[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 159 (Wednesday, August 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51022-51023]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20898]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Project No. P-13563-001]

Juneau Hydropower, Inc.; Notice of Scoping Meeting and Site Visit
and Soliciting Scoping Comments for an Applicant Prepared Environmental
Assessment Using the Alternative Licensing Process

    a. Type of Application: Alternative Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 13563-001.
    c. Applicant: Juneau Hydropower, Inc.
    d. Name of Project: Sweetheart Lake Hydroelectric Project.
    e. Location: On Sweetheart Lake, approximately 30 air miles
southeast of the city of Juneau, Alaska. The project would occupy lands
of the Tongass National Forest.
    f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    g. Applicant Contact: Duff Mitchell, Business Manager, Juneau
Hydropower, Inc., P.O. Box 22775, Juneau, AK 99802;<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    h. FERC Contact: Jennifer Harper, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. Deadline for filing scoping comments: October 7, 2011.
    All documents (original and seven copies) should be filed with:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure require all interveners filing documents with
the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the
official service list for the project. Further, if an intervener files
comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an
issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource
agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource
agency.
    Scoping comments may be filed electronically via the Internet in
lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ferconline.asp) under the
``e-filing'' link. For a simpler method of submitting text only
comments, click on ``Quick Comment.''
    j. The proposed project would consist of: (1) The existing Lower
Sweetheart Lake, raised from a surface water elevation of 544 feet and
a surface area

of 1,414 acres to a new surface water elevation of 629 feet and a new
surface area of 1,635 acres; (2) a new, approximately 500-foot-long,
90-foot-high concrete and rock-faced dam, constructed at the outlet of
Lower Sweetheart Lake; (3) an intake on the dam connecting to a 12-
foot-diameter, 10,390-foot-long unlined tunnel; (4) a 9-foot-diameter,
1,650-foot-long penstock installed within the lower potion of the
tunnel, connecting to the powerhouse; (5) a powerhouse containing two
new Francis generating units with a total installed capacity of 30 MW;
(6) a new tailrace discharging flows to Sweetheart Creek; (7) a new
approximately 0.6-mile long road from the powerhouse to the dock/
landing site; (8) a new dock/landing site for boat, seaplane, and/or
helicopter access, located on the east shore of Gilbert Bay; (9) a new
138-kilovolt transmission line that would be either 8.9 miles long with
5.9 miles of overhead line and 3 miles of submerged line, or 8.4 miles
long with 0.4 miles of overhead line and 8.0 miles of submerged line;
and (10) appurtenant facilities.
    k. Scoping Process
    Juneau Hydropower, Inc. (Juneau Hydropower) is using the
Commission's alternative licensing process (ALP). Under the ALP, Juneau
Hydropower will prepare an Applicant Prepared Environmental Assessment
(APEA) and license application for the Sweetheart Lake Hydroelectric
Project.
    Juneau Hydropower expects to file, with the Commission, the APEA
and the license application for the Sweetheart Lake project by November
30, 2012. Although Juneau Hydropower's intent is to prepare an APEA,
there is the possibility that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
will be required. Nevertheless, this meeting will satisfy the scoping
requirements, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended, irrespective of whether an EA or EIS is issued by the
Commission.
    The purpose of this notice is to inform you of the opportunity to
participate in the upcoming scoping meetings identified below, and to
solicit your scoping comments.

Scoping Meetings

    Juneau Hydropower and the Commission staff will hold two scoping
meetings, one in the daytime and one in the evening, to help us
identify the scope of issues to be addressed in the APEA.
    The daytime scoping meeting will focus on resource agency concerns,
while the evening scoping meeting is primarily for public input. All
interested individuals, Native Alaskan tribes, organizations, and
agencies are invited to attend one or both of the meetings, and to
assist the staff in identifying the environmental issues that should be
analyzed in the APEA. The times and locations of these meetings are as
follows:

Daytime Meeting September 7, 2011, 9 a.m.-12 p.m. (Alaska Standard
Time), Juneau Ranger District Conference Room, 8510 Mendenhall Loop
Road, Juneau, AK 99801.

