[Federal Register: November 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 227)]
[Notices]
[Page 66171-66173]
[DOCID:fr27no07-83]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0340; FRL-8499-5]

Renewable Fuel Standard Under Section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act
as Amended by the Energy Policy Act of 2005

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act (the Act), as amended by
the Energy Policy Act of 2005, requires the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to annually determine a renewable
fuel standard (RFS) which is applicable to refiners, importers and
certain blenders of gasoline, and publish the standard in the Federal
Register by November 30 of each year. On the basis of this standard,
each obligated party determines the volume of renewable fuel that it
must ensure is consumed as motor vehicle fuel. This standard is
calculated as a percentage, by dividing the amount of renewable fuel
that the Act requires to be blended into gasoline for a given year by
the amount of gasoline expected to be used during that year, including
certain adjustments specified by the Act. In this notice we are
publishing an RFS of 4.66% for 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris McKenna, Environmental
Protection Agency, MC 6406J, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Calculation of the 2008 RFS

A. Background

    The preamble to the final rulemaking for the Renewable Fuel
Standard Program included a projected RFS for 2008 of 4.63%. 72 FR
23912 (May 1, 2007). In today's notice we are again using the
calculational procedure from the final rulemaking to calculate the 2008
RFS. However, since some projections and assumptions used in the final
rulemaking to calculate the projected 2008 RFS have changed, today's
notice includes a recalculated and final 2008 RFS using the most
recently available information. Since the RFS rule established clear
legal criteria for deriving the standard (including specification of
the formula used in today's notice, and all data sources), EPA is
simply applying facts to pre-established law in issuing the final 2008
RFS standard. EPA is advising the

regulated community of the revised standard through a Federal Register
Notice, without prior notice and comment, in accordance with the Clean
Air Act and EPA regulations.
    The 2008 RFS is calculated by dividing the volume of renewable
fuels required by the Act to be blended into gasoline in 2008, by the
volume of gasoline projected by the Energy Information Administration
(EIA) to be consumed in 2008 (including certain adjustments specified
by the Act). The following equation from the final RFS Program
regulations summarizes all of the variables that must be considered in
the calculation.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27NO07.004

Where:

RFStdi = Renewable Fuel Standard in year i, in percent
RFVi = Annual volume of renewable fuels required by
section 211(o)(2)(B) of the Act for year i, in gallons
Gi = Amount of gasoline projected to be used in the 48
contiguous states, in year i, in gallons
Ri = Amount of renewable fuel blended into gasoline that
is projected to be consumed in the 48 contiguous states, in year i,
in gallons
GSi = Amount of gasoline projected to be used in Alaska,
Hawaii, or a U.S. territory in year i if the state or territory
opts-in, in gallons
RSi = Amount of renewable fuel blended into gasoline that
is projected to be consumed in Alaska, Hawaii, or a U.S. territory
in year i if the state or territory opts-in, in gallons
GEi = Amount of gasoline projected to be produced by
exempt small refineries and small refiners in year i, in gallons
(through 2010 only unless exemption extended under Sec. Sec.
211(o)(9)(A)(ii) or (B)).
Celli = Beginning in 2013, the amount of renewable fuel
that is required to come from cellulosic sources, in year i, in
gallons (250,000,000 gallons minimum)

B. Data Sources for 2008 RFS Calculation

    The following discussion describes the sources of data for the
variables in the above equation. For ease of calculation, this
discussion regroups the terms (Gi - Ri) +
(GSi - RSi) in the denominator of the above
equation into the terms (Gi + GSi) -
(Ri + RSi).
Calculation of (RFVi - Celli), Total Amount of
Renewable Fuels From Non-cellulosic Sources That Must Be Blended Into
Gasoline in 2008
    The Act requires 5.4 billion gallons of renewable fuels to be
blended into gasoline in 2008. Because there is no cellulosic volume
requirement in the Act until 2013, the amount of renewable fuel that
the Act requires to be produced from cellulosic sources in 2008
(Celli) is zero. Thus the total amount of renewable fuels
from non-cellulosic sources that must be blended into gasoline in 2008
is 5.4 billion gallons.
Calculation of (Gi + GSi), Total Amount of
Gasoline Projected To Be Used in the 48 Contiguous States Plus Opt-in
States/Territories, in Year i, in Gallons
    The Act requires the Administrator of the EIA by October 31 of each
year to provide EPA with an estimate of the volumes of gasoline
projected to be sold or introduced into commerce in the United States
for the following year. During the development of the RFS Program, EIA
informed EPA that the projected gasoline consumption in ``Table 4a:
U.S. Petroleum Supply, Consumption, and Inventories'' (formerly ``Table
5a. U.S. Petroleum Supply and Demand: Base Case'') of the October issue
of the monthly Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO) should be used to
calculate the RFS for the coming year. The October 2007 STEO projects
that an average of 9.42 million barrels/day of gasoline will be
consumed in all of the United States in 2008. Multiplying this average
consumption rate by 366 days (2008 is a leap year) produces a total
consumption of 144.80 billion gallons of gasoline in 2008.
    Only one non-contiguous state or territory has petitioned EPA to
opt into the RFS Program beginning in 2008. Hawaii petitioned EPA on
June 22, 2007 to opt into the RFS program, and EPA approved their
request.\1\ Thus, Alaska is the only one of the 50 states that is not
included in the RFS Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Letter to the Honorable Laura Lingle, Governor of Hawaii,
from Stephen Johnson of EPA dated July 30, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to calculate gasoline consumption in the 48 contiguous
states plus Hawaii, we subtracted Alaska's projected gasoline
consumption from the projected nationwide gasoline consumption of
144.80 billion gallons. Alaska's projected gasoline consumption was
calculated by multiplying the projected nationwide gasoline consumption
in 2008 by the ratio of Alaska's gasoline consumption in 2006 to the
total U.S. consumption in 2006, based on Table 48, ``Prime Supplier
Sales Volumes of Motor Gasoline by Grade Formulation, PAD District, and
State'' gasoline data from EIA's Petroleum Marketing Annual 2006 (the
final rulemaking used data from Petroleum Marketing Annual 2005).
According to EIA, Prime Supplier data reflects where gasoline is used,
rather than where it is produced.\2\ Alaska's projected gasoline
consumption in 2008 is 0.30 billion gallons. Subtracting this
consumption from the projected nationwide consumption of 144.80 billion
gallons in 2008 produces a total consumption of 144.50 billion gallons
of gasoline in 2008 in the 48 contiguous states plus Hawaii.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Energy Information Administration, Petroleum Marketing
Annual 2006, Explanatory Notes, Relationship of Refiner and Prime
Supplier Sales Volumes (p. 382).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Calculation of (Ri + RSi), Total Amount of
Renewable Fuel Blended Into Gasoline That Is Projected To Be Consumed
in the 48 Contiguous States Plus Opt-in States/Territories, in Year i,
in Gallons
    The projected gasoline consumption in the October 2007 STEO
includes renewable fuel that is blended into gasoline. This volume of
renewable fuel must be subtracted from the total volume of gasoline in
order to calculate the total consumption of non-renewable gasoline. In
Table 8 of the October 2007 STEO, EIA estimates that 0.755 quadrillion
Btu of ethanol will be used as transportation fuel in all of the United
States in 2008. Dividing this energy usage by the high heating value of
ethanol (3.539 million Btu/barrel), and multiplying by 42 gallons/
barrel produces a total ethanol usage of 8.96 billion gallons
nationwide in 2008.
    Since Hawaii has opted in, but Alaska has not opted in, to the RFS
program for 2008, Alaska's renewable fuels consumption must be
subtracted from the nationwide renewable fuels consumption to calculate
renewable consumption in the 48 contiguous states plus Hawaii. In
Chapter 2 of the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the RFS program
rulemaking, EPA estimated that ethanol consumption in Alaska would be
negligible prior to 2012. Thus, we project renewable fuels consumption
in

