[Federal Register: April 8, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 66)]
[Notices]
[Page 15971-15976]
[DOCID:fr08ap09-56]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0045; FRL-8407-4]

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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

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

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 8, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number and the pesticide petition number (PP) of interest as shown
in the body of this document, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation 8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to the docket ID number and the
pesticide petition number of interest as shown in the body of this
document. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A contact person, with telephone
number and e-mail address, is listed at the end of each pesticide
petition summary. You may also reach each contact person by mail at
Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed at the end of the pesticide petition
summary of interest.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

     1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
     2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).

    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

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

New Tolerances

     1. PP 8E7433. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0013). The Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), IR-4 Project Headquarters, 500 College Rd.
East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to establish
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.603 for the combined residues of the
insecticide dinotefuran, (RS)-1-methyl-2-nitro-3-(tetrahydro-3-
furylmethyl)guanidine and its major metabolites DN, 1-methyl-3-
(tetrahydro-3-furylmethyl)guanidine, and UF, 1-methyl-3-(tetrahydro-3-
furylmethyl)-urea in or on brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 17.0
parts per million (ppm) and turnip, greens at 17.0 ppm. The IR-4
submitted this petition on behalf of the registrants, Valent USA
Corporation and Mitsui Corporation, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan. Mitsui
Chemicals, Inc., has submitted practical analytical methodology for
detecting and measuring levels of dinotefuran and its metabolites, UF
and DN, in or on raw agricultural commodities. The high performance
liquid chromatography (HPLC) method was validated for determination of
dinotefuran, DN and UF in or on tomatoes and peppers, cucurbits,
brassica, grapes, potatoes, and lettuce for raw agricultural commodity
matrices and in or on tomato paste and puree, grape juice and raisins
and potato chips, granules, and wet peel for processed commodity
matrices. After extraction with a water/acetonitrile mixture and clean
up with hexane and extraction columns, concentrations of dinotefuran
and its metabolites were quantified after HPLC separation by tandem
mass spectrometry (MS/MS) detection. The limit of quantitation was 0.01
ppm for all matrices. Contact: Sidney Jackson,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     2. PP 8E7447. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0012). IR-4, IR-4 Project
Headquarters, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540,
proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.544 for residues of the
insecticide methoxyfenozide and its metabolites RH-117,236 free phenol
of methoxyfenozide; 3,5-dimethylbenzoic acid N-tert-butyl-N'-(3-
hydroxy-2-methylbenzoyl) hydrazide, RH-151,055 glucose conjugate of RH-
117,236; 3,5-dimethylbenzoic acid N-tert-butyl-N-[3( -[beta]-D-
glucopyranosyloxy)-2-methylbenzoyl]-hydrazide) and RH-152,072 the
malonylglycosyl conjugate of RH-117,236 in or on fruit, citrus, group
10 at 2.0 ppm and citrus oil at 70 ppm for tolerances with regional
registrations; and pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean,
subgroup 6C at 0.35 ppm; pomegranate at 0.6 ppm; corn, pop, grain at
0.05 ppm; corn, pop, stover at 125 ppm; and corn, pop, forage at 30
ppm. Adequate enforcement methods are available for determination of
methoxyfenozide residues in plant commodities, as derived from Dow
AgroSciences GRM 02.25, ``Determination of Residues of Methoxyfenozide
in High Moisture Crops by Liquid Chromatography with Tandem Mass
Spectrometry Detection'' which has been validated. This method is based
on enforcement method TR 34-00-28 developed by Rohm and Haas which has
been extensively validated, including an independent laboratory
validation. It was judged to be adequate to enforce tolerances for
indirect or inadvertent residues of methoxyfenozide and relevant
metabolites in/on high and low moisture rotational crops. Contact:
Sidney Jackson,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>     3. PP 8E7480. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0176). BASF Corporation, P.O. Box
13528, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, proposes to establish an
import tolerance in 40 CFR 180.517 for residues of the insecticide
mixture comprising fipronil (5-amino-1[2,6-dichloro-4-
(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-[(1R,S)-trifluoromethyl)sulfinyl]-1H-
pyrazole-3-carbonitrile) and its metabolites 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4-
(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-[(trifluoromethyl)sulfonyl]-1H-pyrazole-3-
carbonitrile and 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl-4-
[(trifluoromethyl)thio]-H-pyrazole-3-carbonitrile and its
photodegradate 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-
[(1R,S)-(trifluoromethyl)-1H-pyrazole-3-carbonitrile] in or on rice,
grain at 0.04 ppm. Validated analytical methods are available for
detecting and measuring levels of fipronil and its metabolites in rice.
The method utilizes capillary gas chromatography equipped with a Ni
electron capture detector. Alternatively, a liquid chromatography with
tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) detector

