UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

							            OFFICE OF

							PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

							AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

February 15, 2006

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Fomesafen Sodium: Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment for the HED Human Health Risk Assessment.

		  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 PC Code:	123802

DP Number:	D325798

FROM:	Toiya Goodlow, Chemist

		Reregistration Branch 1

		Health Effects Division (7509C)

THROUGH:	Tom Bloem  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 , Chemist

Leung Cheng, Chemist

Dietary Exposure Science Advisory Council (DESAC)

		Health Effects Division (7509C)

			and

		Whang Phang, Ph.D., Branch Senior Scientist

		Reregistration Branch 1

		Health Effects Division (7509C)

TO:		  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Donna Davis, Chemist

		Reregistration Branch 1

Health Effects Division (7509C)

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Executive Summary

Chronic dietary risk assessments were conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM-FCID™), Version 2.03, which used food consumption data from the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) from 1994-1996 and 1998.  The analyses were performed to support the HED Human Health Risk Assessment for fomesafen sodium (commonly called fomesafen).

No acute dietary toxicity endpoint could be identified based on the toxicology data currently available for fomesafen sodium.  The Cancer Assessment Review Committee (CARC) classified fomesafen as “Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans”; therefore, a cancer assessment was not performed.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Chronic Dietary Exposure Results and Characterization

Chronic dietary exposure assessments were performed for fomesafen sodium.  The assumptions of these assessments were tolerance level residues and 100% crop treated.  Estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) from the Environmental Fate and Effects Division were also included.  The dietary exposure analyses in this assessment result in dietary risk estimates for food and water that are below the Agency’s level of concern for chronic dietary exposure.  The highest exposure and risk estimates were for the ‘all infants’ population subgroup.  The exposure for food plus surface water was 0.000766 mg/kg/day, which utilized 31% of the chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD); and the exposure for food plus ground water was 0.000107 mg/kg/day, which utilized 4.3% of the cPAD.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 I.	Introduction

The 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 HED 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 Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) Safety Factor.

For non-cancer chronic exposures, HED is concerned when estimated dietary risk exceeds 100% of the PAD.  References which discuss the chronic 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:      HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2000/July/Day-12/6061.pdf"  http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2000/July/Day-12/6061.pdf ; or see SOP 99.6 (8/20/99).

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 This action represents the first dietary exposure assessment for the fomesafen HED human health risk assessment.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 II.	Residue Information

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Fomesafen sodium is a contact herbicide in the diphenylether chemical class.  The herbicide acts via inhibition of protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO), and is therefore a Group 14 herbicide.  It is used to control broadleaf and grass weeds, as well as postemergence weeds in soybeans and other legumes.

Fomesafen Sodium Use:

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Tolerances for fomesafen residues are listed in 40 CFR §180.433.  Currently, the single established tolerance is expressed in terms of “sodium salt of fomesafen, 5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-N-(methylsulfonyl)-2-nitrobenzam ide” for residues in/on soybean at 0.05 ppm.  The registrant,   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Syngenta, has proposed to reduce the soybean tolerance to 0.02 ppm, in addition to the establishment of tolerances for fomesafen residues in/on cottonseed and cotton gin byproducts, both at 0.025 ppm.  Additionally,   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 the Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) has proposed the establishment of tolerances for the fomesafen residues in/on snap beans and dry beans at 0.025 ppm.  HED has approved the tolerance reduction for soybeans, new uses for cotton and the IR-4 uses on snap and dry beans.

The residue of concern for plant commodities and water is fomesafen per se.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The residue of concern in livestock commodities consists of fomesafen and its metabolites 5-(2-chloro-α,α,α-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy) anthranilic acid (compound V) and 5-(2-chloro-α,α,α-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-N-methylsulfonylanthranilamid e (compound XV).  However, based on the submitted livestock metabolism studies HED concluded that the proposed/registered uses of fomesafen result in a

40 CFR §180.6(a)(3) situation for livestock commodities; i.e., there is no reasonable expectation of finite residues in livestock commodities.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Residue Data Used for Chronic Assessments:

Tolerance level residues and 100% crop treated were used for all commodities included in these assessments.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Estimated drinking water concentrations for the chronic assessments were estimated using two Environmental Fate and Effects Division screening models: PRZM-EXAMS and SCI-GROW, Version 2.3.  Syngenta submitted a prospective ground water monitoring study for fomesafen use on soybeans.  EFED recommended using the ground water monitoring concentration of 1 ppb, since it represents actual use conditions of fomesafen on soybeans on a vulnerable soil.  Chronic EDWCs for surface and ground water sources were used in these assessments, see Tables I and II below.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Table I.  Surface Water EDWCs for Fomesafen Sodium Using PRZM-EXAMS

Crop	Peak	90 Day Average	Annual Average	30 Year Average

	ppb (μg/L)

Soybeans	15.489	12.177	6.574	3.364

Cotton	25.167	19.178	10.535   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 1	5.609

Cotton	20.488	15.312	9.735	5.443

Cotton	25.372	18.612	8.615	3.873

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 1 Represents value used in dietary assessment

Table II.  Ground Water EDWCs for Fomesafen Sodium

Monitoring 	Modeling (SCI-GROW)

ppb (μg/L)

1.01	11.2

1 Represents value used in dietary assessment

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 III  Program and Consumption Information

Several reasonable peer-reviewed softwares have recently been emerging for modeling dietary exposure to pesticides.  For a variety of technical, historical, and availability reasons, DEEMTM was the program generally used by EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) for conducting its dietary risk assessments.  With the advent and current availability of a number of other exposure software programs, OPP, registrants, and other interested parties have available to them the option of selecting other peer-reviewed exposure software in conducting risk assessments for pesticides.  Dietary exposure assessments may also be performed with other, similar programs, and if submitted, such results will be reviewed by EPA for acceptability and comparability to existing peer-reviewed software being used by OPP.

FCID™ Program and Consumption Information

Fomesafen sodium chronic dietary exposure assessments were conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID™, 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 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 (<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 food-form (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.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 IV.	Toxicological Information

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Table III.  Summary of Toxicological Dose and Endpoints for Dietary Exposure Assessment of Fomesafen Sodium

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Exposure	Dose and Uncertainty Factors	Special FQPA Safety Factor	Study and Toxicological Effects

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Acute Dietary                       (any population)	No appropriate study is available for determination of this endpoint.

Chronic Dietary                     (all populations)	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 NOAEL = 0.25 mg/kg/day

UF = 100

Chronic RfD  = 0.0025 mg/kg/day	FQPA  SF  = 1X

(cPAD) = 0.0025

mg/kg/day	Chronic toxicity - rat

LOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day based on hyalinization of the liver in males

Cancer	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Classification: The CARC classified Fomesafen as “Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.”

