[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 166 (Friday, August 26, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59036-59038]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20481]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Environmental Impact Statement for the Long Bridge Project in
Washington, DC

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS).

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

SUMMARY: FRA announces its intent to prepare an EIS for the Long Bridge
Project jointly with the District Department of Transportation (DDOT).
The Long Bridge Project (Proposed Action) consists of potential
improvements to bridge and related railroad infrastructure located
between the Virginia Railway Express (VRE) Crystal City Station in
Arlington, Virginia and Control Point (CP) Virginia in Washington, DC.
FRA and DDOT will develop the EIS in compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. FRA and
DDOT invite the public and Federal, state, and local agencies to
provide comments on the scope of the EIS, including the purpose and
need; alternatives to analyze; environmental effects to consider and
evaluate; methodologies to use for evaluating effects; and the approach
for public and agency involvement.

DATES: Persons interested in providing written comments on the scope of
the EIS (scoping comments) must do so by September 26, 2016. Please
submit written comments via the methods specified below.
    A public scoping meeting is scheduled on Wednesday, September 14,
2016, between 3:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. in Washington, DC. The meeting
will be held at the L'Enfant Plaza Club Room, Promenade Level, 470
L'Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, DC 20024. Oral and written comments
will be accepted at the September 14, 2016 meeting. The meeting
facilities will be accessible to persons with disabilities. If special
translation, signing services, or other special accommodations are
needed, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER>
at least one week prior to the meeting.

ADDRESSES: The public and other interested parties are encouraged to
submit written scoping comments by mail, the Internet, email, or in
person at the scoping meeting. Scoping comments can be mailed to the
address identified in the ``For Further Information Contact'' paragraph
below. Internet and email correspondence may be submitted through the
Long Bridge Project Web site (http://longbridgeproject.com/) or at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amanda Murphy, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Office of Railroad Policy and Development,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., (Mail
Stop-20), Washington, DC 20590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FRA is an operating administration of DOT
and is responsible for overseeing the safety of railroad operations,
including the safety of any proposed rail ground transportation system.
FRA is also authorized to provide, subject to appropriations, funding
for intercity passenger and rail capital investments and to provide
loans and other financial support for railroad investment. In 2016, FRA
awarded DDOT a grant to prepare an EIS for the Proposed Action, and FRA
may provide funding or financing for the rehabilitation or replacement
of the Long Bridge in the future.
    FRA is the lead Federal agency under NEPA; DDOT, as project
sponsor, is a joint lead agency. FRA and DDOT will prepare the EIS
consistent with NEPA, the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations
for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA in 40 CFR parts
1500-1508; FRA's Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts in 64
FR 28545, dated May 26, 1999; and 23 U.S.C. 139. After release and
circulation of a Draft EIS for public comment, FRA will issue a single
document consisting of the Final EIS and a Record of Decision under the
Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (Pub. L. 114-94, section
1304(n)(2)) unless it determines that statutory criteria or
practicability considerations preclude issuing a combined document.
    The EIS will also document compliance with other applicable
Federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations,
including: section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; the
Clean Water Act; section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act
of 1966; the Endangered Species Act; Executive Order 11988 and USDOT
Order 5650.2 on Floodplain Management; Executive Order 11990 on
Protection of Wetlands; the Magnuson-Stevens Act related to Essential
Fish Habitat; the Coastal Zone Management Act; and Executive Order
12898 on Environmental Justice.

