[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 16, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33883-33886]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14989]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2019-0269, FRL-9996-58-Region 10]

Air Plan Approval; OR: 2018 Permitting Rule Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve
revisions to the Oregon State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on
December 11, 2018. The revisions update the SIP to allow for electronic
public notice of proposed major stationary source permits, add
references to stationary source sampling requirements, make use of
plain language, and correct errors. The EPA reviewed the submitted
revisions and proposes to find they are consistent with Clean Air Act
requirements.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 15, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2019-0269, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not electronically submit any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to

make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents
located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Hall, EPA Region 10, 1200
Sixth Avenue--Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it means the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Evaluation of Submission
    A. Division 12: Enforcement Procedure and Civil Penalties
    B. Division 200: General Air Pollution Procedures and
Definitions
    C. Division 209: Public Participation
    D. Division 216: Air Contaminant Discharge Permits
    E. Volume I: Source Sampling Manual
III. Proposed Action
IV. Oregon Notice Provision
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Each state has a State Implementation Plan (SIP) containing the
control measures and strategies used to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) established by the EPA
for the criteria pollutants (carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide,
ozone, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide). The SIP contains such
elements as air pollution control regulations, emission inventories,
attainment demonstrations, and enforcement mechanisms. Section 110 of
the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires each state to periodically revise its
SIP. As a result, the SIP is a living compilation of regulatory and
non-regulatory elements that are updated to address federal
requirements and changing air quality issues in the state.
    Air quality regulations for the State of Oregon (``Oregon'' or
``the State'') are found in Chapter 340 of the Oregon Administrative
Rules (OAR) and are generally implemented by the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (ODEQ). On November 15, 2018, the State adopted
new and revised air quality regulations that became effective November
16, 2018. Most of the adopted regulations implement Oregon's new,
state-only air toxics permitting program known as Cleaner Air Oregon,
established in OAR Chapter 340, Division 245. The State did not submit
the Division 245 Cleaner Air Oregon regulations for SIP approval.
However, some of the regulations adopted in the state rulemaking
package also make changes to rules in the federally-approved SIP. On
December 11, 2018, Oregon submitted these SIP-related changes to the
EPA for approval. The changes account for electronic public notice of
proposed major source permits, add references to stationary source
sampling requirements, make use of plain language, and correct errors.
For more details, please see the December 11, 2018 submission in the
docket for this action.

II. Evaluation of Submission

A. Division 12: Enforcement Procedure and Civil Penalties

    Division 12 contains enforcement procedures and civil penalties for
violations of environmental regulations. In the submission, Oregon made
minor edits to this division for clarity and to correct errors. For
example, Oregon replaced the phrase ``pursuant to'' with ``under''
because the word has a plainer meaning. In addition, the State
corrected references to the federally-defined term ``Best Available
Control Technology.''
    We reviewed the submitted changes and propose to find that Division
12 continues to provide the ODEQ with adequate authority to enforce the
SIP as required by section 110 of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.230(b).
Consistent with our prior action on October 23, 2015, we propose to
approve the changes to this division only to the extent the provisions
relate to enforcement of the requirements contained in the Oregon SIP
(80 FR 64346). We are not proposing to incorporate the changes by
reference into the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), however, because
the EPA relies on its independent enforcement procedures and penalty
provisions in bringing enforcement actions and assessing penalties
under the CAA.

B. Division 200: General Air Pollution Procedures and Definitions

    Division 200 contains general procedures and definitions used in
the State's air quality program. In the submission, Oregon made minor
changes to clarify rule language throughout the definitions section of
this division. The State also revised the definition of ``continuous
monitoring systems'' to reference the Oregon Continuous Monitoring
Manual, adopted in OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>. Likewise, the State clarified the
definitions of ``source test'' and ``volatile organic compounds'' to
reference the Oregon Source Sampling Manual, adopted in OAR 340-200-
0035. Oregon added a new definition for ``toxic air contaminant'' to
account for the new, state-only air toxics permitting program, and made
conforming changes to related definitions in Division 200. However,
these revisions have limited impact on the federally-approved Oregon
SIP because the revisions primarily relate to the new, state-only air
toxics rules which are not part of the SIP and were not submitted to
the EPA for approval.
    Division 200 also includes key reference materials used throughout
Oregon air quality rules. The submission revises citation dates for
these reference materials. First, all references to federal
requirements in the CFR now refer to the July 1, 2018 version. Second,
all references to the Oregon Source Sampling Manual now refer to the
November 2018 edition (also submitted for approval into the SIP).
    We reviewed the submitted changes to Division 200 and propose to
approve and incorporate them by reference into the Oregon SIP, except
all references to ``toxic air contaminants'' and the state-only air
toxics permitting program set forth in OAR Chapter 340, Division 245,
because these provisions were not submitted to the EPA for approval. We
note that the State's submitted update to reference the July 1, 2018
CFR was approved by the EPA in a prior action. Please see our recent
rulemaking entitled ``Air Plan Approval; OR: Infrastructure
Requirements for the 2015 Ozone Standard'' published on June 6, 2019
(84 FR 26347).