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 V.	Results/Discussion

As stated above, for chronic assessments, HED is concerned when dietary risk exceeds 100% of the PAD.  The DEEM-FCID™ analysis estimates the dietary exposure of the U.S. population and various population subgroups.  The results summarized in Table IV are for the general U.S. Population, all infants (<1 year old), children 1-2, children 3-5, children 6-12, youth 13-19, females 13-49, adults 20-49, and adults 50+ years.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Results of Chronic Dietary Exposure Analysis

The chronic assessments estimate the dietary exposure of the general U.S. population, all infants (<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.  The highest exposure and risk estimates were for all infants population subgroup.  The exposure for food plus surface water was 0.000766 mg/kg/day, which utilized 31% of the cPAD; and the exposure for food plus ground water was 0.000107mg/kg/day, which utilizes 4.3% of the cPAD.  The results of the chronic dietary analyses for both drinking water sources are reported in Table IV below.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Table IV.  Summary of Chronic Dietary Exposure and Risk for Fomesafen Sodium                                                                            Incorporating Surface and Ground Water As Drinking Water Sources

Population Subgroup 1	Surface Water	Ground Water

	EDWC (ppb)	 Exposure (mg/kg/day)	% cPAD 	EDWC (ppb)	 Exposure

(mg/kg/day)	% cPAD

General U.S. Population	10.535	0.000239	9.5	1.0	0.000038	1.5

All Infants (< 1 year old) 	10.535	0.000766	31	1.0	0.000107	4.3

Children 1-2 years old	10.535	0.000371	15	1.0	0.000072	2.9

Children 3-5 years old	10.535	0.000344	14	1.0	0.000064	2.6

Children 6-12 years old	10.535	0.000236	9.4	1.0	0.000044	1.7

Youth 13-19 years old	10.535	0.000175	7.0	1.0	0.000030	1.2

Adults 20-49 years old	10.535	0.000221	8.8	1.0	0.000033	1.3

Adults 50+ years old	10.535	0.000231	9.2	1.0	0.000033	1.3

Females 13-49 years old	10.535	0.000219	8.8	1.0	0.000032	1.3

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1   1 The values for the population with the highest exposure for each type of risk assessment are bolded.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 VI.	Conclusions

A Tier I dietary exposure assessment was performed for fomesafen sodium.  The assumptions of these dietary exposure assessments were tolerance level residues and 100% crop treated.  The dietary-exposure analyses in this assessment for fomesafen result in dietary risk for food and water estimates that are below the Agency’s level of concern for chronic dietary exposure.  The highest exposure and risk estimates were for all infants.  Thirty-one percent of the cPAD was utilized using surface water as the drinking water source, and approximately four percent of the cPAD was utilized for ground water.

As stated above, for chronic dietary exposure assessments, HED is concerned when dietary risk exceeds 100% of the PAD.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Food and water exposures from both drinking water sources show that the chronic exposure is <31% of the cPAD for fomesafen.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 VII. References

Rossenbalt, Daniel. DP Barcodes: D314014, D354673, D318123. September 27, 2005. Tier II Drinking Water Assessment for Fomesafen Use on Cotton, Soybeans, Dry Beans, and Snap Beans.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 VIII.	List of Attachments

Attachment 1:  DEEM-FCID™ Chronic Food plus Surface Water Residue Input file.

Attachment 2:  DEEM-FCID™ Chronic Food plus Surface Water Results file.

Attachment 3:  DEEM-FCID™ Chronic Food plus Ground Water Residue Input file.

Attachment 4:  DEEM-FCID™ Chronic Food plus Ground Water Results file.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 cc:	T.Goodlow/HED/RRB1.Attachment 1:  DEEM-FCID™ Chronic Food plus Surface Water Residue Input

	file.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                 Ver. 2.00

DEEM-FCID Chronic analysis for FOMESAFEN SODIUM                   1994-98 data

Residue file: C:\2004DEEMFCID\Fomesafen\FomesafenDietary Assessment\Fomesafen_chronic_surfaceH2O.R98

                                                           Adjust. #2 NOT used

Analysis Date 01-26-2006             Residue file dated: 01-25-2006/16:02:54/8

Reference dose (RfD) = 0.0025  (NOEL) = 0.25 mg/kg bw/day

Comment:FQPA SF of 1X

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

Food Crop                                       Residue       Adj.Factors      Comment

EPA Code  Grp  Food Name                          (ppm)

                                                             #1         #2

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

06030300 6C   Bean, black, seed                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030320 6C   Bean, broad, seed                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030340 6C   Bean, cowpea, seed                 0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030350 6C   Bean,  great northern, seed        0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030360 6C   Bean, kidney, seed                 0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030380 6C   Bean, lima, seed                   0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030390 6C   Bean, mung, seed                   0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030400 6C   Bean, navy, seed                   0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030410 6C   Bean, pink, seed                   0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030420 6C   Bean, pinto, seed                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06010430 6A   Bean, snap, succulent              0.025000   1.000      1.000

06010431 6A   Bean, snap, succulent-babyfood     0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030980 6C   Chickpea, seed                     0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030981 6C   Chickpea, seed-babyfood            0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030990 6C   Chickpea, flour                    0.025000   1.000      1.000

95001280 O    Cottonseed, oil                    0.025000   1.000      1.000

95001281 O    Cottonseed, oil-babyfood           0.025000   1.000      1.000

06031820 6C   Guar, seed                         0.025000   1.000      1.000

06031821 6C   Guar, seed-babyfood                0.025000   1.000      1.000

06032030 6C   Lentil, seed                       0.025000   1.000      1.000

06032560 6C   Pea, dry                           0.025000   1.000      1.000

06032561 6C   Pea, dry-babyfood                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06032580 6C   Pea, pigeon, seed                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06003470 6    Soybean, seed                      0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003480 6    Soybean, flour                     0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003481 6    Soybean, flour-babyfood            0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003490 6    Soybean, soy milk                  0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003491 6    Soybean, soy milk-babyfood or in   0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003500 6    Soybean, oil                       0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003501 6    Soybean, oil-babyfood              0.020000   1.000      1.000

86010000 O    Water, direct, all sources         0.010535   1.000      1.000

86020000 O    Water, indirect, all sources       0.010535   1.000      1.000

Attachment 2:  DEEM-FCID™ Chronic Food plus Surface Water Results file.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                 Ver. 2.00

DEEM-FCID Chronic analysis for FOMESAFEN SODIUM                 (1994-98 data)

Residue file name: C:\2004DEEMFCID\Fomesafen\FomesafenDietary Assessment\Fomesafen_chronic_surfaceH2O.R98

                                                 Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.

