[Federal Register: September 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 186)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 59105-59108]
[DOCID:fr27se10-25]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Part 40

[Docket DOT-OST-2010-0161]
RIN 2105-AE03

Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing
Programs: Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form; Technical
Amendment

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.

ACTION: Interim Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services recently issued a
new Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form for use in both the
Federal employee and Department of Transportation drug testing
programs. In order to accommodate the form's use within our
transportation industry program, the Department is making a few
necessary regulation changes in order for collectors, laboratories, and
Medical Review Officers to know how to use the new form. The form's use
is authorized beginning October 1, 2010. The Department is also making
a technical amendment to its drug testing procedures. The purpose of
the technical amendment is to add a provision of the rule which was
inadvertently omitted from the final rule in August 2010.

DATES: The rule is effective October 1, 2010. Comments to this interim
final rule should be submitted by October 27, 2010. Late-filed comments
will be considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that you do not duplicate your docket submissions,
please submit them by only one of the following means:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., West Building Ground Floor
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>;
    Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket number
DOT-OST-2010-0161 or the Regulatory Identification Number (2105-AE03)
for the rulemaking at the beginning of your comments. All comments
received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bohdan Baczara, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590;<PHONE_NUMBER> (voice),
202-366-3897 (fax), or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(e-mail).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    All urine specimens collected under the Department of
Transportation (DOT) drug testing regulation, 49 CFR Part 40, must be
collected using chain-of-custody procedures that incorporate the use of
the Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form (CCF) promulgated by
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). On November 17,
2009, HHS published a proposal to revise the CCF. [74 FR 59196] All the
comments submitted were thoroughly reviewed by HHS and taken into
consideration in fashioning the new CCF. The Department worked closely
with HHS on the new CCF. Recently, HHS announced the new CCF in the
Federal Register [75 FR 41488] which has an effective date of October
1, 2010.
    The following items in the revised CCF are worth noting for the DOT
transportation industry drug testing program:
    (1) In Step 1 of the CCF, the Federal testing authorities--HHS;
DOT; and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)--are noted, with further
specificity for the DOT Agencies--Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA); Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA); Federal Transit Administration (FTA);
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA); and the
United States Coast Guard (USCG) \1\--also noted;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For purposes of following the requirements of 49 CFR Part
40, ``DOT, The Department, DOT Agency'' is defined, at 40.3, to
include the United States Coast Guard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) In Step 5A on Copy 1 of the CCF, the new drug analytes MDMA,
MDA, and MDEA are added, as are ``[Delta]9-THCA'' after ``Marijuana
Metabolite'' and ``BZE'' after ``Cocaine Metabolite'' to specify the
drug analytes;
    (3) In Step 6 on Copy 2 of the CCF, a line has been included on
which the Medical Review Officer (MRO) would write the drug for which a
positive result is verified, and a new line item ``other'' was added to
assist the MRO in documenting other ``refusal to test'' situations--for
example, when there is no legitimate medical explanation for the
employee providing an insufficient amount of urine;
    (4) In Step 7 on Copy 2 of the CCF, a box has been added for the
MRO to check if the split specimen is reported as cancelled; and
    (5) On the reverse side of Copy 5--the ``Donor Copy''--of the CCF,
are the revised instructions for completing the CCF.
    Because HHS sought and received comments on the form and its use,
we seek only to receive comments on the actual implementation of the
new CCF, and not on the form itself.
    In addition, the technical amendment is intended to address an
omission which has been called to our attention since the publication
of the Department's final rule in August 2010 [75 FR 49850] which was
intended to create consistency with many of the new drug testing
requirements established by HHS. Specifically, the HHS Guidelines
require laboratories to report the concentration of the drug or drug
metabolite for a positive result to the MRO. This was omitted from our
rule text in the section that directs what laboratories are to report
and how they are to report it. We have amended the rule text to reflect
this requirement.

Implementation Guidance

    DOT-regulated employers and their service agents are authorized to
begin use of the new CCF on October 1, 2010. However, we recognize
there will be large supplies of old CCFs available after the start
date. To avoid wasting the old forms, the Department will permit use of
the old CCF until September 30, 2011. After this date, collectors and
laboratories are not to use any of the old CCFs in the DOT testing
program. The rule text has been changed to reflect this one-full-year
transition period from old CCF to new CCF.
    However, when the old CCF is used on or before September 30, 2011,
the collector will need to write in the specific DOT Agency under which
the specimen is collected and must do so in the remarks section in Step
2 on Copy 1 of the CCF. This DOT Agency designation is a new feature in
the new CCF. So, if an old CCF is used and the employee's specimen is
collected under, for example, authority of the FMCSA regulation, the
collector will write in ``DOT--FMCSA'' in the remarks section in Step 2
of the CCF.
    Likewise, when an old CCF is used on or before September 30, 2011,
before transmitting a confirmed positive drug test for MDMA, MDA, or
MDEA, as appropriate, to the MRO, the laboratory--in addition to
checking the ``positive'' box--must write in the specific MDMA, MDA, or
MDEA analyte in the ``Remarks'' section in Step 5-A of Copy 1 of the
CCF.
    Like now, use of a CCF past its expiration date will not be a fatal
flaw. Use of the old CCF after September 30, 2011, must be corrected
using the procedures at Sec.  40.205(b)(2).
    Regarding the completion of the new Step 1-D of the CCF, the
Department would like to emphasize that neither the employer nor the
collector should find it difficult to complete this new data item. DOT-
regulated employers and their Consortium/Third Party Administrators (C/
TPAs) currently provide the collector and the collection site with
specific instructions--the test reason, whether the test is to be
conducted under direct observation, the MRO name and address, and
employee information (e.g., name and SSN or ID number), among others.
Adding one additional data element to what is already provided by
employers or their C/TPAs to collectors should not prove significantly
difficult. An employer and its C/TPA should be readily aware of the DOT
Agency regulating the employee's safety-sensitive duties. We have added
a new Sec.  40.14 to put into one place the items that employers and
their C/TPAs have been routinely providing collectors, and if they have
not been doing so, the information they should have always been
providing collectors, in addition to this new requirement for DOT
Agency designations.
    If the information in Step 1-D of the CCF is not completed, the
laboratory will not delay testing the specimen and reporting the
confirmed result to the MRO. Similarly, the MRO will not delay the
medical review process and reporting the verified result to the
employer. The Department believes the laboratory and MRO should note
that the testing authority box was not checked and continue with
processing, testing, verifying, and reporting the specimen result, as
appropriate. To reduce the potential failure of the collector to check
the appropriate box in Step 1-D, the Department will permit the
checkmark to be pre-printed in the appropriate box prior to the
collection. We amended our rule text to reflect these situations.
    As more of the DOT Agencies go toward having employee drug testing
violations reported to them, these designations will prove invaluable
to the process.
    Regarding Step 6 of Copy 2 of the CCF, HHS provided more space for
identifying the positive drug(s) and a new line item ``Other'' was
added to assist the MRO in documenting other ``Refusal to Test''
situations--for example, when there is no legitimate medical
explanation for the employee providing an insufficient amount of urine.
In Step 7 of Copy 2 of the CCF, HHS added a box for ``Test Cancelled''
for the MRO to check when a test is cancelled if a split specimen fails
to reconfirm. We amended our rule text to reflect these modifications.
As a reminder to MROs, the ``Test Cancelled'' box should only be used
when the split fails to reconfirm for all the results verified and
reported for the primary specimen.
    In light of the modifications HHS made to Step 7 of Copy 2 of the
CCF, we have taken this opportunity to incorporate into Sec.  40.187(f)
rule text on how MROs are to document split specimen results. It is our
understanding that MROs have been completing this section correctly
even though the rule text did not instruct the MRO to check the
``Reconfirmed'' and/or ``Failed to Reconfirm'' boxes. The amendment to
Sec.  40.187(f) makes this a requirement.
    On the back of Copy 5--the ``Donor Copy''--of the CCF, the
instructions to the collector on completing the CCF are revised and
updated.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Authority

    The statutory authority for this rule derives from the Omnibus
Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322,
5331, 20140, 31306, and 54101 et seq.) and the Department of
Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 322).