C. Division 209: Public Participation

    Division 209 contains rules to notify the public of certain permit
actions and give the public an opportunity to participate in the
permitting process. In the submission, Oregon removed the requirement
to publish notice of draft major new source review (NSR) permits in the
local newspaper and added the option to publish notice on a publicly-
accessible website, along with the draft permit. These changes are
consistent with recent EPA rules published on October 18, 2016 and
intended to modernize the process (81 FR 71613).
    Oregon also made updates to this division to address the new,
state-only air toxics permitting program. However, Oregon submitted
these public participation rule changes only to the extent the rules
apply to (1) pollutants for which NAAQS have been

established (criteria pollutants) and precursors to those criteria
pollutants as determined by the EPA for the applicable geographic area;
and (2) any additional pollutants that are required to be regulated
under part C of title I of the CAA, but only for the purposes of
meeting or avoiding the requirements of part C of title I of the CAA.
    We most recently approved revisions to Division 209 on October 11,
2017 (82 FR 47122). We found that Division 209 was consistent with the
CAA and regulatory requirements for public notice of new source review
actions in 40 CFR 51.161 Public availability of information, 40 CFR
51.165 Permit requirements, and 40 CFR 51.166 Prevention of significant
deterioration of air quality. After reviewing the submitted changes, we
find that Oregon's public participation rules continue to meet the CAA
and the EPA's NSR public notice requirements.

D. Division 216: Air Contaminant Discharge Permits

    Oregon's Air Contaminant Discharge Permit (ACDP) program is both
Oregon's federally-enforceable non-title V state operating permit
program, and the administrative mechanism used to implement the notice
of construction and NSR programs. There are six types of ACDPs under
Oregon's rules: Construction, General, Short Term Activity, Basic,
Simple, and Standard. In the submission, Oregon made changes to this
division to use plain language, clarify requirements, and reference the
new, state-only air toxics permitting program. Oregon also revised the
applicability and jurisdiction section of this division to spell out
that a source may not continue to operate if the source's ACDP expires,
or is terminated, denied, or revoked. In the ACDP application
requirements section, Oregon made changes to require that sources
seeking new or renewed permits consider the lead time the ODEQ needs to
process and issue permits and apply earlier in the process. Oregon also
set application renewal deadlines and clarified the required contents
of applications.
    Certain SIP-approved rules in Division 216 are used to implement
both the SIP-approved permitting programs and the new, state-only air
toxics permitting program. In the submission, Oregon made clear that
the State requested approval of the submitted changes to Division 216
for purposes of SIP permitting only.\1\ We reviewed the submitted
changes and find that the program remains consistent with section 110
of the CAA and EPA's implementing regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Oregon submitted ACDP permitting rule revisions only to the
extent that the rules apply to (1) pollutants for which NAAQS have
been established (criteria pollutants) and precursors to those
criteria pollutants as determined by the EPA for the applicable
geographic area; and (2) any additional pollutants that are required
to be regulated under part C of title I of the CAA, but only for the
purposes of meeting or avoiding the requirements of part C of title
I of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Volume I: Source Sampling Manual

