[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 69 (Monday, April 11, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19910-19911]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8515]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0202]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Harlem River, New York, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
103rd Street (Wards Island) Pedestrian Bridge, mile 0.0, across the
Harlem River at New York City, New York. The deviation is necessary to
facilitate bridge rehabilitation. This deviation allows the

bridge to remain in the closed position for 70 days.

DATES: This deviation is effective from April 30, 2011 through July 8,
2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0202 and are available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0202 in the
``Keyword'' and then clicking ``Search''. They are also available for
inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First Coast Guard
District<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 103rd Street (Wards Island) Pedestrian
Bridge, across the Harlem River, mile 0.0, at New York City, New York,
has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 55 feet at mean high
water and 60 feet at mean low water. The drawbridge operation
regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.789.
    The owner of the bridge, New York City Department of
Transportation, has requested a temporary deviation from the
regulations to complete rehabilitation of the bridge which was begun in
January 2011.
    The Coast Guard published a temporary deviation for the 103rd
Street (Wards Island) Pedestrian Bridge on January 20, 2011, (76 FR
3516), authorizing the bridge to remain in the closed position
effective from January 10, 2011 through April 29, 2011.
    The bridge owner has requested a second temporary deviation through
July 8, 2011 in order to continue rehabilitation past April 29, 2011,
due to unanticipated additional repair work which was discovered.
    In addition, containment scaffolding located under the lift span
will reduce the vertical clearance by approximately four feet while the
scaffolding is in place. Most vessel traffic that uses this waterway
can fit under the draw without requiring bridge openings.
    Under this temporary deviation the 103rd Street (Wards Island)
Pedestrian Bridge may remain in the closed position from April 30, 2011
through July 8, 2011. Vessels that can pass under the bridge in the
closed position may do so at any time.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the bridge 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: March 31, 2011.
Gary Kassof,
Bridge Program Manager, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-8515 Filed 4-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


EPA REGISTRATION DIVISION COMPANY NOTICE OF FILING FOR PESTICIDE PETITIONS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER

EPA Registration Division contact: Shaja Joyner<PHONE_NUMBER>

Company Name: Taminco US Inc.,

OPP Petition No.: 4E8250

          EPA has received a pesticide petition 4E8250 from Taminco US Inc., Two Windsor Plaza,
Suite 411, 7540 Windsor Drive, Allentown, PA 18195 pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part 180.

      By establishing an import tolerance for residues of thiram in or on the raw agricultural commodity avocado at 8 parts per million (ppm) for avocado whole fruit, EPA has determined that the petition contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in section 408 (d)(2) of FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time whether the data supports granting of the petition.  Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

      1.  Plant metabolism.  The metabolism and chemical nature of residues of thiram in plants has been extensively evaluated and is adequately understood.

      2. Analytical method.  Avocado samples were analyzed according to ALS Laboratory Group method MS 133.02 "The Determination of Mancozeb and/or other Ethylene-bis-dithiocarbamates (EBDCs) as CS2 in Plant Tissue by GC/MS".  Detection and quantitation for thiram (as CS2) were conducted using a gas chromatograph (GC) equipped with a mass spectral detector for determination of CS2. The limit of quantitation (LOQ) was 0.05 ppm reported as carbon disulfide (CS2) evolved.

      3.  Magnitude of residues.  Three residue trials on avocado, HAAS variety, were conducted in the State of Michoacan, Mexico (NAFTA Region 18). This area is representative of the avocado production area in Mexico from which avocadoes may be imported to the United States.  A formulation containing 80% w/w thiram was applied at a rate of 2.4 kg a.i./hectare equivalent to 2.14 lb a.i/acre. The avocados were treated on 14 +- 1 days preharvest (PHI), 7 +- 1 days PHI and on the day of harvest (0 day PHI).  Analytical results support the establishment of import tolerance of 8 ppm for whole avocado fruit.  A tolerance for avocado pulp has not been proposed as no thiram residues were found in avocado pulp samples.

B.  Toxicology Profile
   1. Acute toxicity.  The acute oral LD50 was 2600 mg/kg (Toxicity Category III).  The acute dermal LD50 was greater than 2000 mg/kg (Toxicity Category III). The acute inhalation LC50 for was >= 3.46 mg/L (Toxicity Category III).  Thiram is a moderate eye irritant, a very slight dermal irritant and a moderate skin sensitizer.

      In an acute neurotoxicity study, Sprague-Dawley rats were orally gavaged at 0, 5, 150, and 600 mg/kg, and were subsequently evaluated in functional observational batteries (FOB) and motor function observations.  Neuropathological evaluations were performed.  The Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) was 150 mg/kg based on FOB effects (lethargy, lower temperature, reduced startle response, no tail pinch response), reduced motor activity, and reduced brain weights. The No Observable Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) for neurotoxicity was 5 mg/kg.

   2. Genotoxicity.
      Genotoxicity  evaluations of thiram were negative in a mammalian cell gene mutation assay with Chinese Hamster V9 cells, a chromosomal aberrations assay in Chinese hamster ovary cells, an  DNA repair study in cultured rat hepatocytes and an in vivo micronucleus study in mice.

   3. Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity
      In a developmental toxicity study in rats, a maternal NOAEL was not achieved. The maternal LOAEL was 7.5 mg/kg/day based on reduced body weight gains and clinical signs of toxicity.  The developmental NOAEL was 7.5 mg/kg/day.

      Pregnant female rabbits were dosed with thiram via gavage on gestation days 7 to 19.  The NOEL for maternal and developmental toxicity was 10 mg/kg/day, the highest tested dose.

      Two multigeneration studies with thiram were conducted in rats.  In both studies, the rates were exposed over two generations.  In the first study, the parental NOEL was 25 ppm, the reproductive NOEL was 50 ppm and the fetal NOEL was 50 ppm.  The results from the second study showed a parental NOEL was 20 ppm, the reproductive NOEL was >180 ppm and the fetal NOEL was 20 ppm.

      A developmental neurotoxicity study was conducted in which female rats received diets containing 0, 20, 45 or 90 ppm thiram from gestation day 3 through postnatal day 20.  The maternal systemic and neurotoxicity LOAEL was 90 ppm based on decreased body weight, body weight gain and food consumption, clinical signs of toxicity and FB findings.  The maternal NOAEL was 45 ppm.  The offspring systemic and neurotoxicity LOAEL was 45 ppm based on increased locomotor activity in females on PND 17.  The offspring NOAEL was 20 ppm.

