Background Information on FIRST: 61 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 takes into consideration the so called Index Drinking Water Reservoir by representing a larger field and pond than the standard GENEEC 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 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 sorbing 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 runoffprone watershed, the use of the maximum use rate, no buffer zone, and a single large rainfall Background Information on SCIGROW:

SCIGROW 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 SCIGROW 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 SCIGROW for national or regional exposure estimates.

SCIGROW 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.

Modeling Inputs and Results:

Tables 1 and 2 summarize the input values used in the model runs for FIRST 1.0 and SCIGROW, respectively. The lowest non sand K D was used in FIRST 1.0. The median K OC value was used in SCIGROW. The available aerobic soil metabolism half life for oxadiazon was extremely high. For FIRST, stability was assumed, while the extrapolated value of 841 days was used in SCIGROW. The modeling results associated with maximum allowable rate per year ( 4 lb ai/ A applied twice at 6 months interval) are presented in Table 3. Attached to this memo are copies of the original printouts generated from FIRST and SCIGROW runs.

cc: Nancy McCarroll ( HED) 62 Table 1. Environmental Fate and Other Input Parameters for the Estimation of Oxadiazon using FIRST Parameter Value Source Water Solubility ( 25  C) 1 ppm One Liner Hydrolysis Half Life ( pH 7) stable MRID 41863603 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half Life ( from 6 values) essentially stable MRID 42772801 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half life not available N/ A Aqueous Photolysis Half Life 2.75 days MRID 41897201 Soil/ Water Partition Coefficient ( Lowest non sand K d) 16.9 MRID 41898202 Pesticide is Wetted In Yes Labels PCA ( turf) 0.87 Default Depth of Incorporation ( Broadcast) 0.0 inch Labels Table 2. Environmental Fate Input Parameters for the Estimation of Oxadiazon using SCIGROW.

Parameter Value Source Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient ( median K OC) 2376 MRID 41898202 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half Life ( median) 841 days MRID 42772801 Table 3. Modeling Results for Use of Oxadiazon on ( Turf) Golf Courses Parameter Value Source Application Method Ground Spray Labels Application Rate 4.0 lb a. i./ A Registrant Applications Permitted per Year 2 Registrant***

Application Interval ( days) 182 Registrant FIRST 1.0 Peak Untreated Water Concentration 246 ppb N/ A FIRST 1.0 Annual Average Untreated Water Concentration 100 ppb N/ A SCIGROW Ground Water Concentration 0.6 ppb N/ A *** The Registrant supports multiple applications, at lower application rates. 63 RESULTS OBTAINED USING FIRST RUN No. 1 FOR OXADIAZON ON Turf ( Golf * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE % CROPPED INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Kd ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) AREA ( IN)  4.000( 8.000) 2 182 16.9 1.0 GROUND( 6.4) 87.0 .0 FIELD AND RESERVOIR HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( RESERVOIR) ( RES. EFF) ( RESER.) ( RESER.)  .00 0 N/ A 2.75 341.00 .00 341.00 UNTREATED WATER CONC ( MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB)) Ver 1.0 MAY 1, 2001  PEAK DAY ( ACUTE) ANNUAL AVERAGE ( CHRONIC) CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION  246.388 100.013 RESULTS OBTAINED USING SCIGROW RUN No. 1 FOR OXADIAZON INPUT VALUES  APPL (#/ AC) APPL. URATE SOIL SOIL AEROBIC RATE NO. (#/ AC/ YR) KOC METABOLISM ( DAYS)  4.000 2 8.000 2376.0 841.0 GROUND WATER SCREENING CONCENTRATIONS IN PPB  .592986  A= 836.000 B= 2381.000 C= 2.922 D= 3.377 RILP= 1.821 F=  1.130 G= .074 URATE= 8.000 GWSC= .592986 64 APPENDIX F: EXPOSURE AND RISK CHARACTERIZATION Risk characterization integrates the results of the exposure and ecotoxicity data to evaluate the likelihood of adverse ecological effects. The means of this integration is called the quotient method. Risk quotients ( RQs) are calculated by dividing exposure estimates by acute and chronic ecotoxicity values: RQ = exposure/ toxicity. To evaluate the potential risk to aquatic and terrestrial organisms from the use of Oxadiazon, risk quotients ( RQs) are calculated from the ratio of estimated environmental concentrations ( EECs) to ecotoxicity values.

For risk assessments, EFED used dosage rate information obtained from SRRD and BEAD. Since most of the use is on golf courses, turf was chosen to represent all sites.

Terrestrial and aquatic risk assessments were based on:  4 lb ai/ A liquid and granular product at 1 and 2 applications per year with a six month reapplication interval  2.4 lb ai/ A liquid product at 2 application per year with a six month reapplication interval ( NOTE: aquatic risk assessments did not include granular formulations)

RQs are then compared to levels of concern ( LOC) criteria used by OPP for determining potential risk to nontarget organisms and the subsequent need for possible regulatory action. The criteria indicate that a pesticide used as directed has the potential to cause adverse effects on nontarget organisms. LOCs currently address the following risk presumption categories: ( 1) acute high  potential for acute risk is high; regulatory action may be warranted in addition to restricted use classification, ( 2) acute restricted use  the potential for acute risk is high, but it may be mitigated through restricted use classification, ( 3) acute species  the potential for acute risk to species is high, and regulatory action may be warranted, and ( 4) chronic risk  the potential for chronic risk is high, and regulatory action may be warranted. Currently, EFED does not perform assessments for chronic risk to plants, acute or chronic risks to nontarget insects, or chronic risk from granular/ bait formulations to birds or mammals.

The ecotoxicity test values ( measurement endpoints) used in the acute and chronic risk quotients are derived from required studies. Examples of ecotoxicity values derived from short term laboratory studies that assess acute effects are: ( 1) LC 50 ( fish and birds), ( 2) LD 50 ( birds and mammals), ( 3) EC 50 ( aquatic plants and aquatic invertebrates) and ( 4) EC 25 ( terrestrial plants). Examples of toxicity test effect levels derived from long term laboratory studies that assess chronic effects are: ( 1) LOAEC ( birds, fish, and aquatic invertebrates) and ( 2) NOAEC ( birds, fish and aquatic invertebrates). Generally, the most sensitive species tested are used. The NOAEC is used as the ecotoxicity test value in assessing chronic effects to birds, mammals, fish, and aquatic invertebrates.

Risk presumptions and the corresponding RQs and LOCs, are tabulated in Table 1. 65 Table 1. Risk presumptions for terrestrial organisms Risk Presumption RQ LOC Birds Acute High Risk EEC1/ LC50 or LD50/ sqft2 or LD50/ day3 0.5 Acute Restricted Use EEC/ LC50 or LD50/ sqft or LD50/ day ( or LD50 < 50 mg/ kg) 0.2 Acute Species EEC/ LC50 or LD50/ sqft or LD50/ day 0.1 Chronic Risk EEC/ NOAEC 1 Wild Mammals Acute High Risk EEC/ LC50 or LD50/ sqft or LD50/ day 0.5 Acute Restricted Use EEC/ LC50 or LD50/ sqft or LD50/ day ( or LD50 < 50 mg/ kg) 0.2 Acute Species EEC/ LC50 or LD50/ sqft or LD50/ day 0.1 Chronic Risk EEC/ NOAEC 1 1 abbreviation for Estimated Environmental Concentration ( ppm) on avian/ mammalian food items 2 mg/ ft2 3 mg of toxicant consumed/ day LD50 * wt. of bird LD50 * wt. of bird Risk presumptions for aquatic organisms Risk Presumption RQ LOC Acute High Risk EEC1/ LC50 or EC50 0.5 Acute Restricted Use EEC/ LC50 or EC50 0.1 Acute Species EEC/ LC50 or EC50 0.05 Chronic Risk EEC/ NOAEC 1 1 EEC = ( ppm or ppb) in water 66 Risk presumptions for plants Risk Presumption RQ LOC Plant Inhabiting Terrestrial and Semi Aquatic Areas Acute High Risk EEC1/ EC25 1 Acute Species EEC/ EC05 or NOAEC 1 Aquatic Plants Acute High Risk EEC2/ EC50 1 Acute Species EEC/ EC05 or NOAEC 1 1 EEC = lbs a. i./ A 2 EEC = ( ppb or ppm) in water 67 Table 2. Selection of Toxicological Endpoints Used to Determine Risk Quotients ( RQs)

