U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, DC 20460 . OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES PC Code: 107201 DP Barcode: D215026; D268715 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Tier I Estimated Environmental Concentrations of Hexazinone, for use in Human Health Risk Assessment FROM: Larry Liu, Ph. D., Environmental Scientist ERB V, Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507C)

THROUGH: Mah T. Shamim, Ph. D., Chief Environmental Risk Branch V Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507C)

TO: Margaret Rice, Chief Dirk Helder, Chemical Reviewer Manager Reregistration Branch II Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508C) and Sherrie Kinard, Residue Chemist Carol Christenson, Risk Assessor RRB II, Health Effects Division (7509C)

This memorandum presents the Tier I Estimated Environmental Concentrations (EECs) for the herbicide hexazinone for use in the human health risk assessment. EEC's on surface waters were estimated using the Tier I model FIRST. The EEC's on groundwaters were estimated using an available small scale prospective groundwater monitoring study. This memorandum also provides information about the groundwater prospective small scale study conducted by the registrant, and how it was used to estimate the total hexazinone residues in ground waters. In addition, monitoring data available from the state of Maine was presented.

The surface water concentrations, for hexazinone residues were as follows: acute (peak) value, 130 ppb, and the chronic annual average value, 47 ppb, based on the application of hexazinone on alfalfa, which is the major food crop for the chemical. The groundwater screening concentration for hexazinone residues is 41.8 ppb. These values represent upper bound estimates of the concentrations that might be found in surface water and groundwater due to the use of hexazinone on representative crops. It is noted that the groundwater screening concentration for hexazinone residues, based on the groundwater prospective monitoring study is of the same order of magnitude than the groundwater concentration estimated from the Tier I model SCIGROW (i. e., 20.2 ppb). 2 Should the results of this assessment indicate a need for further refinement, please, contact us as soon as possible so that we may schedule a Tier II assessment.

Hexazinone Environmental Fate Properties Based on the available information, hexazinone appears to be persistent and mobile in soil and aquatic environments. The mobility of hexazinone was demonstrated in batch equilibrium data. The field and forestry dissipation data also confirm that hexazinone is persistent and mobile. Furthermore, the batch equilibrium data also suggest that its degradates are very mobile. Based on the environmental fate properties of hexazinone and its degradates, it can be concluded they may be of concern for surface water and groundwater contamination..

The following table summarizes the environmental fate properties of hexazinone, and the adsorption data for its degradates:

Water solubility = 33,000 ppm (25 C) Vapor pressure = 2x10 7 mm Hg Kow = 15 Henry's Law Constant = 2x10– 12 atm m3/ mol Summary of Environmental Fate Properties of Hexazinone:

Study Type/ Hexazinone Half Life Source (MRID)

Hydrolysis pH 5 stable 41587301 (acceptable)

pH 7 stable 41587301 (acceptable)

pH 9 stable 41587301 (acceptable)

Aqueous Photolysis (pH 7) stable 41300801 (acceptable)

Soil Photolysis 82 days 41300802 (acceptable)

Aerobic Soil 216 days 41807401; 42635001 (acceptable)

Anaerobic Aquatic 230 days 41807402 (acceptable)

Aerobic Aquatic 60 days 41811801 (acceptable) 3 Summary of Environmental Fate of Hexazinone (continued):

Adsorption (Mobility) Studies Kd KOC Source (MRID)

Hexazinone 0.45 37 41528101 (acceptable)

Hexazinone 0.18 50 43621501 (supplemental)

Degradate A 1 0.03 27 43621501 (supplemental)

Degradate 2 0.15 45 43621501 (supplemental)

Degradate H 0.31 51 43621501 (supplemental)

Degradate D 0.34 59 43621501 (supplemental)

Degradate B 0.44 90 43621501 (supplemental)

Degradate 1 0.20 122 43621501 (supplemental)

Degradate A 0.69 176 43621501 (supplemental)

Field Studies/ Hexazinone Half Life Source (MRID)

Field Dissipation Delaware  123 day (parent was detected < 30 cm) 42377901 (acceptable)

Mississippi  154 day (parent was detected > 60 75 cm) 42377901 (acceptable)

Forest Dissipation Litter covered soil  265 days 42379201 (supplemental)

Degradate Profile The following table summarizes the degradates detected in the laboratory fate studies and/ or monitored in the field dissipation and the groundwater study (i. e., Degradates A, A 1, C, D, 1, 2, and G3170). It should be noted that: C although Degradate C was not found in any of the laboratory fate studies, the field dissipation and the small scale prospective groundwater monitoring study monitored this degradate; the registrant indicated that the degradate was observed in aerobic soil metabolism studies with acidic soils; C Degradates D and 2 were the major degradates found in the anaerobic aquatic metabolism study; however, the field dissipation and the small scale prospective groundwater monitoring studies did not monitor these two degradates. Therefore, the fate of Degradates D and 2 could not be assessed under natural environment; the registrant believed that both field studies were mostly aerobic and the degradates were unlikely to be observed; and, 4 C the field dissipation studies did not monitor the fate of Degradate G 3170 which was the degradate detected at the highest concentrations in the small scale prospective groundwater monitoring study (MRID 45132801); this degradate was not observed; however, in the aerobic soil metabolism study. C Summary of Degradates Found in the Environmental Fate Studies Maximum Degradate Concentration (% of applied) and Time (days) to Maximum Concentration in Study: Degradates Analyzed in Study:

