[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 5, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25904-25905]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11864]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0020; Airspace Docket No. 17-AGL-28]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Flint, MI, and Establishment of
Class E Airspace; Owosso, MI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Bishop International Airport, Flint, MI,
and establishes separate Class E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface at Owosso Community Airport, Owosso, MI. This
action is necessary due to the closure of the Athelone Williams
Memorial Airport, Davison, MI, which is included in the Flint, MI,
airspace description; the cancellation of the instrument approach
procedures at the Genesys Regional Medical Center, Grand Blanc, MI,
also included in the Flint, MI, airspace description; and updates the
Bishop International Airport airspace and the Owosso Community Airport
airspace to comply with FAA Order 7400.2L, Procedures for Handling
Airspace Matters. The geographic coordinates of the Bishop
International Airport and Prices Airport, Linden, MI, are also being
updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, September 13, 2018. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11B at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Bishop International Airport, Flint, MI, and establishes
separate Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Owosso Community Airport, Owosso, MI, to support instrument
flight rules (IFR) operations at these airports.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register for Docket No. FAA-2018-0020 (83 FR 8638; February 28, 2018)
to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Bishop International Airport, Flint, MI, and establish
separate Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Owosso Community Airport, Owosso, MI. Interested parties
were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting
written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Subsequent to publication, the FAA discovered a typographical error
in the geographic coordinates for Bishop International Airport in the
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
airspace description. That error has been corrected in this action.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 and
6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and
effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document
will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15,
2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71:
    Modifies the Class E airspace designated as a surface area at
Bishop International Airport, Flint, MI, by updating the geographic
coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical
database, and replaces the outdated term ``Airport/Facility Directory''
with the term ``Chart Supplement'' in the airspace legal description;
    Modifies the Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.9-mile radius (decreased from a 10.5-
mile radius) at Bishop International Airport; removes the extension to
the north referencing the Flint ILS localizer; adds an extension 2.4
miles each side of the 016[deg] radial of the Flint VORTAC extending
from the 6.9-mile radius to 7.9 miles north of the airport; adds an
extension 2.4 miles each side of the 179[deg] radial of the Flint
VORTAC extending from the 6.9-mile radius to 7.9 miles south of the
airport; removes the Owosso Community Airport, Owosso, MI, from the
airspace description (a separate

Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
is being created for Owosso Community Airport as it no longer adjoins
the Flint, MI, Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface with this amendment); removes Athelone Williams
Memorial Airport, Davison, MI, from the airspace description; removes
the PETLI LOM from the airspace description; removes Genesys Regional
Medical Center, Grand Blanc, MI, from the airspace description; updates
the geographic coordinates for Bishop International Airport and Prices
Airport, Linden, MI, to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database;
and removes exclusionary language contained in the legal description to
comply with FAA Order 7400.2L; and
    Establishes Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.4-mile radius of Owosso Community
Airport, Owosso, MI.
    Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the closure of the
Athelone Williams Memorial Airport and the cancellation of the
instrument procedures at the Genesys Regional Medical Center, as they
no longer require a Class E airspace area extending upward from 700
feet above the surface. This action enhances safety and the management
of IFR operations at these airports.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11B,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and
effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002. Class E Surface Area Airspace.

* * * * *

AGL MI E2 Flint, MI [Amended]

Bishop International Airport, MI
    (Lat. 42[deg]57'56'' N, long. 83[deg]44'41'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 5-mile
radius of Bishop International Airport. This Class E airspace area
is effective during the specific dates and times established in
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6005. Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AGL MI E5 Flint, MI [Amended]

Bishop International Airport, MI
    (Lat. 42[deg]57'56'' N, long. 83[deg]44'41'' W)
Prices Airport, MI
    (Lat. 42[deg]48'27'' N, long. 83[deg]46'08'' W)
Flint VORTAC
    (Lat. 42[deg]58'00'' N, long. 83[deg]44'49'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.9-mile radius of Bishop International Airport, and within
2.4 miles each side of the 016[deg] radial of the Flint VORTAC
extending from the 6.9-mile radius to 7.9 miles north of Bishop
International Airport, and within 2.4 miles each side of the
179[deg] radial of the Flint VORTAC extending from the 6.9-mile
radius to 7.9 miles south of Bishop International Airport, and
within a 6.4-mile radius of Prices Airport.
* * * * *

AGL MI E5 Owosso, MI [New]

Owosso Community Airport, MI
    (Lat. 42[deg]59'35'' N, long. 84[deg]08'19'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Owosso Community Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 24, 2018.
Christopher L. Southerland,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2018-11864 Filed 6-4-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