    The Oregon Source Sampling Manual contains procedures for measuring
and sampling exhaust gas streams from stationary sources in accordance
with the requirements of Oregon's air quality rules in OAR Divisions
200 through 268. We most recently approved changes to the Source
Sampling Manual on October 11, 2017 (82 FR 47122). Since then, Oregon
updated Volume I of the manual to account for the new, state-only air
toxics permitting program and made clarifications and corrections
throughout the manual. For example, the State clarified that sources
must notify the ODEQ of all source sampling projects, whether they are
required by the State or not, if a source seeks to rely on the test as
evidence in an enforcement case or to demonstrate compliance with non-
delegated federal requirements. Oregon also made clear in the manual
that complex source testing programs may require 45 days or more for
protocol approval by the ODEQ.
    Oregon revised the sample replication section of Volume I to state
that unless otherwise specified by permit, state rule, federal
regulation, or ODEQ letter, each source test must consist of at least
three test runs, and the emission results are required to be reported
for each run individually and as the arithmetic average of all valid
test runs. Oregon revised the sample postponement and stoppages section
of Volume I to clarify that postposing a test run in progress because
the source is not able to comply with a control equipment standard is
not acceptable. Oregon specified that one bound copy of the source test
report must be submitted within 30 days following field work, and an
electronic version of the report may be submitted, in addition to the
bound copy.
    We reviewed the submitted changes and find that Volume I of the
Source Sampling Manual remains consistent with 40 CFR part 51, appendix
M--Recommended Test Methods for State Implementation Plans and 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A--Test Methods, and appendix B--Performance
Specifications, for purposes of the emission limits and requirements
approved into the SIP.

III. Proposed Action

    The EPA proposes to approve, and incorporate by reference into the
Oregon SIP, the submitted changes to the following sections of the
Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) Chapter 340, state effective November
16, 2018:
     Division 200 General Air Pollution Procedures and
Definitions (0020, 0035);
     Division 209 Public Participation (0020, 0030, 0040,
0050); and
     Division 216 Air Contaminant Discharge Permits (0020,
0030, 0040, 0090, 8020).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Divisions 200, 209, and 216 are proposed to be approved only
to the extent the rules apply to (1) pollutants for which NAAQS have
been established (criteria pollutants) and precursors to those
criteria pollutants as determined by the EPA for the applicable
geographic area; and (2) any additional pollutants that are required
to be regulated under Part C of Title I of the CAA, but only for the
purposes of meeting or avoiding the requirements of Part C of Title
I of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA also proposes to approve, but not incorporate by reference,
the submitted changes to the following sections, state effective
November 16, 2018:
     Division 12 Enforcement Procedure and Civil Penalties
(0030, 0053, 0054, 0135, 0140), only to the extent the rules relate to
enforcement of the requirements contained in the Oregon SIP; and
     ODEQ Source Sampling Manual, Volume I, 2018 Edition, only
for purposes of the emission limits and requirements approved into the
SIP.

IV. Oregon Notice Provision

    Oregon Revised Statute 468.126 prohibits the ODEQ from imposing a
penalty for violation of an air, water or solid waste permit unless the
source has been provided five days' advanced written notice of the
violation and has not come into compliance or submitted a compliance
schedule within that five-day period. By its terms, the statute does
not apply to Oregon's title V program or to any program if application
of the notice provision would disqualify the program from federal
delegation. Oregon has previously confirmed that, because application
of the notice provision would preclude EPA approval of the Oregon SIP,
no advance notice is required for violation of SIP requirements.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include, in a final rule,
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference

the provisions described in Section III. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents generally available electronically
through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA
office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more
information).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because it does not involve technical standards; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and record keeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: June 27, 2019.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2019-14989 Filed 7-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 241 (Friday, December 16, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76946-76949]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26994]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0624; FRL-10296-01-OCSPP]

Tetraniliprole; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
tetraniliprole in or on the grain, cereal, group 15, except rice; and
grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except field corn,
popcorn, and sweet corn. Bayer CropScience requested these tolerances
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective December 16, 2022. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 14, 2023,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0624, is available at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg.,
Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room and the OPP Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For the latest
status information on EPA/DC services, docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Office of the
Federal Register's e-CFR site at the https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0624 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
February 14, 2023. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0624, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of October 21, 2021 (86 FR 58239) (FRL-
8792-04-OCSPP), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section
408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP #1F8930) by Bayer CropScience LP, 800 N Lindbergh Blvd.,
St. Louis, MO 63167. The petition requested to establish tolerances in
40 CFR part 180 for residues of the insecticide, tetraniliprole [1-(3-
chloro-2-pyridinyl)-N-[4-cyano-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-3-[[5-(trifluoromethyl)-2H-tetrazol-2-
yl]methyl]-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide], in or on Crop Group 15; cereal
grains, except rice at 0.01 parts per million (ppm); and Crop Group 16;
forage, fodder, and straw of cereal grains group, except field corn,
popcorn, and sweet