Degradate Soil Photo. Aerobic Soil Anaerobic. Aquatic Aerobic Aquatic Field Diss. Ground Water A (T3937) 5.5% (365d) yes yes A 1 (G3453) 18.7% (365d) <10.0% (56d) yes yes B (A3928) 10.1% (30d) 2.3% (365d) <10.0% (56d) yes yes C (T3935) yes yes D (B2838) 4.8% (365d) 24.0% (365d) <10.0% (56d)

1 (( JS472) 10.9% (365d) <10.0% (56d) yes yes 2 (JT677) 25.0% (365d)

G3170 yes Background Information on FIRST FIRST is a new screening model designed to estimate the pesticide concentrations found in water for use in drinking water assessments. It provides high end values on the concentrations that might be found in a small drinking water reservoir due to the use of pesticide. Like GENEEC, the model previously used for Tier I screening level, FIRST is a single event model (one run off event), but can account for spray drift from multiple applications. FIRST uses a Drinking Water Reservoir instead of a pond as the standard scenario. The FIRST scenario includes a 427 acres field immediately adjacent to a 13 acres reservoir, 9 feet deep, with continuous flow (two turnovers per year). The pond receives a 5 spray drift event from each application plus one runoff event. The runoff event moves a maximum of 8% of the applied pesticide into the pond. This amount can be reduced due to degradation on field and the effect of binding to soil. Spray drift is equal to 6.4% of the applied concentration from the ground spray application and 16% for aerial applications.

FIRST also makes adjustments for the percent crop area. While FIRST assumes that the entire watershed would not be treated, the use of a PCA is still a screen because it represents the highest percentage of crop cover of any large watershed in the US, and it assumes that the entire crop is being treated. Various other conservative assumptions of FIRST include the use of a small drinking water reservoir surrounded by a runoff prone watershed, the use of the maximum use rate, no buffer zone, and a single large rainfall.

Background Information on SCI GROW SCI GROW provides a groundwater screening exposure value to be used in determining the potential risk to human health from drinking water contaminated with the pesticide. Since the SCI GROW concentrations are likely to be approached in only a very small percentage of drinking water sources, i. e., highly vulnerable aquifers, it is not appropriate to use SCI GROW for national or regional exposure estimates. SCI GROW estimates likely groundwater concentrations if the pesticide is used at the maximum allowable rate in areas where groundwater is exceptionally vulnerable to contamination. In most cases, a large majority of the use area will have groundwater that is less vulnerable to contamination than the areas used to derive the SCIGROW estimate.

Small Scale Prospective Groundwater Monitoring Study The registrant submitted a small scale prospective groundwater monitoring study for hexazinone (MRID45132801). Results indicated that hexazinone and its degradates are very mobile and persistent. As indicated earlier, the Degradates D and 2 (which were the major degradates found in the anaerobic aquatic metabolism study), were not monitored in the small scale prospective groundwater monitoring studies. No information about the fate of Degradates D and 2 under natural environment is currently available. The following table provides a summary with the maximum concentrations of the parent and its degradates, detected in the small scale prospective groundwater monitoring study. These concentrations (see column 2) were expressed in parent equivalents (see Column 3). The maximum total residues of hexazinone and its degradates detected in the groundwater study were 41.8 ppb (expressed as parent equivalents). 6 Summary of Small Scale Prospective Groundwater Monitoring Study Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Chemical Maximum Concentration in Groundwater (ppb) Maximum Concentration in Groundwater (ppb, expressed as parent equivalent)

Parent 9.2 9.2 A 1 (G3453) 3 2.8 B (A3928) 7.2 7.6 C (T3935) 1.2 1.1 1 (( JS472) 2.1 2.0 G3170 12.9 19.1 Total Residues (parent equivalent) Not applicable 41.8 Concise Facts and Results About the Small Scale Prospective GroundWater Study Hexazinone [Velpar L, 2 lb a. i/ gallon water dispersable liquid] was broadcast applied once at 0.75 lb a. i./ A in January 1996 onto a field of alfalfa underlain with sandy soil in Merced County, California. The site is located within the recharge area for a shallow unconfined aquifer. The treated area consisted of five 100 x 300 foot strips separated by irrigation berms, and the control area was 100 feet distant and upgradient from the treated area. The organic matter content of the soil was #0.7%, the pH was 7.5 8.9 in the upper 1.5 feet, and there were no continuous impeding layers. The first rainfall was received at 7 days and the first irrigation event was at 75 days. The cumulative net daily water budget was <0.0 inches through 19 days, 0.10 inches at 21 days, and 0.93 inches at 21 days. The monthly cumulative precipitation plus irrigation ranged from 111 to 195% of baseline. The depth of the water table ranged from 8 to 15 feet below ground surface (bgs) during the study. Potassium bromide was used as a tracer; breakthrough into the shallow groundwater occurred at about 152 days posttreatment. Soil (to 2 feet), soil pore water (lysimeters at 3, 6, 9, and 12 feet), and groundwater (wells screened at 14 19 and 20 25 feet bgs) samples were collected at up to 1063 days posttreatment and analyzed using HPLC for hexazinone and six transformation products: G3170, A, B, C, A1, and 1.