Administrative Procedure Act

    The Department has determined this rule may be issued without a
prior opportunity for notice and comment because providing prior notice
and comment would be unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary to the
public interest. This rule will authorize DOT-regulated employers to
use the CCF beginning October 1, 2010. Providing an opportunity for
prior notice and comment would be unnecessary, and would seem
redundant, because the public already had an opportunity to comment and
did provide comments to HHS on the proposed CCF. In their Notice of
Proposed Revisions to the Federal Custody and Control Form, HHS stated
that the CCF is used for the Federal workplace drug testing program but
also pointed out that ``* * * the Department of Transportation (DOT)
requires its regulated industries to use the Federal CCF.'' [74 FR
59196] Because many of the commenters were transportation industry
employers, C/TPAs, and associations, we are confident they understood
that the new CCF would be used in the DOT-regulated program. And,
because the DOT utilizes the CCF for our drug testing program, the DOT
and HHS collaborated in preparing the final CCF.
    Providing an opportunity for prior notice and comment would be
impracticable because there is such a short time frame from when HHS
published the new CCF [75 FR 41488] to its October 1, 2010 effective
date. In addition, this Interim Final Rule makes minor procedural
amendments to its rule text to merely reflect the changes to the
revised CCF and a technical amendment to correct an inadvertent
oversight from a prior rulemaking. For these reasons, the Department
finds there is good cause to make the rule effective immediately.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This Interim Final Rule is not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866 or the DOT's regulatory policies and procedures.
The rule makes minor procedural amendments to its rule text to merely
reflect the changes to the revised CCF and a technical

amendment to correct an inadvertent oversight. The use of the revised
CCF does not increase costs on regulated parties because it authorizes
regulated employers to continue using the old CCF for an additional
twelve months, until September 30, 2011. After this date, the revised
CCF must be used. This allows employers to use their current supply of
old CCFs rather than discarding them. The rule will impose no new
burdens on any parties. While small entities are among those who may
use the revised CCF, the Department certifies, under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, that this rule does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 40

    Administrative practice and procedures, Alcohol abuse, Alcohol
testing, Drug abuse, Drug testing, Laboratories, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.

    Issued September 20, 2010, at Washington, DC.
Ray LaHood,
Secretary of Transportation.

0
For reasons discussed in the preamble, the Department of Transportation
amends Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 40, as
follows:

PART 40--PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE DRUG AND ALCOHOL
TESTING PROGRAMS

0
1. The authority citation for 49 CFR part 40 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322, 5331, 20140, 31306, and
54101 et seq.

0
2. A new Sec.  40.14 is added, to read as follows:

Sec.  40.14  What collection information must employers provide to
collectors?

    As an employer, or an employer's service agent--for example a C/
TPA, you must ensure the collector has the following information when
conducting a urine specimen collection for you:
    (a) Full name of the employee being tested.
    (b) Employee SSN or ID number.
    (c) Laboratory name and address (can be pre-printed on the CCF).
    (d) Employer name, address, phone number, and fax number (can be
pre-printed on the CCF at Step 1-A).
    (e) DER information required at Sec.  40.35 of this part.
    (f) MRO name, address, phone number, and fax number (can be pre-
printed on the CCF at Step 1-B).
    (g) The DOT Agency which regulates the employee's safety-sensitive
duties (the checkmark can pre-printed in the appropriate box on the CCF
at Step 1-D).
    (h) Test reason, as appropriate: Pre-employment; Random; Reasonable
Suspicion/Reasonable Cause; Post-Accident; Return-to-Duty; and Follow-
up.
    (i) Whether the test is to be observed or not (see Sec.  40.67 of
this part).
    (j) (Optional) C/TPA name, address, phone, and fax number (can be
pre-printed on the CCF).

0
3. In Sec.  40.23, paragraph (f)(4) is revised, to read as follows:

Sec.  40.23  What actions do employers take after receiving verified
test results?

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (4) You must instruct the collector to note on the CCF the same
reason (e.g., random test, post-accident test) and DOT Agency (e.g.,
check DOT and FMCSA) as for the original collection.
* * * * *

0
4. In Sec.  40.45, revise paragraphs (b) and (c)(3), to read as
follows:

Sec.  40.45  What form is used to document a DOT urine collection?

* * * * *
    (b) You must not use a non-Federal form or an expired CCF to
conduct a DOT urine collection. As a laboratory, C/TPA or other party
that provides CCFs to employers, collection sites, or other customers,
you must not provide copies of an expired CCF to these participants.
You must also affirmatively notify these participants that they must
not use an expired CCF (e.g., that after September 30, 2011, they may
not use an expired CCF for DOT urine collections).
    (c) * * *
    (3) As an employer, in Step 1-D of the CCF you may preprint the box
for the DOT Agency under whose authority the test will occur.
* * * * *

0
5. In Sec.  40.63, paragraph (e) is revised, to read as follows:

Sec.  40.63  What steps does the collector take in the collection
process before the employee provides a urine specimen?

* * * * *
    (e) You must pay careful attention to the employee during the
entire collection process to note any conduct that clearly indicates an
attempt to tamper with a specimen (e.g., substitute urine in plain view
or an attempt to bring into the collection site an adulterant or urine
substitute). If you detect such conduct, you must require that a
collection take place immediately under direct observation (see Sec.
40.67) and complete Step 2 by noting the conduct in the ``Remarks''
line of the CCF and the fact that the collection was observed by
checking the ``Observed'' box. You must also, as soon as possible,
inform the DER and collection site supervisor that a collection took
place under direct observation and the reason for doing so.

0
6. In Sec.  40.83, paragraph (a) is revised, to read as follows:

Sec.  40.83  How do laboratories process incoming specimens?

* * * * *
    (a) You are authorized to receive only Copy 1 of the CCF. You are
not authorized to receive other copies of the CCF or any copies of the
alcohol testing form.
* * * * *

0
7. In Sec.  40.97, paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii), and (e)(1) are
revised, to read as follows:

Sec.  40.97  What do laboratories report and how do they report it?

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Positive, with drug(s)/metabolite(s) noted, with numerical
values for the drug(s) or drug metabolite(s).
    (ii) Positive-dilute, with drug(s)/metabolite(s) noted, with
numerical values for the drug(s) or drug metabolite(s) and with
numerical values for creatinine and specific gravity;
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) You must provide quantitative values for confirmed positive
drug test results to the MRO.
* * * * *

0
8. In Sec.  40.129, paragraph (c) is revised, to read as follows:

Sec.  40.129  What are the MRO's functions in reviewing laboratory
confirmed non-negative drug test results?

* * * * *
    (c) With respect to verified positive test results, place a
checkmark in the ``Positive'' box in Step 6 on Copy 2 of the CCF,
indicate the drug(s)/metabolite(s) verified positive, and sign and date
the verification statement.
* * * * *

0
9. In Sec.  40.163:
0
a. Paragraph (c)(8) is amended by removing ``and''.
0
b. Paragraph (c)(9) is amended by removing the period at the end and
adding ``; and'' in its place.
0
c. Paragraph (c)(10) is added.
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  40.163  How does the MRO report drug test results?

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (10) The DOT Agency, if noted on the CCF.
* * * * *

0
10. In Sec.  40.187, paragraph (f) is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  40.187  What does the MRO do with split specimen laboratory
results?

* * * * *
    (f) For all split specimen results, as the MRO you must in Step 7
of Copy 2 of the CCF:
    (1) Report split specimen test results by checking the
``Reconfirmed'' box and/or the ``Failed to Reconfirm'' box, or the
``Test Cancelled'' box, as appropriate.
    (2), Enter your name, sign, and date.
    (3) Send a legible copy of Copy 2 of the CCF (or a signed and dated
letter, see Sec.  40.163) to the employer and keep a copy for your
records. Transmit the document as provided in Sec.  40.167.

0
11. In Sec.  40.191, paragraph (d)(2) is revised, to read as follows:

Sec.  40.191  What is a refusal to take a DOT drug test, and what are
the consequences?