Project Background

    The current Long Bridge, dating from 1904, is owned and maintained
by CSX Transportation (CSXT). It is the only freight railroad crossing
over the Potomac River between the District of Columbia and the
Commonwealth of Virginia. The two-track bridge serves CSXT freight
trains, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) passenger rail
trains, and VRE commuter rail trains. Norfolk-Southern (NS) has
trackage rights on the bridge and connecting CSXT tracks but does not
currently exercise those rights.
    In 2011, DDOT received a High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail grant
from FRA to complete a two-phase feasibility study of the
rehabilitation or replacement of the Long Bridge. Long Bridge Study
Phase I included a preliminary operations plan; visual inspection of
the corridor; initial evaluation of existing and future capacity needs;
and preliminary development of conceptual alternatives. Phase II of the
Long Bridge Study developed a draft Purpose and Need Statement;
developed a service plan based on future demand in the corridor;
further refined conceptual alternatives; and defined evaluation
criteria to screen and identify alternatives which will be carried
forward for analysis. In 2016, DDOT received a Transportation
Investment Generating Economic Recovery grant from FRA for the
preparation of the Long Bridge EIS (Phase III).
    The Long Bridge is located within the Washington Monumental Core.
The EIS Study Area extends approximately 3.2 miles from the VRE Crystal
City Station in Arlington, Virginia to CP Virginia located near Third
Street SW., in Washington, DC. The EIS Study Area includes Federal park
land managed by the National Park Service; historic and cultural
properties; the Potomac River; offices, hotels, and apartment
buildings; transportation facilities (VRE Crystal City Station, VRE
L'Enfant Station, Long Bridge, eleven other railroad bridges, and four
roadway bridges); and numerous pedestrian and bicycle trails.

Purpose and Need

    The purpose of the Proposed Action is to address reliability and
long-term railroad capacity issues for the Long Bridge corridor. The
Proposed Action is needed to identify alternatives that would increase
capacity to meet projected demand for passenger and freight rail
services; improve operational flexibility and resiliency; and provide
redundancy for this critical link in the local, regional, and national
railroad network.
    The need to make improvements to the Long Bridge corridor is noted
in various studies. An Amtrak study in 1999 (Potential Improvements to
the Washington Richmond Railroad Corridor) identifies the Washington
Metropolitan Area, including the Long Bridge, as the most critical
section of the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) corridor and stated
the need for capacity improvements. Following the 1999 infrastructure
study, FRA completed a Tier 1 EIS for the SEHSR corridor (May 2002).
The Tier 1 EIS identified a Preferred Alternative that utilized the
Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac rail corridor, which includes the
Long Bridge. VRE's System Plan 2040 states that increasing the capacity
at the Long Bridge is critical to its long-term growth and development.
Additionally, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments'
National Capital Region Freight Plan recommends a new rail bridge over
the Potomac to minimize rail conflicts between passenger and freight
trains.
    Current and projected rail demand supports the need for capacity
improvements to the Long Bridge corridor. Intercity passenger and
commuter services operate at or close to capacity within the corridor
during the morning peak hour, with eight passenger train movements
scheduled in 60 minutes. Over the course of a full weekday, Amtrak and
VRE currently operate 24 and 32 trains across the Long Bridge,
respectively. CSXT freight trains operate approximately 18 through-
freight trains each day on the same tracks used by the two passenger
train operators.
    Future rail demand during peak periods is forecasted to exceed the
current capacity for Long Bridge. According to the service plan
developed in Phase II of the Long Bridge Project, over the course of
the full day, the number of trains crossing the bridge in 2040 is
expected to increase to 44 trains for Amtrak, 92 for VRE, eight for the
Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC); 42 for CSXT, and six for NS.
The projected growth represents an average increase of over 100 percent
in traffic on the bridge compared to 2015. The existing track
infrastructure, which is limited by the two-track design of the Long
Bridge, cannot support the increased demand.
    The removal of additional rail capacity bottlenecks east and south
of the Long Bridge, combined with population and employment growth in
the Washington Metropolitan Area, increases the need for greater
railroad capacity within the wider corridor. Attempting to serve future
intercity passenger and freight rail demand solely on the current Long
Bridge would not provide needed resiliency or redundancy within the
Virginia to DC rail network. Limited capacity, coupled with shared-use
infrastructure within the corridor, limits the flexibility of commuter,
intercity passenger, and freight service to operate efficiently. These
conditions create a systemic bottleneck that results in operational
conflicts and delays, decreasing reliability and on-time performance of
train operations. Currently, there are no reasonable detours to route
rail traffic around the Long Bridge for maintenance or emergencies
without extensive service delays.
    This bottleneck limits efficient network connectivity for the rail
operators within the Long Bridge corridor, including CSXT, VRE, Amtrak,
and potentially MARC, and the overall transportation network. It also
affects rail operations well beyond the limits of the Long Bridge
corridor given the extensive reach of freight, commuter, and intercity
passenger services along the eastern U.S. and beyond.

