[Federal Register: March 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 48)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 12888-12889]
[DOCID:fr11mr08-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[USCG-2008-0113]
RIN 1625-AA-09

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Intracoastal Waterway (ICW);
Beach Thorofare, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District, has approved a
temporary deviation from the regulations governing the operation of the
Margate Bridge, at ICW mile 74.0, across Beach Thorofare at Margate,
New Jersey. This deviation is necessary to make emergency structural
steel repairs.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on March 1, 2008, to
11:59 p.m. on May 1, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Materials referred to in this document are available for
inspection or

copying at Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal
Building, 1st Floor, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704-5004
between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Commander (dpb),
Fifth Coast Guard District maintains the public docket for this
temporary deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Sandra S. Elliott, Bridge
Management Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The subcontractor on behalf of the Margate
Bridge Company, who owns and operates this double-leaf bascule
drawbridge, has requested a temporary deviation from the current
operating regulations set out in 33 CFR 117.5 that requires the bridge
to open promptly and fully for the passage of vessels when a request to
open is given.
    Margate Bridge has a vertical clearance in the closed position to
vessels of 14 feet above mean high water (MHW).
    Under this temporary deviation, the drawbridge will provide partial
openings of the lift spans for vessels. The emergency structural steel
repairs require immobilizing half of the draw span to single-leaf
operation each day, beginning 7 a.m. on Saturday, March 1, 2008, until
and including 11:59 p.m. Thursday, May 1, 2008, with a work barge
occupying one-half of the 58-foot wide channel under the bridge, so
passage through the bridge will be limited to a 29-foot width for the
duration of the project. The opposite connecting span while not under
repair will continue to open for vessels if at least a half-hour
advance notice is given to the bridge tender at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via
marine radio on channel 13 VHF. Also, mariners requiring the full
opening of the lift spans or the full width of the channel under the
bridge will be directed to use the Atlantic Ocean as the alternate
route between Absecon and Great Egg Harbor Inlets.
    The Coast Guard will inform the users of the waterway through our
Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the partial openings of the
draw span to minimize transiting delays caused by the temporary
deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: February 26, 2008.
Waverly W. Gregory, Jr.,
Chief, Bridge Administration Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E8-4813 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 138 (Monday, July 20, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42708-42710]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17709]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2015-2219; Airspace Docket No. 15-AWA-5]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class B Airspace; New Orleans, LA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule, technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class B airspace at the Louis Armstrong New
Orleans International Airport, New Orleans, LA, by removing reference
to the Instrument Landing System (ILS) Runway 10 Outer Compass Locator
(LOM) from the text header information and surface area (Area A)
description and replacing it in the Area A description with the
geographic latitude/longitude coordinates of the LOM. This change is
necessary due to the planned decommissioning of the LOM navigation aid.
The Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport and New Orleans
Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base (Alvin Callender Field) airport
names and airport reference point (ARP) geographic coordinates are also
updated. The St. Charles and Lakefront airports, used in the Class B
description, are added in the legal description text header
information, as well as, the Harvey VHF Omnidirectional Range/Tactical
Air Navigation (VORTAC) navigation aid. Lastly, general editing of the
legal description is accomplished to improve clarity. These changes are
editorial only to match existing FAA aeronautical database information
and do not alter the current charted boundaries or altitudes or the ATC
procedures for the New Orleans Class B airspace area.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, November 12, 2015. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual

revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.9Y, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. The Order is also available for
inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call
(202) 741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15. For further
information, you can contact the Airspace Policy and Regulations Group,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy and
Regulations Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends the Class B airspace at the Louis Armstrong New Orleans
International Airport, New Orleans, LA.