may be used. The limit of quantitation for rice is 0.01 ppm for all
analytes. The limit of detection is 0.003 ppm for all analytes.
Contact: Bonaventure Akinlosotu,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     4. PP 8E7481. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0092). IR-4, IR-4 Project
Headquarters, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540,
proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.431(a) for the combined
residues of the herbicide clopyralid, (3,6-dichloro-2-
pyridinecarboxylic acid) in or on swiss chard at 5.0 ppm and bushberry
subgroup 13-07B at 6.0 ppm; and to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR
180.431(c) with regional restrictions for residues of clopyralid in or
on strawberry, annual at 4.0 ppm. An adequate residue analytical method
is available for enforcement of the tolerances. This method determines
clopyralid as the methyl ester by gas chromatography using electron
capture detection. This method has been successfully validated by the
EPA and has been published in FDA's Pesticide Analytical Manual, Volume
II (PAM II). Contact: Laura Nollen,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     5. PP 8E7492. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0018). IR-4, IR-4 Project
Headquarters, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540,
proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.510 for residues of the
insecticide pyriproxyfen in or on vegetable, leaves of root and tuber,
group 2 at 2.0 ppm; vegetable, leafy, except brassica, group 4 at 3.0
ppm; vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7 at 2.0 ppm; artichoke, globe
at 2.0 ppm; asparagus at 2.0 ppm; watercress at 2.0 ppm; and small
fruit vine climbing subgroup, except grape 13-07E at 0.35 ppm.
Practical analytical methods for detecting and measuring levels of
pyriproxyfen (and relevant metabolites) have been developed and
validated in/on all appropriate agricultural commodities, respective
processing fractions, milk, animal tissues, and environmental samples.
The extraction methodology has been validated using aged radiochemical
residue samples from metabolism studies. The methods have been
validated in cottonseed, apples, soil, and oranges at independent
laboratories. The EPA has successfully validated the analytical methods
for analysis of cottonseed, pome fruit, nutmeats, almond hulls, and
fruiting vegetables. The limit of detection of pyriproxyfen in the
methods is 0.01 ppm which will allow monitoring of food with residues
at the levels proposed for the tolerances. Contact: Susan Stanton,
(703) 305-5218<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     6. PP 8E7506. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0032). IR-4, IR-4 Project
Headquarters, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540,
proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.574 for residues of the
fungicide fluazinam (3-chloro-N-[3-chloro-2,6-dinitro-4-
(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinamine) in or on
lettuce, head at 0.02 ppm; lettuce, leaf at 2.0 ppm; onion, bulb,
subgroup 3-07A at 0.15 ppm; and bushberry subgroup 13-07B at 4.5 ppm.
An analytical method using gas chromatography with electron capture
detection (GC-ECD) for the determination of fluazinam residues on
blueberry, lettuce and onion has been developed and validated. The
method involves solvent extraction followed by liquid partitioning and
concentration prior to a final purification using column
chromatography. The method has been successfully validated by an
independent laboratory using peanut nutmeat as the matrix. The limit of
quantitation (LOQ) of the method is 0.01 ppm in lettuce and onion, and
0.02 in blueberry. An analytical method using reversed-phase HPLC with
ultraviolet (UV) absorbance detection for the determination of AMGT
residues on blueberry has been developed and validated. The limit of
quantitation of the method for AMGT is 0.04 ppm in/on blueberry.
Contact: Laura Nollen,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>     7. PP 7F7197. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0184). Cheminova A/S, c/o
Cheminova, Inc., 1600 Wilson Blvd., Suite 700, Arlington, VA 22209,
proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the
fungicide flutriafol in or on apple at 0.2 ppm; apple, wet pomace at
0.3 ppm; soybean at 0.3 ppm; soybean, aspirated grain fractions at 0.5
ppm; liver, (cattle, goat, hog, horse, and sheep) at 0.01 ppm. Residues
of flutriafol in plants and plant products can be determined by gas
chromatography using thermionic nitrogen specific detection (GC/NPD)
for soybeans or mass selective detection (GC/MS) for apples. The method
was validated for determination of residues of flutriafol in apples,
soybeans, and the corresponding processed commodities. Residues of
1,2,4-triazole (T), triazole alanine (TA), and triazole acetic acid
(TAA) can be determined by HPLC employing mass spectrometric detection
(LC/MS/MS). Each analyte can be determined separately after extraction,
clean-up and/or derivatization specific for each analyte. Residues of
flutriafol in animal matrices can be determined by gas chromatography
with mass selective detection (GC/MS). The method was validated for
determination of residues of flutriafol in milk, muscle, kidney, liver,
and egg. Contact: Tamue Gibson,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>     8. PP 8F7424. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0003). Canyon Group LLC, c/o Gowan
Company, 370 South Main St., Yuma, AZ 85364, proposes to establish a
tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide
halosulfuron-methyl in or on soybeans at 0.05 ppm. A practical
analytical method, gas chromatography with a nitrogen-specific
detector, is available for enforcement purposes. The limit of detection
is 0.003 ppm. Contact: Vickie Walters,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     9. PPs 8F7430 and 8F7439. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0009). E.I. du Pont de
Nemours & Company, Laurel Run Plaza, P.O. Box 80038, Wilmington, DE
19880-0038, proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.451 for
residues of the herbicide chlorimuron-ethyl (ethyl 2-[[[[(4-chloro-6-
methoxypyrimidin-2-yl) amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl] benzoate in or on
(PP 8F7430) corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, forage at 0.5
ppm; corn, field, stover at 2.0 ppm; corn, field, meal at 0.014 ppm;
corn, field, flour at 0.015 ppm; corn, aspirated grain fractions at
1.28 ppm; and (PP 8F7439) soybean, seed at 0.01 ppm; soybean, forage at
0.45 ppm; soybean, hulls at 0.04 ppm; soybean, aspirated grain
fractions at 2.79 ppm; and soybean hay at 1.8 ppm. The nature of
residues of chlorimuron-ethyl is adequately understood and an
acceptable analytical method is available for enforcement purposes. The
method procedure used solid phase extraction (SPE) for extract
purification and reversed phased HPLC coupled with a triple quadrupole
mass spectrometer using an electrospray interface (ESI) operating in
positive ion mode with tandem mass spectrometric (MS/MS) detection. A
LOD was estimated for each analyte in the range of 0.0007-0.002 mg/kg.
Contact: Vickie Walters,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>     10. PPs 8F7431 and 8F7440. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0004). E.I. du Pont de
Nemours & Company, Laurel Run Plaza, P.O. Box 80038, Wilmington, DE
19880-0038, proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.478 for
residues of the herbicide rimsulfuron: N-((4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-
yl)aminocarbonyl)-3-(ethylsulfonyl)-2-pyridinesulfonamide in or on (PP
8F7440) corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, forage at 0.4 ppm;
corn, field, stover at 2.5 ppm; and (PP 8F7431) soybean, seed at 0.01
ppm; soybean, forage at 0.25 ppm; and soybean, hay at 1.2 ppm. Adequate