Type Of Toxicity Organism Species Toxicological Endpoint Oral Acute Bird Mallard 1040 mg/ kg Dietary bobwhite/ mallard > 5000 ppm Chronic bobwhite 500 ppm 1 Oral Acute Mammal Rat > 5000 mg/ kg Chronic Rat 100 ppm 2 Acute Freshwater Fish Rainbow trout/ Bluegill 0.88 ppm Chronic Rainbow trout 0.88 ppb 3 Acute Freshwater Invertebrates Daphnid 2.18 ppm Chronic Daphnid 0.03 ppm Acute Estuarine Fish Sheepshead Minnow 1.5 ppm Chronic Sheepshead Minnow 0.0015 ppm4 Acute Estuarine Invertebrates Mysid 0.27 ppm Chronic Mysid 0.0037 ppm4 Acute Aquatic Plants ( vascular)

Aquatic Plants ( Nonvascular) duckweed marine diatom EC50 = 41 ppb; NOAEC = < 8 ppb EC50 = 5.2 ppb 1 No effects on any reproductive parameter or viability of of F1 offspring at the highest dose tested, 1000 ppm; however due to excessive mortality ( 33%) of adult female birds in that dose level, a NOAEC for chronic effects was set at 500 ppm. 2 Based on LOAEL of > 38 mg/ kg/ day for inactive mammary tissue and fetal/ pup death observed in the one year range finding test of a rat reproduction study. NOAEC > 100 ppm. 3 Rainbow trout was more sensitive than the fathead minnow ( fathead minnow NOAEC= 33 ppb). 4 Extrapolation from acute/ chronic ratio. 68 Table 6. Environmental Fate Input Parameters for GENEEC 2.0.

Chemical Oxadiazon PC Code 109001 Water Solubility ( 25

C) 1 ppm Hydrolysis Half Life ( pH 7) stable Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half Life stable Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half life not available Photolysis Half Life 2.75 days Soil/ Water Equilibrium Partition Coefficient ( Kd) 16.91 Depth of Incorporation ( Broadcast) 0.0 in.

Wetted In Yes Table 7. Modeling Results for Use on Turf Ground spray1 granular Application Rate 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Application Frequency 1 1 1 2 2 Application Interval ( days) N/ A N/ A 182 182 182 GENEEC 2.0 Peak EEC 44 67 89 173 150 21 Day EEC 43 65 87 170 147 60 Day EEC 42 63 84 163 142 3. Low boom ground sprayer with fine spray quality ( EFED defaults), no buffer ( no spray zone). 69 APPENDIX G: ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS DATA REQUIREMENTS Table of Data Requirements of Ecological Effects for Oxadiazon Guideline # Data Requirement Is Data Requirement Satisfied? MRID #' s Study Classification 71 1 850.2100 Avian Oral LD50 yes 41610101 core 71 2 850.2200 Avian Dietary LC50 yes 41610102 41610103 core core 71 4 850.2300 Avian Reproduction yes 41993201 41993202 supplemental core 72 1 850.1075 Freshwater Fish LC50 yes 42350601 42330401 core core 72 2 850.1010 Freshwater Invertebrate Acute LC50 yes 41784301 core 72 3( a) 850.1075 Estuarine/ Marine Fish LC50 yes 42615801 core 72 3( b) 850.1025 Estuarine/ Marine Mollusk EC50 yes 42570301 core 72 3( c) 850.1035 850.1045 Estuarine/ Marine Shrimp EC50 yes 42615802 core 72 4( a) 850.1400 Estuarine Fish Early Life Stage no 72 4( b) 850.1300 850.1350 Estuarine/ Marine Invertebrate Life Cycle no 72 5 850.1500 Freshwater Fish Full Life Cycle na

122 1( a) 850.4100 Seed Germ./ Seedling Emergence no

122 1( b) 850.4150 Vegetative Vigor no   70 122 2 850.4400 Aquatic Plant Growth yes 41610107 41610108 41610105 41610106 42659001 supplemental core core core supplemental 123 1( a) 850.4225 Seed Germ./ Seedling Emergence no 123 1( b) 850.4250 Vegetative Vigor no 123 2 850.4400 Aquatic Plant Growth partially 5 41610105 41610106 41610106 41610108 core 141 1 850.3020 Honey Bee Acute Contact LD50 yes 4268301 core 141 2 850.3030 Honey Bee Residue on Foliage not required 70 1 Acute and Chronic Sediment Toxicity Testing no6 70 1 Aquatic Phototoxicity Studies no 1 Although the mallard study was supplemental since a NOAEC was not established, the study does not have to be repeated; the bobwhite was more sensitive and was used for risk assessment purposes.

2 Early life stage fish testing with an estuarine species is required. The raw data for the rainbow trout study MRID 41811601 must be submitted. This information was requested in 1997 under D165510.

4 The rates used should be low enough to elicit an NOAEC or allow for accurate estimation of the EC05 for all measured parameters. The measured endpoints should include: shoot length, root length and/ or height, and a phytotoxic rating of the visible effects. Testing must be conducted with a liquid typical end use product, rather than technical product, due to the insolubility of the material and since historically, plant species have been found to be more sensitive to the end use product, than technical. Concentrations must be measured, and results must be based on measured concentrations. The nominal concentrations used in statistical analyses most likely did not represent actual exposure. This information was requested in 1995 under D166982.

5 A freshwater blue green algae ( Anabaena flos aquae) is required; the study submitted ( MRID 41610104) was invalid.

6 The high KOC of oxadiazon, combined with the high persistance exhibited in the aerobic soil metabolism, as well as the anaerobic aquatic metabolism (>> 10 days) trigger the requirement of a Chronic Sediment Toxicity Testing with both Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans. 2 Waived due to the relatively low vapor pressure for oxadiazon ( 1.00x10 6 mm Hg).

3Satisfied by submission of an Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism study.

71 Table of Data Requirements of Environmental Effects for Oxadiazon Guideline # Data Requirement Is Data Requirement Satisfied? MRID #' s Study Classification 161 1 835.2120 Hydrolysis Yes 41863603 acceptable 161 2 835.2240 Photodegradation in Water Yes 41897201 acceptable 161 3 835.2410 Photodegradation on Soil Yes 41898201 acceptable 161 4 835.2370 Photodegradation in Air waived2 N/ A N/ A 162 1 835.4100 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Yes 42772801 acceptable 162 2 835.4200 Anaerobic Soil Metabolism Yes3 NA N/ A 162 3 835.4400 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Yes 42773802 supplemental 162 4 835.4300 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism No NA NA 163 1 835.1240 835.1230 Leaching Adsorption/ Desorption Yes 44555608, 41898202 acceptable,

supplemental 163 2 835.1410 Laboratory Volatility waived1 N/ A N/ A 163 3 835.8100 Field Volatility waived1 N/ A N/ A 164 1 835.6100 Terrestrial Field Dissipation Yes 41767401 acceptable 164 2 835.6200 Aquatic Field Dissipation not required N/ A N/ A 164 3 835.6300 Forestry Dissipation not required N/ A N/ A 72 164 4 835.6400 Combination Products and Tank Mixes Dissipation not required N/ A N/ A 165 4 850.1730 Accumulation in Fish Yes 42226701 acceptable 165 5 850.1950 Accumulation aquatic non target not required N/ A N/ A 166 1 835.7100 Ground Water small prospective not required N/ A N/ A 201 1 840.1100 Droplet Size Spectrum reserved N/ A N/ A 202 1 840.1200 Drift Field Evaluation reserved N/ A N/ A 73 APPENDIX H: QUALITATIVE USE ASSESSMENT Case No.: 2485 PC Code: 109001 Date: 01 10 01 Analyst: Stephen Smearman Oxadiazon is a selective preemergence and early post emergence herbicide used primarily to control annual grasses and broadleaf weeds. The tradename for Oxadiazon in the US is Ronstar ( formerly Chipco Ronstar) and formulations are available as emulsifiable concentrates, granules, flowable and wetable powders.