corn at 0.1 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition,
which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. No
comments were received in response to the notice of filing.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified therein, EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and
other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for tetraniliprole including exposure resulting from
the tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of
exposures and risks associated with tetraniliprole follows.
    In an effort to streamline its publications in the Federal
Register, EPA is not reprinting sections that repeat what has been
previously published for tolerance rulemaking of the same pesticide
chemical. Where scientific information concerning a particular chemical
remains unchanged, the content of those sections would not vary between
tolerance rulemaking, and EPA considers referral back to those sections
as sufficient to provide an explanation of the information EPA
considered in making its safety determination for the new rulemaking.
    On February 24, 2021, EPA published a tolerance rulemaking for
tetraniliprole in which EPA concluded, based on the available
information, that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm would
result from aggregate exposure to tetraniliprole and established
tolerances for residues of that pesticide chemical. EPA is
incorporating previously published sections from the February 24, 2021,
rulemaking as described further in this rulemaking, as they remain
unchanged.

A. Toxicological Profile

    For a discussion of the Toxicological Profile of tetraniliprole,
see Unit III.A. of the tetraniliprole tolerance rulemaking published in
the Federal Register of February 24, 2021 (86 FR 11133) (FRL-10005-77).

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Based on a thorough analysis of the toxicology database of
tetraniliprole, the Agency has determined that a qualitative risk
assessment is more appropriate for tetraniliprole than a quantitative
risk assessment. For more details, please reference Unit III.B. of the
February 24, 2021, rulemaking.

C. Exposure Assessment

    There is potential for exposure to tetraniliprole via food and feed
based on the proposed uses. However, no adverse effects were observed
in the submitted toxicological studies for tetraniliprole regardless of
the route of exposure. Thus, no quantitative dietary exposure
assessments are needed for EPA to conclude with reasonable certainty
that dietary exposures to tetraniliprole do not pose a significant
human health risk.
    Drinking water and non-occupational exposures. There are no
residues of toxicological concern expected in drinking water from the
use of tetraniliprole. Thus, no drinking water exposure assessments are
needed for the Agency to conclude with reasonable certainty that
drinking water exposures to tetraniliprole do not pose a significant
human health risk.
    Tetraniliprole is registered for use on golf course turf and sports
fields that could result in residential post-application exposures.
However, no adverse effects were observed in the submitted
toxicological studies for tetraniliprole regardless of the route of
exposure; therefore, a quantitative residential post-application
exposure assessment was not conducted. Thus, no residential exposure
assessments are needed for the Agency to conclude with reasonable
certainty that residential exposures to tetraniliprole do not pose a
significant human health risk.
    Cumulative exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires
that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other
substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' Unlike other
pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk approach based
on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made a common mechanism
of toxicity finding as to tetraniliprole and any other substances.
Tetraniliprole does not also appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this action,
therefore, EPA has not assumed that tetraniliprole has a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    EPA has not identified any toxicological endpoints of concern
associated with any threshold effects and conducted a qualitative
assessment. That qualitative assessment showed no risk of concern for
infants and children and does not use safety factors for assessing
risk, and no additional safety factor is needed for assessing risk to
infants and children. EPA has also evaluated the available data and
concluded that there are no residual uncertainties concerning the
potential risks to infants and children that would impact its
conclusions about threshold effects.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute population-adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic population-adjusted
dose (cPAD). Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are
evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate points of departure to ensure
that an adequate margin of exposure (MOE) exists. For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer
given the estimated aggregate exposure.
    No adverse effects were observed in the submitted toxicological
studies at doses relevant to human health pesticide risk assessment for
tetraniliprole regardless of the route of exposure. Effects observed in
the data base (e.g., decreased body weight) were both marginal, and
only seen at doses not expected to occur daily or over an extended
period.
    Based on a lack of toxicity at exposure levels expected from
approved application rates and an expectation that aggregate exposures
to residues of tetraniliprole will not reach the levels