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) As the MRO, you must note the refusal by checking the ``Refusal
to Test'' box in Step 6 on Copy 2 of the CCF, checking whether the
specimen was adulterated or substituted and, if adulterated, noting the
adulterant/reason. If there was another reason for the refusal, check
``Other'' in Step 6 on Copy 2 of the CCF, and note the reason next to
the ``Other'' box and on the ``Remarks'' lines, as needed. You must
then sign and date the CCF.
* * * * *

0
12. In Sec.  40.193, paragraph (d)(2)(i) is revised, to read as
follows:

Sec.  40.193  What happens when an employee does not provide a
sufficient amount of urine for a drug test?

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Check the ``Refusal to Test'' box and ``Other'' box in Step 6
on Copy 2 of the CCF and note the reason next to the ``Other'' box and
on the ``Remarks'' lines, as needed.
* * * * *

0
13. In Sec.  40.203, paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) are revised, to read
as follows:

Sec.  40.203  What problems cause a drug test to be cancelled unless
they are corrected?

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) The certifying scientist's signature is omitted on Copy 1 of
the CCF for a positive, adulterated, substituted, or invalid test
result.
    (3) The collector uses a non-Federal form or an expired CCF for the
test. This flaw may be corrected through the procedure set forth in
Sec.  40.205(b)(2), provided that the collection testing process has
been conducted in accordance with the procedures of this part in an
HHS-certified laboratory. During the period of October 1, 2010-
September 30, 2011, you are not required to cancel a test because of
the use of an expired CCF. Beginning October 1, 2011, if the problem is
not corrected, you must cancel the test.

0
14. In Sec.  40.209, paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(9) are revised, to read
as follows:

Sec.  40.209  What procedural problems do not result in the
cancellation of a test and do not require corrective action?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) A minor administrative mistake (e.g., the omission of the
employee's middle initial, a transposition of numbers in the employee's
social security number, the omission of the DOT Agency in Step 1-D of
the CCF.)
* * * * *
    (9) Personal identifying information is inadvertently contained on
the CCF (e.g., the employee signs his or her name on Copy 1); or
* * * * *

0
15. In Sec.  40.355, paragraph (l) is revised, to read as follows:

Sec.  40.355  What limitations apply to the activities of service
agents?

* * * * *
    (l) In transmitting documents to laboratories, you must ensure that
you send to the laboratory that conducts testing only Copy 1 of the
CCF. You must not transmit other copies of the CCF or any ATFs to the
laboratory.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2010-24038 Filed 9-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 141 (Friday, July 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47800-47801]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17283]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0676; FRL--9947-97-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing and
Phosphate Fertilizers Production (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``NESHAP for Phosphoric Acid
Manufacturing and Phosphate Fertilizers Production (40 CFR part 63,
subparts AA and BB) (Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 1790.08, OMB Control No.
2060-0361), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently
approved through July 31, 2016. Public comments were requested
previously via the Federal Register (80 FR 32116) on June 5, 2015,
during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30
days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given
below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency
may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before August 22,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0676, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: Owners and operators of affected facilities are required
to comply with reporting and record-keeping

requirements for the General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), as
well as for the specific requirements at 40 CFR part 63 subparts AA and
BB. This includes submitting initial notifications, performance tests
and periodic reports and results, and maintaining records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. These reports are used by EPA to
determine compliance with the standards.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Phosphoric acid manufacturing and
phosphate fertilizer production facilities.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subparts AA and BB).
    Estimated number of respondents: 13 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, quarterly,
semiannually and annually.
    Total estimated burden: 2,200 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $413,000 (per year), which includes $186,000
in either annualized capital/startup or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the
total estimated cost, burden, number of responses, and capital and O&M
costs as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens.
The change in burden for the new and existing facilities is due
primarily to a program change in the regulation requiring: (1) Mercury
testing and total fluoride (TF) testing of phosphate rock calciners;
and (2) TF testing of oxidation reactors. The Residual Risk and
Technology Review (RTR) associated with this program change estimated
12 phosphoric acid units and 11 phosphate fertilizer units (a total of
23 process units) located at 13 facilities.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-17283 Filed 7-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 MEMORANDUM Date: February 28, 2006 Subject: TCMTB. Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessments for the Reregistration Eligibility Decision ( RED) Document.

DP Barcode: D324018 PC Code: 127201 40 CFR § : 180.288 Chemical Class: Benzothiazole From: Samuel Ary, Chemist Reregistration Branch II Health Effects Division ( 7509C)

Through: David E. Hrdy, Biologist Jennifer R. Tyler, Chemist Dietary Exposure Science Advisory Council ( DESAC) Health Effects Division ( 7509C)

William Hazel, Branch Chief Reregistration Branch II Health Effects Division ( 7509C)

To: Deborah C. Smegal, Risk Assessor Reregistration Branch I Health Effects Division ( 7509C)

Kathryn Avivah Jakob, Chemical Review Manager Regulatory Management Branch II Antimicrobial Division ( 7510C) OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES, AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 2 of 13 Executive Summary Acute and chronic dietary ( food and water) exposure assessments were conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database ( DEEM FCID   , Version 2.03), which uses food consumption data from the USDA's Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals ( CSFII) from 1994 1996 and 1998. The acute and chronic dietary risk assessments were conducted for all supported TCMTB food uses and were performed to support the reregistration eligibility decision ( RED) document.

As an antimicrobial pesticide, TCMTB [( 2 benzothiazolylthio) methyl thiocyanate] is used largely as a wood preservative. It is also used as a microbiocide/ microbiostat and bacteriocide/ bacteriostat in industrial processes and water system, as well as in industrial materials, as a preservative. As an agricultural pesticide, TCMTB is a fungicide used as a seed treatment on barley, corn, cottonseed, oats, rice, safflower, sorghum, sugar beets, and wheat.

The reregistration of TCMTB is being supported by Bayer CropScience ( Bayer) and Wilbur Ellis Company ( Wilbur Ellis). TCMTB food/ feed end use products are marketed in the United States under the trade names Busan ® , Cotguard ® , Nusan ® , and Nu Flow ® . The Bayer and Wilbur Ellis TCMTB formulations registered for food/ feed uses include emulsifiable concentrate ( EC) and soluble concentrate ( SC). For food/ feed uses, Bayer is supporting TCMTB use on cotton only, while Wilbur Ellis is supporting uses on barley, oats, rice, wheat, safflower, cotton, and sugar beets. The technical registrant of TCMTB, Buckman Laboratories, Inc. ( Buckman), has requested cancellation of all food/ feed uses. Bayer and Wilbur Ellis will be responsible for providing the Agency with the appropriate data needed to maintain there supported uses on their product labels.

Tolerances are established for residues of the fungicide 2( thiocyanomethylthio) benzothiazole in/ on barley ( grain and straw), sugar beets ( roots and tops), corn ( forage, grain, and stover), cotton ( forage and undelinted seed), oats ( forage, grain, hay, and straw), rice ( grain and straw), safflower ( seed), sorghum grain ( forage, grain, and stover), and wheat ( forage, grain, hay, and straw) at 40 CFR § 180.288. The permanent tolerances for residues in plant commodities are established at the limit of detection ( LOD) of 0.10 ppm.

Acute Dietary Exposure Results and Characterization of Input Data A conservative acute dietary exposure assessment was conducted to estimate the dietary risks associated with the reregistration of TCMTB. The acute dietary exposure assessment incorporated maximum theoretical concentration factors for all commodities, existing tolerance level residues, 100% crop treated, and the FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool ( FIRST) estimated peak drinking water concentration. Acute dietary risk estimates are provided for the general U. S. population and various population subgroups, with the major emphasis placed on the exposure estimates for infants and children. However, an endpoint for females 13 49 years old was not identified in the available toxicity database for TCMTB; therefore, a separate dietary risk estimate for females 13 49 years old is not provided in this assessment. This assessment concludes that for all supported commodities, the acute dietary risk estimates do not exceed HED's level of concern ( less than 100% of the aPAD) at the 95th exposure percentile for the U. S. population ( less than 1% of the aPAD) and all population subgroups, with the highest exposed population subgroup being children 3 5 years old at 2% of the aPAD. TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 3 of 13 Chronic Dietary Exposure Results and Characterization of Input Data A conservative chronic dietary exposure assessment was conducted to estimate the dietary risks associated with the reregistration of TCMTB. The chronic dietary exposure assessment incorporated maximum theoretical concentration factors for all commodities, existing tolerance level residues, 100% crop treated, and the FIRST estimated mean drinking water concentration. Chronic dietary risk estimates are provided for the general U. S. population and various population subgroups, with the major emphasis placed on the exposure estimates for infants and children. However, an endpoint for females 13 49 years old was not identified in the available toxicity database for TCMTB; therefore, a separate dietary risk estimate for females 13 49 years old is not provided in this assessment. This assessment concludes that for all supported commodities, the chronic dietary risk estimates do not exceed HED's level of concern ( less than 100% of the cPAD) for the U. S. population ( 7% of the cPAD) and all population subgroups, with the highest exposed population subgroup being children 3 5 years old at 17% of the cPAD.