Based upon the available EPA data and other pesticide usage survey information for Oxadiazon on all sites for the years 1989 through 1999, an annual estimate of Oxadiazon's total usage on all sites averaged 249,000 pounds of active ingredient ( a. i.) on an average of 52,000 acres treated over the last 10 years. Most of the acreage is treated with up to 2.4 pounds of a. i. per acre owing most of the usage applies to golf courses which based on reported usage has higher application rates than other uses. Oxadiazon's largest markets in terms of total pounds of active ingredient is allocated to golf courses ( 65%). The remaining usage is primarily for horticultural/ nursery uses and on processed tomatoes ( 22%). Other reported uses include potatoes and barley which accounts for an respective 1.5% and less than 1% of the total pounds a. i. annually. However, there are no tolerances nor labeled uses for these site and therefore should not be considered during risk assessment. However, there is international reported use of Oxadiazon on rice in China and on cotton in Mexico and Sudan.

Additional estimates of total acres grown and total acres treated for the non crop sites of road right of ways ( ROW), landscape maintenance, horticultural/ nursery and park uses are not currently available although there is estimates of pounds of a. i. applied. The following table illustrates the usage of Oxadiazon. 74 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 USAGE OF OXADIAZON Site Acres Grown ( 000) Acres Treated ( 000) % of Crop Treated LB AI Applied ( 000) Average Application Rate Wtd Avg Est Max Wtd Avg Est Max Wtd Avg Est Max lb ai/ acre/ yr # appl / yr lb ai/ A/ appl * Potatoes 1,373 2 4 0% 0% 4 8 2.0 1.0 2.0 * Barley 7,326 0 1 0% 0% 0 1 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lots/ Farmsteads/ etc 56,000 1 3 0% 0% 1 4 1.3 1.0 1.3 Golf Courses 1,618 49 98 3% 6% 160 235 2.4 1.0 2.4 Landscape Mainten      12 24 3.0

Rights of Way      5 10

Parks      11 22

Horticultural Nurseries      56 112 4.0

Total 51.915 106 249.03 416 COLUMN HEADINGS Wtd Avg = Weighted average the most recent years and more reliable data are weighted more heavily. Est Max = Estimated maximum, which is estimated from available data. Average application rates are calculated from the weighted averages.

NOTES ON TABLE DATA Usage data primarily covers 1988  1998. Calculations of the above numbers may not appear to agree because they are displayed as rounded to the nearest 1000 for acres treated or lb. a. i. ( Therefore 0 = < 500) to the nearest whole percentage point for % of crop treated. ( Therefore 0% = < 0.5%) * = Available EPA sources indicate that usage is observed for potatoes and barley in the reported data for this site. However, there are no tolerances or labeled uses for these site. Reason for reported usage is undetermined and therefore usage for these sites should not be used for risk assessment.  = missing information or lack of confidence in the data to determine an accurate estimate of usage. However, these sites were included in the table because of indicated usage.

SOURCES: EPA data, 1988 98; USDA, NASS, 1999 75 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 APPENDIX I. GENEEC 2.0 INPUT PARAMETERS, RESULTS, AND OUTPUTS Environmental Fate Input Parameters for GENEEC 2.0.

Chemical Oxadiazon PC Code 109001 Water Solubility ( 25  C) 1 ppm Hydrolysis Half Life ( pH 7) stable Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half Life stable Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half life not available Photolysis Half Life 2.75 days Soil/ Water Equilibrium Partition Coefficient ( K d) 16.91 Depth of Incorporation ( Broadcast) 0.0 in.

Wetted In Yes Table 2. Modeling Results for Use on Turf Ground spray1 granular Application Rate 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Application Frequency 1 1 1 2 2 Application Interval ( days) N/ A N/ A 182 182 182 GENEEC 2.0 Peak EEC 44 67 89 173 150 21 Day EEC 43 65 87 170 147 60 Day EEC 42 63 84 163 142 4. Low boom ground sprayer with fine spray quality ( EFED defaults), no buffer ( no spray zone). 76 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 RUN No. 1 FOR Oxadiazon ON Turf * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE NO SPRAY INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Kd ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) ( FT) ( IN)  4.000( 8.000) 2 182 16.9 1.0 GRHIFI( 6.6) .0 .0 FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( POND) ( POND EFF) ( POND) ( POND)  .00 0 N/ A 2.75 341.00 .00 341.00 GENERIC EECs ( IN MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB))  PEAK MAX 4 DAY MAX 21 DAY MAX 60 DAY MAX 90 DAY GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC  173.14 172.44 169.50 163.00 158.23 RUN No. 2 FOR Oxadiazon ON Turf * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE NO SPRAY INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Kd ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) ( FT) ( IN)  2.000( 4.000) 2 42 16.9 1.0 GRHIFI( 6.6) .0 .0 FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( POND) ( POND EFF) ( POND) ( POND)  .00 0 N/ A 2.75 341.00 .00 341.00 GENERIC EECs ( IN MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB))  PEAK MAX 4 DAY MAX 21 DAY MAX 60 DAY MAX 90 DAY GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC  88.20 87.84 86.34 83.03 80.60 RUN No. 3 FOR Oxadiazon ON Turf * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE NO SPRAY INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Kd ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) ( FT) ( IN)  3.000( 6.000) 2 182 16.9 1.0 GRHIFI( 6.6) .0 .0 77 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( POND) ( POND EFF) ( POND) ( POND)  .00 0 N/ A 2.75 341.00 .00 341.00 GENERIC EECs ( IN MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB))  PEAK MAX 4 DAY MAX 21 DAY MAX 60 DAY MAX 90 DAY GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC  129.85 129.33 127.12 122.25 118.67 RUN No. 4 FOR Oxadiazon ON Turf * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE NO SPRAY INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Kd ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) ( FT) ( IN)  4.000( 8.000) 2 182 16.9 1.0 GRANUL( .0) .0 .0 FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( POND) ( POND EFF) ( POND) ( POND)  .00 0 N/ A 2.75 341.00 .00 341.00 GENERIC EECs ( IN MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB))  PEAK MAX 4 DAY MAX 21 DAY MAX 60 DAY MAX 90 DAY GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC  150.41 149.80 147.25 141.60 137.46 78 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 RUN No. 1 FOR Oxadiazon ON Turf * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE NO SPRAY INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Kd ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) ( FT) ( IN)  2.000( 2.000) 1 1 16.9 1.0 GRHIFI( 6.6) .0 .0 FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( POND) ( POND EFF) ( POND) ( POND)  .00 0 N/ A 2.75 341.00 .00 341.00 GENERIC EECs ( IN MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB))  PEAK MAX 4 DAY MAX 21 DAY MAX 60 DAY MAX 90 DAY GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC  44.39 44.21 43.46 41.79 40.57 RUN No. 1 FOR Oxadiazon ON Turf * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE NO SPRAY INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Kd ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) ( FT) ( IN)  3.000( 3.000) 1 1 16.9 1.0 GRHIFI( 6.6) .0 .0 FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( POND) ( POND EFF) ( POND) ( POND)  .00 0 N/ A 2.75 341.00 .00 341.00 GENERIC EECs ( IN MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB))  PEAK MAX 4 DAY MAX 21 DAY MAX 60 DAY MAX 90 DAY GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC  66.59 66.32 65.19 62.69 60.85 79 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 RUN No. 1 FOR Oxadiazon ON Turf * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE NO SPRAY INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Kd ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) ( FT) ( IN)  4.000( 4.000) 1 1 16.9 1.0 GRHIFI( 6.6) .0 .0 FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( POND) ( POND EFF) ( POND) ( POND)  .00 0 N/ A 2.75 341.00 .00 341.00 GENERIC EECs ( IN MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB))  PEAK MAX 4 DAY MAX 21 DAY MAX 60 DAY MAX 90 DAY GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC AVG GEEC  88.79 88.43 86.92 83.59 81.14 APPENDIX J. PHOTOXICITY STUDY PROTOCOL for LIGHT DEPENDENT PEROXIDIZING HERBICIDES 4Matringe, M., J. M. Camadro, P. Labbe, and R. Scalla. 1989. Protoporphyrinogen oxidase as a molecular target for diphenyl ether herbicides. Biochem. J. 260: 231 235.