the 48 contiguous states plus Hawaii to be 8.96 billion gallons in
2008.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Table 2.2-21 ``2012 Forecasted Ethanol Consumption by
State,'' Regulatory Impact Analysis: Renewable Fuel Standard
Program, April 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Calculation of GEi, Amount of Gasoline Projected To Be
Produced by Exempt Small Refineries and Small Refiners in Year i, in
Gallons \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Through 2010 only, unless the exemption is extended under
211(o)(9(A)(ii) or (B) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the final rulemaking, we stated that we would estimate the
combined small refinery and small refiner gasoline volume using a
constant percentage of national consumption. Using information from
gasoline batch reports submitted to EPA, EIA data and input from the
California Air Resources Board regarding California small refiners, we
estimated this percentage to be 13.5%.\5\ Multiplying the projected
nationwide consumption of gasoline in 2008 (144.80 billion gallons) by
13.5% results in a total projected production of 19.55 billion gallons
of gasoline from small refiners and small refineries in 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Calculation of the Small Refiner/Small Refinery Fraction
for the Renewable Fuel Program,'' memo to the docket from Christine
Brunner, ASD, OTAQ, EPA, September 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Calculation of RFStdi, Renewable Fuel Standard in Year i, in
Percent
    Substituting all of the terms calculated above into the equation
for RFStdi results in the following RFS for 2008,
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27NO07.005

    Therefore, the RFS for 2008 is 4.66%. This is the standard
referenced in 40 CFR 80.1105(b) through (d) and which obligated parties
apply to determine their renewable volume obligation under 40 CFR
80.1107.

    Dated: November 20, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E7-23095 Filed 11-26-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


46607 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 151 / Wednesday, August 6, 2003 / Notices of the public wishing further information regarding the SAB or the 3MRA Panel may contact Ms. Kathleen White, Designated Federal Officer ( DFO), U. S. EPA Science Advisory Board ( 1400A), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; by telephone/ voice mail at ( 202) 564   4559; or via e mail at white. kathleen@ epa. gov. General information about the SAB can be found in the SAB Web site at http:// www. epa. gov/ sab.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 92   463, Notice is given that the 3MRA Panel will hold public teleconferences, as described above, to prepare for the public meetings, also described above, to further the Panel's review, and to discuss approval of the Panel's final report. The purpose of the public meetings is to advise the Agency on its Multimedia, Multipathway, and Multireceptor Risk Assessment ( 3MRA) Modeling System. Background on the SAB, the 3MRA Panel, and this review was provided in a Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2003 ( 68 FR 17797   17800). More information regarding this review can be found at the SAB Web site at http:// www. epa. gov/ sab/ panels/ 3mramspanel. html. The review documents and background information are located at http:// www. epa. gov/ epaoswer/ hazwaste/ id/ hwirwste/ risk. htm. Individuals who are unable to access the documents electronically may contact Mr. Stephen Kroner of the Office of Solid Waste at ( 703) 308   0468 or via e mail to kroner. stephen@ epa. gov to make other arrangements. A very limited number of paper copies can be made available in special circumstances. Procedures for Providing Public Comment: It is the policy of the EPA Science Advisory Board ( SAB) Staff Office to accept written public comments of any length, and to accommodate oral public comments whenever possible. The EPA SAB Staff Office expects that public statements presented at the 3MRA Panel's meetings will not be repetitive of previously submitted oral or written statements. Oral Comments: In general, each individual or group requesting an oral presentation at a face to face meeting will be limited to a total time of ten minutes ( unless otherwise indicated). For conference call meetings, opportunities for oral comment will usually be limited to no more than three minutes per speaker and no more than fifteen minutes total. Interested parties should contact the Designated Federal Official ( DFO) in writing ( e mail, fax or mail) at least one week prior to the meeting in order to be placed on the public speaker list for the meeting. Speakers should bring at least 35 copies of their comments and presentation slides for distribution to the participants and public at the meeting. Written Comments: Although written comments are accepted until the date of the meeting ( unless otherwise stated), written comments should be received in the SAB Staff Office at least one week prior to the meeting date so that the comments may be made available to the committee for their consideration. Comments should be supplied to the DFO at the address/ contact information noted above in the following formats: One hard copy with original signature, and one electronic copy via e mail ( acceptable file format: Adobe Acrobat, WordPerfect, Word, or Rich Text files ( in IBM PC/ Windows 95/ 98 format). Those providing written comments and who attend the meeting are also asked to bring 35 copies of their comments for public distribution. Meeting Accommodations: Individuals requiring special accommodation to access these meetings, should contact Ms. White at least five business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

Dated: July 24, 2003. Vanessa T. Vu, Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office. [ FR Doc. 03   20036 Filed 8   5   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPP   2003   0153; FRL   7316   7]

Pesticide Products; Registration Applications AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of applications to register pesticide products containing new active ingredients not included in any previously registered products pursuant to the provisions of section 3( c)( 4) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA), as amended. DATES: Written comments, identified by the docket ID number OPP   2003   0153, must be received on or before September 5, 2003. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diana Horne, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division ( 7511C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 308   8367; e mail address: horne. diana@ epa. gov.

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. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:   Crop production ( NAICS 111)   Animal production ( NAICS 112)   Food manufacturing ( NAICS 311)   Pesticide manufacturing ( NAICS 32532) This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System ( NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2003   0153. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket VerDate jul< 14> 2003 19: 35 Aug 05, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 06AUN1. SGM 06AUN1 46608 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 151 / Wednesday, August 6, 2003 / Notices facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official 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 appropriate docket ID number. Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. EPA intends to work towards providing electronic access to all of the publicly available docket materials through EPA's electronic public docket. For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief description written by the docket staff.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments? You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket ID number in the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked `` late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late comments. If you wish to submit CBI or information that is otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions in Unit I. D. Do not use EPA Dockets or e mail to submit CBI or information protected by statute. 1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed in this unit, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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. i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets athttp:// www. epa. gov/ edocket, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once in the system, select `` search,'' and then key in docket ID number OPP   2003   0153. The system is an`` anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. ii. E mail. Comments may be sent by e mail toopp docket@ epa. gov, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP   2003   0153. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system is not an `` anonymous access'' system. If you send an e mail comment directly to the docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system automatically captures your e mail address. E mail addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e mail system are included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM that you mail to the mailing address identified in Unit I. C. 2. These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. 2. By mail. Send your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Office of Pesticide Programs ( OPP), Environmental Protection Agency ( 7502C), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460   0001, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP   2003   0153. 3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Office of Pesticide Programs ( OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA., Attention: Docket ID Number OPP   2003   0153. Such deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation as identified in Unit I. B. 1.

D. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency? Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI electronically through EPA's electronic public docket or by e mail. You may claim information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI ( if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is CBI). Information so marked will not be VerDate jul< 14> 2003 19: 35 Aug 05, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 06AUN1. SGM 06AUN1 46609 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 151 / Wednesday, August 6, 2003 / Notices disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

E. What Should I Consider as 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. 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. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the registration activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this notice. 8. 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.

II. Registration Applications EPA received applications as follows to register pesticide products containing active ingredients not included in any previously registered products pursuant to the provision of section 3( c)( 4) of FIFRA. Notice of receipt of these applications does not imply a decision by the Agency on the applications.

Products Containing Active Ingredients Not Included in Any Previously Registered Products 1. File symbol: 73512   E. Applicant: Interregional Research Project 4 ( IR 4), Rutgers University, Technology Center of New Jersey, 681 U. S. Highway 1 South, North Brunswick, NJ 08902   3390 on behalf of Morse Enterprises Limited, Inc., Brickell East, Floor Ten, 151 South East 15 Road, Miami, FL 33129. Product name: Yeast Hydrolysate Liquid. Active ingredient: Yeast extract hydrolysate from Saccharomyces cerevisiae at 2.5%. Proposed classification/ Use: None. Manufacturing use product for management of plant diseases. 2. File symbol: 73512   R. Applicant: Interregional Research Project 4 ( IR   4). Product name: KeyPlex 350. Active ingredient: Yeast Extract hydrolysate from Saccharomyces cerevisiae at 0.063%. Proposed classification/ Use: None. For use in management of plant diseases.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pest.

Dated: July 28, 2003. Janet L. Andersen, Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[ FR Doc. 03   19917 Filed 8   5   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPP   2003   0261; FRL   7320   4]

Penoxsulam; Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition To Establish a Tolerance for a Certain Pesticide Chemical in or on Food AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide petition proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of a certain pesticide chemical in or on various food commodities. DATES: Comments, identified by docket ID number OPP   2003   0261, must be received on or before September 5, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanne Miller, Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 305   6224; e mail address: miller. joanne@ epa. gov.

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. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:   Crop production ( NAICS 111)   Animal production ( NAICS 113)   Food manufacturing ( NAICS 311)   Pesticide manufacturing ( NAICS 32532) This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System ( NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2003   0261. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to VerDate jul< 14> 2003 19: 35 Aug 05, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 06AUN1. SGM 06AUN1


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 134 (Monday, July 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40790-40792]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16429]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2012-0015]

Modification of the Uniform Chimney Variance To Include
Industrial Access, Inc., and Marietta Silos LLC

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces its final decision to modify
the uniform chimney variance granted to Kiewit Power Constructors Co.
and other employers by adding Industrial Access, Inc., and Marietta
Silos LLC (Industrial Access and Marietta Silos) to the list of
employers covered by the conditions specified in that variance.

DATES: This modification to the uniform chimney variance is effective
on July 14, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    General and technical information: Contact Mr. David Johnson,
Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities,
Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:
(202) 693-2110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>OSHA's Web page
includes information about the Variance Program (see http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/variances/index.html).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of this Federal Register notice.
Electronic copies of this Federal Register notice are available at
http://www.regulations.gov. This Federal Register notice, as well as
news releases and other relevant information, also are available at
OSHA's Web page at http://www.osha.gov.

I. Background

    Between 1973 and 2010, OSHA granted to a number of chimney-
construction companies permanent variances from the provisions of the
OSHA standards that regulate boatswains' chairs and hoist towers,

specifically, paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452 and paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR
1926.552.\1\ On October 2, 2013, the Agency granted a permanent multi-
state uniform chimney variance to 15 construction employers (Kiewit et
al; 78 FR 60900). The uniform chimney variance: (1) Clarified,
improved, and updated the technology and safeguards included in the
conditions of the variance by citing the most recent consensus
standards and best practices; (2) broadened and standardized the scope
of the uniform chimney variance to apply to chimney-related
construction, including work on chimneys, chimney linings, stacks,
silos, towers, and similar structures, built using jump-form and slip-
form methods of construction, regardless of the structural
configuration, and that involve the use of temporary personnel-hoist
systems; (3) provided consistent and safe variance conditions across
the employers applying for, and granted, the uniform chimney variance;
and (4) superseded and replaced the chimney-related construction
variances granted between 1973 and 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 38 FR 8545 (April 3, 1973), 44 FR 51352 (August 31,
1979), 50 FR 20145 (May 14, 1985), 50 FR 40627 (October 4, 1985), 52
FR 22552 (June 12, 1987), 68 FR 52961 (September 8, 2003), 70 FR
72659 (December 6, 2005), 71 FR 10557 (March 1, 2006), 72 FR 6002
(February 8, 2007), 74 FR 34789 (July 17, 2009), 74 FR 41742 (August
18, 2009), and 75 FR 22424 (April 28, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Notice of Applications

    On December 6, 2013, Industrial Access, Inc., and on February 7,
2014, Marietta Silos LLC, submitted their respective applications for a
permanent variance under Section 6(d) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 655) and 29 CFR 1905.11 (``Variances and
other relief under section 6(d)'') (see Exhibits. OSHA-2012-0015-0023
and 0024). The applicants construct, renovate, repair, maintain,
inspect, and demolish tall chimneys and similar structures made of
concrete, brick, and steel. This work, which occurs throughout the
United States, requires the applicants to transport employees and
construction tools and materials to and from elevated worksites located
inside and outside these structures. The applicants' names and
addresses are as follows:

Industrial Access, Inc., 1155 McFarland 400 Drive, Alpharetta, GA
30004.
Marietta Silos LLC, 2417 Waterford Road, Marietta, OH 45750.