History

    The New Orleans Class B airspace area was established as a Terminal
Control Area (TCA) on July 17, 1975 (40 FR 20269, May 9, 1975). In
1993, as part of the Airspace Reclassification Final Rule (56 FR 65638,
December 17, 1991), the term ``terminal control area'' was replace by
``Class B airspace area.'' Because there was no VHF Omnidirectional
Range (VOR) navigation aid located on the Louis Armstrong New Orleans
International Airport (formerly New Orleans International Airport-
Moisant Field), the Class B airspace area was designed using the ARP
latitude/longitude coordinates as the center point. When established,
the surface area (Area A) included an extension, described using an arc
around the ILS Runway 10 LOM. In October 2015, the ILS Runway 10 LOM is
being decommissioned because it cannot be cost-effectively maintained
any longer. To retain the existing charted boundaries of the New
Orleans Class B airspace surface area, the FAA is using the geographic
latitude/longitude coordinates of the ILS Runway 10 LOM being
decommissioned to describe the Class B airspace Area A extension. All
references to the LOM in the New Orleans Class B airspace description
are being removed and reference to the LOM in the Area A description is
being replaced by a point using the geographic latitude/longitude
coordinates of the ILS Runway 10 LOM.
    In preparation of updating the New Orleans Class B airspace
description, the FAA reviewed the aeronautical database and determined
that the New Orleans International Airport-Moisant Field name had
changed to the Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport, the
NAS New Orleans-Alvin Callender Field name had changed to the New
Orleans Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base (Alvin Callender Field),
and the respective ARP geographic coordinates for both had also
changed. Further, the Class B airspace area legal description used the
St. Charles and Lakefront airports in the Area C and Area D
descriptions, respectively, and the Harvey VORTAC in the Area C
description, but the airports and VORTAC information was omitted from
the Class B description text header. This action makes the required
edits above. Lastly, the descriptions have been edited to eliminate
confusing wording and improve clarity.
    The FAA is taking this action so that the current boundaries of the
New Orleans Class B airspace area are not affected by the
decommissioning of the ILS Runway 10 LOM.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Y, airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2014, and effective September 15,
2014. FAA Order 7400.9Y is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this final rule. FAA Order 7400.9Y lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points

The Rule

    The FAA is amending Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) part 71 by amending the New Orleans Class B airspace legal
description for the Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport,
New Orleans, LA. This action removes all references to the ``ILS Runway
10 Outer Compass Locator'' and replaces it in the Area A description
with a point located at the same latitude/longitude geographic
coordinates of the LOM. This rule updates the New Orleans International
Airport-Moisant Field name to the Louis Armstrong New Orleans
International Airport, and the ARP Geographic coordinates from ``lat.
29[deg]59'36'' N., long. 90[deg]15'28'' W.'' to ``lat. 29[deg]59'36''
N., long. 90[deg]15'33'' W.'' Additionally, it updates the NAS New
Orleans-Alvin Callender Field name to New Orleans Naval Air Station
Joint Reserve Base (Alvin Callender Field), and the ARP geographic
coordinates from ``lat. 29[deg]49'31'' N., long. 90[deg]02'06'' W.'' to
``lat. 29[deg]49'38'' N., long. 90[deg]01'36'' W.'' This action also
adds the St. Charles and Lakefront Airports and their associated ARP
geographic coordinates, as well as the Harvey VORTAC and its geographic
coordinates to the legal description text header information. Lastly,
the Class B airspace description is edited to remove confusing wording
and improve clarity.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    Since this action merely involves editorial changes in the legal
description of the New Orleans Class B airspace area, and does not
involve a change in the boundaries or altitudes or operating
requirements of that airspace, notice and public procedure under 5
U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with 311a, FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures.'' This airspace action is an editorial change only and is
not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental
impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant
preparation of an environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120, E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Y,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2014, and
effective September 15, 2014, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 3000 Subpart B--Class B Airspace.