5Birchfield, N. B., and J. E. Casida. 1997. Protoporphyrinogen oxidase of mouse and maize: Target site selectivity and thiol effects on peroxidizing herbicide action. Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology 57, 36 43.

6Halling, B. P., D. A. Yuhas, V. F. Fingar, and J. W. Winkleman. 1994. " Protoporphyrinogen oxidase inhibitors for tumor therapy" in Porphyric Pesticides: Chemistry, Toxicology, and Pharmaceutical Applications, ( S. O. Duke and C. A. Rebeiz, Eds.) pp. 280 290, American Chemical Society Symposium Series 559, Am. Chem. Soc., Washington, D. C., 1994.

7Birchfield, N. B. Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase as a Herbicide Target: Characterization of the [ 3H] Desmethylflumipropyn Sorbing Site. Dissertation. University of California, Berkeley. 1996.

80 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 The light dependent peroxidizing herbicides ( LDPHs) are a growing class of weed control chemicals ( see partial listing attached). They act in plants by inhibiting the enzyme protoporphyrinogen oxidase ( protox), which is the last common enzyme in the heme and chlorophyll biosynthetic pathways. 4 Protox exists in both plants and animals and the enzyme from both sources has been shown to be highly sensitive to many LDPHs. 5 LDPH protox inhibition in plants results in a rapid accumulation of protoporphyrin IX, a phototoxic heme and chlorophyll precursor. In the presence of light, protoporphyrin IX is a powerful generator of singlet oxygen which in plants causes lipid membrane peroxidation leading to a rapid loss of turgidity and foliar burns. LDPH exposure in mammals has been shown to result in excretion of porphyrins in urine ( porphynuria) and feces, increased liver weight, elevated blood porphyrin levels, developmental abnormalities, and cancer. Humans with a hereditary protox disorder ( variegate porphyria) which results in lowered protox activity exhibit many symptoms similar to LDPH exposure in addition to photosensitivity. However, photosensitivity is not a commonly reported symptom of LDPH exposure in animals.

An LDPH induced occurrence of phototoxicity in rats6 and increased cytotoxicity to human skin cells grown in culture in the presence of light and an LDPH7 have been reported but many other LDPH toxicity studies make no mention of phototoxicity in animals. The scarcity of phototoxicity data in animals could result from physiological or biochemical distinctions from plants. For instance, animals exposed to LDPHs may not normally accumulate protoporphyrin IX in their epidermis. However, phototoxicity may not be reported in many LDPH toxicity tests because of relatively low light conditions in laboratories and/ or protection afforded by the animals' fur or feathers. Animals without fur or feathers existing in sunny environments would be expected to be at highest risk for potential phototoxic effects.

The Aquatic Biology Tech Team ( ABTT) recommends that phototoxicity studies be conducted on herbicides with this mode of action to determine if animals exposed to LDPHs and intense light ( similar to sunlight) show increased toxicity relative to controls exposed to LDPHs and low intensity light. The results of these studies will help to determine if animals that are exposed to sunlight in LDPH use areas are at higher risk than guideline toxicity studies suggest. 8American Society for Testing and Materials. 1994. Standard guide for conducting the frog embryo teratogenesis assay Xenopus. E 1439 91. In Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 11.5, pp. 825 835. Philadelphia, PA.

81 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 The ABTT is requesting that a LDPH phototoxicity protocol be submitted for review and agreement by EFED and the registrant prior to study initiation. Protocols for standard toxicity tests have also been published. 8 In nature, fish and other aquatic organisms are expected to be exposed to LDPHs through run off and spray drift. Aquatic organisms inhabiting small, shallow water bodies, exposed to high levels of solar radiation would be expected to be at greatest risk for potential phototoxic effects. Therefore, the ABTT is requesting a small fish species be used in a phototoxicity assay to assess the potential of light to increase LDPH toxicity.

The ABTT requests that the study adequately address the following issues and suggests the paper, " Photoenhanced Toxicity of a Carbamate Insecticide to Early Life Stage Anuran Amphibians", 5 and other studies in the peer reviewed scientific literature serve as sources of additional guidance:

Species The fathead minnow may be an appropriate test species because of existing toxicity protocols which may be adapted for this study.

Exposure duration A subchronic exposure duration would be adequate for proof of principle. A single exposure may not allow adequate time for porphyrin accumulation, however, a life cycle is not necessary to identify a phototoxic effect.

Dosing A range finding study should be conducted under defined low light conditions to identify an LC 50 value and lower dose levels expected to be similar to controls. Doses used in the phototoxicity study should not be expected to result in significant mortality in low light controls. Dissolved concentrations of the test chemical should be confirmed by an appropriate analytical method.

Endpoints Behavioral observations should be made in addition to measurements of mortality, growth, weight, morphology, and appearance. Ideally, measurements of protoporphyrin and heme concentrations in the blood and protox activity in the liver of each test organisms should be made.

Light sources Artificial light may be preferred to natural light that will vary in different regions and seasons as well as with weather. If artificial light is used, the light should resemble full, natural sunlight as closely as possible, particularly around 400 nm. The most important wavelength for porphyrin induced phototoxicity in ~ 400 nm. No matter what the light source, the duration and intensity of UV and visible light should be reported at all wavelengths ( 200 800 nm). At this point EFED does not have a specific recommendation for an artificial light source.

Dark, light, and positive controls As this study is intended to identify potential effects of light on LDPH toxicity, an appropriate study protocol should 82 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 include a dark, or low light, control group. Another group not exposed to chemicals but exposed to full light should be included ( a full light control). In addition to the dark and light controls, a positive control group using protoporphyrin IX may be useful.

Exposure chambers and light filters Light intensity should be measured inside test chambers if glass or any other material is placed between the light source and the test animals. Any filters should be cured under the study light for 72 hours prior to study initiation to ensure consistent transmittance. 83 January 10, 2001 F:\ user\ share\ usage\ Reports quas\ reds\ Oxdiazon00 ATTACHMENT 1.

The following list of herbicides are believed to act by inhibiting protoporphyringen oxidase in the heme and chlorophyll biosynthetic pathway.

acifluorfen azafenidin carfentrazone ethyl flumiclorac pentyl flumioxazin fluthiacet methyl fomesafen lactofen oxadiargyl oxadiazon oxyfluorfen sulfentrazone thidiazimin


Meg McCarthy/DC/USEPA/US

01/17/2007 03:06 PM	To

<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 	cc

	bcc

	Patricia Mercer/DC/USEPA/US@EPA; Kristin Fitzgerald/DC/USEPA/US@EPA; James

Michael/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

	Subject

	Follow-up Questions on USWAG's Comment

Jim Roewer, Executive Director

Utilities Solid Waste Activities Group

c/o Edison Electric Institute

701 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC  20004-2696

Dear Mr. Roewer:

 Thank you for your comments on EPA’s Proposed Rule: Subpart K—Standards

Applicable to Academic Laboratories (71 Federal Register 29712) on behalf

of the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG).

In response to USWAG’s comments (Docket Number

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2003-0012-0179), EPA has a few follow-up questions.  On page 2

of USWAG’s comments you indicate that many of USWAG’s member companies

operate “utility laboratories” that would benefit from the provisions in

Subpart K, particularly the laboratory clean-out provisions.  EPA is very

interested in any information and data that USWAG can provide to give a

clearer picture of how a utility laboratory functions.  For example, any

information or data describing these utility laboratories, their

activities and their hazardous waste generation patterns would be

beneficial to EPA in its development of the final rule.  Are these utility

laboratories conducting research?  Are they conducting quality checks or

tests?  Do their activities differ day-to-day or are they fairly routine

and/or repetitive?  What types of hazardous wastes are generated at these

utility laboratories?  In what amounts are these wastes generated?  EPA

would find it helpful if you could provide any answers, explanations or

data relating to any of the above questions.  In addition, we would

appreciate a timely response to allow us to incorporate any information

you may provide into the decision-making process, as appropriate.   Please

provide a response by February 16, 2007.  If you are unable to provide a

response by then, please contact us to let us know if and when you could

provide a timely response.