Analysis Date 01-26-2006/08:45:28     Residue file dated: 01-25-2006/16:02:54/8

Reference dose (RfD, Chronic) = .0025 mg/kg bw/day

NOEL (Chronic) = .25 mg/kg bw/day

COMMENT 1: FQPA SF of 1X; surface water

======================================================================== =======

                    Total exposure by population subgroup

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

                                                    Total Exposure

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

          Population                         mg/kg       Margin of   Percent

           Subgroup                       body wt/day   Exposure 1/  of RfD

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

U.S. Population (total)                     0.000239        1,048        9.5%

U.S. Population (spring season)             0.000236        1,058        9.4%

U.S. Population (summer season)             0.000255          981       10.2%

U.S. Population (autumn season)             0.000232        1,079        9.3%

U.S. Population (winter season)             0.000231        1,080        9.3%

Northeast region                            0.000217        1,152        8.7%

Midwest region                              0.000241        1,037        9.6%

Southern region                             0.000229        1,094        9.1%

Western region                              0.000271          921       10.9%

Hispanics                                   0.000272          920       10.9%

Non-hispanic whites                         0.000232        1,076        9.3%

Non-hispanic blacks                         0.000229        1,093        9.1%

Non-hisp/non-white/non-black                0.000293          852       11.7%

All infants (< 1 year)                      0.000766          326       30.6%

Nursing infants                             0.000287          870       11.5%

Non-nursing infants                         0.000948          264       37.9%

Children 1-6  yrs                           0.000346          722       13.9%

Children 7-12 yrs                           0.000224        1,117        9.0%

Females 13-19 (not preg or nursing)         0.000169        1,476        6.8%

Females 20+ (not preg or nursing)           0.000234        1,069        9.4%

Females 13-50 yrs                           0.000229        1,092        9.2%

Females 13+ (preg/not nursing)              0.000230        1,087        9.2%

Females 13+ (nursing)                       0.000325          770       13.0%

Males 13-19 yrs                             0.000179        1,394        7.2%

Males 20+ yrs                               0.000213        1,174        8.5%

Seniors 55+                                 0.000230        1,085        9.2%

Children 1-2 yrs                            0.000371          674       14.8%

Children 3-5 yrs                            0.000344          727       13.7%

Children 6-12 yrs                           0.000236        1,058        9.4%

Youth 13-19 yrs                             0.000175        1,428        7.0%

Adults 20-49 yrs                            0.000221        1,132        8.8%

Adults 50+ yrs                              0.000231        1,084        9.2%

Females 13-49 yrs                           0.000219        1,141        8.8%

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

Attachment 3:  DEEM-FCID™ Chronic Food plus Ground Water Residue Input

	file.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                 Ver. 2.00

DEEM-FCID Chronic analysis for FOMESAFEN SODIUM                   1994-98 data

Residue file: C:\2004DEEMFCID\Fomesafen\FomesafenDietary Assessment\Fomesafen_chronic_groundH2O.R98

                                                           Adjust. #2 NOT used

Analysis Date 01-26-2006             Residue file dated: 01-25-2006/15:58:50/8

Reference dose (RfD) = 0.0025  (NOEL) = 0.25 mg/kg bw/day

Comment:FQPA SF of 1X

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

Food Crop                                       Residue       Adj.Factors      Comment

EPA Code  Grp  Food Name                          (ppm)

                                                             #1         #2

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

06030300 6C   Bean, black, seed                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030320 6C   Bean, broad, seed                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030340 6C   Bean, cowpea, seed                 0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030350 6C   Bean,  great northern, seed        0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030360 6C   Bean, kidney, seed                 0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030380 6C   Bean, lima, seed                   0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030390 6C   Bean, mung, seed                   0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030400 6C   Bean, navy, seed                   0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030410 6C   Bean, pink, seed                   0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030420 6C   Bean, pinto, seed                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06010430 6A   Bean, snap, succulent              0.025000   1.000      1.000

06010431 6A   Bean, snap, succulent-babyfood     0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030980 6C   Chickpea, seed                     0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030981 6C   Chickpea, seed-babyfood            0.025000   1.000      1.000

06030990 6C   Chickpea, flour                    0.025000   1.000      1.000

95001280 O    Cottonseed, oil                    0.025000   1.000      1.000

95001281 O    Cottonseed, oil-babyfood           0.025000   1.000      1.000

06031820 6C   Guar, seed                         0.025000   1.000      1.000

06031821 6C   Guar, seed-babyfood                0.025000   1.000      1.000

06032030 6C   Lentil, seed                       0.025000   1.000      1.000

06032560 6C   Pea, dry                           0.025000   1.000      1.000

06032561 6C   Pea, dry-babyfood                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06032580 6C   Pea, pigeon, seed                  0.025000   1.000      1.000

06003470 6    Soybean, seed                      0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003480 6    Soybean, flour                     0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003481 6    Soybean, flour-babyfood            0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003490 6    Soybean, soy milk                  0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003491 6    Soybean, soy milk-babyfood or in   0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003500 6    Soybean, oil                       0.020000   1.000      1.000

06003501 6    Soybean, oil-babyfood              0.020000   1.000      1.000

86010000 O    Water, direct, all sources         0.001000   1.000      1.000

86020000 O    Water, indirect, all sources       0.001000   1.000      1.000

Attachment 4:  DEEM-FCID™ Chronic Food plus Ground Water Results file.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                 Ver. 2.00

DEEM-FCID Chronic analysis for FOMESAFEN SODIUM                 (1994-98 data)

Residue file name: C:\2004DEEMFCID\Fomesafen\FomesafenDietary Assessment\Fomesafen_chronic_groundH2O.R98

                                                 Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.