Proposed Alternatives To Consider

    The EIS will consider a range of reasonable alternatives that FRA
and DDOT will develop based on the purpose and need for the Proposed
Action, information obtained through the scoping process, and previous
reports. The 2015 Long Bridge Study Phase I identified concepts that
are included in the initial range of alternatives to be considered in
the EIS. FRA and DDOT will evaluate and screen the Phase I concepts and
additional concepts during the NEPA process for elimination or further
refinement. Alternatives will include the No-Build Alternative and
Build Alternatives, including potential rehabilitation and/or
replacement of the existing bridge.

Possible Effects

    The EIS will analyze the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative
effects of the alternatives on the social, economic, and environmental
resources in the Study Area. Environmental resources include, but are
not limited to:

     Transportation;
     Social and economic conditions;
     Property acquisition;
     Parks and recreational resources;
     Visual and aesthetic resources;
     Historic and archaeological resources;
     Air quality;
     Aquatic navigation;
     Greenhouse gas emissions and resilience;
     Noise and vibration;

     Ecology (including wetlands, water and sediment
quality, floodplains, and biological resources);
     Threatened and endangered species;
     Contaminated materials; and
     Environmental Justice.

    This analysis will include identification of study areas
appropriate for each resource; documentation of the affected
environment; and identification of measures to avoid and/or mitigate
significant adverse impacts.

Scoping and Comments

    This Notice initiates the scoping process under NEPA, which helps
guide the development of the Draft EIS. The FRA and DDOT invite
comments from the public and all interested parties regarding the scope
of the EIS to ensure that relevant issues, applicable planning efforts,
constraints, and reasonable alternatives are addressed early in the
development of the EIS. FRA and DDOT will also directly contact
appropriate Federal, state, and local agencies as well as and private
organizations that have previously expressed or that are known to have
an interest in the Proposed Action.
    FRA and DDOT will coordinate with participating agencies during
development of the Draft EIS under 23 U.S.C. 139. FRA will invite all
agencies and Native American Tribes that may have an interest in the
Proposed Action to become participating agencies for the EIS. If an
agency or Native American Tribe is not invited and would like to
participate, please contact FRA (``For Further Information Contact''
section). The lead agencies will develop a Coordination Plan
summarizing how the public and other agencies will be engaged in the
process. The Coordination Plan will be posted to the Project Web site
(http://longbridgeproject.com/) and to FRA's Web site (www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0214).

Future Public Participation and Outreach

    At various milestones during the development of the Long Bridge
EIS, FRA and DDOT will provide additional opportunities for public and
interested party consultation, such as public meetings, open houses,
newsletters, and requests for comments/review of the EIS. Dates, times,
and locations for public meetings and other opportunities for public
participation will be announced through the Long Bridge Project Web
site (http://longbridgeproject.com/), mailings, public notices,
advertisements, and press releases.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 19, 2016.
Felicia Young,
Acting Director, Office of Program Delivery.
[FR Doc. 2016-20481 Filed 8-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 52 (Monday, March 18, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9737-9739]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04971]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 174 and 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0577; FRL-9989-71]