Any supporting information you provide to EPA will be made publicly

available in the docket for the rulemaking, unless the information is

claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI).  Therefore, if you

submit any information that you claim as CBI, clearly mark all of the

information that you claim to be CBI.  Information so marked will not be

disclosed, except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part

2.  Please do not fax any information claimed as CBI.  For additional

information on how to submit CBI, refer to page 29713, of the May 23,

2006, Federal Register, proposed rule for academic laboratories, or

contact LaShan Haynes, the Office of Solid Waste CBI contact, at (703)

605-0516<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Again, thank you for your comments on the proposed standards for academic

laboratories.  Please direct any questions or response to this letter to

any member of EPA’s labs team:

Patricia Mercer,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Meg McCarthy,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Kristin Fitzgerald,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 2014)]
[Unknown Section]
[Pages 1216-1223]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29640]

Vol. 79

Tuesday,

No. 4

January 7, 2014

Part XVI

Environmental Protection Agency

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

Semiannual Regulatory Agenda

Federal Register / Vol. 79 , No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2014 /
Unified Agenda

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Ch. I

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0313, EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0813, EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0642; FRL
9900-64-OP]

Fall 2013 Regulatory Agenda

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Semiannual regulatory flexibility agenda and semiannual
regulatory agenda.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publishes the
semiannual regulatory agenda online (the e-Agenda) at http://www.reginfo.gov and at www.regulations.gov to update the public about:
     Regulations and major policies currently under
development,
     Reviews of existing regulations and major policies, and
     Rules and major policymakings completed or canceled since
the last agenda.

Definitions

    ``E-Agenda,'' ``online regulatory agenda,'' and ``semiannual
regulatory agenda'' all refer to the same comprehensive collection of
information that, until 2007, was published in the Federal Register but
now is only available through an online database.
    ``Regulatory Flexibility Agenda'' refers to a document that
contains information about regulations that may have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. We continue to
publish it in the Federal Register because it is required by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980.
    ``Unified Regulatory Agenda'' refers to the collection of all
agencies' agendas with an introduction prepared by the Regulatory
Information Service Center facilitated by the General Service
Administration.
    ``Regulatory Agenda Preamble'' refers to the document you are
reading now. It appears as part of the Regulatory Flexibility Agenda
and introduces both the Regulatory Flexibility Agenda and the e-Agenda.
    ``Regulatory Development and Retrospective Review Tracker'' refers
to an online portal to EPA's priority rules and retrospective reviews
of existing regulations. More information about the Regulatory
Development and Retrospective Review Tracker appears in section H of
this preamble.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions or comments
about a particular action, please get in touch with the agency contact
listed in each agenda entry. If you have general questions about the
semiannual regulatory agenda, please contact: Caryn Muellerleile
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>202-564-2855).

Table of Contents

A. Links to EPA's Regulatory Information
B. What key statutes and executive orders guide EPA's rule and
policymaking process?
C. How can you be involved in EPA's rule and policymaking process?
D. What actions are included in the e-Agenda and the Regulatory
Agenda?
E. How is the e-Agenda organized?
F. What information is in the Regulatory Flexibility Agenda and the
e-Agenda?
G. How can you find out about rulemakings that start up after the
Regulatory Agenda is signed?
H. What tools are available for mining Regulatory Agenda data and
for finding more about EPA rules and policies?
I. Reviews of Rules With Significant Impacts on a Substantial Number
of Small Entities
J. What other special attention does EPA give to the impacts of
rules on small businesses, small governments, and small nonprofit
organizations?
K. Thank You for Collaborating With Us

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Links to EPA's Regulatory Information

     Semiannual Regulatory Agenda: www.reginfo.gov/and
www.regulations.gov.
     Semiannual Regulatory Flexibility Agenda: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action.
     Regulatory Development and Retrospective Review Tracker:
www.epa.gov/regdarrt/.

B. What key statutes and executive orders guide epa's rule and
policymaking process?

    A number of environmental laws authorize EPA's actions, including
but not limited to:
     Clean Air Act (CAA),
     Clean Water Act (CWA),
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA, or Superfund),
     Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA),
     Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA),
     Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
     Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), and
     Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
    Not only must EPA comply with environmental laws, but also
administrative legal requirements that apply to the issuance of
regulations, such as: the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA), the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA), and the Congressional
Review Act (CRA).
    EPA also meets a number of requirements contained in numerous
Executive Orders: 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR
51735, Oct. 4, 1993), as supplemented by Executive Order 13563,
``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'' (76 FR 3821, Jan. 21,
2011); 12898, ``Environmental Justice'' (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994);
13045, ``Children's Health Protection'' (62 FR 19885, Apr. 23, 1997);
13132, ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999); 13175,
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, Nov. 9, 2000); 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001).
    In addition to meeting its mission goals and priorities as
described above, EPA has begun reviewing its existing regulations under
Executive Order (EO) 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review.'' This EO provides for periodic retrospective review of
existing significant regulations and is intended to determine whether
any such regulations should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or
repealed, so as to make the Agency's regulatory program more effective
or less burdensome in achieving the regulatory objectives. More
information about this review is described in EPA's Statement of
Priorities in the Regulatory Plan.

C. How can you be involved in EPA's rule and policymaking process?

    You can make your voice heard by getting in touch with the contact
person provided in each agenda entry. EPA encourages you to participate
as early in the process as possible. You may also participate by
commenting on proposed rules published in the Federal Register (FR).
    Instructions on how to submit your comments are provided in each
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). To be most effective, comments
should contain information and data that support your position and you
also should explain why EPA should incorporate your suggestion in the
rule or other type of action. You can be

particularly helpful and persuasive if you provide examples to
illustrate your concerns and offer specific alternatives.
    EPA believes its actions will be more cost effective and protective
if the development process includes stakeholders working with us to
help identify the most practical and effective solutions to problems.
EPA encourages you to become involved in its rule and policymaking
process. For more information about public involvement in EPA
activities, please visit www.epa.gov/open.

D. What actions are included in the e-Agenda and the regulatory
flexibility agenda?

    EPA includes regulations and certain major policy documents in the
e-Agenda. However, there is no legal significance to the omission of an
item from the agenda, and EPA generally does not include the following
categories of actions:
     Administrative actions such as delegations of authority,
changes of address, or phone numbers;
     Under the CAA: Revisions to state implementation plans;
equivalent methods for ambient air quality monitoring; deletions from
the new source performance standards source categories list;
delegations of authority to states; area designations for air quality
planning purposes;
     Under FIFRA: Registration-related decisions, actions
affecting the status of currently registered pesticides, and data call-
ins;
     Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act: Actions
regarding pesticide tolerances and food additive regulations;
     Under RCRA: Authorization of State solid waste management
plans; hazardous waste delisting petitions;
     Under the CWA: State Water Quality Standards; deletions
from the section 307(a) list of toxic pollutants; suspensions of toxic
testing requirements under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES); delegations of NPDES authority to States;
     Under SDWA: Actions on State underground injection control
programs.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Agenda includes:
     Actions likely to have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
     Rules the Agency has identified for periodic review under
section 610 of the RFA.
    EPA is opening one 610 review and concluding one other in fall
2013. One 610 review remains ongoing during this time.

E. How is the E-Agenda organized?

    You can choose how to organize the agenda entries online by
specifying the characteristics of the entries of interest in the
desired individual data fields for both the www.reginfo.gov and
www.regulations.gov versions of the e-Agenda. You can sort based on the
following characteristics: EPA sub agency; stage of rulemaking, which
is explained below; alphabetically by title; and by the Regulation
Identifier Number (RIN), which is assigned sequentially when an action
is added to the agenda.
    Each entry in the Agenda is associated with one of five rulemaking
stages. The rulemaking stages are:
    1. Prerule Stage--This section includes EPA actions generally
intended to determine whether the agency should initiate rulemaking.
Prerulemakings may include anything that influences or leads to
rulemaking, such as Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRMs),
studies or analyses of the possible need for regulatory action.
    2. Proposed Rule Stage--This section includes EPA rulemaking
actions that are within a year of proposal (publication of Notices of
Proposed Rulemakings [NPRMs]).
    3. Final Rule Stage--This section includes rules that will be
issued as a final rule within a year.
    4. Long-Term Actions--This section includes rulemakings for which
the next scheduled regulatory action is after December 2012. We urge
you to explore becoming involved even if an action is listed in the
Long-Term category. By the time an action is listed in the Proposed
Rules category you may have missed the opportunity to participate in
certain public meetings or policy dialogues.
    5. Completed Actions--This section contains actions that have been
promulgated and published in the Federal Register since publication of
the spring 2013 Agenda. It also includes actions that EPA is no longer
considering and has elected to ``withdraw.'' EPA also announces the
results of any RFA section 610 review in this section of the agenda.