    The applicants were seeking a permanent variance from 29 CFR
1926.452(o)(3), which regulates the tackle used to rig a boatswains'
chair, as well as from paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8),
(c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552, which regulate
hoist towers. These paragraphs specify the following requirements:
     (o)(3)--Requirements for the tackle used to rig a
boatswains' chair;
     (c)(1)--Construction requirements for hoist towers outside
a structure;
     (c)(2)--Construction requirements for hoist towers inside
a structure;
     (c)(3)--Anchoring a hoist tower to a structure;
     (c)(4)--Hoistway doors or gates;
     (c)(8)--Electrically interlocking entrance doors or gates
to the hoistway and cars;
     (c)(13)--Emergency stop switch located in the car;
     (c)(14)(i)--Using a minimum of two wire ropes for drum
hoisting; and
     (c)(16)--Material and component requirements for
construction of personnel hoists.
    Instead of complying with these requirements, the applicants
proposed to use the alternative conditions specified by OSHA for these
requirements in the uniform chimney variance. The applicants contended
that including them under the conditions of the uniform chimney
variance would provide their employees with a place of employment that
is at least as safe and healthful as these employees would receive
under the existing provisions.
    As is the case with the uniform chimney variance, the places of
employment affected by the variance applications are the present and
future projects where the applicants construct chimneys and chimney-
related structures using jump-form and slip-form construction \2\
techniques and procedures, regardless of structural configuration when
such construction involves the use of temporary personnel hoist
systems. The applicants' projects are in states under federal
authority, as well as states that have safety and health plans approved
by OSHA under Section 18 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 (29 U.S.C. 667) and 29 CFR part 1952 (``Approved State Plans for
Enforcement of State Standards''). The affected states cover private-
sector employers and have standards identical to the standards that are
the subject of these applications, and these states agree to the terms
of the variance. (For further information, see the discussion of State-
plan coverage for the uniform chimney variance at 78 FR 60900, 60901.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Throughout this notice, OSHA uses the terms ``jump-form
construction'' and ``slip-form construction'' instead of ``jump-form
formwork construction'' and ``slip-form formwork construction,''
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The variance permits the applicants to operate temporary hoist
systems in the manner prescribed by the uniform chimney variance.
According to the conditions of the uniform chimney variance, the
applicants can use these temporary hoist systems to raise and lower
workers to and from elevated worksites. Examples of elevated worksites
where temporary hoist systems can operate include: Chimneys, chimney
linings, stacks, silos, and chimney-related structures such as towers
and similar structures constructed using jump-form and slip-form
construction techniques and procedures regardless of the structural
configuration of the structure (such as tapered or straight barreled of
any diameter).
    On April 18, 2014, OSHA published a Federal Register notice (79 FR
21956) in which it announced the proposed modification of the uniform
chimney variance granted to Kiewit Power Constructors Co. and other
employers to include Industrial Access, Inc., and Marietta Silos LLC
and requested comments. OSHA received no comments or request for a
hearing on the proposed modification of the uniform chimney variance.
Therefore, with this action, OSHA is modifying the uniform chimney
variance to include Industrial Access, Inc., and Marietta Silos LLC.
Therefore, the applicants must comply with conditions that are
consistent with the conditions used by the other employers listed in
the uniform chimney variance when operating temporary hoist systems in
the construction of chimney-related structures.

III. Specific Conditions of the Variance Applications

    As mentioned previously in this notice, OSHA granted a number of
permanent variances since 1973 from the tackle requirements for
boatswains' chairs in 29 CFR 1926.452(o)(3) and the requirements for
hoist towers specified by paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8),
(c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552. In view of the
OSHA's history, knowledge, and experience with the variances granted
for chimney-related construction, OSHA finds that the variance
applications submitted by Industrial Access and Marietta Silos are
consistent with the uniform chimney variance previously granted to
other employers in the construction industry. Therefore, OSHA
determined that the alternative conditions specified by the
applications protect the applicants' workers at least as effectively as
the

requirements of 29 CFR 1926.452(o)(3) and paragraphs (c)(1) through
(c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552.

IV. Final Decision and Order

    Pursuant to the provisions of 29 CFR 1905.13 (``Modification,
revocation, and renewal of rules or orders''), on April 18, 2014, OSHA
notified the public in a Federal Register notice (79 FR 21956) that
Industrial Access and Marietta Silos proposed to modify the uniform
chimney variance granted previously by OSHA to Kiewit Power
Constructors Co. and other employers (see 78 FR 60900). Therefore, with
this notice, OSHA is adding the applicants to the list of employers
granted authority by the Agency to apply the conditions specified in
the uniform chimney variance when operating temporary hoist systems in
the construction of chimney-related structures (see 78 FR 60900).
Section VI (``Order'') of the uniform chimney variance provides the
alternate conditions with which Industrial Access and Marietta Silos
must comply as part of OSHA's grant of the modified uniform chimney
variance.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice.
Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
655, Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25, 2012),
and 29 CFR part 1905.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on July 9, 2014.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2014-16429 Filed 7-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36142-36143]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15319]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1975-DR;Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

Arkansas; Amendment No. 6 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-1975-DR), dated May 2, 2011, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 3, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident
period for this disaster is closed effective June 3, 2011.

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

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-15319 Filed 6-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

	     Issued by the Department of Transportation on February 19, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2003-14397

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no

additional confirming order will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  KLM Cityhopper B.V.					Date Filed:  January 28, 2003,

									as supplementedFebruary 6, 2003

Relief requested:  (1)  Exemption from 49 U.S.C. 41301 to conduct
scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail by
displaying the airline designator codes of Northwest Airlines, Inc., and
Continental Airlines, Inc.,

on flights operated by KLM Cityhopper between points in The Netherlands
and points in third countries;

(2)  Statement of authorization pursuant to 14 CFR 212 of the
Department’s regulations to display Northwest’s airline designator
code on KLM Cityhopper-operated flights between points in The
Netherlands and points in third countries.

Applicant representative:  Charles Donley<PHONE_NUMBER>		DOT analyst:
Barbara Schools<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved									Action date:  February 19, 2003

Effective dates of exemption authority granted:  February 19, 2003  -
February 19, 2005

Effective dates of statement of authorization granted:  February 19,
2003 - Indefinite, subject to attached conditions

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  The authority is
provided for in the U.S.-Netherlands Air Transport Agreement.  We found,
based on the record, that the carrier is substantially owned and
effectively controlled by citizens of The Netherlands, properly licensed
by its homeland, and operationally and financially qualified to
undertake the proposed operations.  Finally, the FAA has advised us that
it knows of no reason why the Department should act unfavorably on the
carrier’s application.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

 X  Standard exemption conditions (attached)         X  Code-share
conditions (attached)

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that  (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

												        Appendix A

FOREIGN AIR CARRIER CONDITIONS OF AUTHORITY

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the holder shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security;1

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are:

   (a)  based on its operations in international air transportation
that, according to the contract of carriage, include a point in the
United States as a point of origin, point of destination, or agreed
stopping place, or for which the contract of carriage was purchased in
the United States; or

   (b)  based on a claim under any international agreement or treaty
cognizable in any court or other tribunal of the United States.

In this condition, the term "international air transportation" means
"international transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention,
except that all States shall be considered to be High Contracting
Parties for the purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code (formerly the
Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended).__________________

1  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder should, before commencing any new
service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that would be
the holder’s last point of departure for the United States, inform its
Principal Security Inspector of its plans.