                 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                                                 	OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND
                                                                                POLLUTION PREVENTION

MEMORANDUM

Date:  July 11, 2013

SUBJECT:	Fomesafen Sodium, Acute and Chronic Aggregate Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure and Risk Assessments for the Section 3 Registration Action  on Cantaloupe, Cucumber, Pea (Succulent), Pumpkin, Summer Squash, Winter Squash, Watermelon, Soybean (Succulent) and Lima Bean (Succulent)

PC Codes:  123802, 123803
DP Barcodes:  D410439, D410795
Decision Nos.: 467057 , 477271
Registration Nos.:  100-993; 100-1017
Petition Nos.:  2E8061, 3E8167
Regulatory Action:  Section 3 Registration
Risk Assessment Type:  Dietary
Case No.:  NA
TXR No.:  NA
CAS No.:  72178-02-0, 108731-70-0
MRID No.:  NA
40 CFR:  §180.433

FROM:	Danette Drew, Chemist
	Risk Assessment Branch V
	Health Effects Division (HED, 7509P)

THROUGH:	Nancy Dodd, Chemist
	Meheret Negussie, Chemist
	Dietary Exposure Science Advisory Council (DESAC)

TO:	Laura Nollen/	Barbara Madden, RM05
	Risk Integration, Minor Use & Emergency Response Branch
	Registration Division (RD, 7505P)

Executive Summary

Acute and chronic aggregate dietary (food and drinking water) exposure and risk assessments were conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) Version 3.16.  This software uses 2003-2008 food consumption data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA).  The analyses were conducted in support of a human-health risk assessment for the proposed Section 3 uses of fomesafen sodium (commonly called fomesafen) on cantaloupe, cucumber, pea (succulent), pumpkin, summer squash, winter squash, watermelon, soybean (succulent) and lima bean (succulent). This memorandum was reviewed by two peer reviewers of the DESAC, per DESAC SOP 2012.1.

Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment

The assumptions of these unrefined acute and chronic assessments were tolerance-level residues, 100% crop treated, and default DEEM processing factors.  Model-based estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) from the Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) were also included.

The dietary exposure analyses in this assessment result in dietary risk estimates for food and drinking water that are below the Agency's level of concern for both acute and chronic dietary exposures for all population subgroups. The acute exposure for food plus drinking water to the general U.S. population and all population subgroups was <1% of the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD) at the 95[th] percentile of exposure. The chronic exposure for food plus drinking water to the general U.S. population is 32% of the chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD).  The subgroup with the highest chronic exposure and risk estimate is infants.  For infants, the exposure for food plus drinking water was 0.001915 mg/kg/day, which represents 77% of the cPAD.

Cancer Dietary Exposure Assessment

The Cancer Assessment Review Committee (CARC) classified fomesafen as "Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans;" therefore, a cancer assessment was not performed.

I.  Introduction

Dietary risk assessment incorporates both exposure and toxicity of a given pesticide.  For acute and chronic assessments, the risk is expressed as a percentage of a maximum acceptable dose (i.e., the dose that HED has concluded will result in no unreasonable adverse health effects).  This dose is referred to as the population-adjusted dose (PAD).  The PAD is equivalent to the point of departure (POD, NOAEL, LOAEL, e.g.) divided by the required uncertainty or safety factors.

For acute and non-cancer chronic exposures, HED is concerned when estimated dietary risk exceeds 100% of the PAD.  References that discuss the acute and chronic risk assessments in more detail are available on the EPA/pesticides web site:  "Available Information on Assessing Exposure from Pesticides, A User's Guide," 21-JUN-2000, web link:  http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2000/July/Day-12/6061.pdf; or see SOP 99.6 (20-AUG-1999).

The most recent dietary risk assessment for fomesafen was conducted on 10/12/10 (A. LaMay, D382064).

II.  Residue Information

Fomesafen sodium is a contact herbicide in the diphenylether chemical class and acts via inhibition of protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO).  It is used to control broadleaf and grass weeds, as well as postemergence weeds in legumes and other crops.

Tolerances for fomesafen residues are listed in 40 CFR §180.433.  Currently tolerances are established for fomesafen acid in field soybeans, dry beans, and snap (succulent) beans at 0.05 ppm and peppers (bell and non-bell), potatoes, tomatoes, and cotton gin by-products and cottonseed at 0.025 ppm. In the current petitions (2E8061, 3E8167), uses are proposed for fomesafen on cantaloupe, cucumber, pea (succulent), pumpkin, summer squash, winter squash, watermelon, soybean (succulent) and lima bean (succulent). HED is recommending for tolerance levels of 0.025 ppm on cantaloupe, cucumber, pea (succulent), pumpkin, summer squash, winter squash and watermelon and 0.05 ppm on soybean (succulent) and lima bean (succulent) (I. Encarnacion,  D407932). All crops with existing and proposed uses of fomesafen were considered in this assessment.