analytical methodology, HPLC with electrospray interface-tandem mass
spectrometry (ESI-MS/MS) detection, is available for enforcement
purposes. The two methods are ``Analytical Method for the Determination
of Rimsulfuron in Watery and Dry Crop Matrices by HPLC/ESI-MS/MS'',
DuPont Report 15033 and ``Analytical Method for the Determination of
Rimsulfuron in Oily Crop Matrices by HPLC/ESI-MS/MS'', DuPont Report
15027. The limit of quantitation for rimsulfuron with these methods, in
raw agricultural commodities and in processed fractions, is 0.01 ppm.
Contact: Vickie Walters,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    11. PPs 8F7432 and 8F7441. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0005). E.I. du Pont de
Nemours & Company, Laurel Run Plaza, P.O. Box 80038, Wilmington, DE
19880-0038, proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.451 for
residues of the herbicide tribenuron methyl (methyl 2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-
methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)methylamino]
carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoate) in or on (PP 8F7441) corn, field,
grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, forage at 0.2 ppm; corn, field, stover
at 1.1 ppm; corn, aspirated grain fractions at 3.55 ppm; and (PP
8F7432) soybean, seed at 0.01 ppm; soybean, forage at 0.06 ppm;
soybean, hulls at 0.04 ppm; soybean, aspirated grain fractions at 3.46
ppm; and soybean, hay at 0.25 ppm. Various analytical methods are
available for the determination of residues of tribenuron methyl in
plant matrices. An analytical method was developed for the
determination of multiple sulfonylureas including tribenuron methyl and
sulfonylurea herbicide residues in oily crop matrices including soybean
seed, field corn, and their processed commodities. The target LOQ for
each analyte was 0.010 mg/kg (ppm). The method procedure used SPE for
extract purification and reversed-phased HPLC coupled with a triple
quadrupole mass spectrometer using an ESI operating in positive ion
mode with tandem MS/MS detection. Contact: Vickie Walters, (703) 305-
5704<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     12. PP 8F7442. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0937). BASF Corporation, 26 Davis
Drive, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709-
3528, proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.463 for residues
of the herbicide quinclorac, 3,7-dichloro-8-quinolinecarboxylic acid in
or on grass, forage at 105 ppm and grass, hay at 70 ppm. An adequate
analytical method for enforcement of the tolerances exists. The
analytical method used for quantitative determinations was designed to
measure quinclorac residues present as the parent compound. Contact:
Hope Johnson,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>     13. PPs 8F7443 and 8F7448. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0002). Monsanto
Company, 1300 I St., NW, Suite 450 East, Washington DC 20052, (a member
of the Acetochlor Registration Partnership, ARP), proposes to establish
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.470 for residues of the herbicide acetochlor
(2-chloro-2'-methyl-6'-ethyl-N-ethoxymethylacetanilide) and its
metabolites containing either the 2-ethyl-6-methylaniline (EMA) or the
2-(1-hydroxyethyl)-6-methyl-aniline (HEMA) moiety, to be expressed as
acetochlor equivalents, when present therein as a result of the
application of acetochlor to soil or growing crops in or on (P8F7443)
cotton, undelinted seed at 0.6 ppm and cotton, gin byproducts at 4.0
ppm; and (PP 8F7448) soybean, seed at 1.0 ppm. An adequate enforcement
method for residues of acetochlor in crops has been approved.
Acetochlor and its metabolites are hydrolyzed to either EMA or HEMA,
which are determined by high performance liquid chromatography-OCED
(HPLC-OCED) and expressed as acetochlor equivalents. Contact: Vickie
Walters,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>     14. PP 8F7464. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0163). Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W.
Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709,
proposes to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of
the fungicide trifloxystrobin (Benzeneacetic acid, (E,E)-
(methoxyimino)-2-[[[[1-[3-(trifluoromethyl)
phenyl]ethylidene]amino]oxy]methyl]-methyl ester) and the free form of
its acid metabolite CGA-321113 ((E,E)-methoxyimino-[2-[1-(3-
trifluoromethyl-phenyl)-ethylideneaminooxymethyl]-phenyl]acetic acid),
in or on vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.04 ppm;
artichoke, globe at 1 ppm; leafy greens, subgroup 4A at 15 ppm; leafy
petioles, group 4B at 7 ppm; brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at
1.1 ppm; brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 12 ppm; fruit, small
fruit vine climbing, subgroup 13-07F, except fuzzy kiwifruit at 2 ppm;
berry, lowgrowing, subgroup 13-07G at 1.1 ppm; herb, subgroup 19A at
120 ppm; and spice, subgroup 19B, except black pepper at 50 ppm. A
practical analytical methodology for detecting and measuring levels of
trifloxystrobin in or on raw agricultural commodities has been
submitted. The LOD for each analyte of this method is 0.08 ng injected,
and the LOQ is 0.02 ppm. The method is based on crop specific cleanup
procedures and determination by gas chromatography with nitrogen-
phosphorus detection. A newer analytical method is available employing
identical solvent mixtures and solvent to matrix ratio (as the first
method), deuterated internal standards, and LC/MS-MS with an
electrospray interface, operated in the positive ion mode. The LOD for
trifloxystrobin range from 0.002 ppm to 0.01 ppm, depending on the
crops, and the LOQ is 0.01 ppm. Contact: Rosemary Kearns, (703) 305-
5611<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     15. PP 8F7482. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0162). Syngenta Crop Protection,
P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, proposes to establish a tolerance
in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide difenoconazole, (1-[2-
[2-chloro-4-(4-chlorophenoxy)phenyl]-4-methyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-ylmethyl]-
1H-1,2,4-triazole) in or on almond, hulls at 7 ppm; brassica, head and
stem, subgroup 5A at 1.9 ppm; brassica, leafy green, subgroup 5B at 30
ppm; citrus, dried pulp at 2.5 ppm; citrus, oil at 28 ppm; grape at 4
ppm; grape, raisin at 14 ppm; nut, tree, group 14 at 0.03 ppm; onion,
bulb, subgroup 3-07A at 6 ppm; onion, green, subgroup 3-07B at 0.15
ppm; pistachio at 0.03 ppm; and vegetables, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.7
ppm. Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. has submitted a practical
analytical method (AG-575B) for detecting and measuring levels of
difenoconazole in or on food with a LOQ that allows monitoring of food
with residues at or above the levels set in the proposed tolerances.
The EPA has validated this method and copies have been provided to the
FDA for insertion into the pesticide analytical manual (PAM) II. Method
REM 147.08 is also available as an enforcement method, for the
determination of residues of difenoconazole in crops. Residues are
quantified by LC/MS/MS. Contact: Rosemary Kearns,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     16. PP 8F7488. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0029). Nippon Soda Co., Ltd., c/o
Nisso America, Inc., 45 Broadway, Suite 2120, New York, NY 10006,
proposes to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of
the insecticide cyflufenamid, in or on cucurbit crop group at 0.05 ppm;
pome fruit crop group at 0.05 ppm; apple, wet pomace at 0.1 ppm; grape
(and other small climbing vine fruit (except fuzzy kiwifruit)) crop
group at 0.015 ppm; raisin at 0.3 ppm; and strawberry (and other low
growing berries) crop group at 0.2 ppm. Based upon the metabolism of
cyflufenamid in plants (i.e., parent cyflufenamid as the major residue)
and the toxicology of the parent compound, quantification of the parent
cyflufenamid is sufficient to determine toxic residues. As a result, a
method was developed using solvent extraction