* * * * *

ASW LA B New Orleans, LA

Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport (Primary Airport)
    (Lat. 29[deg]59'36'' N., long. 90[deg]15'33'' W.)
New Orleans Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base (Alvin Callender
Field), LA
    (Lat. 29[deg]49'38'' N., long. 90[deg]01'36'' W.)
Ama, St. Charles Airport, LA (pvt)
    (Lat. 29[deg]57'07'' N., long. 90[deg]17'10'' W.)
New Orleans, Lakefront Airport, LA
    (Lat. 30[deg]02'33'' N., long. 90[deg]01'42'' W.)
Harvey VORTAC
    (Lat. 29[deg]51'01'' N., long. 90[deg]00'11'' W.)
    Boundaries.

    Area A. That airspace extending upward from the surface to and
including 7,000 feet MSL within a 7-mile radius of the Louis
Armstrong New Orleans International Airport and within a 1.5-mile
radius of a point located at lat. 30[deg]01'31'' N., long.
90[deg]24'00'' W., excluding that airspace north of the south shore
of Lake Pontchartrain, that airspace within and underlying Area C
described hereinafter, and that airspace 0.5 mile either side of a
line extending from lat. 30[deg]01'10'' N., long. 90[deg]07'47'' W.
to lat. 29[deg]59'31'' N., long. 90[deg]15'37'' W. to lat.
30[deg]03'37'' N., long. 90[deg]22'10'' W.
    Area B. That airspace extending upward from 600 feet MSL to and
including 7,000 feet MSL north of the south shore of Lake
Pontchartrain within a 7-mile radius of the Louis Armstrong New
Orleans International Airport, excluding that airspace 0.5 mile
either side of a line extending from lat. 30[deg]01'10'' N., long.
90[deg]07'47'' W. to lat. 29[deg]59'31'' N., long. 90[deg]15'37'' W.
to lat. 30[deg]03'37'' N., long. 90[deg]22'10'' W.
    Area C. That airspace extending upward from 1,000 feet MSL to
and including 7,000 feet MSL within an area bounded by a line
beginning 7 miles southwest of the Louis Armstrong New Orleans
International Airport on the north shore of the Mississippi River;
thence east along the Mississippi River north shore to a point 0.5
mile east of and parallel to the St. Charles Airport runway 17/35
extended centerline; thence southeast along a line 0.5 miles east of
and parallel to the St. Charles Airport runway 17/35 extended
centerline to the Southern Pacific Railroad track; thence southwest
along the Southern Pacific Railroad track to a point 4 miles
southwest of the Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport;
thence counterclockwise along a 4-mile radius of the Louis Armstrong
New Orleans International Airport to the north shore of the
Mississippi River; thence east along the north shore of the
Mississippi River to the Harvey VORTAC 300[deg] radial; thence
southeast along the Harvey VORTAC 300[deg] radial to a point 7 miles
southeast of the Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport;
thence clockwise along the 7-mile radius of the Louis Armstrong New
Orleans International Airport to the point of beginning.
    Area D. That airspace extending upward from 2,000 feet MSL to
and including 7,000 feet MSL within a 15-mile radius of the Louis
Armstrong New Orleans International Airport, excluding that airspace
within Areas A, B, and C previously described, that airspace within
Area F described hereinafter, that airspace within the Lakefront
Airport Class D airspace area, and that airspace within a 4.4-mile
radius of New Orleans Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base (Alvin
Callender Field).
    Area E. That airspace extending upward from 4,000 feet MSL to
and including 7,000 feet MSL within a 20-mile radius of the Louis
Armstrong New Orleans International Airport, excluding that airspace
within Areas A, B, C, and D previously described, and that airspace
within Area F described hereinafter.
    Area F. That airspace extending upward from the surface to 1,000
feet MSL and from 2,000 feet MSL to 7,000 feet MSL 0.5 mile either
side of a line extending from lat. 30[deg]01'10'' N., long.
90[deg]07'47'' W. to lat. 29[deg]59'31'' N., long. 90[deg]15'37'' W.
to lat. 30[deg]03'37'' N., long. 90[deg]22'10'' W., excluding that
airspace below 600 feet MSL north of the south shore of Lake
Pontchartrain.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 7, 2015.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2015-17709 Filed 7-17-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Tom Cortina < cortina@ alcalde fay. c om>