I. Introduction Dietary risk assessment incorporates both exposure and toxicity of a given pesticide. For acute and chronic assessments, the risk is expressed as a percentage of a maximum acceptable dose ( i. e., the dose which the Health Effects Division has concluded will result in no unreasonable adverse health effects). This dose is referred to as the population adjusted dose ( PAD). The PAD is equivalent to the Reference Dose ( RfD) divided by the special FQPA Safety Factor.

For acute and non cancer chronic exposures, HED is concerned when estimated dietary risk exceeds 100% of the PAD. References which discuss the acute and chronic dietary risk assessments in more detail are available on the EPA pesticides web site: " Available Information on Assessing Exposure from Pesticides, A User's Guide," 6/ 21/ 2000, web link: http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/ EPA PEST/ 2000/ July/ Day 12/ 6061. pdf; or see SOP 99.6 ( 8/ 20/ 1999).

II. Residue Information The Risk Assessment Review Committee ( RARC) met and determined that the interim residue of concern for tolerance expression and risk assessment is TCMTB in/ on plants ( P. Deschamp, Report of the RARC, 1/ 11/ 2006). This is a preliminary decision dependent on the results from the requested confirmatory metabolism data. Metabolism data depicting the nature of residues in wheat, cotton, and sugar beets are requested. For drinking water, the RARC decided that the residues of concern for risk assessment are TCMTB and 2 MBT. Summary of the decisions concerning the residues of concern in plants and drinking water are presented below in Table 1.

Table 1. Summary of TCMTB Residues to be Included in the Risk Assessment and Tolerance Expression.

Matrix Residues Included in Risk Assessment Residues Included in Tolerance Expression Primary crop  barley, cotton, oat, rice, safflower, sugar beet, and wheat TCMTB TCMTB Plants Rotational crop NA = not applicable NA TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 4 of 13 Table 1. Summary of TCMTB Residues to be Included in the Risk Assessment and Tolerance Expression.

Matrix Residues Included in Risk Assessment Residues Included in Tolerance Expression Ruminant NA NA Livestock Poultry NA NA Drinking water TCMTB and 2 MBT NA Residue Data used for Acute and Chronic Dietary Assessments Tolerance level residues of 0.10 ppm were incorporated into the acute and chronic assessments for all commodities.

Processing Factors No processing studies are available for TCMTB; therefore, maximum theoretical concentration factors were used for all commodities ( OPPTS Guideline 860.1520). For a complete list of all processing factors incorporated into the acute and chronic assessments please see attachment 1.

Usage Information No usage data are available for TCMTB, so 100% crop treated was assumed for all commodities.

III. Drinking Water Data The drinking water values used in the dietary risk assessment were provided by the Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( EFED) in the following memorandum: " Drinking Water Assessment for the Use of the Fungicide of TCMTB as a Seed Treatment on Cotton, Wheat, Barley, Oats, Rice, Sugar Beets, and Safflower" ( J. Lin, D324010, 1/ 31/ 06).

The estimated drinking water concentrations are calculated using the FIRST ( version 1.0; Aug. 1, 2001) screening model to assess estimated concentrations of the sum of TCMTB and all potential degradates in surface water. The highest rate of 0.041 lb ai/ A ( safflower scenario) is used for calculating the drinking water concentrations. The model and its description are available at the EPA internet site: http:// www. epa. gov/ oppefed1/ models/ water/.

Results from FIRST indicate that the peak ( acute) concentration of TCMTB and degradates is not likely to exceed 0.94 : g/ L ( ppb), and that the average annual ( chronic) concentration is not likely to exceed 0.67 : g/ L ( ppb).

IV. DEEM FCID   Program and Consumption Information TCMTB acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments were conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database ( DEEMFCID   , Version 2.03), which incorporates consumption data from USDA's Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals ( CSFII), 1994 1996 and 1998. The 1994 96, 98 data are based on the reported consumption of more than 20,000 individuals over two non consecutive survey TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 5 of 13 days. Foods " as consumed" ( e. g., apple pie) are linked to EPA defined food commodities ( e. g. apples, peeled fruit  cooked; fresh or N/ S; baked; or wheat flour  cooked; fresh or N/ S, baked) using publicly available recipe translation files developed jointly by USDA/ ARS and EPA. For chronic exposure assessment, consumption data are averaged for the entire U. S. population and within population subgroups, but for acute exposure assessment are retained as individual consumption events. Based on analysis of the 1994 96, 98 CSFII consumption data, which took into account dietary patterns and survey respondents, HED concluded that it is most appropriate to report risk for the following population subgroups: the general U. S. population, all infants ( less than 1 year old), children 1 2, children 3 5, children 6 12, youth 13 19, adults 20 49, females 13 49, and adults 50+ years old.

For chronic dietary exposure assessment, an estimate of the residue level in each food or foodform ( e. g., orange or orange juice) on the food commodity residue list is multiplied by the average daily consumption estimate for that food/ food form to produce a residue intake estimate. The resulting residue intake estimate for each food/ food form is summed with the residue intake estimates for all other food/ food forms on the commodity residue list to arrive at the total average estimated exposure. Exposure is expressed in mg/ kg body weight/ day and as a percent of the cPAD. This procedure is performed for each population subgroup.

For acute exposure assessments, individual one day food consumption data are used on an individual by individual basis. The reported consumption amounts of each food item can be multiplied by a residue point estimate and summed to obtain a total daily pesticide exposure for a deterministic exposure assessment, or " matched" in multiple random pairings with residue values and then summed in a probabilistic assessment. The resulting distribution of exposures is expressed as a percentage of the aPAD on both a user ( i. e., only those who reported eating relevant commodities/ food forms) and a per capita ( i. e., those who reported eating the relevant commodities as well as those who did not) basis. In accordance with HED policy, per capita exposure and risk are reported for all tiers of analysis. However, for tiers 1 and 2, any significant differences in user vs. per capita exposure and risk are specifically identified and noted in the risk assessment.

V. Toxicological Information A summary of the toxicological doses and endpoints selected for the dietary exposure assessments are provided in Table 2.

Table 2. Summary of Toxicological Dose and Endpoints for TCMTB. 1,2 Exposure Scenario Dose Used in Risk Assessment ( mg/ kg/ day) Target MOEs/ UFs FQPA safety factor for Risk Assessment Study and Toxicological Effects Acute Dietary ( general population including infants and children) NOAEL= 25.1 mg/ kg/ day ( 21 mg ai/ kg/ day)

83.55% ai purity UF = 100 ( 10x interand intra species extrapolation)

FQPA SF = 1x Acute PAD = 0.25 mg TCMTB/ kg/ day Developmental toxicity study in rats ( MRID 00154295, 92179009 ( 1985))

Maternal LOAEL = 76.5 mg TCMTB/ kg/ day ( 64 mg ai/ kg/ day), based on clinical signs of toxicity ( ventral alopecia, rough coat, dyspnea/ wheezing, oral discharge, diarrhea/ loose stool, urine staining, piloerection, and hunched gait). TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 6 of 13 Table 2. Summary of Toxicological Dose and Endpoints for TCMTB. 1,2 Exposure Scenario Dose Used in Risk Assessment ( mg/ kg/ day) Target MOEs/ UFs FQPA safety factor for Risk Assessment Study and Toxicological Effects Acute Dietary ( females 13 49) An endpoint for females 13 49 was not identified in the available database for TCMTB.