U.S. Department of Transportation

Office of the Secretary of Transportation									        (41301/40109)
10/2002

KLM Cityhopper/Northwest Airlines, Inc., Code-Share Conditions  (Docket
OST-2003-14397)

The code-share operations authorized here are subject to the following
conditions:

 (a)  The statement of authorization will remain in effect only as long
as (i) KLM Cityhopper and Northwest continue to hold the necessary
underlying authority to operate the code-share services at issue, and
(ii) the code-share agreement providing for the code-share operations
remains in effect;

 (b)  KLM Cityhopper and/or Northwest must notify the Department no
later than 30 days before they begin any new code-share service under
the code-share services authorized here.  Such notice shall identify the
market(s) to be served, which carrier will be operating the aircraft in
the code-share market added, and the date on which the service will
begin.  Such notices should be filed in Docket OST-2003-14397;

 (c)  KLM Cityhopper and/or Northwest must notify the Department
immediately if the code-share agreement under which these code-share
services are operated is no longer in effect or if the carriers decide
to cease operating all or a portion of the code-share services under the
agreement.  We expect this notification to be received within 10 days of
such non-effectiveness or of such decision.  Such notices should be
filed in Docket OST-2003-14397;

 (d)  The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must
comply with 14 CFR 257 and with any amendments to the Department’s
regulations concerning code-share arrangements that may be adopted.
Notwithstanding any provisions in the contract between the carriers, our
approval here is expressly conditioned upon the requirements that the
subject foreign air transportation be sold in the name of the carrier
holding out such service in computer reservation systems and elsewhere;
that the carrier selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on
the ticket) accept responsibility for the entirety of the code-share
journey for all obligations established in its contract of carriage with
the passenger; that the passenger liability of the operating carrier be
unaffected; and that the operating carrier shall not permit the code of
its U.S. code-sharing partner to be carried on any flight that enters,
departs, or transits the airspace of any area for whose airspace the
Federal Aviation Administration has issued a flight prohibition;

 (e)  The authority to operate to third countries is subject to the
condition that any service provided under the statement of authorization
shall be consistent with all applicable agreements between the United
States and the foreign countries involved.  Furthermore, (i) nothing in
the award of this blanket statement of authorization should be construed
as conferring upon KLM Cityhopper and Northwest rights (including
code-share, fifth freedom intermediate and/or beyond rights) to serve
markets where U.S. carrier rights are limited unless KLM Cityhopper and
Northwest notify us of their intent to serve such a market and unless
and until the Department has completed any necessary carrier selection
procedures to determine which carrier(s) should be authorized to
exercise such rights; and (ii) should there be a request by any carrier
to use the limited-entry route rights that are included in KLM
Cityhopper’s and Northwest’s authority by virtue of the blanket
statement of authorization granted here, but that are not being used by
KLM Cityhopper and Northwest, the holding of such authority will not be
considered as providing any preference for KLM Cityhopper and Northwest
in a competitive carrier selection proceeding to determine which
carrier(s) should be entitled to use the authority at issue; and

 (f)  The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that
neither KLM Cityhopper nor Northwest shall give any force or effect to
any contractual provisions between themselves that are contrary to these
conditions.

We may amend, modify, or revoke this authority at any time without
hearing.

  KLM Cityhopper already holds a statement of authorization permitting
it to display Continental’s code on KLM Cityhopper-operated flights
between The Netherlands and third countries (see Notice of Action Taken
dated November 29, 2001, in Docket OST-2001-10880).

  The notice in paragraph (b) above can be used for this notification.


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 101 (Thursday, May 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24133-24134]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11185]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0280]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0045

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of
its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0045,
Adequacy Certification for Reception Facilities and Advance

Notice--33 CFR part 158; without change. Our ICR describes the
information we seek to collect from the public. Before submitting this
ICR to OIRA, the Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before July 23, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2018-0280] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available from:
Commandant (CG-612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S. Coast
Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Stop 7710, Washington, DC
20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to
your comments, we may revise this ICR or decide not to seek an
extension of approval for the Collection. We will consider all comments
and material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2018-0280], and
must be received by July 23, 2018.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Adequacy Certification for Reception Facilities and Advance
Notice--33 CFR part 158.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0045.
    Summary: This information helps ensure that waterfront facilities
are in compliance with reception facility standards. Advance notice
information from vessels ensures effective management of reception
facilities.
    Need: Section 1905 of Title 33 U.S.C. gives the Coast Guard the
authority to certify the adequacy of reception facilities in ports.
Reception facilities are needed to receive waste from ships which may
not discharge at sea. Under these regulations in 33 CFR part 158 there
are discharge limitations for oil and oily waster, noxious liquid
substances, plastics and other garbage.
    Forms: CG-5401, Certificate of Adequacy for Reception Facility; CG-
5401A, Application for Certificate of Adequacy (COA) for Reception
Facilities, Form A; CG-5401B, Application for Certificate of Adequacy
(COA) for Reception Facilities, Form B; CG-5401C, Application for a
Reception Facility Certificate of Adequacy for Garbage, Form C; CG-
5401D, Application for a Reception Facility Certificate of Adequacy or
Ozone Depletion Substances and Exhaust Gas Cleaning System Residue,
Form D.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of reception facilities, and
owners and operators of vessels.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has decreased from 4,997
hours to 4,825 hours a year due to a decrease in the estimated annual
number of respondents.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: May 21, 2018.
James D. Roppel,
 Acting Chief, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Information Management.
[FR Doc. 2018-11185 Filed 5-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Name:           RIGTRUP DON
Title:
Organization:   MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC
Date:           20030228
Address1:
Address2:
City:           LEHI
State:          UT
Zip Code:       84043
Docket Number:  S030
Exhibit Number: 7-1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Safety Standards for Cranes and Derricks

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is planning to establish a Crane and Derrick Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee (C-DAC) under the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (NRA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The Committee will include representatives of parties who would be significantly affected by the final rule.

On July 16, 2002, OSHA published a Federal Register notice of intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking committee (67 FR 46612) and requested nominations for membership. In the current Federal Register notice OSHA is asking for comments on the proposed list of fifty-five nominations.  The list can be found in the complete notice.

Please note that you may not attach materials such as studies or journal articles to your electronic comments. If you wish to include such materials, you must submit three copies to the OSHA Docket Office at the address listed above. When submitting such materials to the OSHA Docket Office, clearly identify your electronic comments by name, date, subject, and Docket Number, so that we can attach the materials to your electronic comments.

Online comments must be received by March 31, 2003 COB EST.  If you wish to commit online on the proposed list of Committee members, please enter your submission in the box below.  Thank you for your interest in worker safety and health.

It appears that the committee should have representation from other entities with a vested interest in crane safety, such as the ANSI/ASME B30.5 Committee, NCCCO, and AGC.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45336-45337]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16541]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78215A]

Corrected Order Extending a Temporary Exemption From Compliance
With Rules 13n-1 to 13n-12 Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

June 30, 2016.