of cyflufenamid from crops and analyzing sample extracts by LC/MS/MS.
The LOQ for the method was calculated to be 0.01 ppm. Contact: Samantha
Hulkower,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>     17. PP 8F7501. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0057). E. I. DuPont de Nemours and
Company, DuPont Crop Protection, P.O. Box 80038, Wilmington, DE 19880-
0038, proposes to establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for residues
of the herbicide nicosulfuron, 3-pyridinecarboxamide, 2-((((4,6-
dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)aminocarbonyl) aminosulfonyl))-N,N-dimethyl in
or on grass, forage at 9.0 ppm; grass, hay at 25.0 ppm; fat (of cattle,
goat, hog, horse, and sheep) at 0.05 ppm; meat (of cattle, goat, hog,
horse, and sheep) at 0.05 ppm; meat byproducts (of cattle, goat, hog,
horse, and sheep) at 0.05 ppm; milk at 0.05 ppm; and milk, fat at 0.02
ppm. Adequate analytical methodology, high-pressure liquid
chromatography with ESI-MS/MS detection, is available for enforcement
purposes. The two methods are ``Analytical Method for the Determination
of Nicosulfuron (DPX-V9360) and its metabolite IN-V9367 in pasture
grass by (high performance liquid chromatography/electrospray
interface-tandem mass spectrometry) HPLC/ESI-MS/MS'', DuPont Report
17928 and ``Analytical Method for the Determination of Nicosulfuron
(DPX-V9360) and its metabolite IN-V9367 in animal tissues by HPLC/ESI-
MS/MS'', DuPont Report 17927. The limit of quantitation for
nicosulfuron with these methods, in raw agricultural commodities and in
processed fractions, is 0.01 ppm. Contact: Mindy Ondish, (703) 605-
0723<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     18. PP 9F7520. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0556). Nichino America, Inc., 4550
New Linden Hill Road, Suite 501, Wilmington, DE 19808, proposes to
establish a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.566 for residues of the insecticide
fenpyroximate and its z-isomer in or on low-growing berries, subgroup
13-07G at 1.0 ppm. Based upon the metabolism of fenpyroximate in plants
and the toxicology of the parent and metabolites, quantification of the
parent, fenpyroximate and the z-isomer, combined as fenpyroximate is
sufficient to determine toxic residue in plants. As a result an
enforcement method has been developed which involves extraction of
fenpyroximate from crops with acetone, filtration, partitioning and
cleanup, and analysis by gas chromatography using a nitrogen/
phosphorous detector. The method has undergone independent laboratory
validation. Contact: Melody Banks,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     19. PP 9F7523. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0134). IR-4, IR-4 Project
Headquarters, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540,
proposes to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.439 for residues of the
herbicide thifensulfuron methyl (methyl-3-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-
1,3,5-triazin-2-yl) amino] carbonyl] amino] sulfonyl]-2-
thiophenecarboxylate), in or on safflower, seed at 0.05 ppm. Samples
were analyzed for residues of thifensulfuron-methyl using liquid
chromatography (LC). The lowest level of method validation (LLMV) for
each matrix in this study, i.e., safflower seed, meal and oil, was 0.05
ppm of thifensulfuron-methyl. The LOQ for the method for safflower seed
was 0.027 ppm of thifensulfuron-methyl. The estimated LOQ for meal and
oil were calculated at 0.039 ppm, and 0.0068 ppm of thifensulfuron-
methyl, respectively. The LOD for the method for safflower seed was
0.0090 ppm of thifensulfuron-methyl. The estimated LOD for meal and oil
were 0.013 ppm, and 0.0023 ppm of thifensulfuron-methyl, respectively.
Contact: Susan Stanton,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Amended Tolerances