Evening Meeting

    September 7, 2011, 6 p.m.-9 p.m. (Alaska Standard Time), Juneau
Centennial Hall, Hickel Room, 101 Egan Drive, Juneau, AK 99801.

Site Visit

    Juneau Hydropower, Commission staff, and state and federal resource
agencies will participate in an aerial tour of the project site on
Thursday, September 8, 2011. Anyone with questions about the aerial
tour should contact Duff Mitchell, Juneau Hydropower, at (907) 789-
2775. Those individuals planning to participate in the aerial tour
should notify Mr. Mitchell of their intent no later than September 1,
2011.
    To help focus discussions, Scoping Document 1 (SD1) was mailed
August 8, 2011, outlining the subject areas to be addressed in the
APEA, to the parties on the mailing list. Copies of the SD1 also will
be available at the scoping meetings. SD1 is available for review at
the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-
866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    Based on all written comments received, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2)
may be issued. SD2 will include a revised list of issues, based on the
scoping sessions.

Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, the staff will: (1) Summarize the
environmental issues tentatively identified for analysis in the APEA;
(2) solicit from the meeting participants all available information,
especially quantifiable data, on the resources at issue; (3) encourage
statements from experts and the public on issues that should be
analyzed in the APEA, including viewpoints in opposition to, or in
support of, the staff's preliminary views; (4) determine the resource
issues to be addressed in the APEA; and (5) identify those issues that
require a detailed analysis, as well as those issues that do not
require a detailed analysis.

Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will become
part of the formal record of the Commission proceeding on the project.
    Individuals, organizations, and agencies with environmental
expertise and concerns are encouraged to attend the meetings and to
assist Juneau Hydropower in defining and clarifying the issues to be
addressed in the APEA.

    Dated: August 10, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-20898 Filed 8-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 6, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39395-39396]
[FR Doc No: 2011-16879]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R01-OW-2011-0364, FRL-9430-1]

Massachusetts Marine Sanitation Device Standard--Notice of
Determination

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Determination.

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

SUMMARY: The Regional Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency--New England Region, has determined that adequate facilities for
the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels
are reasonably available for the coastal waters of Chatham, Orleans,
Eastham, Wellfleet, Truro, and Provincetown, collectively termed the
Outer Cape Cod for the purpose of this notice.

ADDRESSES: Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available electronically in
http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann Rodney, U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency--New England Region, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
Oceans and Coastal Protection Unit, Five Post Office Square, Suite 100,
OEP06-1, Boston, MA 02109-3912. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Fax number:
(617) 918-0538. E-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 29, 2011, EPA published a notice
that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts had petitioned the Regional
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, to determine that
adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of
sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the waters of the
Outer Cape Cod. Four comments were received on this petition. The
response to comments can be obtained utilizing the above contact
information.
    The petition was filed pursuant to Section 312(f)(3) of Public Law
92-500, as amended by Public Laws 95-217 and 100-4, for the purpose of
declaring these waters a No Discharge Area (NDA).
    Section 312(f)(3) states: After the effective date of the initial
standards and regulations promulgated under this section, if any State
determines that the protection and enhancement of the quality of some
or all of the waters within such State require greater environmental
protection, such State may completely prohibit the discharge from all
vessels of any sewage, whether treated or not, into such waters, except
that no such prohibition shall apply until the Administrator determines
that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and
treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for such
water to which such prohibition would apply.
    This Notice of Determination is for the waters of the Outer Cape
Cod. The NDA boundaries are as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Waterbody/General Area             From  Longitude   From  Latitude   To  Longitude     To  Latitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The westernmost landward boundary of the NDA  69[deg] 59' 0''     41[deg] 39'   69[deg] 59' 0''     41[deg] 37'
 starting on the south side of Chatham is an               W           26'' N                W           20'' N
 imaginary line drawn between the western
 part of the outlet of Stage Harbor and the
 northern tip of Monomoy Island (All state
 waters east of Monomoy Island are included
 in this NDA)...............................
The southwestern boundary then continues      70[deg] 0' 36''     41[deg] 32'   70[deg] 0' 11''     41[deg] 29'
 from the southern tip of Monomoy Island                   W           30'' N                W           15'' N
 through two navigational aids to the state/
 federal waters boundary....................
The landward boundary of the NDA follows the     69[deg] 56'      41[deg] 39'   69[deg] 56' 6''     41[deg] 40'
 mean high water line from Chatham to                 36'' W           40'' N                W           56'' N
 Provincetown except at an imaginary line
 drawn between: (This imaginary line is
 across the mouth of Pleasant Bay, which is
 already an NDA)............................
The westernmost boundary on the northern      70[deg] 10' 0''  42[deg] 7' 59''  70[deg] 10' 0''  42[deg] 4' 47''
 side of Cape Cod is an imaginary line drawn               W                N                W                N
 from three miles off shore to the mean high
 water line in Provincetown (This imaginary
 line is contiguous with the Cape Cod Bay
 NDA).......................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The boundaries were chosen based on easy line-of-sight locations
and generally represent all navigational waters. The area includes the
municipal waters of Chatham, Orleans, Eastham, Wellfleet, Truro, and
Provincetown, and from mean high water out to the state/federal
boundary.
    The information submitted to EPA by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts certifies that there is one landside pumpout facility at
Goose Hummock Marine in Orleans within the proposed area available to
the boating public. The location, contact information, hours of

