isobutyl acetate (CAS Reg. No. 110-19-0)
and isobutyric acid (CAS Reg. No. 79-31-2) when used as inert
ingredients (solvent) in pesticide formulations applied to growing
crops and raw agricultural commodities after harvest. Technology
Sciences Group Inc. on behalf of Jeneil Biosurfactant Company submitted
a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), requesting establishment of these exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to
establish maximum permissible levels for residues of isobutyl acetate
and isobutyric acid.

DATES: This regulation is effective December 29, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 27, 2017,
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 dockets for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) numbers EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0007 and EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-
0008, are available at http://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>. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket
available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goodis, 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_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
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 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

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-2016-0007 or EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0008 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 February 27, 2017. 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-2016-0007 or EPA-HQ-
OPP-2016-0008, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://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 http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of April 25, 2016 (81 FR 24044) (FRL-9944-
86), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (IN-10846 for
isobutyl acetate; IN-10852 for isobutyric acetate) by Technology
Sciences Group Inc., (1150 18th Street NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC
20036) on behalf of Jeneil Biosurfactant Company (400 N. Dekora Woods
Blvd. Saukville, WI 53080). The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.910
be amended by establishing exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of isobutyl acetate (CAS Reg. No. 110-19-0) and
isobutyric acid (CAS Reg. No. 79-31-2) when used as inert ingredients
(solvent) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops and to raw
agricultural commodities after harvest. That document referenced the
summaries of the petitions prepared by Technology Sciences Group Inc.
on behalf of Jeneil Biosurfactant Company, the petitioner, which is
available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. A comment was
received on the notice of filing concerning petition #IN-10846. EPA's
response to this comment is discussed in Unit V.B.

III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for 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. . . .''
    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.

    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 isobutyl acetate and isobutyric
acid including exposure resulting from the exemption established by
this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with
isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid
as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-
observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are
discussed in this unit.
    Only acute toxicity data are available on isobutyric acid and no
data are available on isobutyl acetate. However, upon ingestion,
isobutyl acetate is rapidly and completely hydrolyzed to isobutanol and
acetic acid. Isobutyric acid is a metabolic product of isobutanol.
    Isobutanol is metabolized by alcohol dehydrogenase to form
isobutyric acid via conversion to isobutyraldehyde. Therefore, toxicity
data on isobutanol are considered suitable to assess repeated exposure
to isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid. Since acetic acid is currently
exempted from tolerance under 40 CFR 180.910 without limitation, this
risk assessment focuses on toxicity data available on isobutanol.
    The acute oral and dermal toxicities are low for isobutyric acid.
Isobutyric acid has an acute oral lethal dose (LD50) >=
2,230 milligram/kilogram (mg/kg) in rats and rabbits. The acute dermal
LD50 = 475 mg/kg in rabbits. The acute inhalation
LC50 > 9.59 milligram/liter (mg/L) in rats. It is corrosive
to the eye and skin in rabbits. Isobutyric acid is not a dermal
sensitizer in rabbits. Isobutanol has an acute oral LD50 >=
2,830 mg/kg in rats. The acute dermal acute LD50 >= 2,000
mg/kg in rabbits. The acute inhalation LC50 > 6,000 parts
per million (ppm) (approximately equivalent to 6,000 mg/L) in rats.
Isobutanol is severely irritating to the eye and minimally to
moderately irritating to the skin in rabbits.
    Based on the subchronic data available, isobutanol is not toxic up
to the limit dose of 1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day). In a 90-
day oral toxicity study via gavage in rats, hypo-activity, ataxia and
salivation were observed at 1,000 mg/kg/day of isobutanol. In another
90-day oral toxicity study with isobutanol via drinking water in rats,
no adverse effects were observed at doses up to 16,000 ppm
(approximately 1,450 mg/kg/day), the highest dose tested (HDT). The
study conducted via drinking water in rats is considered more relevant
to human exposure and therefore more reflective of potential human
toxicity.
    In developmental toxicity studies with isobutanol via inhalation in
rats and rabbits, neither maternal nor developmental toxicity is seen
at doses up to 10,000 mg/m\3\ (approximately 3,060 mg/kg/day), the HDT
in both studies and above the limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day.
    Similarly, no adverse effects are observed in a two-generation
reproductive study with isobutanol via inhalation in rats at doses up
to 2,500 ppm (approximately 2,326 mg/kg/day).
    Carcinogenicity studies with isobutyl acetate, isobutyric acid or
isobutanol are not available. However, a chronic toxicity study in rats
treated with isobutantol in drinking water for 53-56 weeks did not show
any evidence of toxicity or tumors at doses as high as 200 mg/kg/day.
In addition, no toxicity is observed in other studies at doses below
1,450 mg/kg/day with isobutanol. Moreover, mutagenicity studies are
negative with isobutanol and isobutyric acid. An Ames test, unscheduled
DNA synthesis and mouse lymphoma assay are negative when tested with
isobutyric acid. The Ames test, mouse lymphoma, Comet and micronucleus
assays are negative when tested with isobutanol. Therefore, isobutyl
acetate and isobutyric acid are not expected to be carcinogenic.
    A neurotoxicity screening battery with isobutanol via the
inhalation route of exposure in rats was available for review. Also,
neurotoxicity endpoints were evaluated in an acute toxicity study in
rats with isobutanol via the inhalation route of exposure. No adverse
effects were observed in the functional observational battery, motor
activity, schedule control operant behavior or neuropathology at doses
up to 1,500 ppm (approximately 1,408 mg/kg/day) and 2,500 ppm
(approximately 2,326 mg/kg/day) in rats in the neurotoxicity screening
battery and acute toxicity studies, respectively. EPA concluded that
isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid are not expected to be neurotoxic.
    Immunotoxicity studies with isobutyric acid and isobutanol are
available for review. Mouse cell-mediated immune response is not
modulated by isobutyric acid in a host-resistant assay using Listeria
monocytogenes. Humoral immunity is unaffected in mice as measured by
the antibody plaque-forming cell response to sheep erythrocytes. Also,
a lymphocyte mitogenesis test with isobutanol showed mitogenic activity
is not inhibited in stimulated B and T cells from mouse spleen.
Therefore, isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid are not expected to be
immunotoxic.
    Metabolism studies are not available for isobutyl acetate. Limited
data are available on isobutyric acid and isobutanol. A metabolism
study with a single dose of isobutyric acid via gavage in rats showed
that it is rapidly metabolized and the majority eliminated as expired
CO2. Less than 1.0% of the dose is found in feces and 3.21-
4.61% in urine. A metabolism study with isobutanol via gavage in
rabbits showed that it is rapidly metabolized. 0.5% is excreted in the
urine or exhaled air. Identified metabolites are isobutyraldehyde,
isobutyric acid, and isovaleric acid. There is no concern for the
metabolites isobutyraldehyde and isovaleric acid as they will be
conjungated and excreted.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    The available toxicity studies indicate that isobutanol has very
low toxicity. The lowest NOAEL (316 mg/kg/day) in the database occurred
in a 90-day oral toxicity study with isobutanol via gavage in rats.
Hypo-activity, ataxia and salivation were seen at 1,000 mg/kg/day. In a
second study conducted for 90 days with isobutanol via drinking water
in rats, the aforementioned effects weren't seen at doses as high 1,450
mg/kg/day. The drinking water study in rats represents a more realistic
route for human exposure to isobutyric acid and isobutyl acetate, and
is considered more reflective of potential toxicity. Therefore, since
no signs of toxicity were observed at doses up to the limit dose in
oral and inhalation toxicity studies, an endpoint of concern for risk
assessment purposes was not identified. Since no endpoint of concern
was identified for the acute and chronic dietary exposure assessment
and short and intermediate dermal and inhalation exposure, a
quantitative risk assessment

