ET	=	Exposure Time (8 hrs).

and

DFRt = AR * F * (1-D)t * CF2 * CF3

where:

AR	=	application rate (0.11 lb a.i./A);

F	=	fraction of a.i. retained on foliage (20%);

D	=	fraction of residue that dissipates daily (10%);

t	=	post-application day on which exposure is being assessed;

CF2	=	weight unit conversion factor to convert the lbs a.i. in the
application rate to µg for the DFR value

		(4.54E8 µg/lb); and

CF3	=	area unit conversion factor to convert the surface area units in
the application rate to cm2 for

		the DFR value (2.47E-8 acre/cm2).

( DFR = 0.11 lb a.i./A * 0.20 * (1-0)0 * 4.54 x 108 µg/lb *  2.47 x10-8
A/cm² = 0.25 µg/cm2

PDR =  (0.25 µg/cm2  * 0.001 mg/µg * 5,000 cm2/hr * 8 hr/day) / 70 kg
= 0.143 mg/kg/day.

MOE = NOAEL ( PDR

( 38 mg a.i./kg/day ( 0.086 mg a.i./kg/day = 450

HED’s level of concern is for MOEs <100.  In this case the estimated
MOE is >100 and, therefore, not of concern to HED.

Grapes

The registrant has presented compound specific DFR data for indoxacarb
on grapes (MRID 45900302; Memo, M. Dow, 10-MAR-2004; DP#: 299249).  In
this study, two applications were made, 5 days apart.  Since the revised
label indicates a 21-day interval for grape application, HED utilizes
the study data taken after the first application.  The maximum DFR
reported after the first application was from the Washington site (0.532
µg/cm²).

TC = 10,000 cm2/hr Grapes (table/raisin)

0.532 µg/cm2 * 10,000 cm2/hr * 8 hr/day * 0.001 mg/µg *  1/70 kg bw =
0.608 mg/kg bw/day.

MOE = NOAEL ( ADD then 50 mg/kg bw/day ( 0.608 mg/kg bw/day = 82.

For grapes, the unadjusted NOAEL (50 mg/kg/day) has been used since the
formulation measured in the DFR study is the same as that measured in
the toxicity studies.  An MOE < 100 is of concern to HED.  Since the
highest DFR value reported results in a MOE of concern, HED presents the
summary study results for all three study sites and the associated
MOE’s for the DFR values reported for each day, post-application.

Table 7.2.1.  Indoxacarb DFR Data for Grape Vines in California.

Sampling Interval

(days after treatment)	Corrected DFR level1

(μg/cm2)

	Replicate 1	Replicate 2	Replicate 3	Arithmetic Mean

(μg/cm2)

0.083	0.174	0.179	0.186	0.180

1	0.180	0.177	0.151	0.169

3	0.116	0.196	0.136	0.150

5	0.097	0.120	0.139	0.118

1  Raw residue data corrected for overall average field fortification
recovery of 84.3%.

Table 7.2.2.  Indoxacarb DFR Data for Grape Vines in New York.

Sampling Interval

(days after treatment)	Corrected DFR level1

(μg/cm2)

	Replicate 1	Replicate 2	Replicate 3	Arithmetic Mean

(μg/cm2)

0.083	0.450	0.328	0.380	0.386

1	0.368	0.241	0.288	0.299

3	0.259	0.284	0.245	0.263

5	0.166	0.150	0.188	0.168

1  Raw residue data corrected for overall average field fortification
recovery of 87.3%

Table 7.2.3.  Indoxacarb DFR Data for Grape Vines in Washington.

Sampling Interval

(days after treatment)	Corrected DFR level1

(μg/cm2)

	Replicate 1	Replicate 2	Replicate 3	Arithmetic Mean

(μg/cm2)

0.083	0.466	0.543	0.585	0.532

1	0.436	0.415	0.464	0.438

3	0.426	0.432	0.413	0.424

5	0.348	0.382	0.426	0.385

1  Raw residue data corrected for overall average field fortification
recovery of 85.4%

To reiterate, ADD (mg a.i./kg bw/day) = DFR µg/cm2 * TC cm2/hr * hr/day
* 0.001 mg/µg * 1/70 kg bw where TC is 10,000 cm²/hr for 8 hr/day and

MOE = NOAEL (50 mg a.i./kg bw/day) ( ADD (mg a.i./kg bw/day)

Table 7.2.4.  Summary of MOEs Associated with DFR for Table/Raisin
Grapes with a TC of 10,000 cm²/hr for Three Treatment Sites (CA, NY and
WA).

Post-application day	DFR µg/cm²	ADD	MOE

California

Day 0 (12 hours)	0.180	0.210	240

Day 1	0.169	0.190	260

Day 3	0.150	0.170	290

Day 5	0.118	0.130	370

New York

Day 0 (12 hours)	0.386	0.440	110

Day 1	0.299	0.340	150

Day 3	0.263	0.300	170

Day 5	0.168	0.190	260

Washington

Day 0 (12 hours)	0.532	0.610	82

Day 1	0.438	0.500	100

Day 3	0.424	0.480	100

Day 5	0.385	0.440	110

Sample calculation:

0.180 µg/cm² * 10,000 cm2/hr * 8 hr/day * 0.001 mg/µg * 1/70 kg bw =
0.210 mg/kg bw/day.

$

	@

€

%

Q

S

Z

[

a

d

h

j

‚

œ

À

Ë

Ì

é

ñ

ö

ü

ó

ù

û

hê

ú

h

h

hû

hê

 hû

 hû

 hû

	@

€

옍)

 h

 h

hñ`

옍)

h

 h

h

h

h

h

将

将

将

将

将

将

将

将

将

将

	@

$

@

$

@

$

@

$

@

$

@

$

@

$

@

h

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

瑹䏶+Ȁ

摧惱

hñ`

hñ`

 hñ`

hñ`

~

¾

摧惱

}

€

‚

ƒ

„

†

š

›

¼

½

hñ`

摧∻&

gd;"&

옍)

옍)

h

h

h

h

 h

h

h

m

耀젆

	”

耀젆

耀젆

È

È

È

È

È

È

È

È

È

È

耀젆

耀젆

耀젆

耀젆

耀젆

耀젆

@

옍)

&

옍)

 h

@

옍)

瑹➬±咊

摧䱜©

愀Ĥ摧䱜©

愀Ĥ摧䱜©

愀Ĥ摧䱜©

愀Ĥ摧䱜©

愀Ĥ摧䱜©

愀Ĥ摧䱜©

愀Ĥ摧䱜©

옍)

摧䈂

@

옍)

옍)

&

&

&

&

&

@

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

옍)

@

옍)

H

š

‚

£

¤

®

¯

¶

·

½

¾

Ì

Í

ß

à

ñ

ò

@

	¶

	¶

	¶

@

0.210 mg a.i./kg bw/day = 240

For table and raisin grapes, where the post-application activities are
cane tying and turning, the MOE is not of concern to HED on the day of
application at the California and New York sites and on Day 1
post-application at the Washington site.

For wine and juice grapes, use of the maximum reported DFR value and a
TC of 5,000 cm²/hr results in a MOE >100 on the day of application,
which is not of concern to HED.

TC = 5,000/Grapes (wine/juice)

0.532 µg/cm2 * 5,000 cm2/hr * 8 hr/day * 0.001 mg/µg * 1/70 kg bw =
0.304 mg/kg bw/day.

MOE = NOAEL ( ADD then 50 mg/kg bw/day ( 0.304 mg/kg bw/day = 164.

Turf Uses

For the turf uses, TCs were taken from a post-application exposure study
on golf course maintenance (MRID 46734001).  It should be noted that a
previous study on golf course maintenance (MRID 45530101) had been
submitted, but had been determined to be unacceptable.  Data from MRID
46734001 are believed to be more appropriate for this use.  For
transplanting sod, the TC (6800 cm2/hr) was taken from MRID 45432303.
The TCs used are conservative, and were used here per ExpoSAC
recommendation.