required to cause any adverse effects, EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children from aggregate exposure to
tetraniliprole residues. More detailed information on this action can
be found in the document titled ``Tetraniliprole: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Registration for Uses on Cereal Grains, Except Rice,
Crop Group 15; and Forage, Fodder, and Straw of Cereal Grains Group,
except Field Corn, Popcorn, and Sweet Corn Crop Group 16'' in docket ID
EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0624.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    For a discussion of the available analytical enforcement method,
see Unit IV.A. of the February 24, 2021, rulemaking.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4).
    There are no Codex MRLs for tetraniliprole on the commodities
covered in this document.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
tetraniliprole in or on grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group
16, except field corn, popcorn and sweet corn at 0.1 ppm; and grain,
cereal, group 15, except rice at 0.01 ppm. In addition, EPA is removing
the tolerance for indirect or inadvertent residues of tetraniliprole in
or on grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except field
corn, popcorn and sweet corn at 0.1 ppm, which is no longer needed with
the changes described above.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), or to Executive Order 13045,
entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not
contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it
require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898,
entitled ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: December 7, 2022.
Daniel Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR chapter 1 as follows:

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

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

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

0
2. Amend Sec.  180.709 by:
0
a. In Table 1 to paraph (a) adding in alphabetical order entries for
``Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except field corn,
popcorn and sweet corn''; and ``Grain, cereal, group 15, except rice'';
and
0
b. In Table 2 to paragraph (d) by removing the entry ``Grain, cereal,
forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except field corn, popcorn and
sweet corn''.
    The additions read as follows:

Sec.  180.709  Tetraniliprole; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except            0.1
 field corn, popcorn and sweet corn........................

Grain, cereal, group 15, except rice.......................         0.01

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-26994 Filed 12-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 249)]
[Notices]
[Page 79467-79470]
[DOCID:fr29de08-58]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0033, FRL-8758-2]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Modification of Secondary Treatment Requirements for
Discharges Into Marine Waters, EPA ICR Number 0138.09, OMB Control
Number 2040-0088

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is
scheduled to expire on May 31, 2009. Before submitting the ICR to OMB
for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before February 27, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OW-2003-0033, to EPA by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
     Mail: Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., EPA West, Room 3334, Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
     Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OW-2003-0033. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online 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 http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
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 http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Virginia Fox-Norse, Office of
Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds: Oceans and Coastal Protection Division
(Mail Code 4504T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
566-1266; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address: fox-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0033, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Water Docket in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC 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 Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and the telephone number for the Water Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Use
http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft collection of
information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in
the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified
in this document.

What Information Is EPA Particularly Interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible, and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Apply to?

    Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0033.
    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
those municipalities that currently have section 301(h) waivers from
secondary treatment, have applied for a renewal of a section 301(h)
waiver, or those with a pending section 301(h) waiver application, and
the states within which these municipalities are located.
    Title: Modification of Secondary Treatment Requirements for
Discharges Into Marine Waters.
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 0138.09, OMB Control No. 2040-0088.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on May 31,
2009. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor,