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of
Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Agency's receipt of several
initial filings of pesticide petitions requesting the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or
on various commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 17, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by the docket
identification (ID) number and the pesticide petition number (PP) of
interest as shown in the body of this document, by one of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Robert McNally, Biopesticides and Pollution
Prevention Division (7511P), main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The mailing address for each
contact person is: Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person's
name, division, and mail code. The division to contact is listed at the
end of each pesticide petition summary.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for the division listed at the end of the
pesticide petition summary of interest.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA is announcing its receipt of several pesticide petitions filed
under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
21 U.S.C. 346a, requesting the establishment or modification of
regulations in 40 CFR part 174 or part 180 for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various food commodities. The Agency is taking
public comment on the requests before responding to the petitioners.
EPA is not proposing any particular action at this time. EPA has
determined that the pesticide petitions described in this document
contain the data or information prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2),
21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the
sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data
support granting of the pesticide petitions. After considering the
public comments, EPA intends to evaluate whether and what action may be
warranted. Additional data may be needed before EPA can make a final
determination on these pesticide petitions.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the petitions
that are the subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is
included in a docket EPA has created for each rulemaking. The docket
for each of the petitions is available at http://www.regulations.gov.
    As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), EPA
is publishing notice of the petitions so that the public has an
opportunity to comment on these requests for the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food
commodities. Further information on the petitions may be obtained
through the petition summaries referenced in this unit.

Amended Tolerances for Non-Inerts

    1. PP 8E8703. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0683). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton,
NJ 08540, requests, upon approval of the ``New Tolerances'' entry for
PP 8E8703 listed 202F; elsewhere in this publication, to remove the
existing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.378 for the combined residues of the
insecticide cis- and trans-permethrin isomers [cis-(3-
phenoxyphenyl)methyl 3-(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropane
carboxylate] and [trans-(3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl 3-(2,2-
dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropane carboxylate] in/on the
following agricultural commodities Cherry, sweet at 4.0 parts per
million (ppm); Cherry, tart at 4.0 ppm; Leaf petioles subgroup 4B at
5.0 ppm; Peach at 1.0 ppm; and Potato at 0.05 ppm. Contact: RD.
    2. PP 8E8717. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0783). IR-4, 500 College Road East,
Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests, upon approval of ``New
Tolerances'' for PP 8E8717 listed elsewhere in this publication, to
remove the existing tolerance in 40 CFR 180.513 for residues of the
insecticide chlorfenapyr, including its metabolites and degradates,
determined by measuring only chlorfenapyr, 4-bromo-2-(4-chlorophenyl)-
1-(ethoxymethyl)-5-(trifluoromethyl)-1H-pyrrole-3-carbonitrile, in or
on the agricultural commodities; Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 1.0
parts per million. Contact: RD.
    3. PP 8F8719. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0793). Makhteshim Agan of North
America (d/b/a ADAMA, 3120 Highlands Blvd., Suite 100, Raleigh, NC
27604), requests to: (1) Amend the tolerance expression in 40 CFR
180.680 paragraphs (a) and (d) to read ``Tolerances are established for
residues of the nematicide fluensulfone, including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance
with the tolerance levels specified in the following table below is to
be determined by measuring only the sum of fluensulfone, 5-chloro-2-
[(3,4,4-trifluoro-3-buten-1-yl)sulfonyl]thiazole and its metabolite,
3,4,4-trifluoro-but-3-ene-1-sulfonic acid, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of fluensulfone, in or on the commodity'';
and, (2) amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.680 for residues of the
nematicide, fluensulfone and its metabolite BSA expressed as
fluensulfone equivalents, on the raw agricultural commodities as
follows: Almond hulls at 5 parts per million (ppm); Fruit, pome, group
11 at 0.4 ppm; Fruit, small vine climbing subgroup 13-07D at 0.8 ppm;
Fruit, stone, group 12 at 0.1 ppm; Grain cereal, forage, fodder and
straw, group 16 at 3 ppm; and, rotated wheat (inadvertent residues with
90-day PBI): Grain, cereal, group 15 at 0.05 ppm; Molasses at 0.3 ppm;
and, rotated cereal grains (inadvertent residues with 10-month PBI):
Nut, tree, group 14 at 0.04 ppm; Sugarcane at 0.05 ppm and Wheat grain
(includes triticale) (Barley grain; Buckwheat grain; Oat grain; and
Teosinte grain) at 0.1 ppm; Wheat bran (Barley bran) at 0.14 ppm; Wheat
forage (Oat forage) at 6 ppm; Wheat germ at 0.10 ppm; Wheat hay (Barley
hay and Oat hay) at 15 ppm; Wheat middlings at 0.10 ppm; Wheat shorts
at 0.11 ppm; and, Wheat straw (Barley straw and Oat straw) at 6 ppm.
The Liquid chromatography--Mass Spectrometry mass spectrometry (LC-MS/
MS) methods are used to measure and evaluate the chemical fluensulfone
plus its metabolite 3,4,4-trifluoro-but-3-ene-1-sulfonic acid (BSA)
expressed as fluensulfone equivalents. Contact: RD.