I. Introduction

    On March 18, 2016, under its authority in section 36 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act''), the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') granted a temporary exemption from
compliance with Rules 13n-1 to 13n-12 (``SDR Rules'') until June 30,
2016. The Commission also granted an extension of the exemptions from
Exchange Act sections 13(n)(5)(D)(i), 13(n)(5)(F), 13(n)(5)(G),
13(n)(5)(H), 13(n)(7)(A), 13(n)(7)(B), 13(n)(7)(C) and 29(b) provided
in the DFA Effective Date Order \1\ (``SDR Relief''), as described in
the Commission's March 18, 2016 order,

such that the SDR Relief will expire on the earlier of (1) the date the
Commission grants registration to an SDR and (2) June 30, 2016.\2\ The
Commission granted the exemptions to help facilitate the potential
submission of any SDR applications at the time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Temporary Exemptions and Other Temporary Relief,
Together with Information on Compliance Dates for New Provisions of
the Exchange Act Applicable to Security-Based Swaps, Exchange Act
Release No. 64678 (June 15, 2011), 76 FR 36287 (June 22, 2011) (the
``DFA Effective Date Order'').
    \2\ See Exchange Act Release No. 77400 (Mar. 18, 2016), 81 FR
15599 (Mar. 23, 2016) (``SDR Section 36 Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since March 18, 2016, two entities have filed applications to
register with the Commission as SDRs.\3\ To allow the Commission
additional time to review these applications prior to the compliance
date for the SDR Rules and the expiration of the SDR Relief, the
Commission is extending the exemptions granted in the March 18, 2016
order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 77699 (Apr. 22, 2016), 81 FR
25475 (Apr. 28, 2016) (``ICE Trade Vault Notice'') and Exchange Act
Release No. 34-78216 (June 30, 2016), 81 FR 44379 (July 7, 2016)
(``DDR Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    The SDR Rules Release \4\ states that SDRs were required to be in
compliance with the SDR Rules by March 18, 2016. The SDR Rules Release
also notes that, absent an exemption, any SDR must be registered with
the Commission and in compliance with the federal securities laws and
the rules and regulations thereunder (including the applicable Dodd-
Frank Act provisions and all of the SDR Rules) by March 18, 2016.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Exchange Act Release No. 74246 (Feb. 11, 2015), 80 FR
14438 (Mar. 19, 2015) (``SDR Rules Release'').
    \5\ See id., 80 FR at 14456. The SDR Rules Release also notes
that all exemptions that the Commission provided in a previous
release, including the exemption to provisions in Exchange Act
Section 13(n), will expire on the March 18, 2016 compliance date.
See id. (discussing the DFA Effective Date Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since March 18, 2016, two entities have filed applications to
register with the Commission as SDRs. ICE Trade Vault, LLC (``ICE Trade
Vault'') filed with the Commission a Form SDR seeking registration as
an SDR on March 29, 2016 and amended that form on April 18, 2016. The
Commission's notice of ICE Trade Vault's application for registration
as an SDR was published in the Federal Register on April 28, 2016.\6\
DTCC Data Repository (U.S.) LLC (``DDR'') filed with the Commission a
Form SDR seeking registration as an SDR on April 6, 2016 and amended
that form on April 25, 2016. The Commission's notice of DDR's
application for registration as an SDR was published in the Federal
Register on July 7, 2016.\7\ Rule 13n-1(c) provides that, within 90
days of the date of the publication of notice of the filing of an
application for registration (or within such longer period as to which
the applicant consents), the Commission will either grant the
registration by order or institute proceedings to determine whether
registration should be granted or denied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See ICE Trade Vault Notice.
    \7\ See DDR Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subject to certain exceptions, section 36 of the Exchange Act \8\
authorizes the Commission, by rule, regulation, or order, to exempt,
either conditionally or unconditionally, any person, security, or
transaction, or any class or classes of persons, securities, or
transactions, from any provision or provisions of the Exchange Act or
any rule or regulation thereunder, to the extent that such exemption is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, and is consistent with
the protection of investors. The Commission finds that it is necessary
and appropriate in the public interest, and consistent with the
protection of investors, to grant a temporary exemption from compliance
with the SDR Rules and an extension of the SDR Relief. The applications
filed by ICE Trade Vault and DDR are the first SDR applications
submitted to the Commission and therefore present issues of first
impression for the Commission's consideration. Therefore, to allow the
Commission additional time prior to the compliance date for the SDR
Rules and the expiration of the SDR Relief to review the applications
and consider issues related to the first applications for registration
of SDRs, the Commission hereby grants, pursuant to Section 36 of the
Exchange Act, a temporary exemption from compliance with the SDR Rules
and an extension of the SDR Relief until October 5, 2016, which is 90
days from publication of notice of DDR's application for registration
as a SDR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78mm.

    By the Commission.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-16541 Filed 7-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


AGENDA

FIFRA SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL (SAP)

	OPEN MEETING

July 20-22, 2010

FIFRA SAP WEB SITE http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/

OPP Docket Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Docket Number: EPA-HQ- OPP-2010-0383

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Conference Center - Lobby Level

One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.)

2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202

Scientific Issues related to SHEDS-Multimedia version 4, Peer consult on
PBPK Modeling, and a SHEDS-PBPK Permethrin Study

Please note that all times are approximate

(See note at the end of the Agenda)

		Tuesday, July 20, 2010

9:00 A.M.	Opening of Meeting and Administrative Procedures by Designated
Federal Official – Sharlene Matten, Ph.D., Designated Federal
Official, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:05 A.M.	Introduction and Identification of Panel Members –

	Daniel Schlenk, Ph.D., Session Chair, FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

9:10 A.M.	Welcome and Opening Remarks – Steven Bradbury, Ph.D.,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs, EPA

9:20 A.M.	Goals and Objectives – Tina Levine, Ph.D., Director, Health
Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, EPA

9:30 A.M	Introduction to and Overview of EPA/ORD/NERL’s Stochastic
Human Exposure and Dose Simulation Model for Multimedia,
Multiroute/Pathway Chemicals (SHEDS-Multimedia) –

	Andrew Geller, Ph.D., Office of Research and Development, EPA

10:00 A.M.	BREAK

10:15 A.M.	SHEDS-Multimedia Dietary Module and Permethrin Case Study
Results – Valerie Zartarian, Ph.D., Office of Research and
Development, EPA

11:15 A\.M.	SHEDS-Multimedia Residential Module and Permethrin Case
Study Results –  Valerie Zartarian, Ph.D., Office of Research and
Development, EPA

12:15 P.M.	LUNCH

1:15 P.M.	SHEDS-Multimedia Model Evaluation Efforts – Valerie
Zartarian, Ph.D., Office of Research and Development, EPA

2:00 P.M. 	PBPK Models of Pyrethroid Pesticides – Rogelio
Tornero-Velez, Ph.D., Office of Research and Development, EPA

3:00 P.M.	BREAK

3:15 P.M.	Bayesian Calibration of PBPK Models – Jimena Davis, Ph.D.,
Office of Research and Development, EPA

4:00 P.M.	Extrapolation of Animal-Calibrated Models to Humans –

	Rogelio Tornero-Velez, Ph.D., Office of Research and Development, EPA

4:45 P.M.	ADJOURN

 AGENDA

FIFRA SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL (SAP)

	OPEN MEETING

July 20-22, 2010

FIFRA SAP WEB SITE http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/

OPP Docket Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Docket Number: EPA-HQ- OPP-2010-0383

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Conference Center - Lobby Level

One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.)