Hexazinone dissipated from the upper 2 feet of soil with a calculated half life of 25 days (r 2 = 0.9997; first order kinetics). Hexazinone and its degradates exhibited a classic pattern of leaching through the soil profile and into the groundwater. Hexazinone concentrations above background (-0.05 ppb) were first detected in pore water at the 3 foot depth at 60 days posttreatment and in the 6 and 9 foot 7 depths at 95 days. The breakthrough of hexazinone and degradate B into the shallow groundwater occurred at 152 days posttreatment. G3170 was the predominant degradate in the soil, soil pore water, and groundwater; breakthrough into the shallow groundwater occurred at 336 days. In the individual shallow groundwater wells (14 19 feet bgs), the maximum measured concentrations were as indicated in the table above. In the individual deep groundwater wells (20 25 feet bgs), the maximum measured concentrations were 2.33 ppb for hexazinone, 2.61 ppb for G3170, 1.32 ppb for B, 0.952 ppb for A1, and 1.32 ppb for C. The average concentrations of all compounds of interest in the shallow and deep groundwater were below their Limit of Quantitation (LOQ 2.0 ppb except 4.0 ppb for C and G3170) in water, except once at 363 days when hexazinone averaged 2.02 ppb in the shallow groundwater. There was a distinct difference in the movement of hexazinone through soil in the western and eastern portions of the site. Hexazinone residues were detected infrequently and at later intervals in groundwater in the eastern portion of the site, where soils were less sandy with thicker soil lens.

Surface Water and Ground Water Monitoring Although this monitoring study was not considered for the estimation of the drinking water concentrations, it is presented for informative purposes, since it corroborates some of the conclusions made earlier. The Board of Pesticides Control in the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Resources in the State of Maine conducted a statewide assessment to determine the impact of highly leachable pesticides (including hexazinone, an herbicide used in the production of blueberries) on surface water and ground water in Maine. This assessment crossed a variety of agricultural and nonagricultural pesticide use sites. Surface water samples were collected in Narraguagus River and Pleasant River in Maine. Groundwater samples were collected from the wells at sites with the following characteristics:

C they contain a private domestic well, currently used for drinking water; C they were within 1/ 4 mile of an active blueberry field in 1994; and C they are down gradient or of equal elevation with the blueberry field.

Although the total amounts of hexazinone used on blueberry in Maine is very low (only approximately 1% of the total sale in the U. S.), it was detected in groundwater and surface water at very high frequency (43 59% of ground water samples, and 31 90% of surface water samples; refer to table below). Although this monitoring study is inherently different than the ground water prospective monitoring study, it was observed that the maximum concentrations of parent hexazinone observed in the ground waters in 1998 and 1999 (i. e. 2.15 and 1.97 ppb, respectively), were similar to the maximum concentration observed in the small scale ground water monitoring study (i. e. 9.2 ppb). Degradate B was also detected in surface water and groundwater; however, no detailed information was provided. Results are summarized in the following table. 8 Summary of Monitoring Information from the Board of Pesticides Control in the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Resources in the State of Maine Year No. of Samples Collected No. of Samples with Hexazinone Detected (% of Frequency) Range of Concentrations (ppb)

Ground Water 1998 42 18 (43%) 0.14 2.15 1999 22 13 (59%) 0.22 1.97 Surface Water 1998 36 11 (31%) 0.22 0.94 1999 21 19 (90%) 0.13 3.80 2000 24 21 (88%) 0.13 2.65 2001 50 44 (88%) 0.08 2.45 Modeling Inputs and Results: The following tables summarize the input values used in the model runs for FIRST and SCIGROW, respectively. Fate parameters were obtained from studies submitted by the registrant and modified, if necessary, according to the Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides, Version Il (February 28, 2002). Because the half lives used in the FIRST model are extremely long and the chemicals structures for degradates are very similar to the parent compound (except for G3170), the output values were used to represent hexazinone residues (including its degradates). 9 Environmental Fate Input Parameters for FIRST.

Parameter Hexazinone Value Source/ MRID PC Code 107201 OPP Water Solubility (20° C, distilled water) 33,000 mg/ L registrant Hydrolysis Half Life (pH 7) Stable 41587301 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half Life 216x3= 648 days 41807401; 42635001 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half Life 60x3= 180 days 41811801 Aqueous Photolysis Half Life (at pH 7) Stable 41300801 Soil Water Partition Coefficient (Kd) 0.45 41528101 Pesticide is Wetted In No label PCA 0.87 OPP Depth of Incorporation (Aerial) 0.0 Label Environmental Fate Input Parameters for SCIGROW.

Parameter Hexazinone Value Source (MRID)

Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (KOC) 37 41528101 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half Life 216 days 41807401; 42635001 Application Information and Modeling Results for Use of Hexazinone on Alfalfa.

Parameter Hexazinone value Source Crop Alfalfa label Application Method Aerial spray label Application Rate 1.5 lbs a. i/ acre label Application Frequency once/ year label Incorporation Depth 0 inches lbel Application Interval (days) N/ A label 10 The modeling results associated with maximum allowable rate per year for representative crops are presented in the following table. Attached to this memo (Appendix 1) are copies of the original printouts generated from FIRST and SCIGROW runs. In addition, the chemical structures of Hexazinone and its major degradation products are presented in Appendix 2.