New Tolerance Exemptions for Non-Inerts (Except PIPS)

    1. PP 8F8688. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0763). Central Coast Garden
Products, 1354 Dayton St., Unit N, Salinas, CA 93901, requests to
establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR
part 180 for residues of the fungicide and miticide sodium lauryl
sulfate in or on all raw agricultural commodities when applied in
accordance with good agricultural practices. The petitioner believes no
analytical method is needed because the proposed exemption would extend
to all food crops with no effective limit. The petitioner further
points to the high degradability and minimal toxicity of sodium lauryl
sulfate. Contact: BPPD.

New Tolerances for Non-Inerts

    1. PP 8E8701. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0644). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), IR-4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W,
Princeton, NJ 08450, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR
180.593, for residues of the insecticide etoxazole (2-(2,6-
difluorophenyl)-4-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-2-ethoxyphenyl]-4,5-
dihydrooxazole) in or on the agricultural commodities Beet, sugar,
roots at 0.02 parts per million (ppm); Beet, sugar, dried pulp at 0.04
ppm; and in/on the following plant leaves at 1.0 ppm: Alexanders
leaves; Alocasia, leaves; American Solomon's seal,

leaves; Angelica, leaves; Angular Solomon's seal, leaves; Arracacha,
leaves; Artichoke, Jerusalem, leaves; Astralagus, leaves; Banana,
Abyssinian, leaves; Bayberry, leaves; Bean, Goa, leaves ppm; Beet,
garden, leaves; Beet, sugar, leaves; Bellflower, Chinese, leaves; Blue
ape, leaves; Blue vervain, leaves; Bupleurum, leaves; Burdock, edible,
leaves; Butchers broom, leaves; Canna, edible leaves; Carolina redroot,
leaves; Carrot, leaves; Cassava, bitter, leaves; Cassava, sweet,
leaves; Celeriac, leaves; Chayote, leaves; Chervil, turnip-rooted,
leaves; Chicory, leaves; Chinese asparagus, leaves; Chinese-potato,
leaves; Chinese skullcap, leaves; Cloveroot, leaves; Coltsfoot, leaves;
Common skullcap, leaves; Cumin, black, leaves; Cup plant, leaves;
Dahurian angelica, leaves; Dong quai, leaves; Echinacea, leaves;
Elephant foot yam, leaves; Fodder beet, leaves; Fodder radish, leaves;
Fodder turnip, leaves; Forskohlii, leaves; Fo-ti, leaves; Hydrangea,
leaves; Indigo, leaves; Japanese knotweed, leaves; Leren, leaves;
King's crown, leaves; Maca, leaves; Madeira vine, leaves; Marshmallow,
leaves; Mashua, leaves; Mauka, leaves; Mustard, tuberous rooted
Chinese, leaves; Nettle, leaves; Niu Xi, leaves; Oca, leaves; Parsley,
turnip rooted, leaves; Parsnip, leaves; Polygala, leaves; Rampion,
leaves; Rauwolfia, leaves; Rehmannia, leaves; Rutabaga, leaves;
Salsify, leaves; Salsify, black, leaves; Salsify, Spanish, leaves;
Schisandra, leaves; Shatavari, leaves; Siberian polygala, leaves;
Siberian Solomon's seal, leaves; Silverweed, leaves; Skirret, leaves;
Solomon's seal, leaves; Sweet gale, leaves; Sweet potato, leaves;
Tanier leaves; Taro, leaves; Ti palm, leaves; Turkish rhubarb, leaves;
Tyfon, leaves; Ullucu, leaves; Umckaloaba, leaves; Valerian, leaves;
Velvet plant, leaves; Vetiver, roots; White peony, leaves; Yacon,
leaves; Yam, Chinese, leaves; Yam, cushcush, leaves; Yam, greater,