Compound-specific data were not available for the proposed new crop
uses.  Therefore, HED assumes 5% of the application rate is available as
turf transferable residue on day zero after application.  This is
adapted from the ExpoSAC SOP No. 003 (07-MAY-1998 - Revised
07-AUG-2000).  HED considers this practice to be conservative, that is
to say, protective.

TC = 6,800/Turf harvest

0.000675 lb a.i./A * 0.05 * (1-0)0 * 4.54 x 108 µg/lb *  2.47 x10-8
A/cm² = 0.000378 µg/cm2 , therefore,

0.000378 µg/cm2 * 6,800 cm2/hr * 8 hr/day * 0.001 mg/µg * 1/70 kg bw =
0.00029 mg/kg bw/day.

MOE = NOAEL ( ADD then 38 mg/kg bw/day ( 0.00029 mg/kg bw/day = 130,000.

TC = 3,400/Turf Golf Course maintenance

0.000675 lb a.i./A * 0.05 * (1-0)0 * 4.54 x 108 µg/lb *  2.47 x10-8
A/cm² = 0.000378 µg/cm2 , therefore,

0.000378 µg/cm2 * 3,400 cm2/hr * 8 hr/day * 0.001 mg/µg * 1/70 kg bw =
0.00015 mg/kg bw/day.

MOE = NOAEL ( ADD then 38 mg/kg bw/day ( 0.00015 mg/kg bw/day = 260,000.

A MOE of 100 is adequate to protect agricultural workers from
post-application exposures to indoxacarb.  Except as reported earlier
for table and raisin grapes, the MOEs are > 100, and the estimated risks
are not of concern to HED.

REI

Indoxacarb is in Acute Toxicity Category IV for acute dermal, III for
primary eye irritation, IV for primary skin irritation and it is not a
dermal sensitizer.  Although the interim WPS REI of 12 hours is adequate
to protect agricultural workers from most post-application exposures to
indoxacarb, a 24-hour REI is recommended to be protective of
post-application activities in table and raisin grapes.

7.3.  Incidents tc \l2 "7.3.	Incidents

The OPP’s Incident Data System (25-MAR-2002) indicates there are no
incidents reported for the compound indoxacarb.

8.0.  DATA NEEDS/LABEL REQUIREMENTS tc \l1 "8.0.	DATA NEEDS/LABEL
REQUIREMENTS

8.1.  Toxicology tc \l2 "8.1.	Toxicology

None.

8.2.  Chemistry tc \l2 "8.2.	Chemistry

Revised Section B.  Based on the available southern pea field trial
data, it is unclear whether the petitioner is pursuing a use on
succulent or dry southern peas.  The proposed label directions for
southern peas should be amended to allow applications only to varieties
used to produce dry seed.  If the petitioner intends to support a
generalized use on southern peas, field trials will be required for the
succulent variety as well.  In addition, the use directions for southern
peas should prohibit applications to varieties grown for livestock feed.
 For turnip greens, a restriction should be placed on the label to
prohibit use on dual purpose turnip cultivars or varieties which produce
a harvestable root.

Revised Section F.  The petitioner should submit a revised Section F
reflecting the HED-recommended tolerance levels and correct commodity
definitions as specified in Table <IP_ADDRESS>.

8.3.  Occupational/Residential Exposure tc \l2 "8.3.
Occupational/Residential Exposure

Revised Section B.  The label should be revised to indicate a 24-hour
REI for postapplication activities.

Attachments

Attachment 1:  Chemical Structures

cc: S. Levy (RAB1/HED-7509P)

RDI: PV Shah (16-MAY-2007); RAB1 (16-MAY-2007)

S. Levy:S-10953:PY1:(703)305-0783:7509P:RAB1

Attachment 1:  Chemical Structures

Common Name

Chemical Name

Structure

Indoxacarb/R-indoxacarb

CAS Name:  (R,S)-Methyl
7-chloro-2,5-dihydro-2-[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]am
ino]-carbonyl]indeno[1,2-e] [1,3,4]-oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate

IN-JT333

CAS Name:  Methyl
7-chloro-2,5-dihydro-2-[[[4-(trifluoromethoxy)-phenyl]amino]carbonyl]ind
eno-[1,2-e][1,3,4]oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate

CAS Inverted Name:  Indeno-[1,2-e][1,3,4]oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylic
acid, 7-chloro-2,5-dihydro-2-[[[4-(trifluoromethoxy)-
phenyl]amino]carbonyl]-, methyl ester

5-HO-IN-JT333

CAS Name:  Methyl
7-chloro-2,5-dihydro-5-hydroxy-2-[[[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]-amino]ca
rbonyl]indeno[1,2-e]-[1,3,4]oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate

IN-KG433

CAS Name:  Methyl
5-chloro-2,3-dihydro-2-hydroxy-1-[[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-trifluoromethoxy
) phenyl]amino]carbonyl]hydrazono]-1H-indene-2-carboxylate

CAS Inverted Name:  1H-indene-2-carboxylic acid,
5-chloro-2,3-dihydro-2-hydroxy-1-[[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-(trifluoromethox
y)phenyl]amino]-carbonyl] hydrazono]-, methyl ester (Z)

IN-KB687

CAS Inverted Name:  Methyl [4-(trifluoro-methoxy)phenyl]-carbamate

Metabolite F

Characterized as the product of dehydration and rehydration of IN-KG433.

IN-KT319

Note:  IN-KT319 is a geometrical isomer of IN-KG433.

CAS Name:  (E)-methyl
5-chloro-2,3-dihydro-2-hydroxy-1-[[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-(trifluoromethox
y)phenyl]amino]-carbonyl]hydrazono]-IH-indene-2-carboxylate

IN-JU873

CAS Name:  Methyl
5-chloro-2,3-dihydro-2-hydroxy-1-[[[[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]amino]-c
arbonyl]hydrazono]-1H-indene-2-carboxylate

 ai = active ingredient is defined as the S isomer of indoxacarb
(KN128).  The R isomer (KN127) is an inactive isomer.
ഠ̍഍ഄ̍഍ഄ倍条–䅐䕇ᐠᔹ漠–啎偍䝁卅ᐠ㜵
ക഍഍


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on July 3, 2002

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 99-6427

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  AEROTRANSPORTES RAFILHER, S.A. de C.V.
                     Date Filed: June 7, 2002

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC section 41301 to permit the
applicant to continue to conduct passenger charter operations between
Mexico and the United States, and other passenger charter operations in
accordance with 14 CFR Part 212, using small equipment.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  June 29, 2001, in this
Docket.

Applicant representative(s):  Eugene E. Smith,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved.
         Action date:  July 3, 2002

Effective dates of authority granted:  July 3, 2002, through July 3,
2003.

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  United
States-Mexico Air Transport Services Agreement of August 15, 1960, as
amended and extended (Agreement).

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  Standard exemption
conditions.

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:  In the conduct
of these operations, the carrier must adhere to all applicable
provisions of the U.S.-Mexico Agreement.  In the conduct of these
operations, the carrier may only use aircraft capable of carrying no
more than 60 passengers and having a maximum payload capacity of no more
than 18,000 pounds (small equipment).  The above grant includes
authority to conduct Third and Fourth Freedom charter operations.  While
we have subjected, consistent with the provisions of the Agreement,
Mexican carriers conducting charter operations with large aircraft to
prior approval or submission of notice for their Third and Fourth
Freedom charters, we determined that any such requirement was not
necessary on public interest grounds in this case, since the carrier
will be conducting these operations solely with small aircraft.  (Other
charter operations to/from the United States under this authority,
however, are subject to prior approval under 14 CFR Part 212.)  Further,
we are continuing to allow Mexican carriers conducting passenger
charters using small equipment to make stopovers in the United States in
the conduct of such operations.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp


                             SUPPORTING STATEMENT
                        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
         NOTICE OF ARRIVAL OF PESTICIDES AND DEVICES (EPA Form 3540-1)
                               19 CFR 12.110-117

1. Identification of the Information Collection

      1(a) Title of the Information Collection

      TITLE: Notice of Arrival of Pesticides and Devices under section 17(c) of FIFRA.