Chronic Dietary ( all populations) LOAEL = 3.8 mg/ kg/ day 81.6% ai purity UF = 300 ( 10x inter and intraspecies extrapolation, 3x for use of a LOAEL)

FQPA SF = 1x Chronic PAD = 0.01 mg ai/ kg/ day Chronic toxicity study in dogs ( MRID 41342201, 92179008 ( 1989))

LOAEL = 3.8 mg/ kg/ day ( males), based on decreased body weight gain, decreased white cells, monocytes, and plasma ALT; decreased uterine weight in females.

Carcinogenicity The CPRC concluded that TCMTB should be classified as Group C  possible human carcinogen  and recommended that for the purpose of risk characterization, the Reference Dose ( RfD) approach should be used for quantitation of human risk. This was based on statistically significant increases in tumors in both sexes of the Sprague Dawley rat: testicular interstitial cell adenomas in males and thyroid c cell adenomas in females. 1. 2( Thiocyanomethylthio) benzothiazole ( TCMTB)  Report of the Antimicrobials Division Toxicity Endpoint Selection Committee ( ADTC). From: T. McMahon and M. Centra of the Antimicrobials Division ( 7510C), PC Code: 035603, January 12, 2005. 2. UF = uncertainty factor, FQPA SF = Special FQPA safety factor, NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level, LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level, PAD = population adjusted dose ( a = acute, c = chronic) RfD = reference dose, MOE = margin of exposure, LOC = level of concern, NA = Not Applicable. NOTE: The Special FQPA Safety Factor recommended by the ADTC assumes that the exposure databases ( dietary food, drinking water, and residential) are complete and that the risk assessment for each potential exposure scenario includes all metabolites and/ or degradates of concern and does not underestimate the potential risk for infants and children.

VI. Results/ Discussion As stated above, for acute and chronic assessments, HED is concerned when dietary risk exceeds 100% of the PAD. The DEEM FCID   analyses estimate the dietary exposure of the U. S. population and various population subgroups. The acute dietary exposure analysis results reported in Table 3 are for the general U. S. population, all infants ( less than 1 year old), children 1 2, children 3 5, children 6 12, youth 13 19, adults 20 49, adults 50+ years, and females 13 49. The chronic dietary exposure analysis results reported in Table 4 are for the general U. S. population, all infants ( less than 1 year old), children 1 2, children 3 5, children 6 12, youth 13 19, adults 20 49, adults 50+ years, and females 13 49.

Results of Acute Dietary Exposure Analysis This assessment concludes that for all supported commodities, the acute dietary risk estimates do not exceed HED's level of concern ( less than 100% of the aPAD) at the 95th exposure percentile for the U. S. population ( less than 1% of the aPAD) and all population subgroups, with the highest exposed population subgroup being all infants less than one years old at 7% of the aPAD. The results of the acute dietary exposure analysis at the 95th, 99th, and 99.9th percentiles of exposure are reported in Table 3. The results of the acute dietary exposure analysis at the 95th TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 7 of 13 percentile are reported in Table 4 along with chronic dietary exposure analyses for easy comparison.

Table 3. Results of Acute ( Food and Water) Dietary Exposure Analysis for TCMTB Using DEEM FCID. 1,2 95th Percentile 99th Percentile 99.9th Percentile Population Subgroup aPAD ( mg/ kg/ day) Exposure ( mg/ kg/ day) % aPAD Exposure ( mg/ kg. day) % aPAD Exposure ( mg/ kg/ day) % aPAD General U. S. Population 0.25 0.002430 0.97 0.003992 1.6 0.006732 2.7 All Infants (< 1 year old) 0.25 0.003256 1.3 0.005395 2.2 0.017325 6.9 Children 1 2 years old 0.25 0.004467 1.8 0.006779 2.7 0.010134 4.1 Children 3 5 years old 0.25 0.004581 1.8 0.006450 2.6 0.010247 4.1 Children 6 12 years old 0.25 0.003370 1.4 0.005086 2.0 0.007745 3.1 Youth 13 19 years old 0.25 0.002109 0.84 0.003324 1.3 0.004994 2.0 Adults 20 49 years old 0.25 0.001547 0.62 0.002258 0.90 0.003428 1.4 Adults 50+ years old 0.25 0.001192 0.48 0.001810 0.72 0.003464 1.4 Females 13 49 years old 0.25 0.001529 0.61 0.002345 0.94 0.003411 1.4 1. The bolded values represent the highest exposed populations for each percentile. 2. NA = Not applicable.

Results of Chronic Dietary Exposure Analysis This assessment concludes that for all supported commodities, the chronic dietary risk estimates do not exceed HED's level of concern ( less than 100% of the cPAD) for the U. S. population ( 7% of the cPAD) and all population subgroups, with the highest exposed population subgroup being children 3 5 years old at 17% of the cPAD. The results of the chronic dietary exposure analysis are reported below in Table 4.

Table 4. Results of Acute and Chronic ( Food and Water) Dietary Exposure Analyses for TCMTB Using DEEM FCID. 1,2 Acute Dietary ( 95th Percentile) Chronic Dietary Population Subgroup aPAD ( mg/ kg/ day) Exposure ( mg/ kg/ day) % aPAD cPAD ( mg/ kg/ day) Exposure ( mg/ kg. day) % cPAD General U. S. Population 0.25 0.002430 0.97 0.013 0.000888 6.8 All Infants (< 1 year old) 0.25 0.003256 1.3 0.013 0.000994 7.6 Children 1 2 years old 0.25 0.004467 1.8 0.013 0.002054 16 Children 3 5 years old 0.25 0.004581 1.8 0.013 0.002226 17 Children 6 12 years old 0.25 0.003370 1.4 0.013 0.001625 13 Youth 13 19 years old 0.25 0.002109 0.84 0.013 0.000936 7.2 TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 8 of 13 Table 4. Results of Acute and Chronic ( Food and Water) Dietary Exposure Analyses for TCMTB Using DEEM FCID. 1,2 Acute Dietary ( 95th Percentile) Chronic Dietary Population Subgroup aPAD ( mg/ kg/ day) Exposure ( mg/ kg/ day) % aPAD cPAD ( mg/ kg/ day) Exposure ( mg/ kg. day) % cPAD Adults 20 49 years old 0.25 0.001547 0.62 0.013 0.000680 5.2 Adults 50+ years old 0.25 0.001192 0.48 0.013 0.000542 4.2 Females 13 49 years old 0.25 0.001529 0.61 0.013 0.000671 5.2 1. The bolded values represent the highest exposed populations for each percentile. 2. NA = Not applicable.

VII. Characterization of Inputs/ Outputs The acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments are refined through the use of theoretically determined processing factors. Tolerance values were used for all commodities in the acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments and 100% crop treated was assumed for all commodities. HED concludes that the exposure estimates provided in this document likely overestimate actual exposure.

VIII. Conclusions The acute and chronic dietary risk assessments were conducted for all supported TCMTB food uses and were performed to support the RED document. The acute and chronic assessments show that dietary ( including drinking water) exposure and risk are not of concern for the supported uses.