Analysis Date 01-26-2006/08:44:35     Residue file dated: 01-25-2006/15:58:50/8

Reference dose (RfD, Chronic) = .0025 mg/kg bw/day

NOEL (Chronic) = .25 mg/kg bw/day

COMMENT 1: FQPA SF of 1X; ground water

======================================================================== =======

                    Total exposure by population subgroup

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

                                                    Total Exposure

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

          Population                         mg/kg       Margin of   Percent

           Subgroup                       body wt/day   Exposure 1/  of RfD

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

U.S. Population (total)                     0.000038        6,639        1.5%

U.S. Population (spring season)             0.000037        6,750        1.5%

U.S. Population (summer season)             0.000039        6,405        1.6%

U.S. Population (autumn season)             0.000037        6,680        1.5%

U.S. Population (winter season)             0.000037        6,740        1.5%

Northeast region                            0.000034        7,440        1.3%

Midwest region                              0.000038        6,594        1.5%

Southern region                             0.000038        6,662        1.5%

Western region                              0.000041        6,064        1.6%

Hispanics                                   0.000044        5,720        1.7%

Non-hispanic whites                         0.000036        6,913        1.4%

Non-hispanic blacks                         0.000038        6,589        1.5%

Non-hisp/non-white/non-black                0.000047        5,317        1.9%

All infants (< 1 year)                      0.000107        2,329        4.3%

Nursing infants                             0.000043        5,827        1.7%

Non-nursing infants                         0.000132        1,897        5.3%

Children 1-6  yrs                           0.000066        3,808        2.6%

Children 7-12 yrs                           0.000041        6,065        1.6%

Females 13-19 (not preg or nursing)         0.000028        8,957        1.1%

Females 20+ (not preg or nursing)           0.000033        7,526        1.3%

Females 13-50 yrs                           0.000034        7,264        1.4%

Females 13+ (preg/not nursing)              0.000035        7,230        1.4%

Females 13+ (nursing)                       0.000046        5,416        1.8%

Males 13-19 yrs                             0.000031        7,953        1.3%

Males 20+ yrs                               0.000033        7,596        1.3%

Seniors 55+                                 0.000033        7,571        1.3%

Children 1-2 yrs                            0.000072        3,457        2.9%

Children 3-5 yrs                            0.000064        3,887        2.6%

Children 6-12 yrs                           0.000044        5,746        1.7%

Youth 13-19 yrs                             0.000030        8,395        1.2%

Adults 20-49 yrs                            0.000033        7,536        1.3%

Adults 50+ yrs                              0.000033        7,543        1.3%

Females 13-49 yrs                           0.000032        7,740        1.3%

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

 PAGE

  PAGE   1

Fomesafen Sodium	Dietary Exposure Assessment	DP Barcode: D325798

PC Code: 123802	                                                                               Page     of 11

 PAGE   8

Fomesafen Sodium	Dietary Exposure Assessment	DP Barcode: D??????

PC Code: 123802	                                                          Page      of  11

     PAGE   8

Fomesafen Sodium	Dietary Exposure Assessment	DP Barcode: D325798

PC Code: 123802	                                                          Page       of  11


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 208 (Monday, October 28, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64159-64162]
[FR Doc No: 2013-25295]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0539; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-145-AD;
Amendment 39-17616; AD 2013-20-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding airworthiness directive (AD) 2000-12-11,
for certain Model A300 B4-600 and Model A300 B4-600R series airplanes.
AD 2000-12-11 required repetitive inspections to detect cracks in the
bolt holes inboard and outboard of rib 9 on the bottom booms of the
front and rear wing spars, and repair if necessary. This new AD reduces
the initial inspection compliance time and repetitive inspection
interval. This AD was prompted by a fleet survey and an updated fatigue
and damage tolerance analysis indicating a high risk for fatigue
cracking on the front and rear spar bottom booms. We are issuing this
AD to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the bolt holes of the wing
spars, which could result in reduced structural integrity of a wing
spar.

DATES: This AD becomes effective December 2, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of December 2,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-0539; or in person at the
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS--
EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44
51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-
227-1221.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
The NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2013 (78 FR
40069), and proposed to supersede AD 2000-12-11, Amendment 39-11789 (65
FR 37853, June 19, 2000). The NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2012-0138, dated July 26, 2012 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    Full fatigue tests carried out by the manufacturer revealed
crack initiation from the bolts holes at inboard and outboard of rib
9, on the front and rear spar bottom booms. Similar cracks at the
same area were reported by A300-600 aeroplane operators.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this unsafe condition, [Direction
G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile] DGAC France issued AD
94-208-169(B)R2 (http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/19942082tb_superseded.pdf/AD_F-1994-208-169R2_2) [which corresponds to FAA AD
95-07-05, Amendment 39-9187 (60 FR 17990, April 10, 1995)] to
require an ultrasonic inspection of holes inboard and outboard of
rib 9 on the front and rear spar bottom booms on Left Hand and Right
Hand wings.
    Since that [DGAC] AD was issued, a fleet survey and updated
Fatigue and Damage

Tolerance analysis have been performed in order to substantiate the
second A300-600 Extended Service Goal (ESG2) exercise. The results
of these analyses have shown that the risk for these aeroplanes is
higher than initially determined and that, consequently, the
inspection threshold and interval must be reduced to allow timely
detection of cracks and the accomplishment of an applicable
corrective action [and related investigative action].
    For the reasons explained above, this new [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of DGAC France AD 94-208-169(B)R2, which is superseded,
and requires the accomplishment instructions within the new
thresholds and intervals specified in Revision 04 of Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin (SB) A300-57-6037 [dated February 24,
2011].

The related investigative action includes doing inspections for
cracking. The corrective actions include oversizing holes and
installing new fasteners, and for certain conditions, contacting the
FAA or EASA (or its delegated agent) for instructions. You may examine
the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013-0539-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (78 FR 40069, July 3,
2013) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed--except for
minor editorial changes and re-formatting of the estimates cost data.
The estimated cost data has not been changed. We have determined that
these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (78 FR 40069, July 3, 2013) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 40069, July 3, 2013).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 29 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                    Labor cost         Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection [new action].........  18 work-hours x $85              $0   $1,530 [per          $44,370 [per
                                   per hour = $1,530                     inspection cycle].   inspection cycle].
                                   [per inspection
                                   cycle].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition work-hours specified in this AD.
The on-condition parts cost estimate is $2,874.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-0539; or in person at the
Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the
MCAI, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2000-12-11, Amendment 39-11789 (65 FR 37853, June 19, 2000), and adding
the following new AD:

2013-20-10 Airbus: Amendment 39-17616. Docket No. FAA-2013-0539;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-145-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective December 2,
2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2000-12-11, Amendment 39-11789 (65 FR
37853, June 19, 2000).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, B4-
622, B4-605R, and B4-622R airplanes; certificated in any category;
all manufacturer serial numbers, except airplanes on which Airbus
Modification 10161 has been incorporated in production.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a fleet survey and an updated fatigue
and damage tolerance analysis indicating a high risk for fatigue
cracking on the front and rear spar bottom booms. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the bolt holes of
the wing spars, which could result in reduced structural integrity
of a wing spar.

(f) Compliance

    You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD
performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions
have already been done.

(g) Repetitive Inspections

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2)
of this AD: Perform an ultrasonic inspection to detect fatigue
cracking of the bolt holes inboard and outboard of rib 9 on the
bottom booms of the front and rear wing spars, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instruction of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A300-57-6037, Revision 04, dated February 24, 2011, except as
specified in paragraph (k) of this AD. Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed the applicable time specified
in paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (1) For normal range airplanes, at the later of the times in
paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Within 14,100 flight cycles or 30,400 flight hours since
airplane first flight or within 14,100 flight cycles or 30,400
flight hours since airplane modification done as specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6039
(which is not incorporated by reference in this AD), whichever
occurs first.
    (ii) Within 1,600 flight cycles or 3,400 flight hours, whichever
occurs first after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For short range airplanes, at the later of the times in
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Within 15,200 flight cycles or 22,800 flight hours since
airplane first flight, or since airplane modification done as
specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-57-6039 (which is not incorporated by reference in
this AD), whichever occurs first.
    (ii) Within 1,700 flight cycles or 2,500 flight hours, whichever
occurs first after the effective date of this AD.