      OMB No. 2070-0020				EPA No. 0152.11

      1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

      The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (Customs) regulations at 19 CFR 12.112 require that an importer desiring to import pesticides into the United States shall, prior to the shipment's arrival in the United States, submit a Notice of Arrival (NOA) of Pesticides and Devices (EPA Form 3540-1 or Form 3540-1) to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency). Once EPA receives the NOA, EPA will determine the disposition of the shipment.  Upon completing its review, the EPA response is sent to the importer of record (importer) or licensed customs broker (broker), who must present the NOA to Customs upon arrival of the shipment at the port of entry. This is necessary to ensure that EPA is notified of the arrival of pesticides and devices as required under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) section 17(c), and that EPA has the ability to examine such shipments to determine compliance with FIFRA.

	The NOA requires the identification and address information of parties involved in the importation of the pesticide or device and information on the identity of the imported pesticide or device shipment. When the NOA is submitted to the EPA regional office having jurisdiction over the state or territory in which the port of entry is located, EPA enforcement personnel will determine whether the shipment should be released for entry upon arrival, detained for examination, or refused admission into the United States.  The responsible EPA official returns the NOA to the importer or broker with EPA instructions to Customs as to the disposition of the shipment.

	Upon the arrival of the shipment, the importer or broker must present the completed NOA to the Customs and Border Protection's port of entry.  The entry information for each shipment will be handled with the NOA and Customs notifies the EPA regional office of any discrepancies, which EPA will resolve with the importer or broker.  If there are no discrepancies, Customs follows instructions regarding release, detention, or refusal.  If there are discrepancies, the shipment may be detained until cleared for release, or retained for examination.  If EPA inspects the shipment and it appears from examination of a sample that it is adulterated, misbranded, or otherwise violates the provisions of FIFRA, or is otherwise injurious to health or the environment, the pesticide or device may be refused admission into the United States.

	During this renewal of this information collection, EPA is also capturing the burden of providing the label and other supporting documentation that is currently submitted by most importers to the Agency as part of an existing voluntary practice. EPA has found that questions about a shipment can often be resolved if the label or other supporting documentation accompanies the NOA prior to the arrival of the shipment in the United States.

      Respondents subject to this information collection include all importers of pesticides and pesticidal devices as defined by FIFRA.

2. Need for and Use of the Collection

      2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

      This information collection activity allows Customs to fulfill its statutory obligation under FIFRA section 17(c) to notify the EPA of the arrival of pesticides and pesticidal devices in the United States. An NOA must be submitted for all imported pesticides and pesticidal devices, including but not limited to those pesticides that are registered under section 3 of FIFRA and to those that may be transferred, sold, or distributed without registration pursuant to 40 CFR 152.30, such as pesticides for which an Experimental Use Permit has been granted under section 5 of FIFRA, and pesticides for which an Exemption has been granted under sections 18 or 25(b) of FIFRA. This notification allows EPA to determine whether imported pesticidal devices and registered and unregistered pesticides comply with FIFRA.  The information permits EPA to stop suspended, cancelled, misbranded, contaminated, or otherwise violative products from being imported into the country, track those that do enter, and minimize any adverse human health or environmental impact that might arise from the importation of violative products.  If EPA did not collect this information, Customs and EPA would be unable to meet their statutory requirements under FIFRA.

      2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	The information is used by EPA regional pesticide compliance and enforcement staff, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), and the Office of Pesticides Programs (OPP) to monitor and assure compliance with FIFRA.  Customs uses this information to ensure pesticide and pesticidal device products admitted to the U.S. have been reviewed by EPA for compliance.  The absence of an accompanying NOA is, under Customs regulations, grounds for refusal of entry into the United States.

3. Non-Duplication, Consultations, and other Criteria.

      3(a) Non Duplication

	Some of the information collected on EPA's Notice of Arrival is identical or similar to information collected on Customs' entry notice form (Form 3461, OMB Control Number 1651-0024) or entry summary form (Form 7501, OMB Control Number 1651-0022). In addition, in order to expedite the processing of shipments of pesticides and pesticidal devices when the NOA Form is filed, EPA recommends the importer submits a copy of either the entry notice or entry summary, or other information submitted to Customs pursuant to 19 CFR 142.3(5).  This supporting documentation allows EPA to validate the information provided on Form 3540-1.  The information on entry forms is currently collected electronically via Customs ABI/ACS.  Filers would plan for and gather the information submitted on Form 3540-1 as part of customary business practices. To avoid double counting of burden hours, EPA only accounts for the additional time to enter the information and submit the form.

	Customs entry forms cannot substitute for the submission of EPA's notice of arrival because the entry forms are not required to be completed prior to the arrival of the shipment and hence do not meet the requirements of FIFRA section 17(c). Entry may be made up to 15 days after a pesticide or pesticidal device arrives in the U.S. and the entry forms does not contain all of the information required in a Notice of Arrival.  The information in a Notice of Arrival is necessary for EPA to determine the disposition of a shipment upon its arrival in the U.S.

      As discussed in Section 5(b), EPA is currently participating in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE)/ International Trade Data System (ITDS) project.  When ACE becomes fully functional (by December 2016), it will allow for the electronic collection of the information in the Notice of Arrival.  EPA is currently undertaking rulemaking to facilitate the electronic submission of Notice of Arrival information. This renewal document only identifies those burdens associated with the current collection activities and forms, and will be revised once ACE is fully functional to take into consideration those changes.

      3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

	As part of the renewal process, EPA will publish a notice in the Federal Register prior to submitting the ICR to OMB. Pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d), any public comments received will be placed in the EPA docket, EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0122, for this action.

      3(c) Consultations

	The Agency will consult with stakeholders who actively interact with the Agency through the use of this collection instrument and will solicit stakeholder assessment of the regulatory burden estimates expressed by the Agency in this ICR. A record of the consultations will be placed in the EPA docket for this action

      3(d) Effects of less frequent collection

      This collection represents the minimum collection frequency possible to comply with statutory requirements, which is that the Agency be notified of the arrival of each shipment into the United States.

      3(e) General Guidelines

      The only PRA-imposed guideline in 5 CFR 1320.6 that is exceeded in this collection is the recordkeeping retention period. Any record required to be made, kept, and rendered for examination and inspection by Customs under 19 CFR 163.2 shall be kept for 5 years.

      3(f) Confidentiality

      If information on Form 3540-1 is declared sensitive or confidential, it cannot be released to the public.  Certain information on Form 3540-1 (names and complete addresses, along with unit size, quantity, total net weight, country of origin, port of entry, entry number, and anticipated entry date) may be claimed as FIFRA Confidential Business Information (CBI).  Other information (EPA Registration Number and Producer Establishment Number, the brand name of product, and active ingredients and percentages of each) may not be claimed as CBI pursuant to FIFRA section 7(d) and labeling requirements for pesticides/pesticidal devices at 40 CFR § 156.10.

      Confidential data submitted to EPA is handled in accordance with the provisions of the FIFRA CBI security manual.  This manual contains instructions to physical security measures; CBI copying and destruction procedures; transfer of CBI materials within EPA to contractors or to other government offices; computer security; CBI typing procedures; and internal office procedures.  The manual dictates that all CBI must be marked or flagged as such, only authorized Agency personnel may be permitted access to CBI, all CBI must be kept in secure (double-locked) areas, and all CBI marked for destruction must be cleared by a Document Control Officer.