F. What information is in the Regulatory Flexibility Agenda and the e-
Agenda?

    The Regulatory Flexibility Agenda entries include only the nine
categories of information that are required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 and by Federal Register Agenda printing
requirements: Sequence Number, RIN, Title, Description, Statutory
Authority, Section 610 Review, if applicable, Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis Required, Schedule and Contact Person. Note that the
electronic version of the Agenda (E-Agenda) has more extensive
information on each of these actions.
    E-Agenda entries include:
    Title: a brief description of the subject of the regulation. The
notation ``Section 610 Review'' follows the title if we are reviewing
the rule as part of our periodic review of existing rules under section
610 of the RFA (5 U.S.C. 610).
    Priority: Entries are placed into one of five categories described
below.
    a. Economically Significant: Under Executive Order 12866, a
rulemaking that may have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more, or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a
sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities.
    b. Other Significant: A rulemaking that is not economically
significant but is considered significant for other reasons. This
category includes rules that may:
    1. Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    2. Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of
recipients; or
    3. Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles in Executive
Order 12866.
    c. Substantive, Nonsignificant: A rulemaking that has substantive
impacts but is not Significant, Routine and Frequent, or Informational/
Administrative/Other.
    d. Routine and Frequent: A rulemaking that is a specific case of a
recurring application of a regulatory program in the Code of Federal
Regulations (e.g., certain State Implementation Plans, National
Priority List updates, Significant New Use Rules, State Hazardous Waste
Management Program actions, and Tolerance Exemptions). If an action
that would normally be classified Routine and Frequent is reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget under EO 12866, then we would
classify the action as either ``Economically Significant'' or ``Other
Significant.''
    e. Informational/Administrative/Other: An action that is primarily
informational or pertains to an action outside the scope of EO 12866.
    Major: a rule is ``major'' under 5 U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L. 104-121) if
it has resulted or is likely to result in an annual effect on the
economy of $100

million or more or meets other criteria specified in that Act.
    Unfunded Mandates: whether the rule is covered by section 202 of
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). The Act
requires that, before issuing an NPRM likely to result in a mandate
that may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of more than
$100 million in 1 year.
    Legal Authority: The sections of the United States Code (U.S.C.),
Public Law (Pub. L.), Executive Order (EO), or common name of the law
that authorizes the regulatory action.
    CFR Citation: The sections of the Code of Federal Regulations that
would be affected by the action.
    Legal Deadline: An indication of whether the rule is subject to a
statutory or judicial deadline, the date of that deadline, and whether
the deadline pertains to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, a Final
Action, or some other action.
    Abstract: A brief description of the problem the action will
address.
    Timetable: the dates and citations (if available) for all past
steps and a projected date for at least the next step for the
regulatory action. A date displayed in the form 06/00/14 means the
agency is predicting the month and year the action will take place but
not the day it will occur. For some entries, the timetable indicates
that the date of the next action is ``to be determined.''
    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Indicates whether EPA has
prepared or anticipates that it will be preparing a regulatory
flexibility analysis under section 603 or 604 of the RFA. Generally,
such an analysis is required for proposed or final rules subject to the
RFA that EPA believes may have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    Small Entities Affected: Indicates whether the rule is anticipated
to have any effect on small businesses, small governments or small
nonprofit organizations.
    Government Levels Affected: Indicates whether the rule may have any
effect on levels of government and, if so, whether the governments are
State, local, tribal, or Federal.
    Federalism Implications: Indicates whether the action is expected
to have substantial direct effects 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.
    Energy Impacts: Indicates whether the action is a significant
energy action under Executive Order 13211.
    Sectors Affected: Indicates the main economic sectors regulated by
the action. The regulated parties are identified by their North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. These codes were
created by the Census Bureau for collecting, analyzing, and publishing
statistical data on the U.S. economy. There are more than 1,000 NAICS
codes for sectors in agriculture, mining, manufacturing, services, and
public administration.
    International Trade Impacts: Indicates whether the action is likely
to have international trade or investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
    Agency Contact: The name, address, phone number, and email address,
if available, of a person who is knowledgeable about the regulation.
    Additional Information: Other information about the action
including docket information.
    URLs: For some actions, the Internet addresses are included for
reading copies of rulemaking documents, submitting comments on
proposals, and getting more information about the rulemaking and the
program of which it is a part. (Note: To submit comments on proposals,
you can go to the associated electronic docket, which is housed at
www.regulations.gov. Once there, follow the online instructions to
access the docket in question and submit comments. A docket
identification [ID] number will assist in the search for materials.)
    RIN: The Regulation Identifier Number is used by OMB to identify
and track rulemakings. The first four digits of the RIN identify the
EPA office with lead responsibility for developing the action.

G. How can you find out about rulemakings that start up after the
Regulatory Agenda is signed?

    EPA posts monthly information of new rulemakings that the Agency's
senior managers have decided to develop. This list is also distributed
via email. You can find the current list, known as the Action
Initiation List (AIL), at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/actions-initiated-month where you will also find information about how to get
an email notification when a new list is posted.

H. What tools are available for mining Regulatory Agenda data and for
finding more about EPA rules and policies?

    1. The http://www.reginfo.gov/ Searchable Database
    2. The Regulatory Information Service Center and Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs have a Federal regulatory dashboard
that allows users to view the Regulatory Agenda database (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaMain), which includes search, display,
and data transmission options. Subject Matter EPA Web sites
    Some actions listed in the Agenda include a URL that provides
additional information about the action.
    3. Public Dockets
    When EPA publishes either an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(ANPRM) or a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal
Register, the Agency typically establishes a docket to accumulate
materials throughout the development process for that rulemaking. The
docket serves as the repository for the collection of documents or
information related to a particular Agency action or activity. EPA most
commonly uses dockets for rulemaking actions, but dockets may also be
used for RFA section 610 reviews of rules with significant economic
impacts on a substantial number of small entities and for various non-
rulemaking activities, such as Federal Register documents seeking
public comments on draft guidance, policy statements, information
collection requests under the PRA, and other non-rule activities.
Docket information should be in that action's agenda entry. All of
EPA's public dockets can be located at www.regulations.gov.
    4. EPA's Regulatory Development and Retrospective Review Tracker
    EPA's Regulatory Development and Retrospective Review Tracker
(www.epa.gov/regdarrt/) serves as a portal to EPA's priority rules,
providing you with earlier and more frequently updated information
about Agency regulations than is provided by the Regulatory Agenda. It
also provides information about retrospective reviews of existing
regulations. Not all of EPA's Regulatory Agenda entries appear on Reg
DaRRT; only priority rulemakings can be found on this Web site.

I. Reviews of Rules With Significant Impacts on a Substantial Number of
Small Entities

    Section 610 of the RFA requires that an agency review, within 10
years of promulgation, each rule that has or will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. EPA is
opening one 610 review and concluding one other in fall 2013. One 610
review remains ongoing during this time.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Review Title                            RIN                            Docket ID No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 610 Review of Control of          2060-AR91..................  EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0642
 Emissions of Air Pollution from Nonroad
 Diesel Engines and Fuel.
Section 610 Review of National Pollutant  2040-AF46..................  EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0813
 Discharge Elimination System Permit
 Regulation and Effluent Limitations
 Guidelines Standards for Concentrated
 Animal Feeding Operations.
Section 610 Review of Heavy-Duty Engine   2060-AR83..................  EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0313
 and Vehicle Standards and Highway
 Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements
 (Completed).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA established an official public dockets for each 610 Review
under the docket identification (ID) numbers indicated above. All
documents in the dockets are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available; e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air or Water dockets, EPA/
DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20460. 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>.