   4. Subchronic Toxicity
      Thiram was administered via the diet to rats for 13 weeks.  The LOEL was 250 ppm based on effects on body weight, body weight gain, food consumption, hematologic and clinical chemistry parameters, organ weights and liver histopathologic findings.  The NOEL was 50 ppm.

      In a subchronic neurotoxicity study,  rats were exposed to thiram technical (98.76% a.i.) in their diet at doses of 0, 30, 125, or 500 ppm. The neurotoxicity LOAEL is 125 ppm, based on increased numbers of rearing events and elevated incidences of hyperactivity in females at weeks 8 and 13. The NOAEL was 30 ppm  for females and 125 ppm for males.

   5. Chronic Toxicity
      In a combined chronic/oncogenicity study, Thiram technical was administered to albino rats in the diet for 104 weeks.  The LOAEL was 119 ppm based on a reduction in body weight gain, changes in hematology and clinical chemistry parameters, and an increased incidence of bile duct hyperplasia.  The NOAEL was 16.3 ppm.

      Thiram was administered to male and female beagle dogs via the diet for 52 weeks.  The LOAEL was 90 ppm (2.6 mg/kg/day) based on elevated cholesterol levels and increases in liver-to-body weight ratio. The NOAEL was 30 ppm (0.84 mg/kg/day).

   6. Animal Metabolism
      Thiram is readily absorbed (via the oral route), distributed, extensively metabolized and eliminated primarily in the expired air and urine of rats within 24 hours following single or repeated oral administrations.  No sex differences in metabolism were noted and very low levels were found in tissues (1.5-4.2%).

   7. Metabolite Toxicity
      No metabolites of toxicologic concern have been noted.

   8. Endocrine Disruption
      No indication of potential endocrine effects have been seen in any of the toxicological studies including reproductive and developmental toxicity studies conducted with thiram.

C.  Aggregate Exposure
	1.  Dietary exposure

	i. Food
      No additional dietary exposure is expected from this petition as no residues of thiram are found in the edible avocado pulp.

      ii. Drinking water
      No additional water exposure is expected as this is an import tolerance petition.

   1. Non-dietary exposure
      N/A-Remove

D.  Cumulative Effects
      The USEPA is developing methodologies for assessing cumulative risks for chemicals having common mechanisms of toxicity.   No available data indicate that the toxic effects produced by thiram would be cumulative with those of any other chemical compounds.

E.  Safety Determination

   1. U.S. Population
      The acute dietary exposure for the General U.S. Population was 23.3% of the ARfD.  The population group with the highest acute dietary exposure was Females 13-49 yrs.     Total acute exposure for females 13-49 years was estimated to be 0.009522 mg/kg/day, equivalent to 68.0% of the ARfD.

      Chronic dietary exposure for the General U.S. Population and the multiple population subgroups was 3.2% of the CRfD.

   2. Infants and Children
      The acute dietary exposure for Infants and Children ranged from 27.4% to 50% of the     ARfD.  The highest acute dietary exposure for Infants and Children was Children 1-2 years.

      Chronic dietary exposure for Infants and Children ranged from 4.2% to 9.2% of the CRfD with the highest chronic dietary exposure for Children 1-6 years.

F. International Tolerances
      Codex MRLS  have been established for the Dithiocarbamates as the sum of residues of zineb, ziram, thiram, nickel bis(dimethyl dithiocarbamate), ferbam, propineb, polycarbamate, mancozeb, maneb and metiram which are calculated as carbon disulfide.  Applicable MRLs (Codex, February 2006) for thiram are apples (5 ppm), bananas (2 ppm), stone fruits ( 7 ppm) and strawberries (5 ppm).


"CHADBOURNE John"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>05/18/2007 06:01 PM	To
Keith Barnett/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
cc
"Anderson, William"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"YBANEZ Hector"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>bcc

Subject
Essroc Sampling and Analysis - EPA request for mercury and TOC information

	History:
This message has been forwarded.

Keith,

Essroc will begin sampling next Monday, May 21, 2007 to comply with the
May 8 letter from Peter Tsirigotis.
I have been assigned responsibility for ensuring the success of the Essroc
sampling and analysis program.
Hector Ybanez asked that I prepare this note to you clarifying issues that
may have the potential to cause concerns.

I have attached an email distributed yesterday to plant environmental
engineers and quality control chemists concerning sampling requirements.
Please review that document and let us know if you have a different view
on any of the issues raised for sample collection.

The methods referenced in Mr. Tsirigotis' letter are essentially "SW846"
methods.  Essroc has retained Severen Trent Laboratories (STL) to provide
guidance and analytical capabilities to accomplish the sampling and
analysis required.  Dr. William Anderson of STL and I have discussed a
number
of issues raised on review of the methods to be applied to determine the
mercury and Total Organic Carbon (TOC) concentration in the thousands of
samples that will be taken.  Dr. Anderson has pointed out that SW846
methods are guidelines to which professional judgment must be applied to
produce practical, accurate results.  This is explained in various
chapters of SW846 where it becomes clear that the quality of the results
is the
responsibility of the analytical laboratories, even when difficulties
arise in the application of the SW846 methods.

Essroc intends to use a direct mercury analysis method that is in accord
with Method 7473 and capable of detecting concentrations as low as 20
parts per billion (ppb).  Depending on results, some samples will also be
analyzed using HF total digestion procedures to compare results with the
direct mercury analysis.  The laboratory Essroc has selected will follow
the quality control guidelines for duplicate, spiked and calibration
samples
as specified in the method.  Analytical reports will include the time the
samples were received and analyzed in addition to sample identification
parameters.  The samples will be retained on site at the analytical
laboratory through at least September, 2007 so that confirmatory analyses
can
be provided as needed.  Since the all of the samples have been exposed to
ambient or high temperatures, there will be no need to refrigerate any
of the samples.  In addition, the usual 28 day holding time for mercury
samples will not apply.  No change in the mercury concentrations for these
samples is expected under long-term (six month or greater) storage.  Given
the huge number of samples, the nature of the samples and the ability
to confirm previous results with reanalysis and comparative analytical
methods, the guidelines for refrigeration and holding time shall not apply.