operation, and water depth are provided at the end of this notice.
    Based on the examination of the petition and its supporting
documentation, and information from site visits conducted by EPA New
England staff, EPA has determined that adequate facilities for the safe
and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are
reasonably available for the area covered under this determination.
    This determination is made pursuant to Section 312(f)(3) of Public
Law 92-500, as amended by Public laws 95-217 and 100-4.

                                  Pumpout Facility Within the No Discharge Area
                                                [Outer Cape COD]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Mean low  water
             Name                      Location           Contact info.          Hours               depth
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goose Hummock Marine, Nauset    13 Old County Rd.,<PHONE_NUMBER>.....  On call..........  3 ft.
 Harbor.                         Orleans, MA.           VHF 16...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: June 27, 2011.
Ira W. Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, New England Region.
[FR Doc. 2011-16879 Filed 7-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: February 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 25)]
[Notices]
[Page 6254-6255]
[DOCID:fr08fe10-112]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Mazda

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the petition of Mazda Motor
Corporation (Mazda) of the Mazda2 vehicle line in accordance with 49
CFR part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard. This
petition is granted because the agency has determined that the
antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard equipment is
likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft
as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541).

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2011 model year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rosalind Proctor, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West
Building, W43-302, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Ms. Proctor's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is
(202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated September 24, 2009,
Mazda requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the
Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the MY 2011 Mazda2
vehicle line. The petition requested an exemption from parts-marking
pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard
equipment for the entire vehicle line.
    Under Sec.  543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant
exemptions for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition, Mazda
provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design,
and location of the components of the antitheft device for the Mazda2
vehicle line. Mazda will install its passive transponder-based,
electronic immobilizer antitheft device as standard