J. What other special attention does EPA give to the impacts of rules
on small businesses, small governments, and small nonprofit
organizations?

    For each of EPA's rulemakings, consideration is given whether there
will be any adverse impact on any small entity. EPA attempts to fit the
regulatory requirements, to the extent feasible, to the scale of the
businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to
the regulation.
    Under RFA as amended by SBREFA, the Agency must prepare a formal
analysis of the potential negative impacts on small entities, convene a
Small Business Advocacy Review Panel (proposed rule stage), and prepare
a Small Entity Compliance Guide (final rule stage) unless the Agency
certifies a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. For more detailed information
about the Agency's policy and practice with respect to implementing
RFA/SBREFA, please visit the RFA/SBREFA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/sbrefa/.

K. Thank You for Collaborating With Us

    Finally, we would like to thank those of you who choose to join
with us in making progress on the complex issues involved in protecting
human health and the environment. Collaborative efforts such as EPA's
open rulemaking process are a valuable tool for addressing the problems
we face, and the regulatory agenda is an important part of that
process.

    Dated: August 28, 2013.
Shannon Kenny,
Principal Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Policy.

                            10--Prerule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Regulation
       Sequence No.                    Title             Identifier No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
385.......................  Section 610 Review of              2060-AR91
                             Control of Emissions of
                             Air Pollution from
                             Nonroad Diesel Engines
                             and Fuel (Section 610
                             Review).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         10--Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Regulation
       Sequence No.                    Title             Identifier No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
386.......................  SAN No. 5367 National              2060-AP69
                             Emission Standards for
                             Hazardous Air Pollutants
                             (NESHAP): Brick and
                             Structural Clay Products
                             Manufacturing and Clay
                             Ceramics Manufacturing.
387.......................  Standards of Performance           2060-AP93
                             for New Residential Wood
                             Heaters, New Residential
                             Hydronic Heaters and
                             Forced-Air Furnaces, and
                             New Residential Masonry
                             Heaters.
388.......................  General Permits and                2060-AR98
                             Permits by Rule for the
                             Tribal Minor New Source
                             Review Program.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          10--Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Regulation
       Sequence No.                    Title             Identifier No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
389.......................  Control of Air Pollution           2060-AQ86
                             From Motor Vehicles: Tier
                             3 Motor Vehicle Emission
                             and Fuel Standards (Reg
                             Plan Seq No. 130).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
References in boldface appear in The Regulatory Plan in part II of this
  issue of the Federal Register.

                          10--Completed Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Regulation
       Sequence No.                    Title             Identifier No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
390.......................  Section 610 Review of              2060-AR83
                             Heavy-Duty Engine and
                             Vehicle Standards and
                             Highway Diesel Fuel
                             Sulfur Control
                             Requirements (Completion
                             of a Section 610 Review).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          35--Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Regulation
       Sequence No.                    Title             Identifier No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
391.......................  Formaldehyde Emissions             2070-AJ92
                             Standards for Composite
                             Wood Products (Reg Plan
                             Seq No. 133).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
References in boldface appear in The Regulatory Plan in part II of this
  issue of the Federal Register.

                          60--Long-Term Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Regulation
       Sequence No.                    Title             Identifier No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
392.......................  Financial Responsibility           2050-AG61
                             Requirements under CERCLA
                             Section 108(b) for
                             Classes of Facilities in
                             the Hard Rock Mining
                             Industry.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            70--Prerule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Regulation
       Sequence No.                    Title             Identifier No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
393.......................  Section 610 Review of              2040-AF46
                             National Pollutant
                             Discharge Elimination
                             System Permit Regulation
                             and Effluent Limitations
                             Guidelines Standards for
                             Concentrated Animal
                             Feeding Operations
                             (Section 610 Review).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

10

Prerule Stage

385.  Section 610 Review of Control of Emissions of Air
Pollution From Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel (Section 610 Review)

    Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 610
    Abstract: The rulemaking ``Control of Emissions of Air Pollution
From Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel'' was finalized by EPA in June
2004 (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004). This program set new emission
standards for nonroad diesel engines, and fuel standards requiring
sulfur reductions in nonroad diesel fuel. EPA developed a Small Entity
Compliance Guide, which provides descriptions of the regulations and
small entity provisions, Q&As, and other helpful compliance
information. This new entry in the regulatory agenda announces that EPA
will review this action pursuant to section 610 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 610) to determine if the provisions that
could affect small entities should be continued without change, or
should be rescinded or amended to minimize adverse economic impacts on
small entities. As part of this review, EPA will consider and solicit
comments on the following factors: (1) The continued need for the rule;
(2) the nature of complaints or comments received from the public
concerning the rule; (3) the complexity of the rule; (4) the extent to
which the rule overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other Federal,
State, or local government rules; and (5) the degree to which the
technology, economic conditions or other factors have changed in the
area affected by the rule. Comments must be received within 60 days of
this notice. In submitting comments, please reference Docket ID EPA-HQ-
OAR-2013-0642 and follow the instructions provided in the preamble to
this issue of the Regulatory Agenda. This docket can be accessed at
www.regulations.gov.
    Timetable:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                    Date            FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Rule..........................   06/29/04  69 FR 38958
Begin Review........................   11/00/13  .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No.
    Agency Contact: Tom Eagles, Environmental Protection Agency, Air
and Radiation, 6103A, Washington, DC 20460, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:
202 564-1554, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    RIN: 2060-AR91

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

10

Proposed Rule Stage

386. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP):
Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing and Clay Ceramics
Manufacturing

    Legal Authority: Clean Air Act
    Abstract: This rulemaking will establish emission limits for
hazardous air pollutants (hydrogen flouride (HF), hydrogen chloride
(HCl) and metals) emitted from brick and clay ceramics kilns, as well
as dryers and glazing operations at clay ceramics production
facilities. The brick and structural clay products industry primarily
includes facilities that manufacture brick, clay, pipe, roof tile,
extruded floor and wall tile, and other extruded dimensional clay
products from clay, shale, or a combination of the two. The
manufacturing of brick and structural clay products involves mining,
raw material processing (crushing, grinding, and screening), mixing,
forming, cutting or shaping, drying, and firing. Ceramics are defined
as a class of inorganic, nonmetallic solids that are subject to high
temperature in manufacture and/or use. The clay ceramics manufacturing
source category includes facilities that

manufacture traditional ceramics, which include ceramic tile,
dinnerware, sanitary ware, pottery, and porcelain. The primary raw
material used in the manufacture of these traditional ceramics is clay.
The manufacturing of clay ceramics involves raw material processing
(crushing, grinding, and screening), mixing, forming, shaping, drying,
glazing, and firing.
    Timetable:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                    Date            FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................   02/00/14  .......................
Final Rule..........................   12/00/14  .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes.
    Agency Contact: Jeff Telander, Environmental Protection Agency, Air
and Radiation, D243-02, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Phone: 919
541-5427, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Keith Barnett, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation,
D243-04, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:
919 541-5450, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    RIN: 2060-AP69

387. Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, New
Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces, and New
Residential Masonry Heaters

    Legal Authority: CAA Section 111(b)(1)(B)
    Abstract: EPA is revising the New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) for new residential wood heaters. This action is necessary
because it updates the 1988 NSPS to reflect significant advancements in
wood heater technologies and design, broadens the range of residential
wood-heating appliances covered by the regulation, and improves and
streamlines implementation procedures. This rule is expected to require
manufacturers to redesign wood heaters to be cleaner and lower
emitting. In general, the design changes would also make the heaters
perform better and be more efficient. The revisions are also expected
to streamline the process for testing new model lines by allowing the
use of International Standards Organization (ISO)-accredited
laboratories and certifying bodies, which will expand the number of
facilities that can be used for testing and certification of the new
model lines. This action is expected to include the following new
residential wood-heating appliances: adjustable burn rate wood heaters,
pellet stoves, single burn rate wood heaters, outdoor hydronic heaters
(outdoor wood boilers), indoor hydronic heaters (indoor wood boilers),
wood-fired forced air furnaces, and masonry heaters. These standards
would apply only to new residential wood heaters and not to existing
residential wood-heating appliances.
    Timetable:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                    Date            FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................   11/00/13
Final Rule..........................   11/00/14
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes.
    Agency Contact: Gil Wood, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and
Radiation, C404-05, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Phone: 919 541-
5272, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    David Cole, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation,
C404-05, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:
919 541-0242, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    RIN: 2060-AP93