Analysis for TOC will be conducted using the Lloyd Kahn modification of
Methods 9060 and 9060a.  One of the laboratories selected to do these
analyses employs a Shimadzu SSM-5000A TOC analyzer.  We understand that
phosphoric acid is substituted for hydrochloric or sulfuric acids
where samples high in carbonates are to be analyzed.  As explained above,
no refrigeration or holding times are required to provide accurate analyses
of these samples.  For some materials, TOC results will be lower than the
quantification limit of 500 ppm.  It would be unreasonable to run hundreds
of "non-detect" samples, when this information can be obtained by
analyzing composite samples plus randomly selected daily samples.  In
order to
determine which daily samples need to be analyzed for TOC, the laboratory
will prepare composite samples representing two week or longer intervals
from the daily composite samples.  If all of the long-term composite
samples and selected daily composite samples of a particular material (for
example, Bessemer Kiln 1 slurry feed) are below 500 ppm, no further
analyses for TOC for that material will be conducted.  The TOC
concentration will be reported
as less than 500 ppm. For materials which demonstrate the presence of
measurable levels of TOC, multiple analyses of daily composite samples
will be
run to determine the average and variability of TOC results.  The
requirement for quadruplicate analyses specified in methods 9060 and 9060a
will not
apply.  Rather, the laboratory analyst will determine the number of
additional samples to be analyzed based on the results for each sample
analyzed.

I feel sure you will appreciate the need to focus resources on the most
important questions as we undertake this voluminous sampling and analysis
program.

If you have any questions or comments, please call me at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
send an email.

Dr. John F Chadbourne
Senior Environmental Engineer
Essroc Cement Corp.
3251 Bath Pike
Nazareth, PA 18064

Essroc Cement Corp.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This message is intended exclusively for the party
or parties to whom it is addressed. This communication may contain
information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise
legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not one of the named
addressees, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or
disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and
delete/destroy all copies of the message. Any views or opinions presented
in this email are solely those of the author and might not represent those
of Essroc Cement Corp.
WARNING: Although Essroc Cement Corp. has taken reasonable precautions to
ensure no viruses are present in this e-mail, the company cannot accept
responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email
or attachments.
Essroc Cement Corp.
----- Message from "CHADBOURNE John"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>on Thu,
17 May 2007 18:24:10 -0400 -----
To:	"ANDREWS Mark"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"AYALA MELENDEZ Nivia"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"CAWTHRAY Mike"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
"CONN Corey"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"CONSTANT David"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"DUETTA Dale"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"HARP
Allen"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"HITT David"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
"LUNGU Radu"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"RIVERA Beatriz"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"SHAW Derek"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"YBANEZ
Hector"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>cc:	"AYALA MELENDEZ Nivia"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"CORDER Rebecca"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"COSTELLO James"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
"DUBCHAK Patricia"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"EATON Melissa"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"EMMERT Allen"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
"FARMER Kelly"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"GROTHEER Kevin"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"KLEMICK William"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"LEGATE Harold"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
"STOFFICK Thomas"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"WILT Larry"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"JANY Lou"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"CORDER
Rebecca"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"RIZZI Fabio"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"DIDION Josh"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
"Anderson, William"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Carswell, Patti"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:	Sample Preparation for Shipment to Analytical Laboratories
Folks,

As we agreed in the conference call last Friday, the samples to be taken
to comply with the EPA Section 114 letter that Essroc received last week
need to be collected with rigorous quality assurance protocols.
Representatives of Severen Trent Laboratories (STL) have assisted us by
preparing master sample logs, daily sample collection sheets and request
for analysis/chain of custody forms.

All samples sent to the laboratories must be homogeneous dry powder.  The
laboratories will remove a sample (<1 gram) from each container.  The
sample you send must be a sample from which a representative aliquot can
be removed with no further preparation.  For samples of fuel taken from
the burner pipe, CKD and ground feed to sent to the kiln, fine dry powders
are collected directly at the sampling locations.  For clinker samples,
please grind the samples finer than ~200 mesh before preparing split
samples.  For slurry from wet-process kilns, please dry the samples as you
normally do and retain excess dried feed material to prepare your daily
composite samples.  For raw material components, minimal drying is
recommended, so long as a homogeneous "dry" powder is produced for sample
splitting.  A clay or other material with high water affinity can be dried
at 105 C as necessary to produce a dry powder.  Excessive drying must be
avoided.

Sample splitting into thirds is accomplished by thoroughly shaking the
container of dry powder to achieve a homogeneous mixture.  Remove
approximately 200 grams of material from the thoroughly-shaken composite
sample mixture and place it on a clean sheet of paper.  Carefully divide
the pile of dry powder into "sixths" using a clean spatula to divide the
pile.  Remove two "opposite" sixths into one of the sample containers to
prepare the first split sample.  The two remaining "opposite sixths" to
prepare the second split sample.  The remaining sample is placed into a
third sample container.  One of the samples will be analyzed for mercury,
another for TOC and the third will be archived for repeat or subsequent
analysis.

The sample containers shipped from STL will be packaged with five cases
(24 count) per shipping box.  The packaging materials must be saved so
that the samples can be shipped to the laboratories in the same shipping
materials.  This procedure will minimize breakage.  Collect mercury
samples in one set of sample cases until 5 cases have been accumulated.  A
plant collecting 10 mercury samples per day will fill the sample shipping
box in 12 days of sampling.
(10 samples per day X 12 days of sampling = 120 samples = 5 cases X 24
samples per case).  There is no need to refrigerate samples.  The
materials used to manufacture cement are stored at ambient temperatures
and exposed to high temperatures in the pyroprocess.  Mercury present in
feed to the raw mills will be stable as complex mercury minerals.

Since the only constituents to be measured are mercury and TOC, you may
use grinding equipment which contains chromium metal to prepare these
samples.  The amount of chromium contamination possible from chromium
grinding equipment in this instance is acceptably low.

Please complete the daily sample collection log that describes the time
when each component of the composite sample was collected.  The initials
of the individual should be entered in addition to the time when the
sample was collected.  At least three samples are needed for each daily
composite sample, unless an equipment failure prevents collection of a
"shift" sample.  In the case where equipment outages result in a "short
sample" it is best to start preparation of another complete composite
sample.  If a "short" composite sample is submitted for analysis, it is
essential that notes on the sample collection sheet describe the reason
for collecting that sample.