and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR,
after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40
CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register
or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers
in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Regulations implementing section 301(h) of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) are found at 40 CFR part 125, subpart G. The section
301(h) program involves collecting information from two sources: (1)
The municipal wastewater treatment facility, commonly called a
publicly-owned treatment works (POTW), and (2) the state in which the
POTW is located. Municipalities had the opportunity to apply for a
waiver from secondary treatment requirements, but that opportunity
closed in December, 1982. A POTW that seeks a section 301(h) waiver
does so voluntarily to obtain or retain a benefit. A section 301(h)
waiver modifies secondary treatment requirements of CWA section
301(b)(1)(B). Secondary treatment requirements establish technology-
based effluent limitations for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),
suspended solids (SS), and pH (a measure of acidity or alkalinity) (40
CFR part 133). A POTW seeking to obtain a section 301(h) waiver,
holding a current waiver, or reapplying for a waiver, provides
application, monitoring, and toxic control program information. The
state provides information on its determination whether the discharge
under the proposed conditions of the waiver ensures the protection of
water quality, biological habitats, and beneficial uses of receiving
waters. The state also provides information on whether the discharge
will result in additional treatment, pollution control, or any other
requirement for any other point or nonpoint sources. The state also
provides information to certify that the discharge will meet all
applicable state laws, and that the state accepts all permit
conditions.
    There are four situations where information will be required under
the section 301(h) program:
    (1) A POTW continuing the application process for a section 301(h)
waiver, or reapplying for a waiver: As the permits with section 301(h)
waivers reach their expiration dates, EPA must have updated information
on the discharge to determine whether the section 301(h) criteria are
still being met, and whether the section 301(h) waiver should be
reissued. Under 40 CFR 125.59(f), each section 301(h) permittee is
required to submit an application for a new section 301(h) modified
permit within 180 days of the existing permit's expiration date. 40 CFR
125.59(c) lists the information required for a modified permit. The
information that EPA needs to determine whether the POTW's
reapplication meets the section 301(h) criteria is outlined in the
questionnaire attached to 40 CFR part 125, subpart G.
    (2) Monitoring and toxic control program information: Once a waiver
has been granted, EPA must continue to assess whether the discharge is
meeting section 301(h) criteria, and that the receiving water quality,
biological habitats, and beneficial uses of the receiving waters are
protected. To do this, EPA needs monitoring information furnished by
the permittee. According to 40 CFR 125.68(d), any permit issued with a
section 301(h) waiver must contain the monitoring requirements of 40
CFR 125.63(b), (c), and (d) for biomonitoring, water quality criteria
and standards monitoring, and effluent monitoring, respectively.
Section 125.68(d) also requires reporting at the frequency specified in
the monitoring program. In addition to monitoring information, EPA
needs information on the toxics control program required by section
125.66 to ensure that the permittee is effectively minimizing
industrial and nonindustrial toxic pollutant and pesticide discharges
into the treatment works.
    (3) Application revision information: Section 125.59(d) of 40 CFR
allows a POTW to revise its application one time only, following a
tentative decision by EPA to deny the waiver request. In its
application revision, the POTW usually corrects deficiencies and
changes proposed treatment levels, as well as outfall and diffuser
locations. The application revision is a voluntary submission for the
applicant, and a letter of intent to revise the application must be
submitted within 45 days of EPA's tentative decision (40 CFR
125.59(f)). EPA needs this information to evaluate revised applications
to determine whether the modified discharge will ensure protection of
water quality, biological habitats, and beneficial uses of receiving
waters.
    (4) State determination and state certification information: For
revised or renewal applications for section 301(h) waivers, EPA needs a
state determination. The state determines whether all state laws
(including water quality standards) are satisfied. This helps ensure
that water quality, biological habitats, and beneficial uses of
receiving waters are protected. Additionally, the state must determine
if the applicant's discharge will result in additional treatment,
pollution control, or any other requirement for any other point or
nonpoint sources. This process allows the state's views to be taken
into account when EPA reviews the section 301(h) application and
develops permit conditions. For revised and renewed section 301(h)
waiver applications, EPA also needs the CWA section 401(a)(1)
certification information to ensure that all state water quality laws
are met by any permit it issues with a section 301(h) modification, and
that the state accepts all the permit conditions. This information is
the means by which the state can exercise its authority to concur with
or deny a section 301(h) decision made by the EPA Regional Office.
    The information covered by this information collection request
involves treatment plant operating data, effects of POTWs' discharges
on marine environments, and states' viewpoints on issues concerning
effects of discharges from POTWs on marine environments. None of this
information is confidential; thus confidentiality is not an issue.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 652
hours per response for POTWs and 86 hours per response for states.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements
which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond
to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and
review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 50.
    Frequency of response: The frequency of response varies from once
every five years, to case-by-case, depending on the category of
information.

    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
This varies from once every five years, to case-by-case, depending on
the category of information.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 61,377 hours.
    Estimated total annual costs: $1.3 million. This includes an
estimated burden cost of $1.3 million and an estimated cost of $0 for
capital investment or maintenance and operational costs. The average
annual reporting burden varies depending on the size of the respondent
and the category of the information collection.

Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval?

    There will be a decrease in hours in the total estimated respondent
burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by
OMB. This decrease reflects EPA's estimate of a decrease in the number
of respondents, with a corresponding decrease in the total estimated
respondent burden. The new revised estimates will be presented when the
final ICR package is submitted to OMB review and approval. This change
is an adjustment.