equipment on its Mazda2 vehicle line beginning with MY 2011. Major
components of the antitheft device will include a powertrain control
module, an immobilizer control module, a security light, transceiver
and a transponder ignition key. Mazda stated that the integration of
the transponder into the ignition key prevents any inadvertent
activation of the device. When the ignition is turned to the ``ON''
position a code is transmitted from the transponder to the immobilizer
control module. If the transponder code matches the code programmed in
the immobilizer control module, the vehicle's engine can be started. If
the transponder code does not match, the engine will be disabled.
Activation of the immobilization device occurs when the ignition is
turned to the ``OFF'' position. Mazda's submission is considered a
complete petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it meets the
general requirements contained in Sec.  543.5 and the specific content
requirements of Sec.  543.6.
    Mazda stated that the antitheft device to be installed on the
Mazda2 vehicle line is based on the design of the immobilizer device
installed on the Ford Mustang GT, Cobra, Taurus LX, SHO and Sable LS
models beginning with the 1996 model year. The device will provide
protection against unauthorized use (i.e., starting and engine
fueling), but the device will not provide any visible or audible
indication of unauthorized vehicle entry (i.e., flashing lights or horn
alarm).
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Mazda
provided a detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the
device is reliable and durable since the device complied with its
specified requirements for each test. Specifically, Mazda stated that
the components of the immobilization device are tested in climatic,
mechanical and chemical environments, and that the device is also
tested for its immunity to various electromagnetic radiation and
electric conduction.
    Mazda stated that the design and the operation of the electronic
engine immobilizer device makes conventional theft methods such as hot-
wiring or attacking the ignition lock cylinder ineffective, and
virtually eliminates drive-away thefts. Mazda also stated that there is
no way to start the vehicle by mechanically overriding the device and
that successful key duplication is virtually impossible.
    There is currently no available theft rate data published by the
agency for the Mazda2 vehicle line. However, Mazda provided data on the
effectiveness of other similar antitheft devices installed on vehicle
lines in support of its belief that its device will be at least as
effective as those comparable devices. Mazda stated that according to
National Crime Information Center's (NCIC) theft information, there was
a 70% reduction in theft experienced when comparing MY 1997 Mustang
vehicle thefts (with immobilizers) to MY 1995 Mustang vehicle thefts
(without immobilizers). Mazda also stated that the Highway Loss Data
Institute's (HLDI) September 1997 Theft Loss Bulletin reported an
overall theft loss decrease of approximately 50% for both the Ford
Mustang and Taurus models upon installation of an antitheft
immobilization device. Additionally, Mazda stated that supportively, a
July 2000 International Institute for Highway Safety news release
reported that when comparing theft loss data before and after equipping
vehicles with passive immobilizer devices, the data showed an average
theft reduction of approximately 50% for vehicles with immobilizer
devices.
    Based on the evidence submitted by Mazda, the agency believes that
the antitheft device for the Mazda2 vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard
(49 CFR part 541).
    The agency also notes that the device will provide four of the five
types of performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3): promoting activation;
preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized
persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants;
and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that Mazda has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Mazda2 vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard
(49 CFR part 541). This conclusion is based on the information Mazda
provided about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Mazda's
petition for exemption for the Mazda2 vehicle line from the parts-
marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, beginning with the 2011 model
year vehicles. The agency notes that 49 CFR Part 541, Appendix A-1,
identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention
Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains publication
requirements incident to the disposition of all part 543 petitions.
Advanced listing, including the release of future product nameplates,
the beginning model year for which the petition is granted and a
general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order to
notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from the
parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    If Mazda decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR 541.5 and
541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Mazda wishes in the future to modify the device
on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a
petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a part 543
exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted under
this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on which the line's
exemption is based. Further, part 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency
before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.

    Issued on: February 2, 2010.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010-2599 Filed 2-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 225 (Friday, November 24, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 82272-82274]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25768]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0597; FRL-11426-01-OCSPP]