2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202

Scientific Issues related to SHEDS-Multimedia version 4, Peer consult on
PBPK Modeling, and a SHEDS-PBPK Permethrin Study

Please note that all times are approximate

(See note at the end of the Agenda)

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

9:00 A.M.	Opening of Meeting - Administrative Procedures by Designated
Federal Official - Sharlene Matten, Ph.D., Designated Federal Official,
Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:05 A.M.	Introduction and Identification of Panel Members –

	Daniel Schlenk, Ph.D., Session Chair, FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

9:10 A.M.	Follow-up from Previous Day’s Discussion – Office of
Pesticide Programs and Office of Research and Development, EPA

9:25 A.M.	Examining Uncertainty in the Linked Model – R. Woodrow
Setzer, Ph.D., Office of Research and Development, EPA

10:15 A.M.	BREAK

10:30 A.M.	Permethrin SHEDS-PBPK Linked Model Case Study –

	Rogelio Tornero-Velez, Ph.D., Office of Research and Development, EPA

11:15 A.M.	Plans to Extend the SHEDS-PBPK Permethrin Case Study to
Multiple Pyrethroids –  Rogelio  Tornero-Velez, Ph.D., Office of
Research and Development, EPA

12:00 P.M.   	LUNCH

1:00 P.M.	PUBLIC COMMENTS

2:00 P.M.	Charge to the Panel – Issue 1: Usability aspects of the
SHEDS Dietary Module (SHEDS-Dietary v.1.0) and the SHEDS Residential
Module (SHEDS-Residential v.4.0)

A. SHEDS DIETARY

Question 1-1: What, if any, difficulties were encountered in loading or
running the SHEDS-Dietary software?

Question 1-2: Please comment on the organization, clarity, completeness,
and usefulness of the SHEDS Dietary Technical Manual and the User Guide.
Please provide any suggestions for improvement.

Question 1-3: Please comment on the organization and usability of the
SHEDS-Dietary GUI (Graphic User Interface), and whether additional
changes would be helpful the Dietary SHEDS.

B. SHEDS RESIDENTIAL

Question 1-4: What, if any, difficulties were encountered in loading or
running the software for SHEDS-Residential software?

Question 1-5: Please comment on the organization, clarity, completeness,
and usefulness of the SHEDS Residential Technical Manual and the User
Guide? Please provide any suggestions for improvement.

Question 1-6: Please comment on the organization and usability of the
SHEDS Residential GUI, and whether additional changes would be helpful
for the Residential SHEDS.

3:15 P.M.	BREAK

3:30 P.M.	Charge to the Panel – Issue 2: Documentation, completeness,
and clarity of technical aspects of SHEDS Dietary v. 1.0 and SHEDS
Residential v. 4.0

Question 2-1:

BACKGROUND: In August 2007, the FIFRA SAP reviewed the model and
documentation for the SHEDS Residential module (then termed
“SHEDS-Multimedia version 3”), plans for the dietary module, and
plans for extending the model to aggregate the dietary and residential
modules. The 2007 SAP report, EPA responses to the 2007 SAP comments,
and specific changes from version 3 to version 4 of the Residential
module have been provided to this SAP in the materials and background
documents.

Please comment on whether the exposure algorithms and model components
as described in the Technical Manuals are science based and technically
correct for a) the Dietary module and b) the Residential module.

Question 2.2:

BACKGROUND: The 2007 FIFRA SAP, which reviewed the SHEDS Residential
model and code, was provided with the SAS code and asked to comment on
whether the code was consistent with the descriptions provided in the
SHEDS Technical Manual, and whether the code was clear and was
adequately described and annotated such that the algorithms could be
followed and understood. At that time, the Panel was not provided with a
code and there was no graphical user interface for the SHEDS dietary
module. The 2007 SAP review of the dietary aspect of SHEDS was limited
to reviewing several conceptual issues associated with dietary exposure
and covered both data issues and algorithms. In the intervening three
years, the Agency has updated SHEDS residential model to include
applicator exposures (the 2007 version was limited to post application
exposures only) and has made a number of additional changes as per the
2007 Panel review comments. Additional changes were made based on
considerations that arose during review of the model and the desire to
simplify the code and reduce the number of user-specified inputs. The
specific changes that were made are listed and detailed in Section 1.6
of the Residential Technical Manual entitled “Changes from
SHEDS-Residential version 3 to version 4”. The current status of the
SHEDS-Dietary module remains behind the residential module.
Nevertheless, a number of advances have been made, including: (i)
development of a GUI through which users can more easily develop and
produce dietary exposure estimates, (ii) ability to read residue input
files from another aggregate model (*.rdf), (iii) option to use the
NHANES\WWEIA food consumption data (FCID recipes will be incorporated
following public release), (iv) the ability to conduct Eating Occasions
Analyses, (v) the ability to select among different Food Residue
Options, (vi) simultaneous use of multi-chemical residue inputs for
cumulative exposure assessment (i.e., pre-simulation adjustments using
RPFs not required), and (vii) options for generating longitudinal
(multi-day) consumption patterns. The Agency also prepared a draft User
Guide and a Technical Manual for the SHEDS-Dietary module, and we
anticipate future work on both of these documents and SHEDS-dietary
advances.

A. SHEDS RESIDENTIAL

Version 4 of SHEDS-Residential provides a number of additional
capabilities compared to the SHEDS-Multimedia v.3 model reviewed in
August, 2007. A summary the main changes from SHEDS-Residential version
3 to version 4 is provided in Section 1.6 of the Residential Technical
Manual to which the Panel may wish to refer. The changes include: the
ability to perform multichemical runs; the ability to reproduce
(pseudo-) random number seeds; the capability of evaluating applicator
(handler) exposures (and not just post application exposures); a new
longitudinal diary assembly method based on the D&A statistic which
supplements the 8-diary method from version 3; and a new option for
evaluating uncertainty using bootstrap methods and the implementation of
Sobol’s method for sensitivity analysis, among numerous others.

Please comment on whether the annotated code for the SHEDS residential
model (i) is sufficiently clear such that the algorithms can be followed
and understood; and (ii) whether the algorithms defined in the
Residential Technical Manual are consistent with those present in the
code. In what ways might the code, its annotations, or the description
in the Technical Manual be improved? Please consider in particular the
new components of the code (i.e., added or modified since the 2007 SAP)
as detailed and described in Section 1.6 of the Residential Technical
Manual.

B. SHEDS DIETARY

Version 1 of SHEDS-Dietary represents the first version which provides
the user with a graphical “point and click” interface and other
enhancements and capabilities such as the ability to read residue input
files from other aggregate models (*.rdf), the option to use the
NHANES\WWEIA food consumption data, and Eating Occasions Analyses
options. These are detailed in the Dietary User Guide and Dietary
Technical Manual.

While the underlying SAS code has not at this time been fully annotated
and/or is not as “reader-friendly” as the residential code, does the
Panel have any comments or suggestions on the structure or form of the
code or ways in which the code may be improved? Can the Panel identify
any apparent discrepancies between the calculations described in the
Dietary Technical Manual and the algorithms operating in and described
by the SAS code?

5:30 P.M.	Adjourn

AGENDA

FIFRA SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL (SAP)

	OPEN MEETING

July 20-22, 2010

FIFRA SAP WEB SITE http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/

OPP Docket Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Docket Number: EPA-HQ- OPP-2010-0383

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Conference Center - Lobby Level

One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.)