07/ 03/ 2003 04: 02 PM To: Mary Dominiak/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA cc: Subject: Report on Groundwater Monitoring << fieldreport. pdf>>

Mary,

Attached is a report prepared by Dr. Jennifer Field for the Fire Fighting Foam Coalition ( FFFC) that presents data on fluorinated alkyl surfactants in groundwater from the fire training areas of 3 military bases. As we stated on June 6, FFFC is submitting this report to EPA in response to item # 11 of the telomer data needs in the preliminary ECA framework.

This report contains unpublished data that has been submitted for publication in a scientific journal, so at the request of the author the report is being submitted to EPA as " subject to copyright." We understand that this means the report will not be made available on the internet and will not be distributed by EPA staff. Internet availability or wide distribution of this report will jeopardize the authors ability to have her work published in a scientific journal. The report is labeled as " Pre publication copy, subject to copyright, do not reference, and not for further reproduction.

Tom Cortina Executive Director Fire Fighting Foam Coalition ( FFFC)

fieldreport. pdf


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 997-1001]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00026]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0416; FRL-9972-76--Region 7]

Approval of Iowa's Air Quality Implementation Plan; Muscatine
Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area; Availability of Supplemental
Information and Reopening of the Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of supplemental information and
reopening of the comment period.

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

SUMMARY: On August 24, 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
published a notice of proposed rulemaking to approve the Iowa State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for attaining the 1-hour sulfur
dioxide (SO2) primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) for the Muscatine nonattainment area (herein called a
``nonattainment plan'') in the Federal Register. EPA received several
comments, including one suggesting that insufficient information was
provided in the docket to allow the reviewer the ability to fully
evaluate the nonattainment plan and EPA's proposed action to approve it
and another comment that insufficient emissions inventory information
for the 2018 attainment year was provided for the action. As a result,
we are: Providing additional information in the docket and clarifying
that all information, including files that are too large to be provided
in the docket, are available upon request; providing an updated 2018
projected emissions inventory; and reopening the public comment period
to afford stakeholders an opportunity to comment on these specific
additions of information only. EPA has updated Document A, ``Index of
Docket Documents'' in the docket to this rulemaking. EPA will address
all comments received on the original proposal and on this supplemental
action in our final action.

DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published on August 24,
2017 (82 FR 40086) (FRL-9966-60-Region 7) is reopened. Comments,
identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-RO7-OAR-2017-0416
must be received on or before February 8, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments pertaining to this supplemental action,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0416 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracey Casburn, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by
addressing the following:

I. What action is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for this action?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA taking?

    On August 24, 2017, at 82 FR 40086, EPA proposed to approve a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the state of Iowa for
attaining the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the Muscatine
nonattainment area. EPA received several comments on the original
proposal, including one suggesting that insufficient information was
provided in the docket to allow the reviewer the ability to fully
evaluate the nonattainment plan and the basis of EPA's proposed action
to approve it. As a result, in this supplemental action, EPA is
providing additional information in the docket for the proposed action
and clarifying that, especially in the case of files too large to post
in the docket, this information is available upon request. These large
files include modeling files utilized to support the nonattainment
plan. EPA also received a comment that the SIP submittal, and EPA's
proposed approval of the nonattainment plan, did not include adequate
emissions inventory information for the 2018 attainment year. As a
result, EPA is providing updated 2018 projected emissions inventory
information for the proposed action. EPA is soliciting comment only
regarding the information added by this document and its relationship
to EPA's proposed SIP approval. That is, at this time, EPA is
soliciting comment only on the newly docketed information, including
modeling files which can be obtained upon request, and how they relate
to EPA's proposed action. We will address all comments received on the
original proposal and new comments submitted in response to this action
in our final rulemaking action.