Oxathiapiprolin; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of
oxathiapiprolin in or on peanut, hay. Syngenta Crop Protection
requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective November 24, 2023. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 23, 2024,
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-2022-0597, 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 and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Smith, 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 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-2022-0597 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
January 23, 2024. 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-2022-0597, 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 August 30, 2022 (87 FR 52868) (FRL-9410-
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
2F8997) by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro,
NC 27419. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.685 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide oxathiapiprolin,
1-[4-[4-[5-(2,6-difluorophenyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-isoxazolyl]-2-thiazolyl]-
1-piperidinyl]-2-[5-methyl-3-(trifluoromethyl)-1H-pyrazol-1-yl]-
ethanone, in or on the following commodity: peanut hay at 0.15 parts
per million (ppm). This document referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. No comments were
received on 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 oxathiapiprolin, including exposure resulting
from the tolerance established by this action. EPA's assessment of
exposures and risks associated with oxathiapiprolin follows.
    As indicated in the Federal Register for previous tolerances
established for residues of oxathiapiprolin (see 81 FR 87463, FRL-9954-
69, December 6, 2016), the toxicity database for oxathiapiprolin
supports a decision to conduct a qualitative risk assessment, due to
the lack of treatment-related effects and limited toxicity. While
dietary exposure to oxathiapiprolin may occur through food and drinking
water, no risks of concern are anticipated due to the lack of toxicity
at anticipated human exposure levels. While residential post-
application exposures may occur through the registered uses on turf and
ornamentals, no risks of concern are anticipated due to the lack of
toxicity at anticipated human exposure levels. While dietary and
residential exposures may occur through the registered and proposed
uses for oxathiapiprolin, no aggregate risks of concern are anticipated
due to the lack of toxicity at anticipated human exposure levels.
    Therefore, based on the lack of toxicity at anticipated human
exposure levels, EPA concludes there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children,
from aggregate exposure to oxathiapiprolin residues. More detailed
information on the subject action to establish tolerances for indirect
or inadvertent residues of oxathiapiprolin in or on peanut, hay can be
found in the document entitled, ``Oxathiapiprolin. Human Health Risk
Assessment to Support a Label Amendment to Reduce the Plant Back
Interval for Peanut and Sugarcane and Establish a Tolerance for Peanut,
Hay'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0597 at https://www.regulations.gov.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Analytical method DuPont-30422, Supplement 1 is a high performance
liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) method
available for the quantitation of oxathiapiprolin residues in plant
matrices. Analytical method DuPont-31138 is an HPLC-MS/MS method
available for the analytical enforcement of oxathiapiprolin residues in
livestock commodities.
    The methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

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). The Codex has not established MRLs
for residues of oxathiapiprolin in peanut commodities.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, a tolerance is established for indirect or inadvertent
residues of oxathiapiprolin, 1-[4-[4-[5-(2,6-difluorophenyl)-4,5-
dihydro-3-isoxazolyl]-2-thiazolyl]-1-piperidinyl]-2-[5-methyl-3-
(trifluoromethyl)-1H-pyrazol-1-yl]-ethanone, in or on peanut, hay at
0.15 ppm. In addition, EPA adjusted the existing tolerance for indirect
or inadvertent residues on ``All other food commodities/feed
commodities'' to exclude commodities covered by higher tolerances for
indirect or inadvertent residues, such as the peanut, hay tolerance
established by this action, or as a result of use on growing crops.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes a tolerance 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 tolerance 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: November 16, 2023.
Charles Smith,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR chapter I 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.  180.685 by revising the table in paragraph (d) to read
as follows:

Sec.  180.685  Oxathiapiprolin; tolerances for residues.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

                        Table 2 to Paragraph (d)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Parts per
                        Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All other food commodities/feed commodities (other than             0.10
 those covered by a higher tolerance as a result of use
 on growing crops or indirect or inadvertent residues)..
Peanut, hay.............................................            0.15
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-25768 Filed 11-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28681-28682]
[FR Doc No: E9-14197]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12665-003]

New York Tidal Energy Company; Notice of Intent To File License
Application, Filing of Draft Application, Request for Waivers of
Integrated Licensing Process Regulations Necessary for Expedited
Processing of a Hydrokinetic Pilot Project License Application, and
Soliciting Comments