What is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: December 19, 2008.
Craig E. Hooks,
Director, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds.
 [FR Doc. E8-30817 Filed 12-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 238)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 66045-66047]
[DOCID:fr14de09-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1124; Directorate Identifier 2009-SW-35-AD;
Amendment 39-16128; AD 2009-25-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France Model SA 330 F, G,
and J Helicopters

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
specified Eurocopter France (Eurocopter) helicopters. This AD results
from a mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) AD issued
by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community. The MCAI
Emergency AD states that there has been a report of the failure of a
flexible coupling on one of the main gearbox (MGB) inputs, which may be
the result of loss of the tightening torque load, or insufficient
tightening of the nuts on the bolts fixing the discs of the flexible
coupling to its sliding and fixed hinges. This condition, if not
corrected, could result in failure of the coupling discs, and if this
condition develops on both the left-hand (LH) and right-hand (RH) MGB
inputs, a complete loss of power to the transmission and subsequent
loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD becomes effective on December 29, 2009.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications is approved
by the Director of the Federal Register as of December 29, 2009.
    We must receive comments on this AD by February 12, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    You may get the service information identified in this AD from
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75053-4005, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at http://
www.eurocopter.com.
    Examining the Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person at the Docket Operations
office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the economic evaluation, any
comments received, and other information. The street address for the
Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is stated in the
ADDRESSES section of this AD. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DOT/FAA Southwest Region, Ed Cuevas,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety Management Group, Rotorcraft
Directorate, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone 817-
222-5355, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Community, has issued EASA AD No. 2008-0049-E, dated March 3,
2008 (Corrected: March 7, 2008), to correct an unsafe condition for
Eurocopter Model SA 330 F, G, and J helicopters, all serial numbers,
with MGB input flexible coupling sliding and fixed flanges assemblies
installed that have been modified per MOD 0752416 and MOD 0752419, but
have not been subject to maintenance scheduled inspection per Working
Card 65.32.601 since new or since a complete overhaul of the MGB. There
has been one report of the failure of a modified flexible coupling
assembly on one of the MGB inputs, which EASA has deemed to be the
result of the loss of the tightening torque load, or insufficient
tightening of the nuts on the bolts attaching the disks of the flexible
coupling to its sliding and fixed flanges. This condition, if not
corrected, could result in progressive fatigue failure of the coupling
discs, caused by extensive fretting on the faces and in the holes of
the flexible coupling discs. If this unsafe condition develops on both
the LH and RH MGB inputs, it could result in a complete loss of power
to the transmission and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter has issued Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. 05.95,
dated March 3, 2008, which specifies readjusting or checking the
tightening torque load of the nuts on the bolts attaching the flexible
coupling to the sliding coupling flange and the bolts attaching the
flexible coupling to the fixed coupling flange, in order to prevent any
damage to the flexible couplings, which, over time, may lead to the
loss of input drive to the MGB. The actions described in the MCAI are
intended to correct the same unsafe conditions as those identified in
the service information.

FAA's Evaluation and Unsafe Condition Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
France and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with France, EASA, their Technical Agent, has
notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI AD. We are
issuing this AD because we evaluated all information provided by EASA
and determined the unsafe conditions exist and are likely to exist or
develop on other helicopters of these same type designs.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI AD

    The MCAI AD uses the term ``flight hours'' instead of ``hours time-
in-service'', as we have used in this AD. Also, the MCAI AD allows
``use of later approved revisions'' of the service information to
comply with the MCAI AD. Our AD requires compliance in accordance with
the Eurocopter EASB. Additionally, this AD requires ``inspections''
conducted by a qualified mechanic, instead of ``checks'', which we
allow a pilot to do. Finally, contacting Eurocopter Technical Support
is not required by this AD as it is by the MCAI AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 14 helicopters of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take about:
     8 work-hours per helicopter to remove the engine, re-
adjust the

tightening torque load, and re-install the engine for 10 helicopters in
the fleet;
     10 work-hours per helicopter to remove the engine, measure
the tightening torque load, and re-install the engine on 3 helicopters
in the fleet; and
     12 work-hours to remove the engine, inspect and replace a
damaged flexible coupling, and re-install the engine on 1 helicopter.

The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Costs to replace a damaged
flexible coupling, if necessary, include $1,018 for 6 nuts, $838 for 1
flexible coupling, $71 for 6 (6 each) bolts, and $624 for 12 washers.
Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S.
operators will be $12,311, assuming that 1 flexible coupling is damaged
and needs to be replaced.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. We find that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving
notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because loss of the
tightening torque load or insufficient tightening of the nuts on the
bolts attaching the disks of the flexible coupling to its sliding and
fixed flanges could result in a complete loss of power to the
transmission, and there are helicopters that will be required to comply
with this AD within a short time period because of the criticality of
this unsafe condition. Therefore, we have determined that notice and
opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable
and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer
than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. However, we invite you to send us any written data, views, or
arguments concerning this AD. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section of this AD. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-
1124; Directorate Identifier 2009-SW-35-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    Therefore, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2009-25-09 Eurocopter France: Amendment 39-16128. Docket No. FAA-
2009-1124; Directorate Identifier 2009-SW-35-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective on
December 29, 2009.