When a shipment of samples has been collected, split and packaged for
delivery to the laboratories, a request for Analysis/Chain of Custody
sheet will need to be prepared and sent with the samples.

All mercury analyses for the first round of samples will be completed by:
G & C Coal Analysis Lab., Inc.
Attn: Michael J. Chestnut
1341 Hoffman Hollow Rd
Summerville, PA 15864
(814) 849-7301.

Information on TOC analysis will be distributed soon.

Please call me or send email if there are any questions or concerns.

John
Essroc Cement Corp.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This message is intended exclusively for the party
or parties to whom it is addressed. This communication may contain
information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise
legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not one of the named
addressees, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or
disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and
delete/destroy all copies of the message. Any views or opinions presented
in this email are solely those of the author and might not represent those
of Essroc Cement Corp.
WARNING: Although Essroc Cement Corp. has taken reasonable precautions to
ensure no viruses are present in this e-mail, the company cannot accept
responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email
or attachments.
Essroc Cement Corp.


                 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460
                                 OFFICE OF
                              CHEMICAL SAFETY AND
                             POLLUTION PREVENTION

                                          PC Code No.:	114004
                                          DP Barcode:		D 384659
                                          Date:	September 7, 2011
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations of Parent Amicarbazone and its Degradates for New Use on Turf and Conifers.

TO:	Kathryn Montague, Risk Manager
                  Registration Division (7505C)

AND	Christina Swartz, RAB2
                  Health Effects Division

FROM:	Andrew Shelby, Physical Scientist.
                  Environmental Risk Branch VI
                  Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507C)

THRU:	Mark Corbin, Chief
                  Environmental Risk Branch VI
                  Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507C)

Summary
This memo presents the Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs) for parent amicarbazone and its Des-amino and N-methyl Des-amino degradates for use in an FQPA human health risk assessment.  The two degradates chosen for this assessment are those expected to be present in natural/acidic or neutral environments where the parent is proposed to be applied.  Application of this herbicide is not proposed for soils with pH greater than 7.4. Parent amicarbazone and/or its degradates may reach both surface and groundwater under some conditions.  The registrant is seeking registration for use of this new chemical on turf on golf courses, sod farms, residential and commercial turf sites, park and recreation areas, school grounds and other turf areas and conifers in nurseries and field plantings (including Christmas trees).

The surface water and ground water estimates are calculated using PRZM/EXAMS and SCI-GROW, respectively.   The estimates are presented in Table 1 for surface water and groundwater for total toxic residues of amicarbazone to include the des-amino and N-methyl des-amino degradates as well as unextracted residues.

Table 1.  A list of the surface/ground water EDWC values for amicarbazone.

                                   Chemical
                           Surface water EDWCs (ppb)
                                 Ground water
Acute/Chronic EDWC (ppb)

                             Peak 96 hour average
                              Peak annual average
30 year average

                     Total Toxic Residues of amicarbazone

                                     33.3

                                     25.8

                                     11.1

                                      136

The above stated values for total toxic residues of amicarbazone represent upper-bound estimates that might be found in surface water and groundwater due to the use of amicarbazone on turf and conifers using one application at the maximum yearly rate (worst case scenario).  EDWCs would be reduced if degradates were not assumed equally toxic as amicarbazone or if unextracted residues were determined to be bound residues. Exclusion of degradates and bound residue results in reduction of EDWCs as much as 70%.  Exclusion of bound residue results in reduction of EDWCs as much as 20%.

Environmental fate of amicarbazone
Environmental Persistence
Amicarbazone has a low vapor pressure (9.75 x10[-9] mm Hg at 30 [o]C) and is highly soluble in water (solubility 4,600 ppm at 20 [o]C).  Based on submitted environmental fate studies, the chemical is moderately persistent in aerobic soil (t1/2= 37-87 days determined for five soils, shorter half-lives were determined under field conditions: t1/2= 19 to 29 days).  It appears to slowly degrade into a number of degradation products under different environmental conditions.  The three major degradates for amicarbazone are Des-amino, N-methyl Des-amino, and Decarboxamide.  Amicarbazone is stable to direct photolysis (indirect photolysis in natural pond water: t1/273 days); hydrolysis (except at pH 9: t1/2= 66 days); and anaerobic aquatic metabolism (t1/2= >4 years in the solid phase and 533 days in the water phase).  With the exception of natural clear water bodies subjected to sunlight, the major route of dissipation of amicarbazone appears to be bio-transformation.  In clear water bodies subjected to sunlight, indirect photolysis may contribute to amicarbazone dissipation.  Although photolysis might occur on soil surfaces (t1/2= 54 days), label recommended incorporation of the pesticide just after application may render this process unimportant.  Photolysis on soil study suggests that the resultant major degradate is Des-amino (Max. of 15% in irradiated samples compared with 6% in the dark) with Decarboxamide being a very minor degradate (Max. Of 1% in irradiated samples compared with 3% in the dark).

Environmental Metabolites
Laboratory and field studies identified only three major degradates for amicarbazone: Des-amino, N-methyl Des-amino and Decarboxamide.  Des-amino and  N-methyl Des-amino degradates were both the result of biodegradation in aerobic soil in the laboratory and in the field while Des-amino alone resulted from indirect photolysis in aqueous systems. Decarboxamide resulted only from hydrolysis in alkaline aqueous systems.  Mobility studies were the only reviewed studies for the major three degradates of amicarbazone, however, data from the single aerobic soil study on the parent and unreviewed degradate specific studies suggest that both Des-amino and N-methyl Des-amino are highly persistent.  Table 2 is a summary of available data indicating maximum concentrations of degradation products found in submitted fate studies.

Table 2. Maximum concentrations of various degradation products found in submitted fate studies.