June 10, 2009.
    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File a License Application
for an Original License for a Hydrokinetic Pilot Project.
    b. Project No.: 12665-003.
    c. Dated Filed: June 1, 2009.
    d. Submitted By: New York Tidal Energy Company.
    e. Name of Project: East River Tidal Energy Pilot Project.
    f. Location: In the East River at Hell Gate, in New York City, New
York. The project would not occupy federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mike Hoover, New York Tidal Energy Company,
1785 Massachusetts Ave., NW., Suite 100, Washington, DC 20036, (202)
772-0099.
    i. FERC Contact: Timothy Konnert<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. New York Tidal Energy Company (NYTEC) has filed with the
Commission: (1) A notice of intent (NOI) to file an application for an
original license for a kinetic hydropower pilot project and a draft
license application with monitoring plans; (2) a request for waivers of
the integrated licensing process regulations necessary for expedited
processing of a hydrokinetic pilot project license application; (3) a
proposed process plan and schedule; (4) a request to be designated as
the non-federal representative for section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act consultation; and (5) a request to be designated as the non-federal
representative for section 106 consultation under the National Historic
Preservation Act (collectively the pre-filing materials).
    k. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the pre-filing
materials listed in paragraph j above, including the draft license
application and monitoring plans. All comments should be sent to the
address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments (original and
eight copies) must be filed with the Commission at the following
address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. All filings
with the Commission must include on the first page, the project name
(East River Tidal Energy Pilot Project) and number (P-12665-003), and
bear the heading ``Comments on the proposed East River Tidal Energy
Pilot Project.'' Any individual or entity interested in submitting
comments on the pre-filing materials must do so by July 10, 2009.
    Comments may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of
paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-filing'' link.
    l. With this notice, we are approving NYTEC's request to be
designated as the non-federal representative for section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and its request to initiate consultation
under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; and
recommending that it begin informal

consultation with: (a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the
National Marine Fisheries Service as required by section 7 of ESA; and
(b) the New York State Historic Preservation Officer, as required by
section 106, National Historical Preservation Act, and the implementing
regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR
800.2.
    m. This notice does not constitute the Commission's approval of
NYTEC's request to use the Pilot Project Licensing Procedures. Upon its
review of the project's overall characteristics relative to the pilot
project criteria, the draft license application contents, and any
comments filed, the Commission will determine whether there is adequate
information to conclude the pre-filing process.
    n. The proposed East River Tidal Energy Pilot Project would consist
of: (1) A 2-meter-diameter 20 kW capacity hydrokinetic device during
Phase 1, which would be replaced by a 6-meter-diameter 200 kW device in
Phase 2; (2) an underwater cable connecting the hydrokinetic device to
shore at one of two proposed locations; and (3) appurtenant facilities
for operating and maintaining the project. NYTEC does not provide an
estimate of annual generation of the proposed pilot project.
    o. A copy of the draft license application and all pre-filing
materials are available for review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, of for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    p. Pre-filing process schedule. The pre-filing process will be
conducted pursuant to the following tentative schedule. Revisions to
the schedule may be made as appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Milestone                               Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on pre-filing materials due...  July 10, 2009.
Issuance of meeting notice (if needed).  July 24, 2009.
Public meeting/technical conference (if  August 24, 2009.
 needed).
Issuance of notice concluding pre-       August 10, 2009 (if no meeting
 filing process and ILP waiver request    is needed) September 7, 2009
 determination.                           (if meeting is needed).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    q. Register online at http://ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm to be
notified via e-mail of new filing and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-14197 Filed 6-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 16 (Thursday, January 26, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8499-8501]
[FR Doc No: 2017-01822]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 22, 51, 52, 61, 68, 80, 81, 124, 147, 171, 239, 259,
300, and 770

[FRL-9958-87-OP]

Delay of Effective Date for 30 Final Regulations Published by the
Environmental Protection Agency Between October 28, 2016 and January
17, 2017

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective dates.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Presidential directive as expressed in
the memorandum of January 20, 2017, from the Assistant to the President
and Chief of Staff, entitled ``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,'' this
action temporarily delays until March 21, 2017, the effective date of
the regulations listed in the table below. EPA identified 30
regulations that meet those criteria.