     1. PP 8E7447. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0012). IR-4, IR-4 Project
Headquarters, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540,
proposes to delete the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.544 for residues of the
insecticide methoxyfenozide and its metabolites RH-117,236 free phenol
of methoxyfenozide; 3,5-dimethylbenzoic acid N-tert-butyl-N'-(3-
hydroxy-2-methylbenzoyl) hydrazide, RH-151,055 glucose conjugate of RH-
117,236; 3,5-dimethylbenzoic acid N-tert-butyl-N-[3(-[beta]-D-
glucopyranosyloxy)-2-methylbenzoyl]-hydrazide) and RH-152,072 the
malonylglycosyl conjugate of RH-117,236 in or on dry bean seed at 0.24
ppm since it is a member of the proposed pea and bean, dried shelled,
except soybean, subgroup 6C under ``New Tolerance'' number 2 of this
document. Contact: Sidney Jackson,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     2. PP 8E7474. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0076). IR-4, IR-4 Project
Headquarters, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540,
proposes to increase the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.507 for residues of
the fungicide azoxystrobin: (methyl (E)-2-{2-[6-(2-cyanophenoxy)
pyrimidin-4-yloxy]phenyl{time} -3-methoxyacrylate) and the Z isomer of
azoxystrobin,(methyl (Z)-2-{2-[6-(2-cyanophenoxy)pyrimidin-4-
yloxy]pheny1{time} -3-methoxyacrylate) in or on barley, grain from 0.1
ppm to 3.0 ppm and barley, straw from 4.0 ppm to 7.0 ppm. An adequate
analytical method, gas chromatography with nitrogen-phosphorus
detection (GC-NPD) or in mobile phase by high performance liquid
chromatography with ultra-violet detection (HPLC-UV), is available for
enforcement purposes with a limit of detection that allows monitoring
of food with residues at or above the levels set in these tolerances.
The EPA concluded that the methods are adequate for enforcement.
Analytical methods are also available for analyzing meat, milk, poultry
and eggs which also underwent successful independent laboratory
validations. Contact: Susan Stanton,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     3. PP 8E7506. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0032). IR-4, IR-4 Project
Headquarters, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540,
proposes to delete the existing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.574 for
residues of the fungicide fluazinam (3-chloro-N-[3-chloro-2,6-dinitro-
4-(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinamine) in or
on aronia berry; buffalo currant; chilean guava; european barberry;
highbush cranberry; edible honeysuckle; jostaberry; juneberry;
lingonberry; native currant; salal; sea buckthorn; and bushberry
subgroup 13B at 7.0 ppm. Contact: Laura Nollen,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
New Tolerance Exemptions