(h) Repetitive Inspection Compliance Times

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2)
of this AD, repeat the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this
AD.
    (1) For normal range airplanes: Repeat the inspection thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 3,900 flight cycles or 8,400 flight
hours, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For short range airplanes: Repeat the inspection thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 4,200 flight cycles or 6,300 flight
hours, whichever occurs first.

(i) Corrective Action for Cracking

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, repair the cracking
including applicable related investigative and corrective actions,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-57-6037, Revision 04, dated February
24, 2011, except as specified in paragraph (k) of this AD. Do
related investigative and corrective actions before further flight.
Thereafter, repeat the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this
AD at intervals not to exceed the applicable time specified in
paragraph (h) of this AD. Corrective actions required by this
paragraph do not constitute terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD.

(j) Definition of Short Range and Long Range Airplanes

    For purposes of this AD, short range airplanes are those with an
average flight time lower than 1.5 flight hours, and normal range
airplanes are those with an average flight time equal to or higher
than 1.5 flight hours.

(k) Exception to Service Information

    Where the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory
Service Bulletin A300-57-6037, Revision 04, dated February 24, 2011,
specify contacting Airbus for an approved repair: Before further
flight, contact either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, or the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) (or its delegated agent), for instructions and do
those instructions.

(l) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using any of the service
bulletins specified in paragraphs (l)(1) through (l)(4) of this AD.
    (1) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-57-6037, dated August
1, 1994, which was incorporated by reference in AD 2000-12-11,
Amendment 39-11789 (65 FR 37853, June 19, 2000).
    (2) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-57-6037, Revision 01,
dated August 31, 1995, which was incorporated by reference in AD
2000-12-11, Amendment 39-11789 (65 FR 37853, June 19, 2000).
    (3) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-57-6037, Revision 02,
dated January 9, 2001, which is not incorporated by reference in
this AD.
    (4) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-57-6037, Revision 03,
dated January 11, 2002, which is not incorporated by reference in
this AD.

(m) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) AMOCs Approved Previously: AMOCs approved previously in
accordance with AD 2000-12-11, Amendment 39-11789 (65 FR 37853, June
19, 2000), are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of
this AD.

(n) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2012-0138, dated July 26, 2012, for related
information. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013-
0539-0002.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference may be obtained at the addresses specified
in paragraphs (o)(4) and (o)(5) of this AD.

(o) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
December 2, 2013.
    (i) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-57-6037, Revision 04,
dated February 24, 2011.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (4) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61

93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (6) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 18, 2013.
Ross Landes,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-25295 Filed 10-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


3M General Offices 3M Center St. Paul, MN 551444000 651 733 1110 31V1 March 13, 2003 Stephen L. Johnson Assistant Administrator Office Of Prevention, Pesticides And Toxic Substances United States Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20004 Re: Environmental, Health And Safety Measures Relating To Pertluorooctanoic Acid And Its Salts ( PFOA)

Dear Assistant Administrator Johnson:

3M Company ( 3M) understands that your office has been evaluating perfluorooctanoic acid and its salts (` PFOA"), which are perfluorinated, 8 carbon carboxylate surfactants used primarily as fluorinated polymerization aids ( FPAs) in the manufacture of fluoropolymers.' This letter confirms 3M's intent to continue ongoing environmental, health and safety ( EHS) measures relating to PFOA. In particular, this letter documents past EHS measures by 3M to characterize exposure to PFOA; to conduct health and environmental fate and effects research for PFOA; and to reduce PFOA exposure through a production phase out and other measures. This letter also summarizes 3M's plans for ongoing and future EHS measures to develop additional data characterizing exposure to PFOA; to continue to monitor possible PFOA presence in the environment near 3M's former manufacturing facilities; to characterize possible PFOA exposure pathways from 3M's former manufacturing and commercial activities; and to fund additional health and environmental fate and effects research for PFOA.

I. PERTINENT BACKGROUND 3M production records reflect that PFOA was produced at various facilities from 1969 to 2002 using electrochemical fluorination ( ECF) technology. Between 1992 and 2002, 3M's total PFOA production averaged 250,000 pounds per year.

Chemical Name: Perfluorooctanoic Acid ( FFOA). Molecular formula: C3 H F15 02. CAS Number: Various, including: 335 67 1 ( free acid); 3825 26 1 ( ammonium salt); 335 95 5 ( sodium salt); and 2395 00 8 ( potassium salt). The perfluorooctanoate anion has no specific cAS number. Stephen L. Johnson March 23, 2003 Page 2 Approximately 97 percent of the PFOA produced by 3M was used by its industrial customers and in its own processes as a fluoropolymer processing aid. The remaining 3 percent totaled roughly 8,000 pounds per year and was used in a medical film coating application and in electronics applications involving printed circuit boards and precision bearings.

Between 1998 and 2002, 3M submitted to EPA serum analyses of the U. S. population and certain U. S. population subgroups. These analyses indicated the presence in individual and pooled human serum samples of the PFOA anion at very low mean levels of 4 6 parts per billion ( ppb). Wildlife sampling also occurred during this period and indicated the presence of the PFOA anion only in limited circumstances.

Toxicological and epidemiology studies on PFOA have been sponsored by 3M as well as other members of industry addressing a range of health end points. These studies are available to the public along with other information through a public docket maintained by EPA OPPTS  AR 226.

3M does not believe that the PFOA levels measured in workers, the U. S. population or the environment cause adverse effects in humans, but is acting on a voluntary basis to develop additional PFOA health and environmental fate and effects data; to provide additional characterization of potential PFOA routes of exposure; and to agree to undertake additional measures to reduce or prevent PFOA exposure whenever practicable. The details ofthese EHS commitments by 3M are described in Section II. below.

II. EHS COMMITMENTS BY 3M A. Past 3M EHS Measures For PFOA Over the years, 3M has undertaken a wide range of measures to assess the exposure and toxicological profile of PFOA. The elements below describe 3M's major past actions, but are not an exhaustive list of 3M's past EHS measures.

1. 3M has monitored the health of fluorochemical production workers dating back to 1978. More recently, this monitoring program has involved periodically measuring PFOA levels in serum, tracking clinical chemistries and communicating with workers regarding these results; undertaking industrial hygiene measures to monitor and reduce workplace exposures; and conducting medical surveillance, epidemiological and other forms of pertinent study.

2. 3M has both engaged in and supported toxicological research to address whether PFOA has the potential to cause any health effects for a range of endpoints including developmental toxicity, mutagenicity, chronic toxicity, reproductive effects and cancer. These data are available to the public, along with other information, through the EPA maintained OPPTS AR 226 docket. Stephen L. Johnson Merch 13,2003 Page 3 3. 3M has performed extensive analytical work to determine PFOA exposure levels in the U. S. population and the environment. For this work, 3M engaged in state of the art methods development and refinement to lower limits of detection and quantification. 3M also qualified independent laboratories to apply these methods. Analyses were performed of pooled blood samples from U. S. blood banks as well as of individual blood samples from various population subgroups. A study also examined liver tissue. With respect to environmental monitoring, 3M conducted monitoring in the vicinity of its now former PFOA production facilities; analyzed serum and liver samples from fish, birds and other wildlife for the presence of PFOA; and sponsored a Multi City Study in which a variety of environmental compartments were analyzed. These data also are available to the public through the OPPTS AR 226 docket.