2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202

Scientific Issues related to SHEDS-Multimedia version 4, Peer consult on
PBPK Modeling, and a SHEDS-PBPK Permethrin Study

Please note that all times are approximate

(See note at the end of the Agenda)

Thursday, July 22, 2010

9:00 A.M.	Opening of Meeting - Administrative Procedures by Designated
Federal Official – Sharlene Matten, Ph.D., Designated Federal
Official, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:05 A.M.	Introduction and Identification of Panel Members –

	Daniel Schlenk, Ph.D., Session Chair, FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

9:10 A.M.	Follow-up from Previous Day’s Discussion – Office of
Pesticide Programs and Office of Research and Development, EPA

9:30 A.M.	Charge to the Panel – Issue 3: Strengths and Limitations of
PBPK Approaches

BACKGROUND: The FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) convened in August
16 - 17, 2007, to address science issues on approaches to model
pyrethroids. To guide discussions, four charge questions were developed
concerning: (1) application of a common model structure; (2) the
parallelogram approach for extrapolation; (3) dose metric
considerations; and, (4) pyrethroid stereochemistry. Recognizing that
the 2007 SAP has commented on these approaches, the Agency seeks comment
from the current SAP on issues concerning PBPK model calibration and the
coupling of SHEDS and PBPK.

Question 3-1: Please comment on the strengths and limitations of the
pharmacokinetic modeling approach for pyrethroids with added attention
to the PBPK structures for interpreting aggregate exposure data from
SHEDS.

Question 3-2: Please comment on the Bayesian approach outlined here for
calibrating the PBPK model against rodent PK data, including the use of
computational and in vitro methods to develop priors for
chemical-specific parameters.

Question 3-3: Please comment on the approach used to characterize the
animal-to human extrapolation, including the uncertainty of the
extrapolation.

Question 3-4: Please comment on the plausibility and limitations of
model-predicted dose-metrics, such as area under the curve (AUC), peak
tissue values, time above a toxicological threshold, or AUC above a
toxicological threshold, in analyzing animal dose-response data and in
extrapolation to humans.

Question 3-5: The presentation described methods for addressing
uncertainty in model parameters and extrapolation from animals to
humans. What other important sources of uncertainty need to be addressed
for either the SHEDS exposure model or the PBPK model?

10:30 A.M.	BREAK

10:45 A.M.	Charge to the Panel – Issue 3: Strengths and Limitations of
PBPK Approaches, continued

12:00 P.M.	LUNCH

1:00 P.M. 	Charge to the Panel – Issue 4: Model Evaluation

BACKGROUND: Model evaluation is an important component of model
development that helps ensure that the quality of the model meets the
regulatory needs of OPP and other end-users. In performing its model
evaluation, the Agency compared SHEDS model output – specifically
exposure and urinary concentration estimates – with both output from
other exposure assessment models and data from observational studies.
These comparisons permit the SHEDS development team and model end-users
to compare and contrast outputs among different models, to compare
estimates with measured real-world data, to explore and investigate
reasons for any differences, and to evaluate and better understand the
reasons behind these differences. As part of the model evaluation
procedure for SHEDS, the Agency has attempted to evaluate the SHEDS
model in a number of ways. These include:

comparison of SHEDS-Dietary cross-sectional output to DEEM-FCIDTM; the
DEEM-FCIDTM model is commonly used by OPP in its regulatory decisions
and was reviewed by the SAP in 2000 (see SHEDS-Dietary Technical Manual
(Section.2.8.1) and EPA 2010 Response to Comment (p.10));

comparison of (a) SHEDS-Dietary arsenic and permethrin estimates against
duplicate diet data and (b) the predicted urinary concentrations from
the SHEDPBPK linked model with the measured arsenic concentrations in
urine from the 2003-2004 NHANES biomonitoring program (see SHEDS-Dietary
Technical Manual and link to Xue et al. 2010 article provided in
background materials);

comparison of SHEDS Residential outputs with outputs from other models
or calculation methods (ORD’s Draft Protocol, OPP’s Residential
Standard Operating Procedures (1997), Calendex, CARES, and ConsExpo)
which was originally organized as a day long symposium at the annual
meeting of ISEA in 2008 held in Pasadena, CA (see slides in background
materials); and

following the model quality assurance procedures as detailed in Chapter
8 of the SHEDS-Residential Technical Manual and EPA’s SHEDS-Multimedia
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)  these included EPA-contractor
cross-checking of the code and hand-calculation verification on a subset
of data for a simulated individual to ensure the SHEDS-Residential
algorithms were implemented and performing as intended.

Question 4:  Please comment on the process used to evaluate SHEDS. Are
the above listed ways in which SHEDS was evaluated appropriate? In what
ways could they be improved? Are there other methods through which the
model should or can be evaluated? Are there other data (e.g.,
biomonitoring data, duplicate diet data) that the Panel is aware of
through which the SHEDS model can be compared?

3:00 P.M.	BREAK

3:15 P.M.	Charge to the Panel – Issue 5: SHEDS-PBPK Permethrin Case
Study

Question 5-1: EPA has used a pyrethroid insecticide, permethrin, as a
case study to link the SHEDS exposure model with PBPK modeling in order
to be able to better interpret and understand exposure data in terms of
dose and target-organ dose and assist in refining exposure estimates and
associated risk.

Please comment on the approaches and offer alternatives and suggestions
for:

linking dietary consumption diaries and residential activity information
(e.g. key factors used for matching food consumption and activity
pattern diaries such as caloric consumption);

quantification of dietary vs. residential contribution, including
relative contribution of residential exposure pathways (dermal,
inhalation, hand-to-mouth, object-to mouth);

D[iversity] & A[utocorrelation] longitudinal diary assembly approach
(Glen et al., 2007, reviewed for residential module by 2007 SAP);

identifying significant contributors at upper percentiles of dietary
exposure; and

techniques and utility of bootstrapping approaches for quantifying
uncertainty and its interpretation.

Question 5-2: Please comment on whether the model evaluation approach
comparing the linked SHEDS-PBPK dose predictions and NHANES (National
Health and Nutrition Exams Survey) biomonitoring data is reasonable. Are
there other model evaluation methods that the Panel would like to see
the Agency perform?

Question 5-3: Please comment on the approaches presented to extend the
SHEDS-PBPK Permethrin Case Study to include exposure to cypermethrin and
cyfluthrin. Furthermore, please advise on other methodologies (e.g.,
cross-sectional vs. longitudinal), exposure scenarios, chemicals, and
datasets which may be useful to consider in assessing SHEDSPBPK
simulations of pyrethroids.

5:30 P.M.	ADJOURN

Please be advised that agenda times are approximate; when the discussion
for one topic is completed, discussions for the next topic will begin.
For further information, please contact the Designated Federal Official
for this meeting, Dr. Sharlene Matten, via telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
The QAPP (and additional material related to SHEDS) is available on the
ORD SHEDS website at

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/heasd/products/sheds_multimedia/sheds_mm.html"
http://www.epa.gov/heasd/products/sheds_multimedia/sheds_mm.html

 PAGE

 PAGE   9