     1. PP 8E7477. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0165). Huntsman Corporation, 10003
Woodloch Forest Dr., The Woodlands, TX 77380, proposes to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.920 for
residues of tallowamine, ethoxylated, mixture of dihydrogen phosphate
monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium, calcium,
potassium, and sodium salts of the phosphate esters, where the
poly(oxyethylene) content averages 2-20 moles (CAS Reg. No. 68308-48-5)
when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations in
or on all raw agricultural commodities. Because this petition is a
request for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, no
analytical method is required. Contact: Alganesh Debesai, (703) 308-
8353<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     2. PP 8E7490. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0047). Rohm and Haas Chemicals LLC,
100 Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA 19106-2399, proposes to
establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR

180.960 for residues of 2-propenoic acid, butyl ester polymer with
ethyl 2-propenoate and N-(hydroxymethyl)-2-propenamide (CAS Reg. No.
33438-19-6) when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide
formulations in or on raw agricultural commodities. Because this
petition is a request for an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance, no analytical method is required. Contact: Karen Samek,
(703) 347-8825<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     3. PP 8E7504. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0138). Dow AgroSciences, LLC, 9330
Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN, 46268, proposes to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-
Propanol, 1,1',1''-nitrilotris-(TIPA) (CAS Reg. No. 122-20-3) under 40
CFR 180.910 when used as a pesticide inert ingredient for use as a
neutralizer in pesticide formulations. Because this petition is a
request for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, no
analytical method is required. Contact: Lisa Austin,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: March 26, 2009.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E9-7965 Filed 4-7-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 712-716]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0143; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-113-AD;
Amendment 39-18753; AD 2016-25-27]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A300 B4-603, B4-620, B4-622, B4-605R, B4-622R, F4-605R,
F4-622R, and C4-605R variant F airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports of cracks in the frame base fittings connecting the frame lower
positions to the center wing box. This AD requires repetitive detailed
inspections for cracking of the lower frame fittings of the frame foot,
and replacement with a new frame foot if cracking is found. This AD
also provides optional terminating action for the repetitive
inspections. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: This AD is effective February 8, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of February 8,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 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 referenced 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<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2014-0143.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0143; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m.