4. Over the years, 3M also has undertaken steps to limit PFOA exposures in the workplace. These steps have included implementation of industrial hygiene controls at 3M fluorochemical production facilities, including adoption of exposure guidelines. 3M also has taken various actions to reduce environmental releases of PFOA at these facilities, including capture and incineration of PFOAcontaining waste streams and the implementation in 1998 of activated carbon systems to improve the removal of PFOA from wastewaters.

5. In 1997, 3M obtained new analytical data on PFOA and periluorooctane sulfonate ( PFOS) serum levels in the general population and promptly shared these data with EPA. Thereafter, 3M shared additional data and exposure information with EPA on perfluorooctanyl chemicals, including PFOA, and cooperated with EPA in evaluating hazard and exposure issues associated with these chemicals.

6. Subsequent to obtaining the new analytical data on PFOA and PFOS serum levels in the general population, 3M decided to phase out its perIluorooctanyl chemistry substantially by the end of 2000. This phase out included terminatin9 all PFOA production for commercial sale by the end of 2002. 3M's Dyneon subsidiary2 continues to manufacture small quantities of PFOA at its facility in Gendorf, Germany for its own internal use as a fluoropolymer manufacturing aid at its two facilities. In this connection, Dyneon has made process changes that reduce the quantity of PFOA required and has developed a " capture for recycle" technology that reduces the need for new PFOA. As described in Section Il. C. 6. below, Dyneon will be engaging in its own EHS measures in connection with this limited production and use, including further reduction of PFOA use.

2 Dyneon engages in the manufacture of fluoropolymers and fluoroelastomers and operatestwo facilities  one in the United States and one in Germany. Formerly a joint venture between 3M and Hoechst AG, Dyneon now is a wholly owned subsidiary of 3M. Stephen L. Johnson March 13, 2003 Page 4 B. Characterization Of Other Potential Routes Of Exposure A qualitative discussion more fully characterizing possible exposure routes related to non fluoropolymer PFOA uses and discontinued perfluorooctanesulfonyl fluoride ( POSF) based products follows below. This discussion reflects two key points: ( i) 3M's commercial PFOA production for non fluoropolymer uses occurred on a limited basis at a level of only 8000 pounds per year for medical film and electronics applications with low exposure potential; and ( ii) POSF based products did not likely pcov~ dea route of measurab~ ePFOA exposure.

1. Production Of PFOA For Non Fluoropolvmer Uses 3M produced limited quantities of PFOA  approximately 8,000 pounds per year in recent years  for non fluoropolymer uses. The principal non fluoropolymer use occurred in a medical film application where PFOA served as an antistatic additive in coatings sandwiched between multi layer medical films. No consumer or medical patient exposure would be expected from this application. Worker exposure should have been minimal given that the PFOA sold for this application in recent years was in a 30 percent aqueous solution and the MSDS advised protective measures during handling and use.

A small amount of PFOA  less than 500 pounds per year was derivatized as an ester to form a methacrylate co polymer coating used in electronics applications to provide a humidity barrier on printed circuit boards and to secure silicone oil on precision bearings, for example, in gyroscopes and telecommunications switching stations. These applications involved PFOA derivatized into a stable polymer, making PFOA exposure to workers, the consumer or the environment highly unlikely.

2. Transformation Of POSF Based Substances 3M has submitted two biodegradation studies to EPA on N Et FOSE alcohol. 3 N Et FOSE alcohol was both a building block intermediate used in the production of many POSF based products and one of the prevalent fluorochemical residuals found in POSF based products. The biodegredation studies were performed in accordance with EPA OPPTS Guidelines at 40 C. F. R. 835.3200   3210 &  5045. Both studies indicate that PFOS would be generated through the biotic degradation of N Et FOSE alcohol, but that PFOA could be formed instead of PFOS only under an abiotic or hydrolytic condition during the last step of the degradation pathway. The diagram below depicts the degradation pathway indicated by these studies.

3M E01 0415 dated February 23, 2001; 3M E0O 2252 dated October 1,2000, available in OPPTS AR 226 docket. Stephen L. Johnson March 13, 2003 Page 5 N Et FOSE Alcohol Biodegradation Pathway N ETFOSE ALCOHOL ( STARTING SUBSTANCE)

+

N ETFOSE ALDEHYDE + N ETFOSAA 4 N ETFOSA N( 2) HYDROXYETHYL PERFLU ROOCTANE SULFONAMIDE 4 PERFLUOR000TANE SULFONAMIDE ACETALDEHYDE 4 M556 + FOSA 4 PFOSulfinate Biotic Mechanism/ PFOS Only Under \~ iot1c Conditions PFOA Stephen L. Johnson March 13, 2003 Page 6 As the diagram depicts, these studies indicate that under biotic conditions, the N Et FOSE alcohol will follow a stepwise degradation pathway that results in PFOS as the ultimate degradation product. Prior to the final degradation step to PFOS, the penultimate intermediate degradation step involves degradation to a compound known as periluorooctane sulfinate. The protocol for these studies requires a degradation control test to be run under abiotic conditions for each step in the pathway. In this control test, the perfluorooctane sulfinate did show some degradation to PFOA. My such degradation to PFOA, however, did not occur under biotic conditions, but instead only in the abiotic control test mode and only during the last step.

Several factors indicate that PFOA is not the expected biological degradation end product of the other fluorochemical residuals present in POSF based products. First, while some degree of abiotic degradation can occur in a biotic system, the particular biodegradation pathway described above suggests that PFOS formation would be the expected degradation route. Hence, even if the other fluorochemical residuals present in POSF based products were absorbed by humans or wildlife, PFOA is unlikely to be formed as a metabolite. Second, to the extent PFOA could be formed in an abiotic environmental compartment, no PFOA uptake from that compartmentwould be expected because, as studies have shown, PFOA does not bioconcentrate. 4 Third, in the highly specialized and limited circumstances where PFOA could form and transfer from an abiotic environmental compartment to water, the PFOA should be immediately diluted due to its water solubility (> 100,000 mg/ L or 10 percent by weight for ammoniurn perfluorooctanoate), 5 and hence, should remain present in the water, if at all, at miniscule levels. Finally, although studies have been done only on the N Et FOSE alcohol, this degradation pathway should be representative of the other major building blocks for POSF based products. 6 3. PFOA As An Impurity In POSF Based Products 3M analytical studies of eight POSF based product samples have identified the presence of PFOA at very low concentrations ranging from 200 1600 ppm as a manufacturing impurity. Based on 1997 production information, the estimated See Kurume Laboratory, 2001. Bioaccumulation Test of Perfluoroalkylcarboxylic acid ( c= 7 1 3), Test No. 51519., chemicals Evaluation and Research Institute, Japan ( Dec. 18, 2001), at 1 26 ( the carp exposed to 5 * gIL resulted in a BCF of 3.1, while carp exposed to 50 * gIL showed a BCF of < 5.1 9.1); see also Revised Draft Hazard Assessment Of Perfluorooctanoic Acid And Its Salts, U. S. EPA ( Nov. 4,2002), at 1, 14.