Degradate

Max Degradate Concentration (% of applied) and Time (days) to Max Concentration

                                Hydrolysis [2]

                        Indirect Aqueous Photolysis [1]

                                 Aerobic Soil

                                  Anaerobic
                                    Aquatic

                                    Aerobic
                                    Aquatic

                                     TFD

Des-amino

                                     None

                                      16%
                                   (35 days)

                                     63%
                                  (125 days)

                                     None
                              (Parent is stable)

                                 No Acceptable
                                     Data

                                    26-27%
                                  (59-61days)

N-methyl Des-amino

                                     None

                                     None

                                      11%
                                  (360 days)

                                     None

Decarboxamide

                                     29%
                                  (30 days)
                                  Only @ pH 9

                                      9%
                                  (35 days)
                              with 2% in the dark

                                     None

                                     None
[1] In natural pond water, pH 8.4, note that parent is stable to direct aqueous photolysis.

Amicarbazone is not to be applied on soils with pH values higher than 7.4.  Therefore, the fate of the chemical in only neutral and acidic conditions is important to this assessment.  In such environments, amicarbazone and two of its major degradates (Des-amino, N-methyl Des-amino) are expected to be important.  Only in cases where amicarbazone is transported into alkaline ground water, surface water bodies and/or soils, the third degradate (Decarboxamide) is expected to become important.

Expected Mobility of Amicarbazone and its Metabolites
Available data suggest that amicarbazone is very highly mobile (Koc range= 16.7 to 37.0 L kg[-1], from adsorption/desorption and aged leaching studies).  Additionally, adsorption/desorption and aged leaching studies, suggest that all of the three major degradates of amicarbazone are very highly mobile (ASTM 1996).  Determined Koc values were: Des-amino (Koc range= 26.4 to 42.3 L kg[-1]), N-methyl Des-amino (Koc range= 34.3 to 56.4 L kg[-1]) and Decarboxamide (Koc range= 9.4 to 16.2 L kg[-1]).

Given the moderate persistence/high mobility and solubility of the parent and the apparent high persistence/high mobility of its two degradates, parent is expected to dissipate slowly and at the same time be vulnerable to leaching/run-off.  The resultant Des-amino and N-methyl Des-amino degradates are expected to behave similar to their parent and become the major terminal degradates of this chemical in surface and ground water.

In the case of amicarbazone being transported into alkaline ground water, surface water bodies and/or soils, the third degradate (Decarboxamide) is expected to become important contaminant to surface and/or groundwater. This is because decarboxamide was the major hydrolysis degradate in alkaline conditions and it was determined to be highly mobile.  Possible contamination of surface and ground water with this degradate is expected to increase if it was determined to be highly persistent.

Estimating Drinking Water Exposure from Surface Water Sources

Surface water EDWCs were estimated using PRZM/EXAMS.  Input parameters are presented and described in the following table.

Table 3. PRZM/EXAMS input parameter values for ambicarbazone use on turf and conifers
                               PARAMETER (units)
                                   VALUE(S)
                                    SOURCE
                                    COMMENT
Application Rate (kg a.i./ha)
                                 Parent: 0.490

                  Product label; MRID 45121731; MRID 48237507
Represents the maximum possible single application rate per crop season (year) for all new uses.
Number of Applications
                                       1

       Maximum single application rate equals maximum annual application
Molecular weight (g/mol)
                                  Parent: 241

                               Product Chemistry
                                       -
Henry's Law Constant (atm-m[3]/mol)
                                 1.5 x 10[-12]

   (Vapor Pressure [torr]/760)/(Solubility [mg/L]/Molecular Weight [g/mol])
Vapor Pressure (torr)
                                 2.2 x 10[-8]

                                       -
Solubility in Water @ 20 [O]C, (mg/L or ppm)
                                    4,600
                               Product Chemistry
                                       -
Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient  (mL/g)
                                 Parent: 16.7

                    45121719; 45121732; 45121801; 45121733
KOC ranges from 16.7 to 37.0.  Lowest non-sand KOC used for modeling.  KOC is correlated to KD (r[2] = 0.62).
CAM (Chemical Application Method)
                                       1

                  ground spray; pre-emergence, unincorporated
Depth of Incorporation (inches)
                                       0
                                 Product label
                                       -
Application efficiency (decimal)
                                     0.99

Spray drift fraction (decimal)
                                     0.064

Application date
                                  February 15

Multiple application dates surrounding the emergence dates for highest agricultural and non-agricultural EDWCs were modeled also
Hydrolysis Half-life (days)
                                    Stable
    45121730 (parent); 48073601 (N-methyl Des-amino); 48237506 (Des-amino)

Aqueous Photolysis Half-life @ pH 7 (days)
                                    Stable
                                   45121803

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half-life (days)
                                     2816

                     2x Aerobic Soil Metabolism half-life
Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half-life (days)
                                    Stable

Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half-life (days)
                                     1408

                              45121731; 48237507
90[th] percentile average of 5 total toxic residue half-life estimates: 533 days, 990 days, 1155 days, 1155 days and 1733 days.  These total toxic residue half-lives include des-amino and N-methyl des-amino degradates along with ambient unextracted residues.
Percent Crop Area
                                       1

      PCAs for turf and conifers have not been developed and/or approved
1 "Input Parameter Guidance" refers to Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides; Version 2.1, October 22, 2009.

For new uses on turf and conifers, nine PRZM scenarios and two application dates were utilized with the California Nursery scenario resulting in highest EDWCs.  All available scenarios representing turf and conifers were used and two early spring application dates were used to represent label application recommendations.  Results for the all scenarios and application dates are presented below.  PRZM/EXAMS output for the highest modeled concentrations (CA Nursery/February 15) is attached as Appendix 1.

Table 4.  PRZM/EXAMS EDWCs for amicarbazone use on turf and conifers
Scenario
Application date
Peak 96 hour average (ppb)
Peak annual average (ppb)
30-year average (ppb)
CA Nursery
February 15
                                     33.3
                                     25.8
                                     11.1

March 1
                                     15.2
                                     13.9
                                      6.5
FL Turf
February 15
                                      4.3
                                      3.5
                                      2.4

March 1
                                      4.0
                                      3.1
                                      2.4
FL Nursery
February 15
                                     12.7
                                      3.3
                                      1.5

March 1
                                     22.3
                                      3.7
                                      1.5
MI Nursery
February 15
                                      7.7
                                      2.6
                                      1.5

March 1
                                      9.3
                                      3.2
                                      1.9
NJ Nursery
February 15
                                     11.3
                                      3.8
                                      1.5

March 1
                                     12.5
                                      4.6
                                      1.9
OR Christmas tree
February 15
                                      5.5
                                      4.6
                                      3.0

March 1
                                      3.8
                                      3.3
                                      2.6
OR Nursery
February 15
                                      5.7
                                      3.6
                                      2.0

March 1
                                      5.3
                                      3.3
                                      1.8
PA Turf
February 15
                                      4.4
                                      3.7
                                      2.7

March 1
                                      5.3
                                      4.4
                                      3.0
TN Nursery
February 15
                                     13.7
                                      4.0
                                      1.8

March 1
                                     14.6
                                      3.1
                                      1.4

Estimating Drinking Water Exposure from Ground Water Sources

Groundwater EDWCs were estimated using SCI-GROW.  Input parameters are presented and described in the following table.