II. What is the background for this action?

    As discussed in EPA's original August 24, 2017, proposal (82 FR
40086), on April 23, 2014, the EPA issued recommended guidance for
meeting the statutory requirements in SO2 SIPs, in a
document entitled, ``Guidance for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment
Area SIP Submissions,'' (April 2014 guidance) available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf. In this guidance the EPA
described the statutory requirements for a complete nonattainment area
SIP, which includes an accurate emissions inventory of current
emissions for all sources of SO2 within the nonattainment
area.
    Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires that the state's
nonattainment plan include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory
of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutant or
pollutants in such area, including such periodic revisions as the
Administrator may determine necessary to assure that the requirements
of part D of title I of the CAA are met. Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA
requires that the state's nonattainment plan expressly identify and
quantify the emissions, if any, of any such pollutant or pollutants
which will be allowed, in accordance with section 173(a)(1)(B) of the
CAA, from the construction and operation of major new or modified
stationary sources in each such area. The plan shall demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the emissions quantified for
this purpose will be consistent with the achievement of reasonable
further progress and will not interfere with attainment of the
applicable NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.
    The emissions inventory and source emission rate data for an area
serve as the foundation for air quality modeling and other analyses
that enable states to: (1) Estimate the degree to which different
sources within a nonattainment area contribute to violations within the
affected area; and (2) assess the expected improvement in air quality
within the nonattainment area due to the adoption and implementation of
control measures. As noted above, the state must develop and submit to
EPA a comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions
from all sources of SO2 emissions in each nonattainment
area, as well as any sources located outside the nonattainment area
which may affect attainment in the area. See the April 2014 guidance.
    The base year inventory establishes a baseline that is used to
evaluate emissions reductions achieved by the control strategy and to
assess reasonable further progress requirements. The state's
nonattainment SIP noted that, at the time, the most recent and
available triennial inventory year was 2011, and the stated found that
it served as a suitable base year. Table 1 provides the baseline 2011
SO2 emissions inventory data for sources within and outside
of the nonattainment the area (data have been rounded to the nearest
whole number). It is important to note that emissions from the onroad
mobile, nonroad mobile, area source and fire source categories are for
the entire Muscatine County and not just the nonattainment area which
is a portion of the county. Emissions from these source categories are
approximately 0.11 percent of the total SO2 emissions for
the nonattainment area.

    Table 1--2011 Base Line Emission Inventory for the Muscatine, IA
                           Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Base line emissions inventory for the Muscatine NAA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             2011 SO2
                                          Facility           Emissions
                                                               (tpy)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inside of the NAA.................  Grain Processing              10,810
                                     Corporation.
                                    Muscatine Power and            2,374
                                     Water.
                                    Monsanto............             537
                                    HNI Corp.--North                  <1
                                     Campus.
                                    HNI Corp.--Central                <1
                                     Campus.
                                    H.J. Heinz L.P......              <1
                                    Union Tank Car Co...              <1
Outside of the NAA................  Louisa Generating              7,304
                                     Station.
All of Muscatine County...........  Onroad Mobile.......               3
                                    Nonroad Mobile......               2
                                    Area Sources........              10
                                    Fires...............               9
                                                         ---------------
    Total.........................  ....................          21,049
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The state's nonattainment SIP provided a 2018 projected emissions
inventory only for the stationary sources that would be controlled
under the SIP (Grain Processing Corporation, Muscatine Power and Water
and Monsanto); the state's 2018 projected emissions are provided in
table 2. As noted in EPA's proposal, the inventory was developed
assuming each SO2 source operates 8,760 hours per year at
its permitted maximum allowable emission rate.