DATES: This regulation is effective January 26, 2017. The effective
date of each regulation listed in the table below is delayed to a new
effective date of March 21, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Rees, Director, Office of
Regulatory Policy and Management, Office of Policy, Mail code 1804,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW.,
Washington, DC

20460;<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA bases this action on the Presidential
directive as expressed in the memorandum of January 20, 2017, from the
Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, entitled ``Regulatory
Freeze Pending Review.'' That memorandum directed the heads of
Executive Departments and Agencies to temporarily postpone for sixty
days from the date of the memorandum the effective dates of all
regulations that had been published in the Federal Register but had not
yet taken effect. The memorandum also noted certain exceptions that do
not apply here. EPA identified 30 regulations that meet those criteria.
Those regulations are listed in the table below. The new effective date
for all 30 regulations is March 21, 2017.
    The Agency's implementation of this action without opportunity for
public comment is based on the good cause exceptions in 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) and 553(d)(3), in that seeking public comment is
impracticable, unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. The
temporary delay in effective dates until March 21, 2017, is necessary
to give Agency officials the opportunity for further review and
consideration of new regulations, consistent with the memorandum of the
Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, dated January 20, 2017.
Given the imminence of these effective dates, seeking prior public
comment on this temporary delay would have been impractical, as well as
contrary to the public interest in the orderly promulgation and
implementation of regulations. In addition, to the extent any
regulation below is a procedural rule, it is exempt from notice and
comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A).
    Some of the regulations listed below would not have taken effect
until late February or March. For those regulations, the length of
today's delay is necessarily shorter than the delay established for
regulations that would have taken effect in January or early February.
The good cause exception applies here as well, because soliciting
comment would be contrary to the public interest. First, by announcing
today that all eligible regulations would be delayed until a single
fixed date (March 21, 2017), the Agency provides immediate notice of
its intention to further review and consider those regulations in
addition to the others that would have taken effect sooner. This allows
the later-published regulations to be considered more easily in context
of the earlier-published regulations. Second, by focusing its attention
on the substance of those later regulations rather than soliciting
comment on a decision to delay their effective date until March 21,
2017, the Agency can minimize or obviate the need for further temporary
delays beyond March 21. Third, as a practical matter, the new effective
date for these regulations would extend by only a few weeks their
original effective dates.
    For the foregoing reasons, the good cause exceptions in 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) and 553(d)(3) also apply to EPA's decision to make today's
action effectively immediately.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Publication      Original      New effective
  Federal  Register  citation                 Title                    date       effective date       date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
81 FR 74927...................  State of Kentucky Section 1425          10/28/16       1/26/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Underground Injection Control
                                 (UIC) Program Primacy Approval.
81 FR 95047...................  Approval and Promulgation of            12/27/16       1/26/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Implementation Plans; New York
                                 Prevention of Significant
                                 Deterioration of Air Quality
                                 and Nonattainment New Source
                                 Review; Infrastructure State
                                 Implementation Plan
                                 Requirements.
81 FR 95041...................  Air Plan Approval; KY; RACM             12/27/16       1/26/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Determination for the KY
                                 Portion of the Louisville Area
                                 1997 Annual PM2.5.
81 FR 95043...................  Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin;           12/27/16       1/26/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Infrastructure SIP Requirements
                                 for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
81 FR 95051...................  Approval and Promulgation of            12/27/16       1/26/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Implementation Plans and
                                 Designation of Areas for Air
                                 Quality Planning Purposes;
                                 Louisiana; Redesignation of
                                 Baton Rouge 2008 8-Hour Ozone
                                 Nonattainment Area to
                                 Attainment.
81 FR 95480...................  State of Kentucky Underground           12/28/16       1/27/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Injection Control (UIC) Class
                                 II Program; Primacy Approval.
81 FR 95475...................  Air Plan Approval; Illinois;            12/28/16       1/27/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Volatile Organic Compounds
                                 Definition.
81 FR 95473...................  Approval of California Air Plan         12/28/16       1/27/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Revisions, Great Basin Unified
                                 Air Pollution Control District.
81 FR 95472...................  Approval of California Air Plan         12/28/16       1/27/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Revisions, South Coast Air
                                 Quality Management District.
82 FR 729.....................  Partial Approval and Partial              1/4/17        2/3/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Disapproval of Attainment Plan
                                 for the Idaho Portion of the
                                 Logan, Utah/Idaho PM2.5
                                 Nonattainment Area.
82 FR 2760....................  Addition of a Subsurface                  1/9/17        2/8/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Intrusion Component to the
                                 Hazard Ranking System.
82 FR 2237....................  Approval and Promulgation of              1/9/17        2/8/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Implementation Plans; Rhode
                                 Island; Clean Air Act
                                 Infrastructure State and
                                 Federal Implementation Plans.
81 FR 89746...................  Renewable Fuel Standard Program:        12/12/16       2/10/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Standards for 2017 and Biomass-
                                 Based Diesel Volume for 2018.
81 FR 89674...................  Formaldehyde Emission Standards         12/12/16       2/10/2017       3/21/2017
                                 for Composite Wood Products.
82 FR 3171....................  Approval and Promulgation of             1/11/17       2/10/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Implementation Plans; Texas;
                                 Control of Air Pollution from
                                 Visible Emissions and
                                 Particulate Matter.
81 FR 89868...................  Determination of Attainment of          12/13/16       2/13/2017       3/21/2017
                                 the 2012 Annual Fine
                                 Particulate Matter Standard;
                                 Pennsylvania; Delaware County
                                 Nonattainment Area.
82 FR 3639....................  Air Plan Approval; TN                    1/12/17       2/13/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Infrastructure Requirements for
                                 the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
82 FR 3637....................  Approval and Promulgation of             1/12/17       2/13/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Implementation Plans; Alabama;
                                 Infrastructure Requirements for
                                 the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide
                                 National Ambient Air Quality
                                 Standard.
82 FR 5182....................  Revisions to the Guideline on            1/17/17       2/16/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Air Quality Models:
                                 Enhancements to the AERMOD
                                 Dispersion Modeling System and
                                 Incorporation of Approaches to
                                 Address Ozone and Fine
                                 Particulate Matter.