leaves; Yam, lesser, leaves; Yam, true, leaves; Yam, potato, leaves;
Yam, white, leaves; Yam, yellow, leaves; Yellow dock, leaves. Adequate
enforcement methodology, Gas Chromatograph/Mass Selective Detector (GC/
MSD) is available for detecting and measuring levels of etoxazole to
enforce proposed tolerances. Gas chromatography with a nitrogen-
phosphorous detector (GC/NPD) enforcement methodology is also available
to enforce proposed livestock commodity tolerances. Contact: RD.
    2. PP 8E8703. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0683). IR-4, Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton,
NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.378 for the
combined residues of the insecticide cis- and trans-permethrin isomers
[cis-(3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl 3-(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2-
dimethylcyclopropane carboxylate] and [trans-(3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl 3-
(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropane carboxylate] in or on
the agricultural commodities Celtuce at 5.0 parts per million (ppm);
Cherry subgroup 12-12A at 4.0 ppm; Fennel, Florence at 5.0 ppm; Leaf
petiole vegetable subgroup 22B at 5.0 ppm; Peach, subgroup 12-12B at
2.0 ppm; Tea, plucked leaves at 20 ppm; Vegetable, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 1C at 0.05 ppm; and a regional tolerance in/on Fruit, small,
vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 2.0 ppm.
Adequate analytical methods, gas chromatography (GC) electron capture
detection (GC/ECD), are available for enforcing tolerances of
permethrin in plants with a limit of quantitation (LOQ) of 0.05 ppm,
which will allow monitoring of permethrin residues in crops at the
levels proposed for the tolerances. Contact: RD.
    3. PP 8E8717. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0783). IR-4, 500 College Road East,
Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances for
residues of the insecticide chlorfenapyr, including its metabolites and
degradates, determined by measuring only chlorfenapyr, 4-bromo-2-(4-
chlorophenyl)-1-(ethoxymethyl)-5-(trifluoromethyl)-1H-pyrrole-3-
carbonitrile, in or on the following agricultural commodities; Basil,
fresh leaves at 80 parts per million (ppm); Chive, fresh leaves at 20
ppm; Cucumber at 0.5 ppm; and to increase the established tolerance for
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 from 1.0 ppm to 2.0 ppm. Adequate
analytical methods are available to enforce the tolerance expression.
Method M2686 which uses gas chromatography/electron capture detection
(GC/ECD) as a primary quantitation method and gas chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry (GC/MS) as its confirmatory method is used to determine
chlorfenapyr residues in various fruits (such as Stone Fruit, Pome
Fruits, Strawberries, and Grapes). Method M2686 (with minor
modification if needed) could be used the analysis of chlorfenapyr
residues in basil and chives as well as for small fruited tomato and
cucumber. Another method, designated as M2427, which uses GC/ECD is
suitable for tolerance enforcement purposes for basil and chives. Both
methods have a limit of quantitation (LOQ) of 0.05 ppm. Contact: RD.

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a.