See characterization Study of PFOA( Lot # 332) Primary Standard   Test control Reference # TCR 99030 030 Phase: Solubility Determination, available in OPPTS Docket AR 226.

6 The N Et FOSE alcohol served as the key building block for the vast majority of 3M's POSFbased products. The other key alcohol building block, N Me FOSE alcohol, would be expected to have a comparable degradation pathway due to its structural similarity to the N Et FOSEalcohol. Moreover, N Et FOSE alcohol was a precursor to the other key building block compounds for 3M's POSF based products, and hence, degradation pathways for these building blocks already are captured by the N Et FOSE alcohol degradation studies. Stephen L. Johnson March 13,2003 page 1 annual levels of PFOA residual present in POSF based products would not have exceeded 6000 pounds. Nearly 95 percent of POSF based products  and hence nearly all of the 6000 annual pounds of PFOA residual present in such products   were commercialized into industrial applications. 7 A number of these applications involved use of high molecular weight polymers or other formulated POSF based products for surface treatment of carpets and fabrics or for coating on paper and packaging. Due to the nature of these applications, only a minute amount of the PFOA residual, at most, would have ended up in the finished article. Moreover, a number of the industrial applications br POSF based products involved the use of aqueous washing or finishing steps. In view of PFOA's water solubility, a washing or finishing step most likely removed the very small amount of PFOA residual present in such product. Any industrial release of PFOA residual into the environment from these sources would likely have resulted in extremely low concentrations in localized aquatic systems and would not have provided a source of measurable PFOA exposure.

C. Future EElS Measures In addition to the PFOA production phase out and the numerous other measures undertaken to date as detailed above, 3M plans to engage in ongoing and future EHS measures itemized below. 3M plans to undertake these measures in an expeditious manner and may undertake additional EHS measures not described in this letter, as warranted, under 3M's existing safety, health and environmental programs.

1. 3M will not resume the manufacture of PFOP.. for comiwerdat sale.

2. 3M will continue with its medical monitoring efforts for fluorochemical production workers and will provide reports to EPA on a bi annual basis on the results of this program. These efforts will continue to include monitoring for the presence of PFOA. In addition, 3M will continue to track the mortality experience of the fluorochemical production worker cohort and will submit updated epidemiologicâl study reports to EPA every five years.

3. 3M will continue to monitor in the vicinity of its former PFOA production facilities. This monitoring will include groundwater, surface water and other environmental media and will be part of ongoing requirements and/ or voluntary commitments established with local regulatory agencies. 3M will provide an initial summary report to EPA for this monitoring within two years of the date ofthis letter and periodic additional reports at appropriate intervals thereafter.

4. 3M will work with other members of industry to conduct additional validation of the PFOA serum analytical method and sampling protocol; publish the analytical method in a peer reviewed journal; and continue to qualify independent See Fluorochemical Use, Distribution Arid Release Overview ( May 26, 1999), available in OPPTS Docket AR 226. Stephen L. Johnson March 13, 2003 Page 8 laboratories to perform the validated method. 3M will support the efforts of the Centers For Disease Control ( CDC) and EPA to develop a more complete understanding of the PFOA levels present in the general population and the environment. 3M will continue to assess the appropriateness of undertaking additional research and other actions in coordination with CDC and EPA.

5. 3M will participate in certain human health and environmental fate and effects studies of PFOA. These studies will occur under the auspices of the Association of Plastics Manufacturers of Europe ( APME) and will include the following: ( i) chronic toxicity in daphnia; ( ii) chronic toxicity in trout; ( iii) ADE mass balance in rats; ( iv) protein binding  rat/ human; ( v) physiologically based kinetic modeling; ( vi) adsorption/ desorption studies; ( vii) acute toxicity in daphnia; ( viii) acute toxicity in trout; ( ix) algal growth; and ( x) mechanistic studies of pancreatic tumor induction in rats. The results of these studies, and any additional studies, will be promptly communicated to EPA in the form of final reports. The industry participants will consult with EPA on what additional studies would be beneficial.

6. As discussed above, Dyneon will continue to produce small amounts of PFOA for internal use and will continue to use PFOA in fluoropolymer production. In connection with this production and use, Dyneon will engage in various EHS measures, including:

a. Dyneon will continue to reduce further the now small use at its facility in the United States of PFOA imported from Dyneon's Gendorf, Germany facility.

b. Dyneon has developed and is using a " capture for recycle' technology for PFOA and has made that technology available for license by other PFOA users. This technology, which allows for a recapture and reuse of PFOA, has and will continue to result in a significant reduction of PFOA emissions and production demands for Dyneon.

c. Dyneon's employees in the United States will continue to be part of the 3M program for medical monitoring of fluorochemical production workers and will be included in the above referenced reports to be submitted by 3M on the results of this program. This program will continue to include monitoring for the presence of PFOA. Dyneon's employees at the Gendorf, Germany facility have been and will continue to be subject to an equivalent program that follows 3M's monitoring protocols.

d. Dyneon's fluoropolymer manufacturing facility in the United States will continue to be part of the above referenced 3M environmental monitoring program. This monitoring will include groundwater, surface water and other environmental media and will be part of ongoing requirements and/ or voluntary commitments established with local regulatory agencies. Periodic reporting of the results of this monitoring program will begin within two years from the date of this letter and occur at appropriate intervals thereafter. Stephen L. Johnson March 13, 2003 Page 9 e. Dyneon will commit, as a signatory to the separate letter of intent among PFOA users in the fluoropolymer industry, to perform the exposure assessment and testing specified therein.

In connection with the foregoing EHS measures, 3M recognizes the importance of EPA's recently issued guidelines pursuant to the Data Quality Act. 8 We will continue  as we have in the past  to employ scientific practices, protocols and procedures designed to ensure that data meeting reasonably appropriatwbenctimarksfor objectivity, utility and integrity are developed and provided to the Agency.

* * *

3M appreciates this opportunity to memorialize our prior, ongoing and future EHS measures for PFOA. We look forward tp dialogue with EPA regarding the content of this letter.