81 FR 91839...................  Air Plan Approval; Michigan;            12/19/16       2/17/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Part 9 Miscellaneous Rules.
81 FR 94262...................  National Oil and Hazardous              12/23/16       2/21/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Substances Pollution
                                 Contingency Plan; National
                                 Priorities List: Partial
                                 Deletion of the North Penn Area
                                 6 Superfund Site.
81 FR 93624...................  Determination of Attainment of          12/21/16       2/21/2017       3/21/2017
                                 the 2008 Ozone National Ambient
                                 Air Quality Standards; Mariposa
                                 County, California.
81 FR 85438...................  Adequacy of Washington Municipal        11/28/16       2/27/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Solid Waste Landfill Permit
                                 Program--Direct Final Rule.
81 FR 95477...................  Approval and Promulgation of            12/28/16       2/27/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Implementation Plans;
                                 Louisiana; State Boards.
82 FR 952.....................  Pesticides; Certification of              1/4/17        3/6/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Pesticide Applicators.
82 FR 1206....................  Air Plan Approval; Georgia:               1/5/17        3/6/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Procedures for Testing and
                                 Monitoring Sources of Air
                                 Pollutants.
82 FR 2230....................  Consolidated Rules of Practice            1/9/17       3/10/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Governing the Administrative
                                 Assessment of Civil Penalties,
                                 Issuance of Compliance or
                                 Corrective Action Orders, and
                                 the Revocation/Termination or
                                 Suspension of Permits;
                                 Procedures for Decisionmaking.
82 FR 2239....................  Approval of Arizona Air Plan              1/9/17       3/10/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Revisions; Ajo and Morenci,
                                 Arizona; Second 10-Year Sulfur
                                 Dioxide Maintenance Plans and
                                 Technical Correction.
82 FR 4594....................  Accidental Release Prevention            1/13/17       3/14/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Requirements: Risk Management
                                 Programs Under the Clean Air
                                 Act.
82 FR 5142....................  Revisions to National Emission           1/17/17       3/20/2017       3/21/2017
                                 Standards for Radon Emissions
                                 from Operating Mill Tailings.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Where appropriate, the Agency may consider delaying the effective
dates of the above-referenced regulations beyond March 21, 2017. If the
Agency were to do so, consistent with the memorandum of the Assistant
to the President and Chief of Staff, the Agency would propose any later
effective date for public comment.

    Dated: January 23, 2017.
Catherine McCabe,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-01822 Filed 1-24-17; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P