Other Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Model SA 330 F, G, and J helicopters, all
serial numbers, with main gearbox (MGB) input flexible coupling
flange assemblies, part number (P/N) 330A-32937401, installed that
have been modified per MOD 0752416 and MOD 0752419, but have not
been subject to a maintenance scheduled inspection per Working Card
65.32.601 since new or since a complete overhaul of the MGB,
certificated in any category.

Reason

    (d) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) AD
states that there has been one report of disks failure of a flexible
coupling on one of the MGB inputs, which may be the result of the
loss of the tightening torque load, or insufficient tightening of
the nuts on the bolts attaching the disks of the flexible coupling
to its sliding and fixed flanges. This condition, if not corrected,
could result in progressive fatigue failure of the coupling discs,
caused by extensive fretting on the faces and in the holes of the
flexible coupling discs. If this unsafe condition develops on both
the LH and RH MGB inputs, a complete power loss to the transmission
could occur, resulting in subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

Actions and Compliance

    (e) Required as indicated, unless previously accomplished.
    (1) For MGB input flexible coupling flange assemblies with less
than 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) since new or since a complete
overhaul of the MGB, re-adjust the tightening torque load of the 6
nuts on the flexible coupling-to-flange attachment bolts. Accomplish
this re-adjustment between 50 hours TIS and 75 hours TIS since new
or since a complete overhaul of the MGB in accordance with paragraph
2.B.2.a. of Eurocopter Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. 05.95,
dated March 3, 2008 (EASB).
    (2) For MGB input flexible coupling flange assemblies with 50
hours TIS and 75 or less hours TIS since new or since a complete
overhaul of the MGB, either:
    (i) Upon or before reaching 75 hours TIS since new or since a
complete overhaul of the MGB, re-adjust the tightening torque load
of the 6 nuts on the flexible coupling-to-flange attachment bolts in
accordance with paragraph 2.B.2.a. of the EASB; or
    (ii) Upon or before reaching 125 hours TIS since new or since a
complete overhaul of the

MGB, inspect the tightening torque load of the 6 nuts on the
flexible coupling-to-flange attachment bolts in accordance with
paragraph 2.B.2.b. of the EASB, except you are not required to
contact the manufacturer.
    (3) For MGB input flexible coupling flange assemblies that have
more than 75 hours TIS since new or since a complete overhaul of the
MGB, within the next 50 hours TIS, inspect the tightening torque
load of the 6 nuts on the flexible coupling-to-flange attachment
bolts, in accordance with paragraph 2.B.2.b. of the EASB, except you
are not required to contact the manufacturer.
    (4) Prior to installing a MGB that contains an input flexible
coupling flange assembly that has been modified per MOD 0752416 and
MOD 0752419, you must comply with the provisions of this AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI AD

    (f) The MCAI AD uses the term ``flight hours'' instead of
``hours time-in-service'', as we have used in this AD. Also, the
MCAI AD allows ``use of later approved revisions'' of the service
information to comply with the MCAI AD. Our AD requires compliance
in accordance with Eurocopter Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No.
05.95, dated March 3, 2008. Additionally, this AD requires
``inspections'' by a qualified mechanic instead of ``checks'', which
we allow a pilot to do. Finally, this AD does not require you to
contact Eurocopter Technical Support, which is required by the MCAI
AD.

Other Information

    (g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Safety Management Group, Attn: DOT/FAA Southwest Region, Ed Cuevas,
Aerospace Engineer, Rotorcraft Directorate, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (h) European Aviation Safety Agency MCAI Airworthiness Directive
No. 2009-0049-E, dated March 3, 2008 (Corrected: March 7, 2008),
contains related information.

Joint Aircraft System/Component Code

    (i) JASC Code 6310: Engine/Transmission Coupling.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use the specified portions of Eurocopter Emergency
Alert Service Bulletin No. 05.95, dated March 3, 2008, to do the
actions required.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75053-4005, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at
http://www.eurocopter.com.
    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas
76137; or at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/
federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 18, 2009.
Gary B. Roach,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E9-29424 Filed 12-11-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P