Modeling Results Model Hexazinone value Source FIRST 1.0 Peak Untreated Water Concentration 129.8 ppb Output FIRST 1.0 Annual Average Untreated Water Concentration 47.1 ppb Output SCI GROW Ground Water Concentration 20.2 ppb Output 11 Appendix 1. Printouts of Electronic Outputs Obtained from FIRST and SCIGROW With Use of Hexazinone on Alfalfa at 1.5 lb a. i./ A FIRST run RUN No. 200 FOR hexazinone ON alfalfa * INPUT VALUES *

RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE %CROPPED INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Kd (PPM ) (% DRIFT) AREA (IN)

1.500( 1.500) 1 1 .4 30000.0 AERIAL( 16.0) 87.0 .0 FIELD AND RESERVOIR HALFLIFE VALUES (DAYS)

METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED (FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF (RESERVOIR) (RES. EFF) (RESER.) (RESER.)

648.00 2 N/ A .00 .00 180.00 180.00 UNTREATED WATER CONC (MICROGRAMS/ LITER (PPB)) Ver 1.0 AUG 1, 2001

PEAK DAY (ACUTE) ANNUAL AVERAGE (CHRONIC) CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION

129.789 47.139 SCIGROW run RUN No. 300 FOR hexazinone INPUT VALUES

APPL (#/ AC) APPL. URATE SOIL SOIL AEROBIC RATE NO. (#/ AC/ YR) KOC METABOLISM (DAYS)

1.500 1 1.500 37.0 216.0 GROUND WATER SCREENING CONCENTRATIONS IN PPB

20.177970

A= 211.000 B= 42.000 C= 2.324 D= 1.623 RILP= 5.524 F= 1.129 G= 13.452 URATE= 1.500 GWSC= 20.177970 A= 211.000 B= 55.000 C= 2.324 D= 1.740 RILP= 5.252 F= .963 G= 9.178 URATE= 1.500 GWSC= 13.766800 12 N N N O O CH 3 N( CH 3 ) 2 S N N N O O CH 3 N( CH 3 ) 2 HO S N N N O O CH 3 N( CH 3 ) 2 OH S Appendix 2. Chemical Structures of Hexazinone and its Major Metabolites Nomenclature for the Degradates Structure of Hexazinone, A3674 Metabolite A, T3937 Metabolite A1, G3453 13 N N N O O CH 3 NHCH 3 S N N N O O CH 3 N( CH 3 ) 2 O Metabolite C, T3935 Metabolite B, A3928 Metabolite 1, JS472 14 N N N O OH CH 3 N( CH 3 ) 2 IN G3170 Nomenclature:

Metabolite A, T3937 3( 4 hydroxycyclohexyl) 6( demethylamino) 1 methyl 1,3,5 triazine 2,4( 1H, 3H) dione Metabolite A1, G3453 3( 2 hydroxycyclohexyl) 6( demethylamino) 1 methyl 1,3,5 triazine 2,4( 1H, 3H) dione Metabolite C, T3935 3( 4 hydroxycyclohexyl) 6( methylamino) 1 methyl 1,3,5 triazine 2,4( 1H, 3H) dione Metabolite B, A3928 3 cyclohexyl 6( methylamino) 1 methyl 1,3,5 triazine 2,4( 1H, 3H) dione Metabolite 1, JS472 3( 4 ketocyclohexyl) 6( dimethylamino) 1 methyl 1,3,5 triazine 2,4( 1H, 3H) dione IN G3170, N Demethyl B3170 6( methylamino) 1 methyl 1,3,5 triazine 2,4( 1H, 3H) dione


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 241 (Tuesday, December 15, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 81157-81160]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27460]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 /
Proposed Rules

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1131; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-00613-R]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Airbus Helicopters Model AS350B, AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2,
AS350B3, AS350C, and AS350D helicopters; Model AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1,
AS355F2, AS355N, and AS355NP helicopters; and Model EC130B4 and EC130T2
helicopters. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of failed main
rotor hub-to-mast attachment screws. This proposed AD would require
determining whether the helicopter has been operated in a severe
environment since the last inspection of the main rotor hub-to-mast
attachment screws, an inspection of the main rotor hub-to-mast
attachment screws if the helicopter has been operated in a severe
environment, and replacement of the main rotor hub-to-mast attachment
screws if necessary, as specified in a European Aviation Safety Agency
(now European Union Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) AD, which will be
incorporated by reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 29,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD, contact
the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49
221 8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: www.easa.europa.eu.
You may find this IBR material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this IBR material at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-
321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1131.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
1131; 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 NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hal Jensen, Aerospace Engineer,
Operational Safety Branch, FAA, 470 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC
20024; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES.Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-1131; Project Identifier
MCAI-2020-00613-R'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposal.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Hal
Jensen, Aerospace Engineer, Operational Safety Branch, FAA, 470
L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington DC 20024; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA receives that is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2017-0032, dated February 17, 2017;
corrected February 20, 2017 (EASA AD 2017-0032) (also referred to as
the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to
correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Helicopters Model AS 350 B,
AS 350