      3(g) Sensitive Questions

      Not applicable.  No information of a sensitive or private nature is requested in the information collection activity.

4. The Respondents and Information Collected

      4(a) Respondents/North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Codes.

      Respondents to this information collection are pesticide importers, which includes many types of business entities ranging from Commercial and Institutional Building Construction (NAICS 236220) to Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS 325300) and even Public Administration: Executive Offices (NAICS 921110).  Other business and institutions that import pesticides include Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting (Sector 11), Wholesale Trade, (Sector 42).  The majority of responses come from businesses that fall under NAICS code 325300.

      4(b) Information Requested

      (i) Data items, including record keeping requirements

      The data items that must be submitted for registered pesticides, unregistered pesticides and, pesticidal devices are the same, except where indicated below.

 Required data items.

      All data in this ICR that is recorded and reported is required by FIFRA Sections 3, 7, and 17, and 19 CFR Part 12.

      Provide notification of:
       Name, complete address, phone number, and email address of broker or agent (19 CFR 12.112)
       name, complete address, phone number, and email address of importer or consignee (19 CFR 12.112)
       name, address, phone number, and email address of shipper (19 CFR 12.112)
       EPA registration number (19 CFR 12.111 and FIFRA Sec. 3)
       EPA producer establishment number (19 CFR 12.112 and FIFRA Sec. 7)
       brand name of product (19 CFR 12.112 and FIFRA Sec. 17(c))
       active ingredients and percentage of each (19 CFR 12.112 and FIFRA Sec.17(c))
       unit size, quantity, and total net weight (19 CFR 12.112 and FIFRA Sec. 17(c))
       country of origin (19 CFR 12.112)
       port of entry, entry number, anticipated entry date (19 CFR 12.113)
       name, complete address, phone number, and email address of the carrier (19 CFR 12.113)
       location of good for examination after importation (19 CFR  12.115)

      b. Recommended/voluntary data items

	In addition to the required data items identified in section 4(b)(i)(a), EPA recommends that the following data items be included on EPA Form 3540-1 under this information collection:
          Any additional information, including the intended use and a description of why the product is being imported into the United States (Box 18 on EPA Form 3540-1) or information in the remarks (Box 19). EPA recommends that importers of unregistered pesticides complete Box 18. Providing this information will expedite EPA's review of the Notice of Arrival.
          A copy of the product label that is affixed to the imported pesticidal device and pesticide product as part of the standard NOA package. The label allows EPA to verify compliance with FIFRA labeling requirements and may help to resolve issues with a shipment. The label also communicates information that may help Customs Officers take appropriate precautionary measures when handling these shipments at the port. This recommendation is accounting for current practice.
          Supporting documentation,  such as a material safety data sheets, Customs forms 7501 or 3461 other information submitted to Customs pursuant to 19 CFR 142.3(5), that may assist EPA in evaluating the shipment. The Customs entry forms allow EPA to verify that the information submitted on an NOA is accurate. The MSDS provides EPA inspectors with information about the proper handling of the shipment when an inspection is required. This recommendation is accounting for current practice.

      (ii) Respondent Activities

       Read instructions on reverse side of Form 3540-1
       Plan activities-CBP
       Gather information
       Enter information on Form 3540-1 and submit Form, including  the label, to EPA prior to arrival of pesticide or pesticidal device product
       Respond to questions if further inquiries are made by EPA
       Submit Form 3540-1, after it is reviewed and signed by EPA, to Customs and Border Protection
       Plan and review information for accuracy
       Store, file, and maintain the information

      CBP means "Customary and Usual Business Practice;"  during the course of normal and prudent business operations, a respondent would plan activities for this information collection, arrange for the collection, review the information for accuracy, and arrange to maintain or store the information detailed under 4(b) above.  The Information to be kept is generally information that prudent businesses would maintain.

5. The Information Collected-Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management.

      5(a) Agency Activities

      EPA regional personnel review Form 3540-1 for accuracy and completeness of the submitted information and maintain files of the NOA for inspection and targeting.  If all information is complete and accurate, the Agency reviewer signs and returns the form to the importer.  An incomplete NOA may require additional follow-up in order to determine the disposition of the pesticide or pesticidal device shipment.  EPA regional personnel also work with Customs agents at the port of entry to resolve discrepancies between information submitted on Form 3540-1 and Customs entry documents.

      5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

      The information collected is produced by all importers as part of Customary and Usual Business Practice, as described above.  This collection request concerns the entry and submission of this information using the Form 3540-1. The currently approved version of EPA Form 35401-1 is included in the docket for this action.

      NOA information is entered once onto Form 3540-1, signed, and submitted to EPA.  Form 3540-1 is reviewed by EPA, and, if approved, signed by the EPA reviewer. The form is then returned to the importer for submission as a shipping document to accompany the shipment upon its arrival at the U.S. port of entry.  Customs inspectors compare Form 3540-1 with entry documents for the shipment of pesticides or pesticidal devices and notify the Administrator of any discrepancies.

      EPA is currently participating in an interagency initiative known as the International Trade Data System (ITDS).  The goal of ITDS is to make the Federal government's compliance monitoring of international trade less burdensome and more efficient by integrating and automating the government-wide collection, use, and dissemination of international trade data.  Under the ITDS concept, agencies harmonize their data requirements with Customs, thereby eliminating redundancies and minor definitional differences.

      ITDS is the organizational framework for Customs and more than 40 participating government agencies to integrate import requirements into a modernized, upgraded Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), which is being designed by Customs to process imports and exports.  EPA is currently working with Customs to integrate into the ACE system the Agency's six import regulatory programs, including the current process for notification of arrival of pesticides and pesticidal devices, by the end of 2016. In the future, EPA anticipates that most importers will submit the notice of arrival electronically in the ACE system, and that the notice of arrival process will be done electronically and almost instantaneously among importers, EPA, and Customs for most shipments of pesticides or pesticidal devices.

      5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

      The burden of this information collection is minimal and affects all importers.  It cannot be reduced and still meet requirements outlined in Section 2(a). The information collection does not disproportionately impact small businesses, because the information requested is gathered during "customary and usual business practices."

      5(d) Collection Schedule

      A Notice of Arrival submission is required on each occasion that a pesticide or pesticidal device shipment arrives for entry in the United States.

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection.

      6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

      In calculating the respondent burden, EPA estimates that, on average, importers will submit 38,000 responses to this information collection annually during this renewal ICR. This estimate is based on a projected increase in the number of NOAs EPA receives. For the last renewal, EPA estimated the annual number of responses at 35,000.  EPA received approximately 36,000 NOAs in 2013, 39,000 in 2014, and 38,000 in 2015.  If this trend continues, EPA anticipates that over the next three years, EPA will receive, on average, 38,000 NOAs annually. This indicates an increase of about 3,000 additional NOAs received per year since the last renewal.

 	On average, the burden associated with this information collection activity is approximately 0.43 hours (26 minutes) per response. This estimate is based on an average response time across all response types. The response time includes an estimated average of 4 minutes of managerial time, 9 minutes of technical time and 13 minutes of clerical time, which is broken down approximately as follows:

 4 managerial and technical minutes to read and hear any instructions.
 4 minutes of technical and clerical time to gather information, including the label or supporting information.
 5 managerial and technical minutes to process compile and review information.
 5 technical and clerical minutes to complete the form and attach the label.
 4 clerical minutes to mail the form.
 4 clerical minutes to file the form and supporting information.

      Because EPA recommends that importers of unregistered pesticides voluntarily supply information about the intended use and an explanation of why the product is being imported, the responses types have been divided into two types. The number of respondents expected for each response type is based on the number of each type of response, exhibited in Table 1.