IX. List of Attachments Attachment 1. Data and Residue Estimates Used in Dietary Analyses. Attachment 2. Acute Food and Water Residue Input File. Attachment 3. Acute Food and Water Results File. Attachment 4. Chronic Food and Water Residue Input File. Attachment 5. Chronic Food and Water Results File. TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 9 of 13 Attachment 1. Data and Residue Estimates Used in Dietary Analyses. Anticipated Residue Estimates/ Tolerance RAC1 Classification2 Data Source % CT Avg. 3 % CT Max. 3 Processing Factors Acute ( Tol, AR, RDF) Chronic ( Tol, AR) Barley, grain B Tolerance 100 100 Bran 7.7x Pearled 1.2x Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Tol ( 0.1 ppm)

Beet, sugar, root B Tolerance 100 100 Sugar 12.5x Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Corn, field, grain B Tolerance 100 100 Oil 25x Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Cotton, undelinted seed B Tolerance 100 100 Oil 6.3x Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Oat, grain B Tolerance 100 100 Rolled 1.4x Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Rice, grain B Tolerance 100 100 Bran 7.7x Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Safflower, seed B Tolerance 100 100 Oil 3.3x Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Water NA EDWCs4 NA NA NA AR ( 0.94 ppb) AR ( 0.67 ppb) Wheat, grain B Tolerance 100 100 Bran 7.7x Flour 1.4x Tol ( 0.10 ppm) Tol ( 0.10 ppm)

1. RAC = Raw agricultural commodity. 2. Classification of blended ( B), partially blended ( PB), not blended ( NB). 3. No data were available for percent crop treated, so 100% CT was used in the dietary assessment. 4. EDWCs = Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations. 5. NA = Not applicable. TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 10 of 13 Attachment 2. Acute Food and Water Residue Input File.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.02 DEEM FCID Acute analysis for TCMTB Residue file name: C:\ Pesticides\ TCMTB\ Dietary\ TCMTB acute. R98 Analysis Date 02 05 2006 Residue file dated: 02 05 2006/ 22: 02: 47/ 8 Reference dose ( aRfD) = 0.25 mg/ kg bw/ day Comment: Food and Water  EPA Crop Def Res Adj. Factors Comment Code Grp Food Name ( ppm) # 1 # 2        15000250 15 Barley, pearled barley 0.100000 1.200 1.000 15000251 15 Barley, pearled barley babyfood 0.100000 1.200 1.000 15000260 15 Barley, flour 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15000261 15 Barley, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15000270 15 Barley, bran 0.100000 7.700 1.000 01010520 1A Beet, sugar 0.100000 12.500 1.000 01010521 1A Beet, sugar babyfood 0.100000 12.500 1.000 01010530 1A Beet, sugar, molasses 0.100000 1.000 1.000 01010531 1A Beet, sugar, molasses babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001200 15 Corn, field, flour 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001201 15 Corn, field, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001210 15 Corn, field, meal 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001211 15 Corn, field, meal babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001220 15 Corn, field, bran 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001230 15 Corn, field, starch 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001231 15 Corn, field, starch babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001240 15 Corn, field, syrup 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001241 15 Corn, field, syrup babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001250 15 Corn, field, oil 0.100000 25.000 1.000 15001251 15 Corn, field, oil babyfood 0.100000 25.000 1.000 95001280 O Cottonseed, oil 0.100000 6.300 1.000 95001281 O Cottonseed, oil babyfood 0.100000 6.300 1.000 15002310 15 Oat, bran 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15002320 15 Oat, flour 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15002321 15 Oat, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15002330 15 Oat, groats/ rolled oats 0.100000 1.400 1.000 15002331 15 Oat, groats/ rolled oats babyfood 0.100000 1.400 1.000 15003230 15 Rice, white 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003231 15 Rice, white babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003240 15 Rice, brown 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003241 15 Rice, brown babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003250 15 Rice, flour 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003251 15 Rice, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003260 15 Rice, bran 0.100000 7.700 1.000 15003261 15 Rice, bran babyfood 0.100000 7.700 1.000 20003300 20 Safflower, oil 0.100000 3.300 1.000 20003301 20 Safflower, oil babyfood 0.100000 3.300 1.000 86010000 O Water, direct, all sources 0.000940 1.000 1.000 86020000 O Water, indirect, all sources 0.000940 1.000 1.000 15004010 15 Wheat, grain 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15004011 15 Wheat, grain babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15004020 15 Wheat, flour 0.100000 1.400 1.000 15004021 15 Wheat, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.400 1.000 15004030 15 Wheat, germ 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15004040 15 Wheat, bran 0.100000 7.700 1.000 15004050 15 Wild rice 0.100000 1.000 1.000 TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 11 of 13 Attachment 3. Acute Food and Water Results File.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.02 DEEM FCID ACUTE Analysis for TCMTB ( 1994 98 data) Residue file: TCMTB acute. R98 Adjustment factor # 2 used. Analysis Date: 02 05 2006/ 22: 04: 09 Residue file dated: 02 05 2006/ 22: 02: 47/ 8 Daily totals for food and foodform consumption used. Run Comment: " Food and Water" ===============================================================================

Summary calculations ( per capita):

95th Percentile 99th Percentile 99.9th Percentile Exposure % aRfD Exposure % aRfD Exposure % aRfD       U. S. Population: 0.002430 0.97 0.003992 1.60 0.006732 2.69 All infants: 0.003256 1.30 0.005395 2.16 0.017325 6.93 Children 1 2 yrs: 0.004467 1.79 0.006779 2.71 0.010134 4.05 Children 3 5 yrs: 0.004581 1.83 0.006450 2.58 0.010247 4.10 Children 6 12 yrs: 0.003370 1.35 0.005086 2.03 0.007745 3.10 Youth 13 19 yrs: 0.002109 0.84 0.003324 1.33 0.004994 2.00 Adults 20 49 yrs: 0.001547 0.62 0.002258 0.90 0.003428 1.37 Adults 50+ yrs: 0.001192 0.48 0.001810 0.72 0.003464 1.39 Females 13 49 yrs: 0.001529 0.61 0.002345 0.94 0.003411 1.36 TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 12 of 13 Attachment 5. Chronic Food and Water Residue Input File.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.00 DEEM FCID Chronic analysis for TCMTB 1994 98 data Residue file: C:\ Pesticides\ TCMTB\ Dietary\ TCMTB chronic. R98 Adjust. # 2 used Analysis Date 02 05 2006 Residue file dated: 02 05 2006/ 22: 03: 22/ 8 Reference dose ( RfD) = 0.013 mg/ kg bw/ day Comment: Food and Water  Food Crop Residue Adj. Factors Comment EPA Code Grp Food Name ( ppm) # 1 # 2        15000250 15 Barley, pearled barley 0.100000 1.200 1.000 15000251 15 Barley, pearled barley babyfood 0.100000 1.200 1.000 15000260 15 Barley, flour 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15000261 15 Barley, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15000270 15 Barley, bran 0.100000 7.700 1.000 01010520 1A Beet, sugar 0.100000 12.500 1.000 01010521 1A Beet, sugar babyfood 0.100000 12.500 1.000 01010530 1A Beet, sugar, molasses 0.100000 1.000 1.000 01010531 1A Beet, sugar, molasses babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001200 15 Corn, field, flour 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001201 15 Corn, field, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001210 15 Corn, field, meal 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001211 15 Corn, field, meal babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001220 15 Corn, field, bran 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001230 15 Corn, field, starch 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001231 15 Corn, field, starch babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001240 15 Corn, field, syrup 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001241 15 Corn, field, syrup babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15001250 15 Corn, field, oil 0.100000 25.000 1.000 15001251 15 Corn, field, oil babyfood 0.100000 25.000 1.000 95001280 O Cottonseed, oil 0.100000 6.300 1.000 95001281 O Cottonseed, oil babyfood 0.100000 6.300 1.000 15002310 15 Oat, bran 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15002320 15 Oat, flour 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15002321 15 Oat, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15002330 15 Oat, groats/ rolled oats 0.100000 1.400 1.000 15002331 15 Oat, groats/ rolled oats babyfood 0.100000 1.400 1.000 15003230 15 Rice, white 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003231 15 Rice, white babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003240 15 Rice, brown 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003241 15 Rice, brown babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003250 15 Rice, flour 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003251 15 Rice, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15003260 15 Rice, bran 0.100000 7.700 1.000 15003261 15 Rice, bran babyfood 0.100000 7.700 1.000 20003300 20 Safflower, oil 0.100000 3.300 1.000 20003301 20 Safflower, oil babyfood 0.100000 3.300 1.000 86010000 O Water, direct, all sources 0.000670 1.000 1.000 86020000 O Water, indirect, all sources 0.000670 1.000 1.000 15004010 15 Wheat, grain 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15004011 15 Wheat, grain babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15004020 15 Wheat, flour 0.100000 1.400 1.000 15004021 15 Wheat, flour babyfood 0.100000 1.400 1.000 15004030 15 Wheat, germ 0.100000 1.000 1.000 15004040 15 Wheat, bran 0.100000 7.700 1.000 15004050 15 Wild rice 0.100000 1.000 1.000 TCMTB Dietary Exposure Assessment   RED DP Barcode: D324018 Page 13 of 13 Attachment 6. Chronic Food and Surface Water Results File.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.00 DEEM FCID Chronic analysis for TCMTB ( 1994 98 data) Residue file name: C:\ Pesticides\ TCMTB\ Dietary\ TCMTB chronic. R98 Adjustment factor # 2 used. Analysis Date 02 05 2006/ 22: 12: 18 Residue file dated: 02 05 2006/ 22: 03: 22/ 8 Reference dose ( RfD, Chronic) = 0.013 mg/ kg bw/ day COMMENT 1: Food and Water =============================================================================== Total exposure by population subgroup