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus
Model A300 B4-603, B4-620, B4-622, B4-605R, B4-622R, F4-605R, F4-622R,
and C4-605R variant F airplanes. The SNPRM published in the Federal
Register on July 7, 2016 (81 FR 44241) (``the SNPRM''). We preceded the
SNPRM with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the
Federal Register on March 19, 2014 (79 FR 15266) (``the NPRM''). The
NPRM was prompted by reports of cracks in the frame base fittings
connecting the frame lower positions to the center wing box. The NPRM
proposed to require repetitive detailed inspections of the lower frame
fittings, related investigative actions, and corrective actions if
necessary. The SNPRM proposed to replace the proposed requirements in
the NPRM with new repetitive detailed inspections for cracking of the
lower frame fittings of the frame foot, and replacement with a new
frame foot if cracking is found. The SNPRM also proposed to provide
optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the lower frame
fittings, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2015-0217, dated October 30, 2015 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition on all Airbus Model A300 B4-603, B4-620,
B4-622, B4-605R, B4-622R, F4-605R, F4-622R, and C4-605R variant F
airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During accomplishment of Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) A300-53-
6111 (EASA AD 2012-0103), addressing detailed visual inspections of
the lower frame fittings between Frame (FR) 41 and FR46, a crack was
detected on one A300-600 aeroplane in the area 2 of the foot of FR46
at junction radius level.
    This frame, previously repaired due to a crack finding in the
frame foot area 1, was not due to be inspected before reaching the
post-repair inspection threshold, i.e. 45,400 flight cycles since
repair embodiment.
    Further investigation determined that the repairs specified in
Airbus SB A300-53-6111 were of limited effect to prevent cracking in
the frame foot area 2.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the
structural integrity of the fuselage of all aeroplanes operated up
to the extended service goal (ESG).
    As a temporary action and until an improvement of the existing
repairs was made available, EASA issued AD 2012-0229 [AD * * *] to
require a one-time detailed inspection (DET) of the frame feet that
were repaired in accordance with Airbus SB A300-53-6111, and the
reporting of findings to Airbus.
    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, a detailed study was performed
resulting in the development of a new inspection programme.
    Consequently, Airbus cancelled SB A300-53-6111 and replaced it
with SB A300-53-6177, introducing repetitive DET of the lower frame
fittings between FR41 and FR46 for the entire fleet. In addition to
this new inspection programme, Airbus designed a new frame foot
which can be installed on aeroplanes through Airbus SB A300-53-6176.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD supersedes EASA
AD 2012-0103, not retaining its requirements, and instead requires
the new inspection programme for the lower frame fittings. This
[EASA] AD also introduces an optional terminating action for the
repetitive inspections required by the [EASA] AD.

    Corrective actions include replacing any cracked lower frame
fittings with a new frame foot. You may examine the MCAI in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0143.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the SNPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Extend Compliance Time for Reporting Requirement

    United Parcel Service (UPS) asked that the compliance time for
submitting the inspection report specified in paragraph (h) of the
proposed AD (in the SNPRM) be extended from 30 to 60 days. UPS stated
that accomplishing the inspection may occur many days before the final
task signoff (i.e., restoring access due to other work in the area),
risking noncompliance with the 30-day requirement.
    We agree to extend the compliance time for the reporting
requirement in this AD to 60 days, because we have determined that this
longer compliance time does not affect continued operational safety. We
have changed paragraph (i) of this AD accordingly.

Request for Clarification of Compliance Time

    Airbus asked that we clarify the compliance time for the
inspections specified in paragraph (g) of the proposed AD (in the
SNPRM). Airbus stated that unless Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177,
dated May 20, 2015, specifies differently, the inspection thresholds
should be counted from the first flight of the airplane, not from the
effective date of the AD. Airbus added that the compliance time
provided in the proposed AD could be confusing to operators. Airbus
also stated that for airplanes on which the inspections have not been
done as of the effective date of the AD, no grace period is provided,
which is a burden on operators.
    We agree that clarification is necessary.
    We agree that the compliance time identified in the ``Threshold''
column of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015, refers to accumulated flight cycles
or flight hours on the airplane since its first flight, but only if
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015, does not
specify differently. We redesignated paragraph (h) in the SNPRM as
paragraph (i) of this AD, and redesignated subsequent paragraphs
accordingly. We added clarification of the compliance times for the
thresholds in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD.
    We acknowledge that a grace period was not provided for all
configurations. We removed the grace period exception language from
paragraph (g) of the proposed AD (in the SNPRM) and moved it to
paragraph (h)(2) of this AD. Paragraph (h)(2) of this AD explains that
where grace periods specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177,
dated May 20, 2015, refer to the issue date of certain service
information, those compliance times are after the effective date of the
AD. The exception in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD does not apply to
compliance times specified as

thresholds in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015.
    In addition, we have determined that the actions for Configuration
004 airplanes identified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated
May 20, 2015, must be clarified. For Configuration 004 airplanes
identified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015,
the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD cannot be accomplished
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015. Paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20,
2015, specifies the action for Configuration 004 airplanes as
contacting and reporting to Airbus. Therefore, we have added paragraph
(h)(3) to this AD to require operators to contact the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or
the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA), for corrective actions for Configuration
004 airplanes.