      Table 1: Number of Responses by Type
 Type of Response
                              Number of Responses
                              Percent of Total (%)
                           Burden Hours per Response
 Registered Pesticides and Pesticidal Devices
                                     26,600
                                       70
                                      0.40
 Unregistered Pesticides
                                     11,400
                                       30
                                      0.50

      As discussed above, importers must submit EPA Form 3540-1 prior to the arrival in the United States of a shipment of a pesticide or pesticidal device. In estimating the burden per response, EPA assumes that all importers will include a copy of the product label as part of current practice and will voluntarily submit other supporting documents to EPA with Form 3540-1.  In addition, EPA assumes importers of unregistered pesticides will voluntarily provide information regarding the intended use of the product, as well as a description of why the product is being imported.

 EPA estimates it will take respondents submitting a NOA for a registered pesticide or pesticidal device product 0.40 hours per response to read instructions, complete form, and submit information to EPA and Customs, for a total of 10,640 hours annually. Respondents submitting a NOA for unregistered pesticides will require 0.50 hours for these activities, or 5,700 hours annually. The annual burden hours per response type are found by multiplying the annual number of responses per response type times the burden per response. The paperwork burden estimates represent the average costs. Some respondents will spend less time and others more time than the average estimated. The total estimated respondent burden to comply with this information collection is 16,340 hours annually.

      6 (b) Estimating Respondent Costs

      The methodology for calculating the wage rates in this renewal of the ICR has been updated to be consistent with the method for wage calculation for all ICRs managed by the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP).  The current wage estimates are based on latest wage data, 2014 data accessed online in 2016.  The calculation of the wage rate uses base wage data for each sector and labor type for an Unloaded wage rate (hourly wage rate) and calculates the Loaded wage rate (unloaded wage rate + benefits) and the Fully loaded wage rate (loaded wage rate + overhead) based on that data.  Fully loaded wage rates are used to calculate respondent and Agency costs.

      Unloaded Wage Rate:  Wages are estimated for labor types (management, technical, and clerical) within applicable sectors.  The Agency uses average wage data for the relevant sectors available in the National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) (see http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm).

      Sectors: The specific North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code and website for each sector is included in that sector's wage rate table in Attachment D.  Within each sector, the wage data are provided by Standard Occupational Classification (SOC).  The SOC system is used by federal statistical agencies to classify workers into occupational categories for the purpose of collecting, calculating, or disseminating data (see http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_stru.htm)

      Loaded Wage Rate: Unless stated otherwise, all benefits represent 46% of unloaded wage rates, based on average rate of benefits for all civilian non-farm workers (see http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t01.htm).

	Fully Loaded Wage Rate:  OPP multiplies the loaded wage rate by 50% (EPA guidelines 20-70%) to get overhead costs. Since the majority of NOAs are submitted by firms in NAICS code 325300 (Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing), hourly wage rates for this sector were used to calculate respondent burden.  The fully loaded hourly wage rates for management, technical, and clerical occupations for NAICS 325300 are $124.02, $73.37, and $41.70, respectively.  See Attachment C for labor wage calculations.

      Table 2 shows the estimated respondent burden and cost for submitting EPA Form 3540-1, including a label and other supporting documents, for registered pesticide and pesticidal devices. For these products, EPA estimates the burden per response to be 0.40 hours.

Table 2: Respondent Burden and Cost per Response: Registered Pesticides and Pesticidal Devices
Collection Activities

                                  Management
                                  (hours)[1]
                                  Technical
                                  (hours)[1]
                                   Clerical
                                  (hours)[1]
                                 Total (hours)

                                     Cost
                                      ($)

                                  $124.02/hr
                                   $73.37/hr
                                   $41.70/hr

Read or hear any instructions
                                     0.01
                                     0.05
                                       -
                                     0.06
                                     4.91
Plan activities
                                       -
                                       -
                                       -
                                       -
                                     0.00
Create information
                                       -
                                       -
                                       -
                                       -
                                     0.00
Gather information, including label and supporting information
                                       -
                                     0.02
                                     0.03
                                     0.05
                                     2.72
Process, compile, review information for accuracy
                                     0.02
                                     0.05
                                       -
                                     0.07
                                     6.15
Complete written forms
                                       -
                                     0.04
                                     0.04
                                     0.08
                                     4.60
Record, disclose, or display information
                                       -
                                       -
                                     0.07
                                     0.07
                                     2.92
Store, file, or maintain information
                                       -
                                       -
                                     0.07
                                     0.07
                                     2.92
 TOTAL BURDEN[2]
                                     0.03
                                     0.16
                                     0.21
                                     0.40

                                    $24.22
[1] Hourly wages rates are fully loaded wage rates based on NAICS 325300 - Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing from U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014 data, Accessed March 2016. See Attachment C for wage calculations.
[2] Totals may not sum due to rounding.

The estimated total annual burden for registered pesticides and pesticidal devices is shown in Table 3. The total annual burden is estimate to be 10,640 burden hours, at a cost of $644,161.  The burden and cost per response is multiplied by the number of responses to get total annual respondent burden and cost, respectively.

Table 3: Total Annual Respondent Burden and Cost: Registered Pesticides and Pesticidal Devices
                            Information Collection
                              Burden Per Response
                              Cost Per Response
                              Responses Per Year
                                 Annual Burden
                                     Total
                                     Costs
      Notice of Arrival for Registered Pesticides and Pesticidal Devices

                                   0.40 hrs

                                    $24.22

                                    26,600

                                    10,640

                                   $644,161

      Table 4 shows the estimated respondent burden and cost for submitting EPA Form 3540-1, including a label, supporting documents, and intended use information, for unregistered pesticides. For these responses, EPA estimates the burden per response to be 0.50 hours.

 Table 4: Respondent Burden and Cost per Response: Unregistered Pesticides
Collection Activities

                                  Management
                                  (hours)[1]
                                  Technical
                                  (hours)[1]
                                   Clerical
                                  (hours)[1]
                                Total (hour)
                                     Cost
                                     ($)

                                  $124.02/hr
                                   $73.37/hr
                                   $41.70/hr

Read or hear any instructions
                                     0.02
                                     0.05
                                       -
                                     0.07
                                     6.15
Plan activities
                                       -
                                       -
                                       -
                                       -
                                     0.00
Create information
                                       -
                                       -
                                       -
                                       -
                                     0.00
Gather information, including label and supporting information
                                       -
                                     0.03
                                     0.04
                                     0.07
                                     3.87
Process, compile, review information for accuracy
                                     0.02
                                     0.05
                                       -
                                     0.07
                                     6.15
Complete written forms
                                       -
                                     0.04
                                     0.04
                                     0.08
                                     4.60
Record, disclose, or display information
                                       -
                                     0.07
                                     0.07
                                     0.14
                                     8.05
Store, file, or maintain information
                                       -
                                       -
                                     0.07
                                     0.07
                                     2.92
 TOTAL BURDEN[2]
                                     0.04
                                     0.24
                                     0.22
                                     0.50

                                    $31.74
 [1] Hourly wages rates are fully loaded wage rates based on NAICS 325300 - Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing from U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014 data, Accessed March 2016. See Attachment C for wage calculations.
 [2] Totals may not sum due to rounding.

      The estimated total annual burden for unregistered pesticides is shown in Table 5. The total annual burden for unregistered pesticides and pesticidal devices is estimate to be 5,700 burden hours, at a cost of $361,874.