Table 5. Summary of SCI-GROW input parameters for total toxic residues of amicarbazone.
Parameter
Value
Reference

Application Rate
 (lb a.i./acre)
And
(Number of Applications)

                                  0.4375 (1)

Maximum label rate for turf and conifers

Aerobic Soil Metabolism t(1/2) (days)

                                     1155

Median value from 5 studies... (451217-31)

Koc (L Kg[-1])

                                     24.2

Median of  7 values (451217-19/32)
* Fate data values are as per Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides; Version 2.1 October 22, 2009

Refinements to groundwater EDWCs can be made using the provisional Tier II model, PRZM-GW.  Though mitigation of maximum application rates can be modeled through SCIGROW, PRZM-GW can allow for other mitigation options to be explored such as well set-backs and geographic restrictions. The groundwater EDWs produced by SCIGROW is 136 ppb for acute and chronic endpoints.

Appendix 1

stored as CAnursery215.out
Chemical: amicarbazone
PRZM environment: CAnurserySTD.txt	modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:16:36
EXAMS environment: ir298.exv	modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:14:08
Metfile: w23188.dvf	modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:15:38
Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly
1961	1.279	1.278	1.274	1.266	1.261	1.072
1962	4.07	4.051	3.964	3.924	3.906	3.442
1963	5.155	5.149	5.123	5.098	5.084	4.644
1964	5.391	5.389	5.38	5.363	5.35	5.038
1965	7.55	7.534	7.467	7.089	6.912	5.926
1966	4.056	4.041	3.975	3.889	3.665	3.025
1967	3.598	3.596	3.59	3.57	3.561	3.286
1968	12.23	12.13	11.74	11.32	11.21	9.385
1969	10.49	10.22	9.176	8.997	8.957	8.656
1970	39.93	39.56	39.28	38.83	38.64	32.47
1971	35.55	35.33	34.6	34.24	33.97	32.1
1972	27.5	27.49	27.47	27.41	27.36	26.18
1973	20.34	20.31	20.16	19.75	19.72	19.1
1974	18.04	17.83	16.99	16.16	16.14	15.6
1975	16.28	16.11	15.42	14.42	14.1	13.3
1976	12.97	12.97	12.96	12.34	12.19	11.68
1977	10.45	10.35	10.08	10.06	9.993	8.592
1978	9.111	9.025	8.729	8.203	8.071	7.254
1979	6.108	5.845	4.884	4.257	4.233	4.101
1980	4.654	4.577	4.301	4.012	3.926	3.618
1981	17.87	17.65	16.74	14.83	14.34	11.68
1982	11.18	10.99	10.75	10.44	10.32	9.156
1983	10.19	10.09	9.52	8.392	8.099	7.499
1984	7.997	7.993	7.981	7.952	7.929	7.54
1985	6.423	6.421	6.413	6.397	6.384	5.781
1986	34.54	33.9	31.57	29.46	28.31	22.18
1987	19.03	18.92	18.54	18.43	18.3	17.34
1988	12.29	12.25	12.07	11.75	11.61	9.391
1989	10.09	10.08	10.05	10.01	9.982	9.356
1990	17.31	17.26	17.08	16.96	16.89	15.37

Sorted results
Prob.	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly
0.032258064516129	39.93	39.56	39.28	38.83	38.64	32.47
0.0645161290322581	35.55	35.33	34.6	34.24	33.97	32.1
0.0967741935483871	34.54	33.9	31.57	29.46	28.31	26.18
0.129032258064516	27.5	27.49	27.47	27.41	27.36	22.18
0.161290322580645	20.34	20.31	20.16	19.75	19.72	19.1
0.193548387096774	19.03	18.92	18.54	18.43	18.3	17.34
0.225806451612903	18.04	17.83	17.08	16.96	16.89	15.6
0.258064516129032	17.87	17.65	16.99	16.16	16.14	15.37
0.290322580645161	17.31	17.26	16.74	14.83	14.34	13.3
0.32258064516129	16.28	16.11	15.42	14.42	14.1	11.68
0.354838709677419	12.97	12.97	12.96	12.34	12.19	11.68
0.387096774193548	12.29	12.25	12.07	11.75	11.61	9.391
0.419354838709677	12.23	12.13	11.74	11.32	11.21	9.385
0.451612903225806	11.18	10.99	10.75	10.44	10.32	9.356
0.483870967741936	10.49	10.35	10.08	10.06	9.993	9.156
0.516129032258065	10.45	10.22	10.05	10.01	9.982	8.656
0.548387096774194	10.19	10.09	9.52	8.997	8.957	8.592
0.580645161290323	10.09	10.08	9.176	8.392	8.099	7.54
0.612903225806452	9.111	9.025	8.729	8.203	8.071	7.499
0.645161290322581	7.997	7.993	7.981	7.952	7.929	7.254
0.67741935483871	7.55	7.534	7.467	7.089	6.912	5.926
0.709677419354839	6.423	6.421	6.413	6.397	6.384	5.781
0.741935483870968	6.108	5.845	5.38	5.363	5.35	5.038
0.774193548387097	5.391	5.389	5.123	5.098	5.084	4.644
0.806451612903226	5.155	5.149	4.884	4.257	4.233	4.101
0.838709677419355	4.654	4.577	4.301	4.012	3.926	3.618
0.870967741935484	4.07	4.051	3.975	3.924	3.906	3.442
0.903225806451613	4.056	4.041	3.964	3.889	3.665	3.286
0.935483870967742	3.598	3.596	3.59	3.57	3.561	3.025
0.967741935483871	1.279	1.278	1.274	1.266	1.261	1.072