BA, AS 350 BB, AS 350 B1, AS 350 B2, AS 350 B3, and AS 350 D
helicopters; AS 355 E, AS 355 F, AS 355 F1, AS 355 F2, AS 355 N, and AS
355 NP helicopters; and EC 130 B4 and EC 130 T2 helicopters. Model AS
350 BB helicopters are not certificated by the FAA and are not included
on the U.S. type certificate data sheet; this proposed AD therefore
does not include those helicopters in the applicability. This AD also
applies to Airbus Helicopter Model AS 350C helicopters because these
helicopters have a similar design and are included on the U.S. type
certificate data sheet.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a report of failed main rotor hub-
to-mast attachment screws on a Model EC130B4 helicopter during a
scheduled maintenance inspection. The FAA is proposing this AD to
address failed main rotor hub-to-mast attachment screws, which could
lead to disconnection of the main rotor hub-to-mast attachment,
possibly resulting in loss of control of the helicopter. See the MCAI
for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2017-0032 describes procedures for determining whether the
helicopter has been operated in a severe environment since the last
inspection of the main rotor hub-to-mast attachment screws, an
inspection of the main rotor hub-to-mast attachment screws for
corrosion and damage (damage includes cracks, dents, and bolt
distortion) if the helicopter was operated in a severe environment, and
replacement of the main rotor hub-to-mast attachment screws if
necessary. This material 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.

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 the bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, the FAA
has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD because the FAA
evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other
products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2017-0032, described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this AD and except as discussed under ``Differences
Between this Proposed AD and the MCAI.''

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA initially worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a
process to use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information
for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2017-0032
will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed
AD would, therefore, require compliance with EASA AD 2017-0032 in its
entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular
section in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only
with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to
``all required actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD
requirement is not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s)
and Compliance Time(s)'' in the EASA AD. Service information specified
in EASA AD 2017-0032 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2017-
0032 will be available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1131 after the FAA
final rule is published.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI

    EASA AD 2017-0032 does not apply to Airbus Helicopter Model AS350C
helicopters, which are included on the U.S. type certificate data
sheet. However, this proposed AD would apply to Airbus Helicopter Model
AS350C helicopters because those helicopters have a similar design to
the helicopters identified in EASA AD 2017-0032.
    Where the service information specified in paragraph (3) of EASA AD
2017-0032 specifies to contact Airbus Helicopters if damage or
corrosion exceeds existing criteria, this proposed AD would require
replacing the affected screws using a method approved by the Manager,
International Validation Branch, FAA.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 1,220 helicopters
of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

           Estimated Costs for Required Determination of Helicopter Operation in a Severe Environment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hours x $85 per hour = $85............................              $0              $85         $103,700
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates that it would take about 1 hour per product to
comply with the proposed reporting requirement in this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA
estimates the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S.
operators to be $103,700, or $85 per product.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. If a helicopter is determined to have been operated
in a severe environment, an inspection of the main rotor hub-to-mast
attachment screws will be required. If there is corrosion or damage to
any of the screws, replacement of the affected screws will be required.
The FAA has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might
need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours x $85 per hour = $340....            $106             $446
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this proposed AD
is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this proposed AD has
been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and
includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and
reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting
associated with this proposed AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the
accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should
be directed to: Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal
Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-
1524.

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

    The FAA 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) 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 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 airworthiness
directive:

Airbus Helicopters: Docket No. FAA-2020-1131; Project Identifier
MCAI-2020-00613-R.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by January 29, 2021.

(b) Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs)

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus Helicopters, certificated in any
category, as identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this AD.
    (1) Model AS350B, AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350C,
and AS350D helicopters.
    (2) Model AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, and AS355NP
helicopters.
    (3) Model EC130B4 and EC130T2 helicopters.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 6200, Main Rotor
System.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of failed main rotor hub-to-
mast attachment screws. The FAA is issuing this AD to address failed
main rotor hub-to-mast attachment screws, which could lead to
disconnection of the main rotor hub-to-mast attachment, possibly
resulting in loss of control of the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Aviation Safety Agency (now European Union
Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) AD 2017-0032, dated February 17,
2017; corrected February 20, 2017 (EASA AD 2017-0032).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2017-0032

    (1) Where EASA AD 2017-0032 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2017-0032 does not apply
to this AD.
    (3) Paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2017-0032 specifies to report
inspection results to Airbus Helicopters within a certain compliance
time. For this AD, report inspection results at the applicable time
specified in paragraph (h)(3)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date
of this AD.
    (4) Where EASA AD 2017-0032 refers to flight hours (FH), this AD
requires using hours time-in-service.
    (5) Where the service information specified in paragraph (3) of
EASA AD 2017-0032 specifies to contact Airbus Helicopters if damage
or corrosion exceeds existing criteria, for this AD, replace the
affected screws using a method approved by the Manager,
International Validation Branch, FAA. For a repair method to be
approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, as
required by this paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must
specifically refer to this AD.
    (6) Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2017-
0032 specifies to discard certain parts, this AD does not include
that requirement.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):

    The Manager, International Validation 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 local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Validation Branch, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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.

(j) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to
the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is
2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 1 hour per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this
collection of information are mandatory as required by this AD. Send
comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this
burden to: Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal
Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX
76177-1524.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2017-0032, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 8999 000; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may
view this material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be found in the AD docket
on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1131.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Hal Jensen,
Aerospace Engineer, Operational Safety Branch, FAA, 470 L'Enfant
Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20024; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on December 9, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-27460 Filed 12-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 4, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 191)]
[Notices]
[Page 57887]
[DOCID:fr04oc05-81]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-3214-EM]

Alabama; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and
Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the State of Alabama (FEMA-3214-EM), dated August 28, 2005, and related
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 26, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident
period for this emergency is closed effective September 26, 2005.