 Table 5: Total Annual Respondent Burden and Cost: Unregistered Pesticides
                            Information Collection
                              Burden Per Response
                              Cost Per Response
                              Responses Per Year
                                 Annual Burden
                                     Total
                                     Costs
                 Notice of Arrival for Unregistered Pesticides

                                   0.50 hrs
                                    $31.74
                                    11,400
       5,700
                                   $361,874

	(ii) Other Costs

	EPA acknowledges that delays of shipments resulting from resolution of issues arising in the NOA process may result in real costs incurred by the importer. While these costs are not part of the paperwork burden associated with this information collection activity, EPA is providing an estimate of costs that may arise. During the last renewal cycle, EPA consulted with 5 importers/brokers and asked them estimate the costs associated with delays due to resolving issues arising in the NOA review process. The respondents provided estimates that include storage, broker fees, container demurrage after free time, and additional freight and storage charges, as follows:

Table 6: Other Costs
Other Costs
                            Estimated cost per day
Storage
                                     $264
Broker Fees
                                     $106
Container Demurrage
                                     $132
Additional Freight
                                     $317

	During a previous renewal cycle, one importer also indicated that there is a market loss of $6,500 per day associated with delays. On average, it takes from one to five days to resolve an issue related to an NOA. EPA has not attempted to confirm these estimates. In many instances, if the importer had submitted the NOA prior to the arrival of shipment at the port of entry, issues can be resolved quickly with no associated costs are incurred.

	EPA estimates that delays occur for less than 5% of all NOA submitted to EPA and that as few as 2.5% to 5% of shipments are held at the port annually due to resolving issues associated with the NOA review. In many instances, if the importer has submitted the NOA prior to the arrival of shipment at the port of entry, issues can be resolved quickly and there is a little likelihood that delays and associated costs will be incurred.

      6(c) Estimating Agency Burden

	EPA estimates that, in total, 10 FTEs across EPA regional offices are allocated for processing data submitted under this information collection.  The estimated number of federal government FTEs (full time equivalents) needed to process and review EPA Form 3540-1 on an annual basis was increased from the previous estimate of 8 to 10.  The number of EPA FTEs was estimated upward to 10 based on input from EPA regional offices and the increase in the number of NOAs received annually in comparison to the previous renewal cycle. To estimate the Agency burden hours for this ICR, the number of FTEs, 10, was multiplied by the number of workday hours in a year, 2080 hours (52 weeks multiplied by 40hrs/week), to get a total of 20,800 Agency burden hours.

  Table 7: Agency Burden Estimate

                              Total Burden Hours
FTEs (full time equivalents)
                                    10 FTEs
Workday hours per FTE
                                  2,080 hours
Total Workday Hours Annually
                                 20,800 hours

      6(d) Estimating Agency Costs

      The methodology for calculating the wage rates in this renewal of the ICR has been updated to be consistent with the method for wage calculation for all ICRs managed by the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP). The previous ICR used the 2011 annual salary for a federal employee at the GS-13, Step 1 level ($71,674 annually, or $34/hr, $74/hr when fully loaded). This ICR uses the fully loaded hourly (flh) wage rate for technical staff in the federal government ($77,272, $37/hr, $82/flh) to represent the wage rates for relevant Agency staff.

       The current wage estimates are based on the most recent 2014 wage data, accessed online in 2016.  The calculation of the wage rate uses base wage data for each sector and labor type for an Unloaded wage rate (hourly wage rate) and calculates the Loaded wage rate (unloaded wage rate + benefits) and the Fully loaded wage rate (loaded wage rate + overhead) based on that data.

	Fully Loaded Wage Rate:  OPP multiplies the loaded wage rate by 50% (EPA guidelines 20-70%) to get overhead costs. NAICS code 999100 for the Federal Government was used to calculate hourly wage rates for the Agency. The fully loaded hourly wage rates for management, technical, and clerical occupations for NAICS 999100 are $124.09, $81.53, and $46.42, respectively.  See Attachment C for labor wage calculations.

	Table 7 shows the total cost of federal government labor for processing NOA forms.  At a fully loaded annual wage rate of $169,589 per FTE annually, the total annual cost of 10.0 FTEs to the federal government is approximately $1.7 million.

   Table 8:  Federal Government (Agency) Labor Costs
Data Category
                                     Value
Fully Loaded Annual Rate ($/year per FTE) *
                                   $169,589
Total EPA FTEs
                                      10
Total Federal Government Labor Costs
                                  $1,695,890
* For calculation of Fully Loaded Annual Rate from base salary, see Attachment C

	In addition to labor costs, there are direct costs of printing instructions and reporting forms.  In the previous ICR renewal, this cost was estimated at $70,482.  Adjusting for inflation using the Consumer Price Index, the direct cost of processing NOA forms for this ICR renewal is estimated at $74,438.  Updating the number to account for the increase in NOAs, the value for this renewal is $76,352.

	Table 9 combines the labor costs and direct costs to the federal government of processing Notice of Arrival forms.  The total cost is approximately $1.8 million per year, assuming an average of 38,000 Notice of Arrival forms are processed each year.

   Table 9:  Total Agency Costs
Data Category
                                     Value
Total Federal Government Labor Costs
                                  $1,695,890
Total Federal Government Direct Costs
                                   $76,352
TOTAL AGENCY COSTS
                                  $1,772,242

	6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

	(i) Respondent Burden

      The total annual respondent burden hours for this ICR are estimated at 16,340 hours.  The total annual respondent cost for this ICR is estimated to be $1,006,034.

 Table 10: Total Annual Respondent Burden and Costs
                            Information Collection
                              Responses Per Year
                          Burden Per Response (hours)
                                 Annual Burden
                                    (hours)
                                     Total
                                     Costs
      Notice of Arrival for Registered Pesticides and Pesticidal Devices

                                    26,600

                                     0.40

                                    10,640

                                   $644,161
                 Notice of Arrival for Unregistered Pesticides
                                    11,400
                                     0.50
          5,700
                                   $361,874
                        Total Annual Respondent Burden
                                    16,340
                                  $1,006,034

	(ii) Agency Burden

	The total annual agency burden for this ICR is estimated to be 10 FTEs.  With direct costs, this would result in a total annual agency cost of $1,772,242.

 Table 11: Total Annual Agency Burden and Costs
                            Information Collection
                              Responses Per Year
                                Annual Burden*
                                    (hours)
                                     Total
                           Costs (Labor plus Direct)
                               Notice of Arrival
                                    38,000
                                    20,800
                                  $1,772,242

	(iii) Bottom Line Burden and Cost

  Table 12: Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

                                     TOTAL

                                     Hours
                                     Costs
Respondent Burden Estimate
                                    16,340
                                  $1,006,034
Agency Burden Estimate
                                    20,800
                                  $1,772,242

      6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

      There is an increase of 3,870 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the currently approved ICR burden. This increase is a result of an increase in the annual number of NOAs submitted.  The annual number of NOAs submitted to EPA increased from 35,000 for the previous ICR renewal to 38,000 for this ICR renewal.  The average burden hours per response will remained unchanged from the previous ICR renewal of 0.43 hours per response. This estimate of burden hours per response takes into account past changes to the data items on Form 3540-1, and well as an accounting of the burden of submitting certain information voluntarily or as part of current practice.  Specifically, this burden estimate accounts for the burdens related to providing a copy of the label as well as complete contact information, including a telephone number and email addresses, for the shipper, importer of record, licensed broker, carrier and ultimate consignee when supplying name and address information. In addition, EPA is accounting for the burden of voluntarily providing supporting documentation for registered and unregistered pesticides, active ingredients and percentage of each for registered pesticides, as well as intended use information for unregistered pesticides. The annual burden increase represents an adjustment.

      Labor costs for respondents and the Agency increased as a result of changes in the wage rates made to: a) reflect current wage rates and b) to make the methodology for calculating wage rates consistent with other OPP ICRs.  The new wage estimates incorporated higher estimates for benefits and overhead than were used in the past.

      6(g) Burden Statement

      The total annual public respondent burden for this collection of information is estimated to be 16,340 hours. The annual respondent burden for the collection of information associated with the submission of EPA Form 3540-1 is, on average, 0.43 hours per submission. This estimate includes the time for reviewing instructions, maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.  The Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

      The Agency has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0122, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the OPP Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Rm. 3334, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington DC.  This docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The OPP Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

      You may submit comments regarding the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques. Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0122 and OMB Control No. 2070-0020, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by mail to: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503.