Total Exposure  Population mg/ kg Percent of Subgroup body wt/ day Rfd    U. S. Population ( total) 0.000888 6.8%

U. S. Population ( spring season) 0.000913 7.0% U. S. Population ( summer season) 0.000879 6.8% U. S. Population ( autumn season) 0.000879 6.8% U. S. Population ( winter season) 0.000884 6.8%

Northeast region 0.000874 6.7% Midwest region 0.000952 7.3% Southern region 0.000855 6.6% Western region 0.000886 6.8%

Hispanics 0.000942 7.2% Non hispanic whites 0.000876 6.7% Non hispanic blacks 0.000906 7.0% Non hisp/ non white/ non black 0.000907 7.0%

All infants (< 1 year) 0.000994 7.6% Nursing infants 0.000421 3.2% Non nursing infants 0.001212 9.3% Children 1 6 yrs 0.002140 16.5% Children 7 12 yrs 0.001548 11.9%

Females 13 19 ( not preg or nursing) 0.000840 6.5% Females 20+ ( not preg or nursing) 0.000582 4.5% Females 13 50 yrs 0.000714 5.5% Females 13+ ( preg/ not nursing) 0.000810 6.2% Females 13+ ( nursing) 0.000823 6.3%

Males 13 19 yrs 0.001028 7.9% Males 20+ yrs 0.000674 5.2% Seniors 55+ 0.000536 4.1%

Children 1 2 yrs 0.002054 15.8% Children 3 5 yrs 0.002226 17.1% Children 6 12 yrs 0.001625 12.5% Youth 13 19 yrs 0.000936 7.2% Adults 20 49 yrs 0.000680 5.2% Adults 50+ yrs 0.000542 4.2% Females 13 49 yrs 0.000671 5.2%


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on June 20, 2006

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-1996-1379

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

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).

Application of UNITED PARCEL SERVICE CO. (UPS) filed 12/15/04 for:

XX  Renewal of exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide
the following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of property and mail between (1)
Miami, Florida and Caracas, Venezuela, via the intermediate point San
Juan, Puerto Rico, and (2) Miami, Florida, and the coterminal points
Valencia and Maracaibo, Venezuela, and to integrate this authority with
its existing certificate and exemption authority.

Applicant rep: David L. Vaughn<PHONE_NUMBER>   DOT Analyst: Thuy H.
Cooper<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted renewal of route authority (subject to conditions and
remarks, see below)

XX  Dismissed request for route integration authority

The above action was effective when taken: June 20, 2006, through June
20, 2008.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Venezuela.

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

XX Holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

XX Standard exemption conditions (attached)

Remarks: The U.S.-Venezuela aviation agreement does not provide for
coterminalization of Caracas and Maracaibo.  These points may only be
served as separate terminal points.

The authority for which UPS requested renewal expired on March 19, 2005,
but has been kept in force pursuant to the provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c), as implemented by 14 CFR
Part 377, pending action on its timely filed renewal application.

________________________________________________________________________
_____________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the exemption services authorized.

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 or 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:

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

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

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

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

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

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

05/2004

 By Order 2006-1-1, the Department awarded the carrier a blanket route
integration certificate.

 PAGE


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 234 (Thursday, December 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57775-57778]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26341]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2017-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1753]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS
report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings
and the contents of those buildings.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before March 7, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are

accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1753, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: November 2, 2017.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Boulder County, Colorado and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Project: 15-08-1362S Preliminary Date: February 16, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Lafayette......................  City Hall, 1290 South Public
                                          Road, Lafayette, CO 80026.
City of Louisville.....................  City Hall, 749 Main Street,
                                          Louisville, CO 80027.
Town of Erie...........................  Town Hall, 645 Holbrook Street,
                                          Erie, CO 80516.
Town of Superior.......................  Town Hall, 124 East Coal Creek
                                          Drive, Superior, CO 80027.
Unincorporated Areas of Boulder County.  Boulder County Transportation
                                          Department, 2525 13th Street,
                                          Suite 203, Boulder, CO 80304.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 City and County of Broomfield, Colorado
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Project: 15-08-1362S Preliminary Date: February 16, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City and County of Broomfield..........  City Hall, Engineering
                                          Department, 1 DesCombes Drive,
                                          Broomfield, CO 80020.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Floyd County, Georgia and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Project: 13-04-8403S Preliminary Date: February 14, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Rome...........................  City Hall, 601 Broad Street,
                                          Rome, GA 30161.
Unincorporated Areas of Floyd County...  Historic Floyd County
                                          Courthouse, 4 Government
                                          Plaza, Rome, GA 30161.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Forsyth County, Georgia and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Project: 13-04-8403S Preliminary Date: February 14, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Forsyth County.  Forsyth County Administrative
                                          Building, 110 East Main
                                          Street, Suite 120, Cumming, GA
                                          30040.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Paulding County, Georgia and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Project: 13-04-8403S Preliminary Date: February 14, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Dallas.........................  City Hall, 129 East Memorial
                                          Drive, Dallas, GA 30132.
Unincorporated Areas of Paulding County  Paulding County Development
                                          Division, 240 Constitution
                                          Boulevard, Dallas, GA 30132.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Polk County, Georgia and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Project: 13-04-8403S Preliminary Date: February 14, 2017 and June 15,
                                  2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Rockmart.......................  City Hall, 316 North Piedmont
                                          Avenue, Building 100,
                                          Rockmart, GA 30153.
Unincorporated Areas Polk County.......  Polk County Building Inspection
                                          Department, 144 West Avenue,
                                          Suite C, Cedartown, GA 30125.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Missoula County, Montana and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Project: 15-08-1417S Preliminary Date: March 30, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Missoula County  Missoula County Community and
                                          Planning Services Department,
                                          323 West Alder Street,
                                          Missoula, MT 59802.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Richland County, Montana and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Project: 17-08-0127S Preliminary Date: February 22, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Richland County  Richland County Courthouse, 201
                                          West Main Street, Sidney, MT
                                          59270.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Austin County, Texas and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Project: 14-06-1382S Preliminary Date: January 30, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Bellville......................  City Hall, 30 South Holland
                                          Street, Bellville, TX 77418.
City of Industry.......................  City Hall, 725 Main Street,
                                          Industry, TX 78944.
City of Sealy..........................  Planning and Public Works
                                          Building, 405 Main Street,
                                          Sealy, TX 77474.
Town of San Felipe.....................  Town Hall, 927 6th Street, San
                                          Felipe, TX 77473.
Unincorporated Areas of Austin County..  Austin County Courthouse, 1
                                          East Main Street, Bellville,
                                          TX 77418.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Fort Bend County, Texas and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Project: 14-06-1382S Preliminary Date: January 30, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Fulshear.......................  City Hall, 30603 FM 1093,
                                          Fulshear, TX 77441.
City of Simonton.......................  City Hall, 35011 FM 1093,
                                          Simonton, TX 77476.
City of Weston Lakes...................  Simonton City Hall, 35011 FM
                                          1093, Simonton, TX 77476.
Unincorporated Areas of Fort Bend        Fort Bend County Drainage
 County.                                  District, 1124 Blume Road,
                                          Rosenberg, TX 77471.
Village of Fairchilds..................  Fairchild Volunteer Fire
                                          Department, 8713 Fairchild
                                          Road, Richmond, TX 77469.
Village of Pleak.......................  Pleak Village Hall, 6621 FM
                                          2218 South, Richmond, TX
                                          77469.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Fort Bend County, Texas and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Project: 14-06-1988S Preliminary Date: January 30, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Houston........................  Public Works and Engineering
                                          Department, Houston Permitting
                                          Center, 1002 Washington
                                          Avenue, 3rd Floor, Houston, TX
                                          77002.
Unincorporated Areas of Fort Bend        Fort Bend County Drainage
 County.                                  District, 1124 Blume Road,
                                          Rosenberg, TX 77471.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Harris County, Texas and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Project: 14-06-1988S Preliminary Date: January 30, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Houston........................  Public Works and Engineering
                                          Department, Houston Permitting
                                          Center, 1002 Washington
                                          Avenue, 3rd Floor, Houston, TX
                                          77002.
City of Missouri City..................  City Hall, 1522 Texas Parkway,
                                          Missouri City, TX 77489.
City of South Houston..................  City Hall, 1018 Dallas Street,
                                          South Houston, TX 77587.
Unincorporated Areas of Harris County..  Harris County Engineering
                                          Department, Permit Division,
                                          10555 Northwest Freeway, Suite
                                          120, Houston, TX 77092.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Waller County, Texas and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Project: 14-06-1382S Preliminary Date: January 30, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Hempstead......................  City Hall, 1125 Austin Street,
                                          Hempstead, TX 77445.
City of Prairie View...................  City Hall, 44500 Business
                                          Highway 290, Prairie View, TX
                                          77446.
Unincorporated Areas of Waller County..  Waller County Courthouse, 836
                                          Austin Street, Hempstead, TX
                                          77445.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Washington County, Texas and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Project: 14-06-1382S Preliminary Date: January 30, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Washington       Washington County Courthouse
 County.                                  Annex, 105 West Main Street,
                                          Suite 100, Brenham, TX 77833.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-26341 Filed 12-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12282-12283]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4769]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12756-003; Project No. 12757-003; Project No. 12758-003]