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

R. David Paulison,
Acting Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department
of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 05-19810 Filed 10-3-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P


[Federal Register: April 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 74)]
[Notices]
[Page 20627-20629]
[DOCID:fr16ap08-47]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0250; FRL-8358-9]

Chromated Copper Arsenate Revised Risk Assessments; Notice of
Availability and Solicitation of Risk Reduction Options

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's revised risk
assessments for the restricted use antimicrobial pesticide chromated
copper arsenate (CCA). In addition, this notice solicits public comment
on risk reduction options for CCA and on EPA's preliminary benefits
assessment (Phase 5 of 6-Phase Process). The public is encouraged to
suggest risk management ideas or proposals to address the risks
identified. EPA is developing a Reregistration Eligibility Decision
(RED) for CCA through the full, 6-Phase public participation process
that the Agency uses to involve the public in developing pesticide
reregistration and tolerance reassessment decisions. Through these
programs, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides meet current health and
safety standards.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 16, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0402, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA EPA-HQ-
OPP-2004-0402. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any

personal information provided, unless the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
regulations.gov or e-mail. The regulations.gov website is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit
an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and
other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk
or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available in regulations.gov. To access the electronic docket, go to
http://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced Search,'' then ``Docket
Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the
``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov
website to view the docket index or access available documents.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either in the electronic docket at http://
www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this
Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lance Wormell, Antimicrobials Division
(7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

     1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
     ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is making available the Agency's revised risk assessments,
initially issued for comment through a Federal Register notice
published on March 17, 2004 (69 FR 12653) (FRL-7318-5); a response to
comments; and related documents for CCA. EPA also is releasing for
public comment a preliminary benefits assessment for CCA. EPA developed
the risk assessments for CCA as part of its public process for making
pesticide reregistration eligibility and tolerance reassessment
decisions. Through these programs, EPA is ensuring that pesticides meet
current standards under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), as amended, by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).
    The registered pesticides assessed in this reregistration case are
arsenic acid, arsenic pentoxide, chromic acid, and sodium dichromate.
The chemical case is generically referred to as ``CCA'', although it
also includes wood preservative uses of other inorganic arsenic-based
wood preservatives such as ammoniacal copper zinc arsenate (ACZA).
    CCA is a chemical wood preservative containing chromium, copper and
arsenic. CCA is used in pressure treated wood to protect wood from
rotting due to insects and microbial agents. EPA has classified CCA as
a restricted use product, for use only by certified pesticide
applicators.
    CCA has been used to pressure treat lumber since the 1940s. Since
the 1970s, the majority of the wood used in outdoor residential
settings has been CCA-treated wood. Pressure treated wood containing
CCA is no longer being produced for use in most residential settings,
including decks and playsets. Virtually all residential uses of CCA
were voluntarily cancelled effective December 31, 2003 and, therefore,
are not included in this reregistration case. EPA's risk assessment for
previously registered residential uses is also available in docket EPA-
HQ-OPP-2003-0250.

    EPA is providing an opportunity, through this notice, for
interested parties to provide risk management proposals or otherwise
comment on risk management for CCA. Risks of concern identified in the
revised assessments include worker risks (cancer and non-cancer)
resulting from dermal/inhalation exposure to arsenic and inhalation
exposure to chromium.
    EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all
pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The
Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public
Participation Process, published in the Federal Register on May 14,
2004 (69 FR 26819) (FRL-7357-9), explains that in conducting these
programs, EPA is tailoring its public participation process to be
commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of
issues, and degree of public concern associated with each pesticide.
Due to its uses, risks, and other factors, CCA is being reviewed
through the full 6-Phase public participation process.
    All comments should be submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES,
and must be received by EPA on or before the closing date. Comments and
proposals will become part of the Agency Docket for CCA. Comments
received after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.''
EPA is not required to consider these late comments.
    After considering comments received, EPA will develop and issue the
CCA RED.

B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA, as amended, directs that, after
submission of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient, ``the
Administrator shall determine whether pesticides containing such active
ingredient are eligible for reregistration,'' before calling in product
specific data on individual end-use products and either reregistering
products or taking other ``appropriate regulatory action.''

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pests and pesticides.

    Dated: April 7, 2008.
Frank Sanders
Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E8-8168 Filed 4-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 5 (Thursday, January 8, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 1054]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00057]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Rule 17a-5(c), SEC File No. 270-199, OMB Control No. 3235-0199.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 17a-5(c) (17 CFR
240.17a-5(c)), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a
et seq.). The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of
information to the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for
extension and approval.
    Rule 17a-5(c) generally requires broker-dealers who carry customer
accounts to provide statements of the broker-dealer's financial
condition to their customers. Paragraph (5) of Rule 17a-5(c) provides a
conditional exemption from this requirement. A broker-dealer that
elects to take advantage of the exemption must publish its statements
on its Web site in a prescribed manner, and must maintain a toll-free
number that customers can call to request a copy of the statements.
    The purpose of the Rule is to ensure that customers of broker-
dealers are provided with information concerning the financial
condition of the firm that may be holding the customers' cash and
securities. The Commission, when adopting the Rule in 1972, stated that
the goal was to ``directly'' send a customer essential information so
that the customer could ``judge whether his broker or dealer is
financially sound.'' The Commission adopted the Rule in response to the
failure of several broker-dealers holding customer funds and securities
in the period between 1968 and 1971.
    The Commission estimates that approximately 213 broker-dealer
respondents carrying approximately 115 million public customer accounts
incur an average burden of 142,424 hours per year to comply with the
Rule.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: Pamela Dyson, Acting
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, or send
an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: January 2, 2015.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-00057 Filed 1-7-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 152 (Monday, August 8, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 52335]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18709]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0747]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Umpqua River, Reedsport, OR