                    ATTACHMENTS TO THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Attachments to the supporting statement are available in the public docket established for this ICR under docket identification number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0122.  These attachments are available for online viewing at http://www.regulations.gov/ or otherwise accessed as described in section 6(f) of the supporting statement.

Attachment A:
7 U.S.C. 136o - Section 17 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. Available online at the US Government Publishing Office's website.

Attachment B:
19 CFR 12.110-117.  Available online at the US Government Publishing Office's Electronic CFR Website.

Attachment C:
Work Sheets used to Calculate Labor Costs

Attachment D:
EPA Form 3540-1


From: Holloway, Thomas C. ( Tom) Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 11: 41 AM To: ' Dail. Lynn@ epamail. epa. gov' Cc: Reeves, David Subject: RE: Briefing for Magnetic Tape Residual Risk: Test Results Lynn,

Here are my responses to Anne Pope's arguments:

( 1) Anne is correct that there are reporting thresholds for pollutants ( such as TCE and TCA) in the TRI, but I believe there are ranges even below the thresholds which facilities can check off. The argument is academic anyway since the NEI results for Imation show that TCE and TCA are not associated with the magnetic tape process ( based on the SIC code). As I mentioned in my June 17 and June 19 e mails, we recommended the NEI data for Imation be used because it is possible to segregate the magnetic tape data for that facility from the other processes based on the SIC code.

( 2) Anne is correct that the facilities we initially received from ERG were based on MACT code assignments, and those facilities may at one time have been subject to the Magnetic Tape NESHAP. However, the NEI results we received had no MACT code for Magnetic Tape for facilities like Sony ( Dothan, AL), JVC ( Tuscaloosa, AL), Quantegy ( Opelika, AL), 3M ( Hutchinson, MN), Imation, and others that we knew were covered under the Magnetic Tape NESHAP as early as the proposal BID ( those facilities were all listed there). We probably should have given ERG the SIC code 3695, too, for their initial NEI search. However, that approach would still have missed some facilities because the NEI has incorrect SIC codes for some of the facilities on our list. For example, Sony has been assigned SIC code 3679, and the magnetic tape plant at 3M has been assigned SIC code 2672. The NEI would have been more helpful once we had our list of facilities together.

( 3) Anne is correct that the NEI has some process specific data, but it also includes a lot of default parameter data which are not very useful ( e. g., default stack parameters for fugitive emission sources).

I have looked at your presentation to Sally. It looks good. It's probably too late to make any changes, but I noticed that you mentioned ethyl acrylate and toluene diisocyanate as being emitted from Imation. These data are from the TRI results for the entire Imation facility ( only a portion of which makes magnetic tape). Based on what we have recently learned from the NEI, the magnetic tape process at Imation does not emit these two pollutants. So if we go with the NEI data for Imation, which I submitted to you on June 19, then the carcinogenic risk associated with Imation should actually be even lower. ( My June 19 submittal includes only a portion of the NEI data for Imation, i. e., the data associated with SIC code 3695, which does not include the TCE and TCA emissions that Anne Pope mentions.)

Let me know if you have any questions.

Tom Holloway


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 184 (Monday, September 23, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49727-49728]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20497]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1560-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 091619 Negotiated Rates--Twin
Eagle Resource Management, LLC R-7300-14 to be effective 11/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 9/16/19.
    Accession Number: 20190916-5040.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/30/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1561-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 091619 Negotiated Rates--Twin
Eagle Resource Management, LLC R-7300-15 to be effective 11/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 9/16/19.
    Accession Number: 20190916-5041.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/30/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1562-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 091619 Negotiated Rates--Twin
Eagle Resource Management, LLC R-7300-16 to be effective 11/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 9/16/19.
    Accession Number: 20190916-5045.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/30/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1563-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 091619 Negotiated Rates--Wells
Fargo Commodities, LLC R-7810-16 to be effective 11/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 9/16/19.
    Accession Number: 20190916-5049.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/30/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1564-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 091619 Negotiated Rates--Wells
Fargo Commodities, LLC R-7810-17 to be effective 11/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 9/16/19.
    Accession Number: 20190916-5050.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/30/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1565-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 091619 Negotiated Rates--Wells
Fargo Commodities, LLC R-7810-18 to be effective 11/1/2019.

    Filed Date: 9/16/19.
    Accession Number: 20190916-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/30/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1566-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: TCO SWN Amendments to be
effective 9/16/2019.
    Filed Date: 9/16/19.
    Accession Number: 20190916-5097.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/30/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 17, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-20497 Filed 9-20-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 51 (Friday, March 15, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9540-9541]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04876]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0032]

Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council
Recertification

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of recertification.

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

SUMMARY: This notice informs the public that the Coast Guard has
recertified the Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory
Council (PWSRCAC) as an alternative voluntary advisory group for Prince
William Sound, Alaska. This certification allows the PWSRCAC to monitor
the activities of terminal facilities and crude oil tankers under an
alternative composition, other than prescribed, Prince William Sound
Program established by statute.

DATES: This recertification is effective for the period from February
28, 2019 through March 1, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Ian McPhillips, Seventeenth Coast
Guard District (dpi), by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    As part of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90), Congress passed
the Oil Terminal and Oil Tanker Environmental Oversight and Monitoring
Act of 1990 (the Act), 33 U.S.C. 2732, to foster a long-term
partnership among industry, government, and local communities in
overseeing compliance with environmental concerns in the operation of
crude oil terminals and oil tankers.
    The President has delegated his authority under 33 U.S.C 2732(o)
respecting certification of advisory councils, or groups, subject to
the Act to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
Section 8(g) of Executive Order 12777, (56 FR 54757, October 22, 1991),
as amended by section 34 of Executive Order 13286 (68 FR 10619, March
5, 2003). The Secretary redelegated that authority to the Commandant of
the USCG. Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1,
paragraph 80 of section II. The Commandant redelegated that authority
to the Chief, Office of Marine Safety, Security and Environmental
Protection (G-M) on March 19, 1992 (letter #5402).
    The Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety and Environmental
Protection (G-M), redelegated recertification authority for advisory
councils, or groups, to the Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard District
on February 26, 1999 (letter #16450).
    On July 7, 1993, the USCG published a policy statement,
``Alternative Voluntary Advisory Groups, Prince William Sound and Cook
Inlet'' (58 FR 36504), to clarify the factors considered in making the
determination as to whether advisory councils, or groups, should be
certified in accordance with the Act.
    On September 16, 2002, the USCG published a policy statement, 67 FR
58440, which changed the recertification procedures such that
applicants are required to provide the USCG with comprehensive
information every three years (triennially). For each of the two years
between the triennial application procedures, applicants submit a
letter requesting recertification that includes a description of any
substantive changes to the information provided at the previous
triennial recertification. Further, public comment is only solicited
during the triennial comprehensive review.
    The Alyeska Pipeline Service Company pays the PWSRCAC $3.6 million
annually in the form of a long-term contract. In return for this
funding, the PWSRCAC must annually show that it ``fosters the goals and
purposes'' of OPA 90 and is ``broadly representative of the communities
and interests in the vicinity of the terminal facilities and Prince
William Sound.'' The PWSRCAC

is an independent, nonprofit organization founded in 1989. Though it
receives federal oversight like many independent, non-profit
organizations, it is not a federal agency. The PWSRCAC is a local
organization that predates the passage of OPA 90. The existence of the
PWSRCAC was specifically recognized in OPA 90 where it is defined as an
``alternate voluntary advisory group.''
    Alyeska funds the PWSRCAC, and the Coast Guard makes sure the
PWSRCRC operates in a fashion that is broadly consistent with OPA 90.