   Table 2--Projected 2018 Allowable Annual SO2 Emissions From Control
              Strategy Sources From the Nonattainment Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Projected 2018 emissions for the controlled sources
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             2018 SO2
                        Facility                             Emissions
                                                               (tpy)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grain Processing Corporation............................             167
Muscatine Power and Water...............................           5,051
Monsanto................................................           1,196
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this supplemental document, EPA is providing an update to the
state's 2018 projected emissions inventory for public inspection. The
updated 2018 projected emissions inventory includes: Emissions from
Louisa Generating Station (LGS) located in nearby Louisa County
(presented as a potential to emit (PTE) level as provided by the
state); emissions from the less than 1 ton per year (tpy) point sources
that were included in the baseline emission inventory; and emissions
from the area source, fire, nonroad mobile, and onroad mobile source
categories. Tables 3 through 6 provide information on how EPA completed
the 2018 projections from the area source, fire, nonroad mobile, and
onroad mobile source categories as well as the less than 1 tpy point
sources. A summary of the 2018 projected emissions inventory is
provided in table 7.
    As with the state's 2011 baseline emissions inventory, the fire,
nonroad mobile, onroad mobile and area source emissions are county-wide
and not specific to the partial Muscatine County nonattainment area.
EPA increased the emissions based on population growth factors. In
order to complete these projections, EPA first gathered population
projections for Muscatine county, as seen in table 3.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ http://www.iowadatacenter.org/datatables/CountyAll/co2010populationprojections20002040.pdf.

          Table 3--Population Growth Data for Muscatine County
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Population projections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010....................................................          42,760
2015....................................................          43,453
2020....................................................          44,225
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, EPA developed growth factors by computing population ratios
by comparing the projected 2020 population to the 2010 population and
then comparing the 2020 population to the 2015 population, as provided
in table 4.

                      Table 4--2018 Growth Factors
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           2018 Growth factors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.03....................................................       2020/2010
1.02....................................................       2020/2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Then, EPA downloaded the 2011 and 2014 emissions from the National
Emissions Inventory (NEI) and multiplied the NEI values by the growth
factors to calculate a 2018 maximum projection value, as provided in
table 5. That is, EPA multiplied the 2011 NEI base year emissions by
the 2018 growth factor of 1.03 and the 2014 NEI base year emissions by
the 2018 growth factor of 1.02, then selected the highest estimate for
each source category as the 2018 maximum projected emissions (data have
been rounded to the nearest whole number).

                    Table 5--2018 Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Projections Muscatine County Iowa
                                                     [Tons]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     2018 Sulfur dioxide emissions projections Muscatine County Iowa (tons)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      2011 a          2014 b        2018 (2011)     2018 (2014)    2018 Maximum
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fire............................               9              13               9              13              13
Area Sources....................              10               5              10               5              10
Nonroad Mobile c................               2               1               2               1               2
Onroad Mobile...................               3               4               3               4               4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a 2011NEIV2.
b 2014NEIV1.
c Marine/Aircraft/Rail emissions were included in the nonroad category, rather than area source category for
  2011.

    In order to project the 2018 emissions for the less than 1 tpy
sources provided in the 2011 baseline emission inventory (HNI
Corporation--North and Central Campuses, H.J. Heinz, L.P., and Union
Tank Car Co.--Muscatine), EPA selected the highest emissions from the
2008 to 2015 time period as the sources' projected 2018 emissions,
table 6. The total of the county's nonroad mobile, onroad moble, fire
and area source category projected 2018 emissions would be about .13
percent of the partial county nonattainment area's total emissions).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The total projected 2018 emissions includes LGS at its
projected PTS in 2018, 15,188. It is expected that the actual
emissions from this source in 2018 would be much lower.