    Dated: February 27, 2019.
Delores Barber,
Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2019-04971 Filed 3-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 19, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 181)]
[Notices]
[Page 54808-54809]
[DOCID:fr19se06-35]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EL00-95-135; EL00-98-122]

California Independent System Operator Corporation; Notice of
Compliance Filing

September 13, 2006.
    Take notice that on September 1, 2006, California Independent
System Operator Corporation (CAISO) tendered for filing an Offer of
Settlement and Amended Compliance filed on August 5, 2005.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the

Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a
document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any
FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 22, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-15520 Filed 9-18-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 18, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 45897]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15182]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas and Oil Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP23-892-000.
    Applicants: Ruby Pipeline, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: RP 2023-07-11 Rate Schedule
and GT&C Revisions to be effective 8/11/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20230711-5100.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/23.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-893-000.
    Applicants: Wyoming Interstate Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Diamond Mountain Implementation
Filing in Docket No. CP23-14 to be effective 9/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 7/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20230711-5131.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/23.

    Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a
complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with
Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211,
385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the
specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is
necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Commission's Office of Public Participation
(OPP) supports meaningful public engagement and participation in
Commission proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including
landowners, environmental justice communities, Tribal members and
others, access publicly available information and navigate Commission
processes. For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such
as interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: July 12, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-15182 Filed 7-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 241 (Monday, December 17, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64582-64584]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27237]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2015-N-3454]

Manufacturing Site Change Supplements: Content and Submission;
Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff;
Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a final guidance entitled ``Manufacturing Site
Change Supplements: Content and Submissions; Guidance for Industry and
Food and Drug Administration Staff.'' This guidance describes the
decision-making steps that FDA recommends to determine whether a
premarket approval application (PMA) supplement should be submitted
when a manufacturer intends to change the manufacturing site (including
a change to the processing, packaging, or sterilization site) of its
legally marketed PMA-approved device. This guidance also discusses the
general factors FDA intends to consider when determining whether to
conduct an establishment inspection prior to approval of a site change
supplement.

DATES: The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal
Register on December 17, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit either electronic or written comments on
Agency guidances at any time as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2015-N-3454 for ``Manufacturing Site Change Supplements: Content
and Submission; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration
Staff.'' Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for
those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between
9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    An electronic copy of the guidance document is available for
download from the internet. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for information on electronic access to the guidance. Submit written
requests for a single hard copy of the guidance document entitled
``Manufacturing Site

Change Supplements: Content and Submissions: Guidance for Industry and
Food and Drug Administration Staff'' to the Office of the Center
Director, Guidance and Policy Development, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5431, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; or the Office
of Communication, Outreach, and Development, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing
your request.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bleta Vuniqi, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3463, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under section 515(d)(6) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(21 U.S.C. 360e(d)(6)), a PMA supplement must be submitted for review
and approval by FDA before making a change that affects the device's
safety or effectiveness, unless such change is a modification in a
manufacturing procedure or method of manufacture, which would be
eligible for a 30-day notice. The PMA regulations provide general
criteria in 21 CFR 814.39 for determining when PMA holders are required
to submit a PMA supplement or are eligible to submit a 30-day notice.
    This guidance document explains: (1) What constitutes a
manufacturing site change and when a manufacturer should submit a PMA
supplement for a site change; (2) what documentation a manufacturer
should submit in the site change supplement; and (3) the general
factors that FDA intends to consider when determining whether to
conduct an establishment inspection prior to the approval of a site
change supplement. This guidance is intended to help industry decide
when a change in manufacturing site should be submitted in a PMA site
change supplement. This guidance is also intended to help industry
predict when a preapproval inspection in connection with a PMA
supplement for a manufacturing site change will likely be needed to
evaluate the firm's implementation of Quality System regulation
requirements, 21 CFR part 820. As a result, this guidance should help
manufacturers manage the timeframes associated with implementing the
changes in the manufacturing site and any processes, methods,
procedures, qualifications, and validations.
    Please note that this guidance only applies to a manufacturer of a
device with an approved PMA, a product development protocol, or a
humanitarian device exemption. This guidance does not address
manufacturing site changes for devices cleared under the premarket
notification (510(k)) submissions, granted premarket authorization
through the De Novo pathway, or approved and distributed as part of an
investigational device exemption.
    FDA considered comments received on the draft guidance that
appeared in the Federal Register of October 21, 2015. FDA revised the
guidance as appropriate in response to the comments.