Recertification

    By letter dated Feb 04 2019, the Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard
District, certified that the PWSRCAC qualifies as an alternative
voluntary advisory group under 33 U.S.C. 2732(o). This recertification
terminates on March 1, 2020.

Matthew T. Bell Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2019-04876 Filed 3-14-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: November 5, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 213)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 57271-57273]
[DOCID:fr05no09-16]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1029; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-103-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional
Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above that would supersede an existing AD. This
proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: Following in-flight test
deployments, several Air-Driven generators (ADGs) failed to come on-
line. Investigation revealed that, as a result of a wiring anomaly that
had not been detected during ADG manufacture, a short circuit was
possible between certain internal wires and their metallic over-braided
shields, which could result in the ADG not providing power when
deployed. The unsafe condition is that failure of the ADG could lead to
loss of several functions essential for safe flight. The proposed AD
would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition
described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 21,
2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec
H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fabio Buttitta, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-1029;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-103-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We have lengthened the 30-day comment period for proposed ADs that
address MCAI originated by aviation authorities of other countries to
provide adequate time for interested parties to submit comments. The
comment period for these proposed ADs is now typically 45 days, which
is consistent with the comment period for domestic transport ADs.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On March 6, 2009, we issued AD 2009-06-17, Amendment 39-15854 (74
FR 13086, March 26, 2009). That AD required actions intended to address
an unsafe condition on the products listed above.
    Since we issued AD 2009-06-17, we have been advised that additional
air-driven generators may have been installed between the effective
date of Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2008-09, and the effective
date of the equivalent FAA AD 2009-06-17. Therefore, we have determined
that the actions specified in paragraph (f)(1) of AD 2009-06-17 also
must be done on airplanes having serial numbers 8084 through 8102.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 686 products of U.S. registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 2009-06-17 and retained in this
proposed AD take about 5 work-hours per product, at an average labor
rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts cost about $0 per product.
Where the service information lists required parts costs

that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD
on U.S. operators to be $274,400, or $400 per product.

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 proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 this proposed
regulation:
    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); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-15854 (74 FR
13086, March 26, 2009) and adding the following new AD:

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair): Docket No. FAA-2009-1029;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-103-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by December 21, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) The proposed AD supersedes AD 2009-06-17, Amendment 39-
15854.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional
Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes; certificated in any category;
having serial numbers (SNs) 7305 through 7990, and 8000 and
subsequent.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24:
Electrical power.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    Following in-flight test deployments, several Air-Driven
generators (ADGs) failed to come on-line. Investigation revealed
that, as a result of a wiring anomaly that had not been detected
during ADG manufacture, a short circuit was possible between certain
internal wires and their metallic over-braided shields, which could
result in the ADG not providing power when deployed. This directive
mandates checking of the ADG and modification of the ADG internal
wiring, if required. It also prohibits future installation of
unmodified ADGs.
    The unsafe condition is that failure of the ADG could lead to
loss of several functions essential for safe flight.

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2009-06-17

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) For airplanes having serial number (SN) 7305 through 7990
and 8000 through 8083: Within 12 months after April 30, 2009 (the
effective date of AD 2009-06-17), inspect the SN of the installed
ADG. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu
of this inspection if the serial number of the ADG can be
conclusively determined from that review.
    (i) If the serial number is not listed in paragraph 1.A of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-113, Revision A, dated August
11, 2005, no further action is required by this paragraph.
    (ii) If the serial number is listed in paragraph 1.A of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-113, Revision A, dated August
11, 2005, within 12 months after April 30, 2009, inspect the ADG
identification plate and, as applicable, do the actions of paragraph
(f)(1)(ii)(A) or (f)(1)(ii)(B) of this AD.
    (A) If the identification plate is marked with the symbol ``24-
2,'' no further action is required by this paragraph.
    (B) If the identification plate is not marked with the symbol
``24-2,'' modify the ADG wiring in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-
113, Revision A, dated August 11, 2005.
    (2) For airplanes having SNs 7305 through 7990, and 8000 and
subsequent: As of April 30, 2009, no ADG as described in Table 1 of
this AD may be installed on any airplane, unless the identification
plate of the ADG is identified with the symbol ``24-2.''

    Note 1: Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-113, Revision A,
dated August 11, 2005, refers to Hamilton Sundstrand Service
Bulletin ERPS10AG-24-2, dated February 19, 2004, for further
information on identifying the symbol ``24-2.''

                       Table 1--ADG Identification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      ADG Part Number--                Having ADG Serial Number--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
604-90800-1 (761339C), 604-    0101 through 0132, 0134 through 0167,
 90800-17 (761339D), or 604-    0169 through 0358, 0360 through 0438,
 90800-19 (761339E).            0440 through 0456, 0458 through 0467,
                                0469, 0471 through 0590, 0592 through
                                0597, 0599 through 0745, 0747 through
                                1005, or 1400 through 1439.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (3) Actions done before April 30, 2009, according to Bombardier
Service Bulletin 601R-24-113, dated April 22, 2004, are considered
acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions specified
in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, provided the ADG has not been
replaced since those actions were done.

New Requirements of This AD: Actions and Compliance

    (g) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) For airplanes having SNs 8084 through 8102: Within 12 months
after the effective date of this AD, inspect the SN of the installed
ADG. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu
of this inspection if the serial number of the ADG can be
conclusively determined from that review.
    (i) If the serial number is not listed in paragraph 1.A of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-113, Revision A, dated August
11, 2005, no further action is required by this paragraph.
    (ii) If the serial number is listed in paragraph 1.A of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-113, Revision A, dated August
11, 2005, within 12 months after the effective date of this AD,
inspect the ADG identification plate and, as applicable, do the
actions of paragraph (g)(1)(ii)(A) or (g)(1)(ii)(B) of this AD.
    (A) If the identification plate is marked with the symbol ``24-
2,'' no further action is required by this paragraph.
    (B) If the identification plate is not marked with the symbol
``24-2,'' modify the ADG wiring in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-
113, Revision A, dated August 11, 2005.
    (2) Actions done before the effective date of this AD according
to Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-113, dated April 22, 2004,
are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
actions specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, provided the ADG
has not been replaced since those actions were done.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: The MCAI specifies to inspect SNs 7305 through 7990 and
8000 through 8083. This AD also specifies to inspect S/Ns 8084
through 8102.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (h) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to Attn: Fabio Buttitta, Airframe
and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies,
notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal
avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal
inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. The AMOC
approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (i) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2008-09,
dated February 5, 2008; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-113,
Revision A, dated August 11, 2005; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 29, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-26626 Filed 11-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 225 (Friday, November 24, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 55919]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25361]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-1999-6404]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), this provides the public notice that on September 6,
2017, The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) petitioned
the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for an amendment to a waiver
of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety
regulations contained at 49 CFR 238.111, Pre-revenue service acceptance
testing plan. FRA assigned the petition docket number FRA-1999-6404.
    Specifically, Amtrak and the Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) are requesting permission to operate Talgo
articulated trainsets on Sound Transit's Lakewood Subdivision near
Tacoma, Washington.
    In 2010, WSDOT was awarded nearly $800 million of American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail funds
to improve Amtrak Cascades service in the Pacific Northwest. Two of the
projects funded by this ARRA grant program provided over $200 million
to upgrade Sound Transit's Lakewood Subdivision. These upgrades have
provided infrastructure to allow for the re-routing of Amtrak's long
distance and Amtrak Cascades regional trains off a portion of BNSF
Railway's (BNSF) Seattle Subdivision. The Lakewood Subdivision has
substantially less freight traffic than the existing route along BNSF's
Seattle Subdivision.
    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 parties
desire an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, 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 January 8, 2018 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered if practicable.
    Anyone can 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 document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better
inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including
any personal information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/
ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice for the
privacy notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017-25361 Filed 11-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P