             Table 6--Projected 2018 SO2 Emissions for the Small Uncontrolled Sources (tpy) in the Muscatine County Iowa Nonattainment Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Projected 2018 emissions from the less than 1 ton per year (tpy) sources in the Muscatine NAA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2018
                Facility name                    2008        2009        2010        2011        2012        2013        2014        2015      Projected
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HNI Corporation--North Campus...............        0.06        0.07        0.08        0.07        0.11        0.03        0.03        0.08        0.11
HNI Corporation--Central Campus.............        0.04        0.01        0.04        0.01        0.05        0.04        0.04        0.05        0.05
H.J. Heinz, L.P.............................        0.06        0.03        0.06        0.05        0.06        0.06        0.04        0.06        0.06
Union Tank Car Co.--Muscatine...............           0        0.01        0.01        0.01        0.01        0.01        0.01        0.02        0.02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, there is a large source outside of the nonattainment
area, LGS, that was included in the state's 2011 baseline emission
inventory. On October 12, 2017, the state submitted, via email, the
2018 potential to emit (PTE) from LGS equaling approximately 15,188
tpy. The email has been added to the docket for public inspection.
Table 7 provides a summary of the projected 2018 emissions for the
nonattainment area, and that summary includes LGS at its PTE. However,
after reviewing LGS's operating history from 2012 to 2016 we expect
that the facility will emit considerably less SO2 emissions
than its PTE in 2018. Table 8 provides the annual SO2
emissions from LGS from 2012 to 2016 as reported to EPA's Clean Air
Markets Division.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Data reported to the CAMD shows that LGS has not operated in
a manner to allow for SO2 emissions approaching its PTE
(15,188) since 2008.

            Table 7--Updated 2018 Emissions Inventory Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        2018 Projected emissions inventory for the Muscatine NAA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             2018 SO2
                                         Facility            Emissions
                                                               (tpy)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inside of the NAA..............  Grain Processing                    167
                                  Corporation.
                                 Muscatine Power and               5,051
                                  Water.
                                 Monsanto...............           1,196
                                 HNI Corp.--North Campus            0.11
                                 HNI Corp.--Central                 0.05
                                  Campus.
                                 H.J. Heinz L.P.........            0.06
                                 Union Tank Car Co......            0.02
Outside of the NAA.............  Louisa Generating                15,188
                                  Station.
All of Muscatine County........  Onroad Mobile..........               4
                                 Nonroad Mobile.........               2
                                 Area Sources...........              10
                                 Fires..................              13
                                                         ---------------
    Total......................  .......................          21,631
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Table 8--Louisa Generating Station SO2 Annual Emissions Data, 2012-2016 (CAMD)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Louisa Generating Station SO2 emissions, 2012-2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Year                     2012            2013            2014            2015            2016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual SO2 Emissions............            8743            8285            8763            6096            5129
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is providing the updated 2018 projected emissions inventory
information for public inspection and in support of the Agency's
previous proposal to determine that the state has met the requirements
of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 172(c)(4).

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011). This action is not subject to review under Executive
Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because
SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866. This action is
also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely proposes to
approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly,
the Administrator certifies that this rulemaking will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rulemaking would approve pre-existing requirements under state law
and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). Thus Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
This action merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a
Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This
rulemaking also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state rule
implementing a Federal standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA when it reviews a state
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.3(b).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: December 21, 2017.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2018-00026 Filed 1-8-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 8953]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03613]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2061-099]

Idaho Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing
and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Amendment to Land Management Plan.
    b. Project No: 2061-099.
    c. Date Filed: December 29, 2015.
    d. Applicant: Idaho Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Lower Salmon Falls Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Snake River in Gooding
and Twin Falls counties, Idaho.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: L. Lewis Wardle, Senior Biologist--Licensing
Program<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(208) 388-2964.
    i. FERC Contact: Krista Sakallaris,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: March 14, 2015.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene, protests, comments, or recommendations using the
Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-2061-099.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: Idaho Power Company (IPC) filed a five-
year compliance report for the Lower Salmon Falls project's approved
land management plan as well as proposed updates to the existing plan.
Updates include new land-use classification maps based off previously
approved changes and modifications to the use classification of private
boat docks on conservation and agriculture/grazing land. IPC proposes
to change the classification of private boat docks to ``conditional''
in both conservation and agriculture/grazing land-use areas, which are
currently listed as allowed and prohibited, respectively. To remain
consistent across projects, IPC proposes the modification due to
changes in land ownership and land use patterns from open-range grazing
to private/rural-residential uses in the project area, as well as at
several other IPC projects. IPC states that by listing private boat
docks as conditional it would review all applications to ensure the
proposal does not have adverse resource effects. Additionally, all dock
applications would be required to meet the IPC's existing boat dock
standards and applicants would be required to obtain the required state
and federal permits and consult with specified resource agencies.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing 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. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from
the applicant.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214, respectively. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all
capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or ``MOTION TO
INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing
responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the
person commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply
with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis. Any filing made by an intervenor must be accompanied
by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared
by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR
385.2010.