for isobutyric acid and isobutyl acetate is not necessary.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid, EPA considered
exposure under the proposed exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance. EPA assessed dietary exposures from isobutyl acetate and
isobutyric acid in food as follows:
    Under this exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, residues
of isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid may be found on foods from
crops that were treated with pesticide formulations containing isobutyl
acetate and isobutyric acid. However, a quantitative dietary exposure
assessment was not conducted since a toxicological endpoint for risk
assessment was not identified.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. Since a hazard endpoint of
concern was not identified for the acute and chronic dietary
assessment, a quantitative dietary exposure risk assessment for
drinking water was not conducted, although exposures may be expected
from use on food crops.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, and tables).
    Isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid may be used in pesticide
products and non-pesticide products that may be used in and around the
home. Based on the discussion in Unit IV.B., a quantitative residential
exposure assessment for isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid was not
conducted.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    Based on the available data, isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid
do not have a toxic mechanism; therefore, section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) does
not apply.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
    As part of its qualitative assessment, the Agency did not use
safety factors for assessing risk, and no additional safety factor is
needed for assessing risk to infants and children. Based on an
assessment of isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid, EPA has concluded
that there are no toxicological endpoints of concern for the U.S.
population, including infants and children.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    Because no toxicological endpoints of concern were identified, EPA
concludes that aggregate exposure to residues of isobutyl acetate and
isobutyric acid will not pose a risk to the U.S. population, including
infants and children, and that there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to isobutyl acetate and isobutyric acid
residues.

V. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

B. Response to Comments

    A comment was received from a private citizen who was concerned
about the safety and impact pesticides on food on human health. The
Agency understands the commenter's concerns and recognizes that some
individuals believe that no residue of pesticides should be allowed.
However, under the existing legal framework provided by section 408 of
the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), EPA is authorized to
establish pesticide tolerances or exemptions where persons seeking such
tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the
safety standard imposed by the statute, which EPA has determined here.

VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance are
established under 40 CFR 180.910 for residues of isobutyl acetate (CAS
Reg. No. 110-19-0) and isobutyric acid (CAS Reg. No. 79-31-2) when used
as inert ingredients (solvent) in pesticide formulations applied to
growing crops and raw agricultural commodities after harvest.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerance exemptions under FFDCA section
408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this 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 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 exemptions 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).

VIII. 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: December 16, 2016.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.910, add alphabetically the inert ingredients to the
table to read as follows:

Sec.  180.910  Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Inert ingredients                Limits                Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Isobutyl Acetate (CAS Reg. No.   ....................  Solvent.
 110-19-0).
Isobutyric Acid (CAS Reg. No.    ....................  Solvent.
 79-31-2).

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

[FR Doc. 2016-31211 Filed 12-28-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P