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the US 101 Bridge across the Umpqua
River, mile 11.1, at Reedsport, OR. The deviation is necessary to
accommodate updating the electric control panels on the bridge. This
deviation allows the US 101 Bridge to remain in the closed-to-
navigation position during upgrades.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on August 16, 2016 until
5 p.m. on August 18, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-0747] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Steven Fischer, Bridge
Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Oregon Department of Transportation
requested that the US 101 Bridge, near Reedsport, Oregon, remain in the
closed-to-navigation position to update the electric control panels.
The US 101 Bridge crosses the Umpqua River at mile 11.1 and provides 36
feet of vertical clearance above mean high water when in the closed-to-
navigation position. This deviation allows the US 101 Bridge to remain
in the closed-to-navigation position and need not open for maritime
traffic from 7 a.m. on August 16, 2016 until 5 p.m. August 18, 2016.
The normal operating schedule of this bridge is detailed at 33 CFR
117.893(a).
    Waterway usage on this part of the Umpqua River includes vessels
ranging from occasional commercial tug and barge to small pleasure
craft. ODOT has coordinated with local mariners in this regard, and no
objections have been received. No immediate alternate route is
available for vessels to pass. The Coast Guard will also inform the
users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to
Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that
vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the
temporary deviation. Vessels which do not require an opening of the
bridge may continue to transit beneath the bridge during this repair
period.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: July 29, 2016.
Steven M. Fischer,
Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-18709 Filed 8-5-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 29, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 60)]
[Notices]
[Page 14790-14791]
[DOCID:fr29mr07-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

March 23, 2007.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC07-42-000.
    Applicants: North Allegheny Wind, LLC, B&B Wind Portfolio 1 LLC,
Babcock & Brown Wind Partners-U.S. LLC, Aragonne Wind LLC, Allegheny
Ridge Wind Farm, LLC, Mendota Hills, LLC, BBPOP Wind Equity LLC, GSG,
LLC.
    Description: Consummation Notice of BBPOP Wind Equity LLC, et al.
of Phase 1 of transaction.
    Filed Date: 03/19/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070319-5081.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 09, 2007.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER07-150-003.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Public Service Company of New Mexico submits an errata
to its filings made on 11/2/06 and 2/9/07.
    Filed Date: 03/20/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070322-0156.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 10, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-205-000, ER07-205-001.
    Applicants: Ameren Energy Marketing Company, Union Electric
Company, Ameren Energy, Ameren Energy Marketing Company, Central
Illinois Light Company, Central Illinois Public Service Company,
Illinois Power Company.
    Description: Central Illinois Light Co dba AmerenCILCO et al
request to withdraw their 11/9/06 filing because no affiliate sales
would take place in connection with the application.
    Filed Date: 03/19/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070322-0043.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 09, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-385-001.
    Applicants: American Electric Power Service Corporation.
    Description: American Electric Power Service Corp on behalf of
Public Service Company of Oklahoma et al submits revisions to its OATT,
Third Revised Volume No. 6.
    Filed Date: 03/01/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070320-0013.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, March 30, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-628-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Services, Inc on behalf of Entergy Arkansas,
Inc submits the 2007 Wholesale Formula Rate Update applicable to the
Cities of Hope, Thayer, Campbell, North Little Rock, West Memphis and
Prescott.
    Filed Date: 03/13/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070322-0006.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 03, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-638-000.
    Applicants: Maine Public Service Company.
    Description: Maine Public Service Company submits informational
filing setting forth the changed loss factor effective 3/1/07 together
with back-up materials.
    Filed Date: 03/15/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070321-0063.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 05, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-640-000.
    Applicants: Citadel Energy Investments Ltd.
    Description: Citadel Energy Investments Ltd submits its petition
for acceptance of Initial Rate Schedule, Waivers, and Blanket
Authorization.
    Filed Date: 03/21/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070322-0157.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 11, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-641-000.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
    Description: Puget Sound Energy, Inc submits notice of succession
reflecting the adoption of Goldendale's Rate Schedule FERC 2 for sales
of reactive power from the Golden Facility etc pursuant to FERC's 2/1/
07 Order.
    Filed Date: 03/21/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070323-0177.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 11, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-642-000.
    Applicants: Southern Companies Services, Inc.
    Description: Southern Co Services, acting as agent for Alabama
Power Co et al submits a notice of adoption of revised transmission
loading relief procedures.
    Filed Date: 03/21/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070323-0178.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 11, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER97-504-011.
    Applicants: Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative, Inc.
    Description: PNGC Power submits updated market analysis and request
for continued authority to transact pursuant to market-based rate
authority.
    Filed Date: 03/16/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070321-0110.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 06, 2007.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:
    Docket Numbers: ES07-27-000.
    Applicants: Detroit Edison Company.
    Description: The Detroit Edison Company's application for an order
authorizing short-term securities bearing final maturity dates not to
exceed one year after issue.
    Filed Date: 03/19/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070321-0058.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 09, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For

assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-5773 Filed 3-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 8, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 26)]
[Notices]
[Page 6474]
[DOCID:fr08fe06-86]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER05-1410-000, EL05-148-000, ER06-456-000, EL05-145-000,
ER06-309-000, ER06-406-000, EL06-50-000 (not consolidated)]