0.1	33.836	33.259	31.16	29.255	28.215	25.78
					Average of yearly averages:	11.1254

Inputs generated by pe5.pl - Novemeber 2006

Data used for this run:
Output File: CAnursery215
Metfile:	w23188.dvf
PRZM scenario:	CAnurserySTD.txt
EXAMS environment file:	ir298.exv
Chemical Name:	amicarbazone
Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments
Molecular weight	mwt	241	g/mol
Henry's Law Const.	henry	1.5E-12	atm-m^3/mol
Vapor Pressure	vapr	2.2E-8	torr
Solubility	sol	4600	mg/L
Kd	Kd		mg/L
Koc	Koc	16.7	mg/L
Photolysis half-life	kdp	0	days	Half-life
Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	2816	days	Halfife
Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	0	days	Halfife
Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	1408	days	Halfife
Hydrolysis:	pH 7	0	days	Half-life
Method:	CAM	1	integer	See PRZM manual
Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	0	cm
Application Rate:	TAPP	0.49	kg/ha
Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.99	fraction
Spray Drift	DRFT	0.064	fraction of application rate applied to pond
Application Date	Date	15-02	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm
Record 17:	FILTRA
	IPSCND	1
	UPTKF
Record 18:	PLVKRT
	PLDKRT
	FEXTRC	0.5
Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	Reservoir
Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF		none, monthly or total(average of entire run)


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:

Notice of intent to form a negotiated rulemaking committee

PAGES:  4


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10060-10061]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05109]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2829-010]

City of Loveland; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing,
Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and is available
for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: License Amendment.
    b. Project No: 2829-010.
    c. Date Filed: March 4, 2019.
    d. Applicant: City of Loveland, Colorado.
    e. Name of Project: Loveland Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: Big Thompson River, in Larimer County, Colorado.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Kimberly Fentress, Project Manager, City of
Loveland, Colorado, 200 North Wilson Street, Building 1, Loveland, CO
80537; phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: David Rudisail at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: April 12, 2019.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene, protests, and comments 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<PHONE_NUMBER> (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-2829-010. Comments emailed to Commission
staff are not considered part of the Commission record.
    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: The City of Loveland has requested to
amend its license to allow filling of underground pipeline on private
land in the Idlewild Subdivision. The purpose of the proposed fill is
to prevent future subsidence of the pipe in the vicinity of homes,
roads, and other infrastructure.
    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 website 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
(202) 502-8659. 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: March 13, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-05109 Filed 3-18-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26356-26358]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10703]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2010-0060]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a document
dated March 12, 2012, the Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) has petitioned
the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a waiver of compliance
from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety regulations. FRA
assigned the petition to Docket Number FRA-2010-0060.
    Pursuant to the requirements of 49 CFR Section 236.1035 (Field
testing requirements), NS has submitted the Interoperable Electronic
Train Management System (I-ETMS) Positive Train Control (PTC) test
waiver request, Version 1.1, dated March 12, 2012, along with
associated required documents for request of relief from select parts
of Subparts A-G. In conjunction with those requests, per 49 CFR Section
236.1035, the NS test waiver includes requests for relief from
regulations other than those contained in Subparts A-G.
    I-ETMS is a vital overlay system as defined in 49 CFR Part 236,
Subpart I, Section 236.1015(e)(2) and fully described in the NS I-ETMS
PTC Development Plan (FRA-2010-0060-0002) found in Appendix A, and for
which FRA Type Approval FRA-TA-2011-02 was issued on August 26, 2011.
    The I-ETMS system is designed to support different railroads and
their individual methods of operation and is intended to be
implementable across a broad spectrum of railroads without significant
modification. This design approach supports interoperability across
railroads as I-ETMS-equipped locomotives apply consistent warning and
enforcement functionality regardless of trackage ownership.
    NS seeks a waiver of compliance from certain sections of 49 CFR,
including Parts 216, Special Notice and Emergency Order Procedures:
Railroad Track, Locomotive and Equipment; 217, Railroad Operating
Rules; 218, Railroad Operating Practices; 229, Railroad Locomotive
Safety Standards; 233, Signal Systems Reporting Requirements; 235,
Instructions Governing Applications for Approval of a Discontinuance or
Material Modification of a Signal System or Relief from the
Requirements of Part 236; and 240, Qualification and Certification of
Locomotive Engineers. NS also seeks a waiver of compliance from 49 CFR
Section 211.51 (Tests) to allow them to test I-ETMS, on nonrevenue
trains, on the Charleston District from Charleston, SC, milepost (MP)
SC 7.0, to Andrews Yard, Columbia, SC, MP SC 128.9; and on the Columbia
District from Andrews Yard, Columbia, SC, MP R 108.5, to Charolette
Junction, MP R0.0.
    The following are the waiver requests and their justifications:

Section 216.13, Special Notice for Repairs--Locomotive

    Waiver is requested for I-ETMS-equipped locomotives to the extent
that non-operation of I-ETMS equipment installed on board, whether
through malfunction or deactivation, shall not be construed as an
unsafe condition requiring special notice for repairs. Waiver is also
sought for non-I-ETMS-equipped locomotives operating in I-ETMS
territory to the extent that the absence of I-ETMS equipment on board
shall not be construed as an unsafe condition requiring special notice
for repairs.
    Justification: With or without I-ETMS equipment operating on board
the controlling locomotive, a train remains subject to existing
operating rules. I-ETMS tests require flexibility in installing,
removing, turning on, and turning off the equipment.

Section 217.9, Program of Operational Tests and Inspections;
Recordkeeping

    Waiver is requested, exempting operation of I-ETMS equipment and
procedures from the requirements for operational tests and inspections,
and associated recordkeeping.
    Justification: During the I-ETMS test phase, procedures for using
I-ETMS equipment and functions will be refined and modified. Until such
procedures are defined in the PTC Safety Plan (PTCSP), or associated
documentation, they cannot be addressed in NS operating rules. I-ETMS
is expected to have minimal impact on existing operating

rules due to its nature of overlay to existing methods of operation.