II. Significance of Guidance

    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
current thinking of FDA on ``Manufacturing Site Change Supplements:
Content and Submission; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug
Administration Staff.'' It does not establish any rights for any person
and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative
approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes
and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the guidance may do so by
downloading an electronic copy from the internet. A search capability
for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance documents
is available at https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm. This
guidance document is also available at https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/default.htm or https://www.regulations.gov. Persons unable to download
an electronic copy of ``Manufacturing Site Change Supplements: Content
and Submissions; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration
Staff'' may send an email request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>to
receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document
number 1269 to identify the guidance you are requesting.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information. These collections of information are subject to review by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in
the following FDA regulations or guidance have been approved by OMB as
listed in the following table.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
     21 CFR part or guidance             Topic          OMB control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
814, subparts A through E.......  Premarket Approval.          0910-0231
814, subpart H..................  Humanitarian Device          0910-0332
                                   Exemption.
``Requests for Feedback on        Q-Submissions......          0910-0756
 Medical Device Submissions: The
 Pre-Submission Program and
 Meetings with Food and Drug
 Administration Staff''.
820.............................  Current Good                 0910-0073
                                   Manufacturing
                                   Practice (CGMP);
                                   Quality System
                                   (QS) Regulation.
807, subparts A through D.......  Electronic                   0910-0625
                                   Submission of
                                   Medical Device
                                   Registration and
                                   Listing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: December 11, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-27237 Filed 12-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: May 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 101)]
[Notices]
[Page 30131]
[DOCID:fr25my06-52]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1390-040-CA]

Southern California Edison Company; Notice of Availability of
Environmental Assessment

May 19, 2006.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Regulations, 18 CFR Part
380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879), the Office of Energy Projects has
reviewed the Offer of Settlement (Settlement) filed on February 4,
2005, including proposed amended license conditions for the Lundy
Hydroelectric Project, located on Mill Creek in Mono County, near the
town of Lee Vining and has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA)
for the proposed amendment.
    The EA contains our analysis of the potential effects of the
existing project and concludes that amending the project license in
accordance with the Settlement as modified by staff would not
constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment.
    A copy of the EA is on file with the Commission and is available
for public inspection at the Commission in the Public Reference Room.
The EA may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
 using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number

excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

(202) 502-8659.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the issuance date
of this notice, and should be addressed to the Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1-A,
Washington, DC 20426. Please affix ``Lundy Hydroelectric Project No.
1390'' to all comments. Comments may be filed electronically via
Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
on the Commission's Web site under the ``eFiling'' link. For further
information, contact John Smith at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-8025 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


From: Carson, Jim R. [ mailto: Jim. Carson@ ispat. com] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 5: 24 PM To: Branscome, Marvin R. Subject: RE: Sinter Plant Method 9 Observations Marvin, Since all of our readings at our Sinter Plant are only for internal evaluations and the facility is also subject to material transfer limitations of 10% three minutes average, we have our observer record all fugitives on the more severe three minute averaging period. As I mentioned in the last email, the 10% six minute average is the fugitive limit for material processing units [ 326 IAC 6 1 11.1( d)( 7)( A) and( B)], which I believe is the appropriate and applicable section for the coolers. Therefore, the same limitation should apply to the three Lake County sinter plants you listed below. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Jim  Original Message From: Branscome, Marvin R. [ mailto: marvin@ rti. org] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 2: 41 PM To: Carson, Jim R. Subject: RE: Sinter Plant Method 9 Observations Thanks, Jim. This is what we needed. I read 326 IAC for material processing to be 10% opacity using Method 9, which means 6 min averages. However, your data seems to be 3 min averages. Is the applicable standard 10% 6 min averages? Could we say that Ispat Inland, USS Gary, and ISG East Chicago are subject to the 10% limit; therefore it constitutes the floor for sinter coolers ( 3 of 5 plants)?

Marvin Branscome RTI International P. O. Box 12194 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 phone: 919 990 8643 fax: 919 990 8600 marvin@ rti. org