    Dated: February 12, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-03613 Filed 2-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 147 (Thursday, July 30, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45883-45884]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16454]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0306; FRL-10011-30]

Petition To Revoke All Neonicotinoid Tolerances; Notice of
Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA seeks public comment on a May 4, 2020 petition by the
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) requesting that the Agency
revoke all tolerances for residues of the neonicotinoid pesticides
acetamiprid, clothianidin, dinotefuran, imidacloprid, and thiamethoxam.
The petitioners claim that the underlying analysis supporting these
tolerances are flawed and that proper consideration of available data
demonstrates that the tolerances are not safe and must be revoked. A
copy of the petition is available at regulations.gov in docket ID EPA-
HQ-OPP-2020-0306.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 31, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0306, 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.
    Please note that due to the public health emergency the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room was closed to public visitors on March
31, 2020. Our EPA/DC staff will continue to provide customer service
via email, phone, and webform. For further information on EPA/DC
services, docket contact information and the current status of the EPA/
DC and Reading Room, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan Williams, Pesticide Re-
Evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general and may be of
interest to those involved with pesticide manufacture, sale, or use; to
a member or affiliate of an agricultural trade or interest group, an
environmental interest group, or a public health interest group; to
federal, state, or local regulatory partners; or to a member of the
general public interested in the manufacture, sale, or use of
pesticides (including neonicotinoids). Given the broad interest, the
Agency has not attempted to identify or describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action.
    The following list of North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. 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 the
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.

C. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    A copy of the NRDC's Petition memorandum, RE: Petition to Revoke
All Neonic Tolerances and Comments Regarding Dietary Exposure, is
available in the docket under docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2020-0306.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA seeks public comment during the next [30] days on a petition
(available in docket number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0306) received from the
NRDC requesting that the Agency revoke all tolerances for residues of
the neonicotinoid pesticides acetamiprid, clothianidin, dinotefuran,
imidacloprid, and thiamethoxam. The petition was submitted under
section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d). The petitioners claim that the existing tolerances are not
safe and must be revoked due to several flaws in EPA's analysis of
neonicotinoid toxicity and exposure when conducting its human health
risk and drinking water assessments for these pesticides. The
petitioners claim that EPA failed to use the most sensitive endpoint
and appropriate uncertainty factors, including the full 10x children's
safety factor, in not considering the potential for developmental
effects in children from neonicotinoid exposure and evidence of toxic
effects at low exposure levels; failed to assess the potential for
cumulative toxicity from exposure to multiple neonicotinoids; failed to
assess the aggregate toxicity of neonicotinoids and other chemicals
resulting from interactions between neonicotinoids and chemicals used
in drinking water sanitation; and failed to consider risks to highly-
exposed individuals in the acute dietary risk assessment. The
petitioners therefore contend that the established tolerances are not
conservative enough to protect the general population, and children,
from exposure to toxic amounts of neonicotinoids in food.
    EPA's human health and drinking water risk assessments the
neonicotinoids are contained in the dockets for each of the respective
registration review cases, listed here:
     Acetamiprid: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0329.
     Clothianidin: EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0865.
     Dinotefuran: EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0920.
     Imidacloprid: EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0844.
     Thiamethoxam: EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0581.

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

    Dated: July 21, 2020.
Mary Reaves,
Acting Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2020-16454 Filed 7-29-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P