Request for Clarification of Inspections for Airplanes With a
Previously Replaced Frame Foot

    UPS asked for clarification of the inspection requirements
specified in paragraph (g) of the proposed AD (in the SNPRM) for
airplanes that previously replaced a frame foot per Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6111. UPS stated that if cracking was found during the
inspections using that service information there were two options
available: Installing a reinforcing doubler on the damaged fitting or
replacing the fitting with a new part. UPS added that in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015, the inspection requirements
are defined for airplanes previously inspected and found with no
cracks, or fittings repaired per Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6111.
UPS noted that it is not clear how to address airplanes on which the
cracked fittings were replaced instead of installing a reinforcing
repair. UPS asked that fittings replaced with a new part per Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-53-6111 be treated as a previously inspected
fitting with no crack findings, with repetitive inspections done per
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015, using
Configuration 001 instructions. UPS stated that this proposal is
conservative and exceeds the inspection requirements in the proposed AD
(in the SNPRM).
    We agree that clarification is necessary. Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015, defines four configurations:
Configuration 001 for a frame foot that was never repaired,
Configuration 002 for a frame foot that was preventatively repaired,
Configuration 003 for a frame foot repaired in Area 1 as specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6111 or with certain other repairs, and
Configuration 004 for any frame foot not addressed by Configurations 1
through 3. If a new frame foot is installed on an airplane, it would be
classified as Configuration 001. We have not changed this AD in this
regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously, and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
SNPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the SNPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20,
2015. The service information describes procedures for repetitive
detailed inspections for cracking of the lower frame fittings between
FR41 and FR46. Airbus has also issued Service Bulletin A300-53-6176,
dated May 20, 2015. The service information describes procedures for
replacing all lower frame feet between frame FR41 and FR46 with new,
improved frame feet. This service information is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 123 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate that it takes about 541 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD, and 1 work-hour per
product for reporting. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S.
operators to be $5,666,610, or $46,070 per product.
    We estimate that the optional terminating modification will take
about 529 work-hours and require parts costing $131,500, for a cost of
$176,465.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA
at 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

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.

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2016-25-27 Airbus: Amendment 39-18753; Docket No. FAA-2014-0143;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-113-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective February 8, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4-603, B4-620, B4-622, B4-
605R, B4-622R, F4-605R, F4-622R, and C4-605R variant F airplanes;
certificated in any category; all serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks in the frame base
fittings connecting the frame lower positions to the center wing
box. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the
lower frame fittings, which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Repetitive Inspections and Replacement

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May
20, 2015, except as required by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this
AD: Perform a detailed inspection for cracking of the lower frame
fittings between frame (FR) 41 and FR46 of the frame foot, and if
any crack is found, before further flight, replace with a new frame
foot, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015, except as
required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Repeat the inspection
thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May
20, 2015.

(h) Service Information Exceptions

    (1) Where the threshold identified in the ``Threshold'' column
of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-
53-6177, dated May 20, 2015, specifies flight cycles or flight hours
without specifying from a repair, replacement, or last inspection,
the specified compliance time is accumulated flight cycles or flight
hours on the airplane since its first flight.
    (2) Where Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20,
2015, specifies a compliance time ``from issuance of revision 04 of
Service Bulletin No. A300-53-6111,'' or ``from issuance of Service
Bulletin No. A300-53-6177,'' this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) For Configuration 004 airplanes identified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015: Within 6 months after the
effective date of this AD, contact the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA), for corrective actions and accomplish
all applicable corrective actions using a method approved by the
Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.

(i) Reporting

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2)
of this AD: Submit a report of the findings (both positive and
negative) of each inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
Send the report to Airbus Service Bulletin Reporting Online
Application on Airbus World (https://w3.airbus.com).
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 60 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 60 days after the effective date of
this AD.

(j) Optional Terminating Action

    Replacement of all lower frame feet between FR41 and FR46, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6176, dated May 20, 2015, terminates the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

(k) 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; telephone:<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) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a
person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 5
minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.

(l) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
EASA AD 2015-0217, dated October 30, 2015, for related information.
This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2014-0143.

(m) 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.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6176, dated May 20, 2015.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6177, dated May 20, 2015.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 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.
    (4) 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.
    (5) 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 December 6, 2016.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-30117 Filed 1-3-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


P-18-0031 Sanitized Support Documents Index:
 P-18-0031 Sanitized Determination Document (linked)
 P-18-0031 Sanitized CHEM Report (attached)
 P-18-0031 Sanitized ECO Report (attached)
 P-18-0031 Sanitized ENG Report (attached)
 P-18-0031 Sanitized EXP Report (attached)
 P-18-0031 Sanitized Fate Report (attached)
 P-18-0031 Sanitized HLTH Report_POST-FOCUS FINAL (attached)