Very truly yours,

Dr. Larry Wbndling Vice President Performance Materials Division 3M Company cc: Charles Auer, Director Office Of Pollution Prevention And Toxics DC\ 571981.4 See Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by the Environmental Protection Agency; Public Law 106.554itR. 5658, § 515( a) ( 2001); Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies, 0MB, 67 Fed. Reg. 8452° f2 002); sse also EPA Order 5360.1A2 ` Policy And Program Requirements For Agency Wide Quality System" ( May 5, 2000); EPA Quality Manual For Environmental Programs, 5360A1 ( May 5, 2000).


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 9 (Thursday, January 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1983-1984]
[FR Doc No: 2016-00620]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee--Public
Teleconference

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee
Teleconference.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given of a
teleconference of the Commercial Space Transportation

Advisory Committee (COMSTAC). The Teleconference will take place on
Wednesday, January 27, 2016 starting at 3:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time
and will last approximately one hour. The agenda and call-in number
will be posted at least one week in advance at http://www.faa.gov/go/ast.
    The purpose of this teleconference is to review the International
Space Policy Working Group findings and recommendations regarding a
potential modification of current U.S. policy on the launching of U.S.
technology on Indian launch vehicles.
    Interested members of the public may submit relevant written
statements for the COMSTAC members to consider under the advisory
process. Statements may concern the issues and agenda items mentioned
above and/or additional issues that may be relevant for the U.S.
commercial space transportation industry. Interested parties wishing to
submit written statements should contact Michael Beavin, COMSTAC
Executive Director, (the Contact Person listed below) in writing (mail
or email) by January 22, 2016, so that the information can be made
available to COMSTAC members for their review and consideration before
the January 27 teleconference. Written statements should be supplied in
the following formats: One hard copy with original signature and/or one
electronic copy via email.
    An agenda will be posted on the FAA Web site at www.faa.gov/go/ast.
    Individuals who plan to participate and need special assistance
should inform the Contact Persons listed below in advance of the
meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Michael Beavin, telephone (202) 267-
9051; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>FAA Office of Commercial Space
Transportation (AST-3), 800 Independence Avenue SW., Room 331,
Washington, DC 20591.
    Complete information regarding COMSTAC is available on the FAA Web
site at: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/advisory_committee/.

     Issued in Washington, DC, January 8, 2016.
George C. Nield,
Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2016-00620 Filed 1-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 20, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64405-64414]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22064]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 541

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0073]

Preliminary Theft Data; Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard

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

ACTION: Publication of preliminary theft data; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This document requests comments on data about passenger motor
vehicle thefts that occurred in calendar year (CY) 2014, including
theft rates for existing passenger motor vehicle lines manufactured in
model year (MY) 2014. The preliminary theft data indicate that the
vehicle theft rate for MY/CY 2014 vehicles (1.1525 thefts per thousand
vehicles) decreased by 0.32 percent from the theft rate for MY/CY 2013
vehicles (1.1562 thefts per thousand vehicles).
    Publication of these data fulfills NHTSA's statutory obligation to
periodically obtain accurate and timely theft data, and publish the
information for review and comment.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 21, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Docket No. NHTSA-2016-
0073 by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., NRM-310, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck's
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NHTSA administers a program for reducing
motor vehicle theft. The central feature of this program is the Federal
Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, 49 CFR part 541. The standard
specifies performance requirements for inscribing or affixing vehicle
identification numbers (VINs) onto certain major original equipment and
replacement parts of high-theft lines of passenger motor vehicles.
    NHTSA obtains, from the most reliable source, accurate and timely
theft data, and publishes the data for review and comment in accordance
with 49 U.S.C. 33104(b)(4). This document reports the preliminary theft
data for CY 2014, the most recent calendar year for which data are
available.
    In calculating the 2014 theft rates, NHTSA followed the same
procedures it has used since publication of the MY/CY 1983/1984 theft
rate data (50 FR 46669, November 12, 1985). The MY/CY 2014 theft rate
for each vehicle line was calculated by dividing the number of reported
thefts of MY 2014 vehicles of that line stolen during calendar year
2014 by the total number of vehicles in that line manufactured for MY
2014, as reported to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As in
all previous reports, NHTSA's data were based on information provided
to NHTSA by the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation. The NCIC is a government system that receives
vehicle theft information from approximately 23,000 criminal justice
agencies and other law enforcement authorities throughout the United
States. The NCIC data also include reported thefts of self-insured and
uninsured vehicles, not all of which are reported to other data
sources.
    The preliminary MY/CY 2014 theft data show a decrease in the
vehicle theft rate when compared to the theft rate experienced in MY/CY
2013 (For 2013 theft data, see 80 FR 72929 November 23, 2015). The
preliminary theft rate for MY 2014 passenger vehicles stolen in
calendar year 2014 decreased to 1.1525 thefts per thousand vehicles
produced, a decrease of 0.32 percent from the rate of 1.1562 thefts per
thousand vehicles experienced by MY 2013 vehicles stolen in CY 2013.
For MY 2014 vehicles, out of a total of 236 vehicle lines, five lines
had a theft rate higher than 3.5826 per thousand vehicles, the median
theft rate established for MYs 1990/1991 (See 59 FR 12400, March 16,
1994). Of the five vehicle lines with a theft rate higher than 3.5826,
four are passenger car lines, one is a multipurpose passenger vehicle
line, and none are light-duty truck lines.
    The data presented in this publication reflect a slight decrease in
the overall vehicle theft rate for MY/CY 2014 which is consistent with
the general theft rate trend over the past several years.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE16.028

    In Table I, NHTSA has tentatively ranked each of the MY 2014
vehicle lines in descending order of theft rate. Public comment is
sought on the accuracy of the data, including the data for the
production volumes of individual vehicle lines.
    Comments must not exceed 15 pages in length (49 CFR 553.21).
Attachments may be appended to these submissions without regard to the
15 page limit. This limitation is intended to encourage commenters to
detail their primary arguments in a concise fashion.
    If a commenter wishes to submit certain information under a claim
of confidentiality, three copies of the complete submission, including
purportedly confidential business information, should be submitted to
the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the street address given in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and two copies from which the
purportedly confidential information has been deleted should be
submitted to the docket. A request for confidentiality should be
accompanied by a cover letter setting forth the information specified
in the agency's confidential business information regulation. 49 CFR
part 512.
    All comments received before the close of business on the comment
closing date indicated above for this document will be considered, and
will be available for examination in the docket at the above address
both before and after that date. To the extent possible, comments filed
after the closing date will also be considered. Comments on this
document will be available for inspection in the docket. NHTSA will
continue to file relevant information as it becomes available for
inspection in the docket after the closing date, and it is recommended
that interested persons continue to examine the docket for new
material.
    Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their
comments in the rules docket should enclose a self-addressed, stamped
postcard in the envelope with their comments. Upon receiving the
comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE16.029

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE16.030

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE16.031

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE16.032

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE16.033

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE16.034

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE16.035

    Issued in Washington, DC, September 8, 2016 under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.95.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2016-22064 Filed 9-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-C