PJM Interconnection, LLC; PJM Interconnection, LLC; District of
Columbia Public Service Commission; PJM Interconnection, LLC; PJM
Interconnection, LLC; American Electric Power Service Corporation;
Supplemental Notice Regarding RPM Technical Conference

February 2, 2006.
    The Commission will hold a technical conference on February 3,
2006, on the matters raised by the Reliability Pricing Model (RPM)
filed by PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM) in Docket Nos. ER05-1410-000
and EL05-148-000 (February 3 RPM conference).\1\ The additional docket
numbers are added because filings in those proceedings contain issues
that may arise in the course of discussions regarding RPM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Notice of Commission Technical Conference (December 28,
2005) and Supplemental Notice of Commission Technical Conference
(January 19, 2006) in Docket Nos. ER05-1410-000 and EL05-148-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These proceedings are not consolidated. Once the February 3, 2006
RPM conference is completed and all documents related to that
conference are filed, parties should not combine issues relating to
these separate proceedings in a single filing. Parties should file
future pleadings relating to PJM's filing in Docket Nos. ER05-1410-000
and EL05-148-000 in those dockets only, and similarly, should file
future pleadings related to the proceedings in Docket Nos. ER06-456-
000, EL05-145-000, ER06-309-000, ER06-406-000, and EL06-50-000 in those
dockets respectively.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-1701 Filed 2-7-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 63 [ R06 OAR 2005 OK 000X; FRL ]

Approval of the Clean Air Act Section 112( l) Program for Hazardous Air Pollutants and Delegation of Authority to the State of Oklahoma AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA).

ACTION: Proposed Rule.

SUMMARY: The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality ( ODEQ) has submitted a request for receiving delegation of EPA authority for implementation and enforcement of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAPs) for all sources ( both part 70 and non part 70 sources). The request applies to certain NESHAPs promulgated by EPA as amended through September 1, 2004, and adopted by ODEQ in State regulations. The delegation of authority under this notice does not apply to sources located in Indian Country.

EPA is providing notice that proposes to approve the delegation of certain NESHAPs to ODEQ.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before [ Insert date 30 days from date of publication in the Federal Register].

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Mr. Jeff Robinson, Air Permits Section ( 6PD R),

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202 2733.

Comments may also be submitted electronically or through hand delivery/ courier by following the 2 detailed instructions in the Addresses section of the direct final rule located in the final rules section of the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeff Robinson, Air Permits Section,

Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division ( 6PD R), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202 2733, at ( 214) 665 6435, or at robinson. jeffrey@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving ODEQ's request for delegation of authority to implement and enforce certain NESHAPs for all sources ( both Part 70 and non Part 70 sources). ODEQ has adopted certain NESHAPs into Texas' state regulations. In addition, EPA is waiving its notification requirements so sources will only need to send notifications and reports to OCEQ.

The EPA is taking direct final action without prior proposal because EPA views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for this approval is set forth in the preamble to the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn, and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final 3 those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is published in the Rules section of this Federal Register.

Authority: 42 U. S. C. 7412.

______________ Dated: November 29, 2005 / s/ Carl E. Edlund Acting Regional Administrator Region 6


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 5, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26100-26101]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11697]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AC19-122-000]

Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on May 9, 2019, Pacific Gas and Electric Company
filed a request for approval to determine its allowance for funds used
during construction rate in a manner that excludes certain liability
provisions required by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles that do
not have an impact on cash available to fund construction.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion

to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 19, 2019.

    Dated: May 30, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-11697 Filed 6-4-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 23, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 204)]
[Notices]
[Page 60053]
[DOCID:fr23oc07-73]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Environmental Desk Reference for Airport Actions

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: On May 18, 2006, the Federal Aviation Administration's Office
of Airports (ARP) published a notice in the Federal Register. That
Notice told interested parties about the availability of the Preamble
for FAA Order 5050.4B, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions (71 FR 29014). In that
Preamble, ARP stated that it would prepare a desk reference to provide
its staff and interested parties with information on integrating and
complying with Federal environmental laws, regulations, and Executive
Orders other than NEPA (71 FR 29015).
    Today's Notice alerts interested parties that ARP has prepared the
desk reference, entitled ``Environmental Desk Reference for Airport
Actions.'' Interested parties may review a copy of the document at the
following Web site: http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/airports/environmental/environmental_desk_ref/
.

    ARP will publish changes to the Desk Reference that may be needed
to respond to changes in the laws, regulations, or Executive Orders the
Desk Reference discusses.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ed Melisky, Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Airports, Airport Planning and Environmental
Division, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 209591; telephone:
202-267-5869. His e-mail is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: October 12, 2007.
Benito DeLeon,
Director, Office of Airport Planning and Programming. APP-1.
[FR Doc. 07-5224 Filed 10-22-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M