Notice Soliciting Scoping Comments

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Project
                                                                  No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOST3 Hydroelectric Company, LLC............................   12756-003
BOST4 Hydroelectric Company, LLC............................   12757-003
BOST5 Hydroelectric Company, LLC............................   12758-003
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric applications have been
filed with the Commission and are available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Original Major License.
    b. Project Nos.: P-12756-003, 12757-003, and 12758-003.
    c. Date filed: July 26, 2010, February 24, 2011, and March 28,
2011, respectively.
    d. Applicants: BOST3 Hydroelectric Company, LLC (BOST3), BOST4
Hydroelectric Company, LLC (BOST4), and BOST5 Hydroelectric Company,
LLC (BOST5).
    e. Name of Projects: Red River Lock & Dam No. 3 Hydroelectric
Project, Red River Lock and Dam No. 4 Hydroelectric Project, and Red
River Lock and Dam No. 5 Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Locations: The proposed projects would be located at the
existing Army Corps of Engineer's (Corps) Red River Lock & Dam No. 3 on
the Red River, in Natchitoches Parish near the City of Colfax,
Louisiana, the existing Corps Red River Lock and Dam No. 4 on the Red
River, in Red River Parish near the Town of Coushatta, Louisiana, and
the existing Corps Red River Lock & Dam No. 5 on the Red River, in
Bossier Parish near the Town of Ninock, Louisiana.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contacts: Mr. Douglas A. Spalding, BOST3 Hydroelectric
Company, LLC, 8441 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 101, Golden Valley, MN 55426;
(952) 544-8133, Mr. Douglas A. Spalding, BOST4 Hydroelectric Company,
LLC, 8441 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 101, Golden Valley, MN 55426; (952) 544-
8133, and Mr. Douglas A. Spalding, BOST5 Hydroelectric Company, LLC,
8441 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 101, Golden Valley, MN 55426;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Jeanne Edwards<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing scoping comments: 30 days from the issuance
date of this notice, or March 22, 2012.
    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. 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
``eFiling'' link. For a simpler method of submitting text only
comments, click on ``eComment.'' For assistance, please contact FERC
Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>call toll-free at (866)
208-3676; or, for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission
strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-
filed. To paper-file, mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D.
Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors 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
intervenor 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.
    k. These applications are not ready for environmental analysis at
this time.
    l. Red River Lock and Dam No. 3: The proposed project would utilize
the Corps' existing Red River Lock and Dam No. 3, and be operated
consistent with the Corps current operation policy. The proposed
project consists of: (1) An excavated 635-foot-long headrace channel to
convey water from the upstream Pool No. 3 of the Red River to a 301-
foot-long by 90-foot-wide concrete powerhouse located southwest of the
end of the existing spillway; (2) an excavated 820-foot-long tailrace
channel to discharge water from the powerhouse to the downstream Pool
No. 2 of the Red River; (3) a 36.2-megawatt (MW) horizontal Kaplan bulb
turbine/generator unit; (4) a 2,300-foot-long, 13.2-kilovolt (kV)
overhead transmission line which crosses the river and connects to a
Central Louisiana Electric Company substation located on the opposite
side of the river; and (5) appurtenant facilities. The proposed project
would generate about 172,779 megawatt-hours (MWh) annually, which would
be sold to a local utility.
    Red River Lock and Dam No. 4: The proposed project would utilize
the Corps' existing Red River Lock and Dam No. 4, and be operated
consistent with

the Corps current operation policy. The proposed project would consist
of: (1) An excavated 385-foot-long headrace channel to convey water
from the upstream Pool No. 4 of the Red River to a 301-foot-long by 90-
foot-wide concrete powerhouse located southwest of the end of the
existing overflow weir; (2) an excavated 477-foot-long tailrace channel
to discharge water from the powerhouse to the downstream Pool No. 3 of
the Red River; (3) a 28.1-MW horizontal Kaplan bulb turbine/generator
unit; (4) a 3.0 mile-long, 34.5-kV overhead transmission line leading
from a project substation located at the project's powerhouse and
connecting to Central Louisiana Electric Company's existing 34.5-kV
transmission line; and (5) appurtenant facilities. The proposed project
would generate about 128,532 MWh annually, which would be sold to a
local utility.
    Red River Lock and Dam No. 5: The proposed project would utilize
the Corps' existing Red River Lock and Dam No. 5, and be operated
consistent with the Corps current operation policy. The proposed
project would consist of: (1) an excavated 416-foot-long headrace
channel to convey water from the upstream Pool No. 5 of the Red River
to a 301-foot-long by 90-foot-wide concrete powerhouse located
northeast of the end of the existing overflow weir; (2) an excavated
495-foot-long tailrace channel to discharge water from the powerhouse
to the downstream Pool No. 4 of the Red River; (3) a 28.1-MW horizontal
Kaplan bulb turbine/generator unit; (4) a 7-mile-long, 34.5-kV overhead
transmission line leading from the project's powerhouse and connecting
to Central Louisiana Electric Company's new substation; and (5)
appurtenant facilities. The proposed project would generate about
129,400 MWh annually, which would be sold to a local utility.
    m. A copy of the application(s) are 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(s), excluding the last three digits in
the docket number field, to access the document(s). For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support. A copy is available for inspection and
reproduction at the respective addresses in item h above.
    n. You may register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to these or other pending projects. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support.
    o. Scoping Process
    The Commission staff intends to prepare a single Environmental
Assessment (EA), to include all three Red River Projects (Red River
Lock and Dam No. 3 Project No. 12756, Red River Lock and Dam No. 4
Project No. 12757, and Red River Lock and Dam No. 5 Project No. 12758),
in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The EA will
consider both site-specific and cumulative environmental impacts, as
well as reasonable alternatives to the proposed actions.
    Commission staff does not propose to conduct any on-site scoping
meetings at this time. Instead, we are soliciting comments,
recommendations, and information on the Scoping Document (SD) issued on
February 17, 2012.
    Copies of the SD outlining the subject areas to be addressed in the
EA were distributed to the parties on the Commission's mailing list and
the applicant's distribution list. Copies of the SD may be viewed on
the Web at http://www.ferc.gov, using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the
docket number(s), excluding the last three digits in the docket number
field(s), to access the document(s). For assistance, call 1-866-208-
3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: February 22, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-4769 Filed 2-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P