Section 217.11, Program of Instruction on Operating Rules;
Recordkeeping; Electronic Recordkeeping

    Waiver is requested, exempting I-ETMS testing and its equipment and
procedures from the requirements for instruction and recordkeeping.
    Justification: During the I-ETMS test phase, procedures for using
I-ETMS equipment and functions will be refined and modified. Until such
procedures are defined in the PTCSP, or associated documentation, they
cannot be addressed in NS operating rules. I-ETMS is expected to have
minimal impact on existing operating rules due to its nature of overlay
to existing methods of operation.

Part 218, Subpart D, Prohibition Against Tampering With Safety Devices

    Waiver is requested, exempting onboard I-ETMS equipment from the
requirements of Sections 218.51, 218.53, 218.55, 218.57, 218.59, and
218.61 to the extent that I-ETMS equipment on board a locomotive shall
not be considered a ``safety device'' subject to the provisions of this
subpart at any time during the test and demonstration phase.
    Justification: I-ETMS tests and demonstrations require flexibility
in installing, removing, turning on, and turning off the onboard
equipment. NS also needs the flexibility to permanently disable or
remove I-ETMS equipment in the event that a revenue service system is
not implemented.

Section 229.7, Prohibited Acts

    Waiver is requested such for both I-ETMS equipped and non-I-ETMS
equipped locomotives operating in the I-ETMS test territory during the
test period.
    Justification: Non-operation of I-ETMS equipment installed on board
a locomotive, whether through malfunction or deactivation, shall not be
construed as an unsafe condition subject to this section. Additionally,
in the absence of I-ETMS equipment onboard, non-I-ETMS-equipped
locomotives operating in I-ETMS territory shall not be construed as an
unsafe condition subject to this regulation. The I-ETMS test program
requires flexibility in installing, removing, turning on, and turning
off the onboard equipment. NS also requires the flexibility to
permanently disable or remove I-ETMS equipment in the event that a
production system is not implemented. The train remains subject to the
safety provisions of the existing method of operation whether or not I-
ETMS equipment on board a locomotive is functioning.

Section 229.135, Event Recorders

    Waiver is requested to the extent that I-ETMS equipment on board a
locomotive shall not be considered an ``event recorder'' subject to the
provisions of this section during the test phase.
    Justification: I-ETMS equipment by design will operate
intermittently during the test phase. The data accumulated by the
onboard I-ETMS equipment will be used to develop and refine I-ETMS
functions. Such data can be expected to contain anomalies that do not
reflect true operating conditions but, by analysis, will contribute to
achieving necessary objectives in the I-ETMS design.

Section 233.9, Reports

    Waiver is requested, exempting I-ETMS operations in the test phase
from the reporting requirements of this section.
    Justification: NS recognizes that a revenue service I-ETMS system
is subject to the provisions of this section; however, imposition of
these requirements during the test and demonstration phase would be an
unnecessary paperwork burden. PTC testing should not affect the final
inventory of the NS signal system, which will be included in the signal
system 5-year report.

Section 235.5, Changes Requiring Filing of Application

    Waiver is requested, exempting I-ETMS from the requirements of this
section during the test phase.
    Justification: I-ETMS tests require flexibility in installing,
removing, modifying, turning on, and turning off the I-ETMS equipment.
NS also requires the flexibility to permanently disable or remove I-EMS
equipment in the event that a revenue service system is not
implemented.

Section 240.127, Criteria for Examining Skill Performance

    Waiver is requested exempting I-ETMS from the testing requirements
for qualification and certification of locomotive engineers during the
test phase.
    Justification: Criteria and procedures for engineer performance
evaluation, as related to I-ETMS, do not yet exist; they will be
identified and defined during the I-ETMS test phase and included in the
PTCSP.

Section 240.129, Criteria for Monitoring Operational Performance of
Certified Engineers

    Waiver is requested, exempting I-ETMS from the performance
monitoring procedures during the I-ETMS test phase.
    Justification: Criteria and procedures for I-ETMS monitoring the
performance of engineers using I-ETMS do not yet exist; they will be
identified and defined during the I-ETMS test phase and included in the
PTCSP.
    In addition, NS is requesting a waiver of compliance from certain
portions of 49 CFR Part 236, Rules, Standards, and Instructions
Governing the Installation, Inspection, Maintenance, and Repair of
Signal and Train Control Systems, Devices, and Appliances; for
information only and of which FRA is not receiving comments. Those
sections are:
     236.11, Adjustment, repair, or replacement of component.
     236.15, Timetable instructions.
     236.23, Aspects and indications.
     236.76, Tagging of wires and interference of wires or tags
with signal apparatus.
     236.101, Purpose of inspection and tests; removal from
service of relay or device failing to meet test requirements.
     236.109, Time releases, timing relays and timing devices.
     236.110, Results of tests.
     236.501, Forestalling device and speed control.
     236.552, Insulation resistance; requirement.
     236.566, Locomotive of each train operating in train stop,
train control or cab signal territory; equipped.
     236.567, Restrictions imposed when device fails and/or is
cut out en route.
     236.586, Daily or after trip test.
     236.587, Departure test.
     236.588, Periodic test.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they

should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by June 18, 2012 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78), or online at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 26, 2012.
Ron Hynes,
Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012-10703 Filed 5-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: October 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 200)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63708]
[DOCID:fr18oc10-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0650; Airspace Docket No. 10-AWP-9]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Kalaupapa, HI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action will establish Class E airspace at Kalaupapa, HI,
to accommodate aircraft using a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global
Positioning System (GPS) Standard Instrument Approach Procedures
(SIAPs) at Kalaupapa Airport. This will improve the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, January 13, 2011. 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On August 16, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to establish controlled airspace at
Kalaupapa, HI (75 FR 49868). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9U dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by establishing Class E surface airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface, at Kalaupapa Airport, to accommodate IFR
aircraft executing new RNAV (GPS) SIAPs at the airport. This action is
necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations.
    The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments
are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this
regulation: (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
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to
issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S.
Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses 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 establishes
controlled airspace at Kalaupapa Airport, Kalaupapa, HI.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 14 CFR Part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 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 the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AWP HI E5 Kalaupapa, HI [New]

Kalaupapa Airport, HI
    (Lat. 21[deg]12'40'' N., long. 156[deg]58'25'' W.)

    That airspace extending from 700 feet above the surface within a
6.3-mile radius of the Kalaupapa Airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on October 6, 2010.
John Warner,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-26095 Filed 10-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P