388.  General Permits and Permits by Rule for the Tribal Minor
New Source Review Program

    Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
    Abstract: The Tribal Minor New Source Review (NSR) program applies
to new and modified minor sources and minor modifications at major
sources of air pollution in Indian country. The program, established in
2011, is implemented through issuance of preconstruction permits that
can include, among other requirements, pollutant emission limits for
minor sources and emission limitations on the potential of sources to
emit pollution that would otherwise be considered major sources. This
minor source program for Indian country is similar to state minor NSR
programs. State minor NSR programs often use general permits and
permits by rule as streamlined permitting approaches for similar
emission units or stationary sources. This action provides general
permits and permits by rule for certain source categories of minor
sources wishing to locate in Indian country. This action proposes
general permits for boilers and engines; and permits by rule (and
general permits in the alternative) for printing operations (including
degreasing and solvent cleaning); stone quarrying and processing;
concrete batch plants and saw mills.
    Timetable:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                    Date            FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................   01/00/14
Final Rule..........................   09/00/14
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes.
    Agency Contact: Chris Stoneman, Environmental Protection Agency,
Air and Radiation, C304-01, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Phone:
919 541-0823, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Mark Sendzik, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation,
C-304.03, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:
919 541-0942, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    RIN: 2060-AR98

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

10

Final Rule Stage

389. Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles: Tier 3 Motor Vehicle
Emission and Fuel Standards

    Regulatory Plan: This entry is Seq. No. 130 in part II of this
issue of the Federal Register.
    RIN: 2060-AQ86

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

10

Completed Actions

390. Section 610 Review of Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and
Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements (Completion of a
Section 610 Review)

    Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 610
    Abstract: On January 18, 2001, EPA established new exhaust emission
standards for heavy-duty highway engines and vehicles, and new quality
standards for highway diesel fuel (66 FR 5002). Pursuant to section 610
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, on October 31, 2012, EPA initiated a
review of this rule to determine if the provisions as they relate to
small entities should be continued without change, or should be
rescinded or amended to minimize adverse economic impacts on small
entities (77 FR 65840). EPA has solicited comments on the following
factors: (1) The continued need for the rule; (2) the nature of
complaints or comments received from the public concerning the rule;
(3) the complexity of the rule; (4) the extent to which the rule
overlaps,

duplicates, or conflicts with other Federal, State, or local government
rules; and (5) the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or
other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule. The
current heavy-duty engine and fuel standards program provided
substantial flexibility for refiners, especially small refiners, and
for manufacturers of engines and vehicles, and does not warrant
revision at this time. See EPA's report summarizing the results of this
review in the docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0313. This docket can be accessed
at www.regulations.gov.
    Timetable:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                    Date            FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Rule..........................   01/18/01  66 FR 5002
Begin Review........................   10/31/12  77 FR 65840
End Review..........................   08/30/13
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No.
    Agency Contact: Tad Wysor, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and
Radiation, USEPA, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax: 734
214-4816, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    RIN: 2060-AR83

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

35

Final Rule Stage

391. Formaldehyde Emissions Standards for Composite Wood Products

    Regulatory Plan: This entry is Seq. No. 133 in part II of this
issue of the Federal Register.
    RIN: 2070-AJ92

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

60

Long-Term Actions

392. Financial Responsibility Requirements Under CERCLA Section 108(B)
for Classes of Facilities in the Hard Rock Mining Industry

    Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 9608 (b)
    Abstract: Section 108(b) of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended,
establishes certain authorities concerning financial responsibility
requirements. The Agency has identified classes of facilities within
the Hard Rock mining industry as those for which financial
responsibility requirements will be first developed. EPA intends to
include requirements for financial responsibility, as well as
notification and implementation.
    Timetable:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                    Date            FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice..............................   07/28/09  74 FR 37213
NPRM................................   08/00/16
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes.
    Agency Contact: Ben Lesser, Environmental Protection Agency, Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, 5302P, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 703
308-0314, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    David Hockey, Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, 5303P, Washington, DC 20460, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    RIN: 2050-AG61

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

70

Prerule Stage

393. Section 610 Review of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System Permit Regulation and Effluent Limitations Guidelines Standards
for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Section 610 Review)

    Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 610
    Abstract: The EPA promulgated revised regulations for Concentrated
Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) on February 12, 2003 (68 FR 7175).
The ``2003 CAFO Rule'' expanded the number of operations covered by the
CAFO regulations and included requirements to address the land
application of manure from CAFOs. The 2003 CAFO Rule required all CAFOs
to seek NPDES permit coverage. The EPA developed a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) for the 2003 CAFO Rule. The EPA took
several steps to minimize the impacts of the 2003 CAFO Rule on small
businesses, including regulatory revisions designed to focus on the
largest producers, eliminating the ``mixed'' animal calculation for
operations with more than a single animal type for determining which
Animal Feeding Operations (AFOs) are CAFOs, raising the duck threshold
for dry manure handling duck operations, and adopting a dry-litter
chicken threshold higher than proposed. There have been a number of
changes to the 2003 regulations due to court decisions based on legal
challenges to the rulemaking; however, this action only pertains to the
2003 rule. Pursuant to section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
on October 31, 2012, the EPA initiated a review of the 2003 CAFO rule
to determine if the provisions as they relate to small entities should
be continued without change, or should be rescinded or amended to
minimize adverse economic impacts on small entities (77 FR 65840). The
EPA has solicited comments on, and will consider, the following
factors: (1) The continued need for the rule; (2) the nature of
complaints or comments received from the public concerning the rule;
(3) the complexity of the rule; (4) the extent to which the rule
overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other Federal, State, or local
Government rules; and (5) the degree to which technology, economic
conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the
rule. After publication, the EPA received requests for additional time
to submit comments and extended the public comment period until March
1, 2013 (78 FR 277). The results of the EPA's review will be summarized
in a report and placed in the rulemaking docket at the conclusion of
this review. This review's Docket ID number is EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0813; the
docket can be accessed at www.regulations.gov.
    Timetable:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                    Date            FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Rule..........................   02/12/03  68 FR 7176
Begin Review........................   10/31/12  77 FR 65840
Comment Period Extended.............   01/03/13  78 FR 277
End Review..........................   11/00/13
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No.
    Agency Contact: Hema Subramanian, Environmental Protection Agency,
Water, 4203M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax: 202 564-
6384, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    RIN: 2040-AF46

[FR Doc. 2013-29640 Filed 1-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50920-50921]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21936]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER19-28-000]

Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing
Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization: Flanders Energy
LLC

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding
Flanders Energy LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is October 22, 2018.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for

electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in
Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the 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 protected], or call (866) 208-
3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 2, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-21936 Filed 10-9-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


January 20, 2004 Robert L. Springer 5301W U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20460 Dear Mr. Springer:

Sierra Club and UNITE write to request a public hearing on U. S. EPA's proposal rule to grant conditional exclusions from hazardous waste and solid waste for solventcontaminated industrial wipes. This proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on November 20, 2003 at 68 Federal Register 65586.

We believe that this proposed rule, if made final in its current form, would create unsafe workplaces for laundry workers and result in unnecessary discharges of solventcontaminated wastewater to rivers, streams and lakes. We also question the legality of the proposal's view that solvent contaminated wipes should not be considered a solid and hazardous waste.

Given the importance of these issues, we hope that the EPA will grant our request for a public hearing on this proposed rule. Thank you for considering our views.

Sincerely,

Ed Hopkins Eric Frumin Director, Environmental Quality Program Health and Safety Director Sierra Club UNITE 408 C Street, NE 275 7th Avenue Washington, DC 20015 New York, New York 10001 202 675 7908 212 265 7000