The residue of concern for plant commodities and drinking water is fomesafen.  The residues of concern in livestock commodities consists of fomesafen and its metabolites 5-(2-chloro-α,α,α-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy) anthranilic acid and 5-(2-chloro-α,α,α-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-N-methylsulfonylanthranilamide.  However, based on the submitted livestock metabolism studies, HED concluded that the proposed/registered uses of fomesafen result in a 40 CFR §180.6(a)(3) situation for livestock commodities; i.e., there is no reasonable expectation of finite residues in livestock commodities.

Tolerance-level residues and 100% crop treated were used for all commodities included in these assessments. Tolerance levels are based on non-detectable residues found in field trials (see Table 1 below).  The tomato and potato processing studies previously submitted were inadequate due to the lack of detectable residues in/on the raw commodity.  Therefore, default tomato paste, dried tomato, tomato juice, and tomato puree, and dried potato concentration factors were used for these processed commodities.

Table 1.  Tolerance Summary for Fomesafen.
Commodity
                           Proposed Tolerance (ppm)
                        HED-Recommended Tolerance (ppm)
                                   Comments
                        (correct commodity definition)
Cantaloupe
                                     0.025
                                     0.025

Cucumber
                                     0.025
                                     0.025

Pea, succulent
                                     0.025
                                     0.025

Pumpkin
                                     0.025
                                     0.025

Squash, summer
                                     0.025
                                     0.025

Winter, Squash
                                     0.025
                                     0.025
Squash, winter
Watermelon
                                     0.025
                                     0.025

Vegetable, soybean, succulent
                                     0.05
                                     0.05
Soybean, vegetable, succulent
Lima, bean
                                     0.05
                                     0.05
Bean, lima, succulent

The USDA Pesticide Data Program (PDP) monitored pesticide residues in catfish in 2008, 2009, and 2010.  In general, pesticide residues would not be expected to be found in fish unless the pesticide bio accumulates or has an aquatic use.  To determine whether or not residues are present in fish, HED now routinely checks PDP monitoring data regardless of the pesticide's uses and physicochemical properties.  However, PDP did not analyze catfish samples for fomesafen.  As a result, residues in fish were not included in the assessment.

III.  Percent Crop Treated Information

The acute and chronic assessments were both based on the assumption that 100% of all commodities with registered or proposed uses of fomesafen will be treated.

IV.  Drinking Water Data

The drinking water residues used in the dietary risk assessment were provided by the EFED in the following memorandum: Revised Fomesafen Drinking Water Assessment to Include IR-4 Use on Lima Bean and Groundwater EDWCs Using a Tier-I PRZM-GW Model (D412599, H. Zhong, 6/24/12) and incorporated directly into this dietary assessment.  Water residues were incorporated in the DEEM-FCID into the food categories "water, direct, all sources" and "water, indirect, all sources."   EFED recommended the Tier I PRZM-GW highest acute value of 51.8 μg/L and chronic value of 32.3 μg/L for ground water estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs).  These EDWCs were based on the highest proposed application rate for fomesafen (0.375 lb a.i./acre). The ground water EDWCs were higher than the surface water EDWCs, which were based on Tier-II PRZM/EXAM modeling, and were therefore selected for use in the fomesafen dietary assessment.

The drinking water models and their descriptions are available at the EPA internet site: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/.

V.  DEEM-FCID Program and Consumption Information

Fomesafen acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments were conducted using the DEEM-FCID, Version 3.16, which incorporates 2003-2008 consumption data from USDA's NHANES/WWEIA.  The data are based on the reported consumption of more than 20,000 individuals over two non-consecutive survey days.  Foods "as consumed" (e.g., apple pie) are linked to EPA-defined food commodities (e.g., apples, peeled fruit - cooked; fresh or N/S; baked; or wheat flour - cooked; fresh or N/S, baked) using publicly available recipe translation files developed jointly by USDA/ARS and EPA.  For chronic exposure assessment, consumption data are averaged for the entire U.S. population and within population subgroups.  However, for acute exposure assessment, consumption data are retained as individual consumption events.  Based on analysis of the 2003-2008 WWEIA consumption data, which took into account dietary patterns and survey respondents, HED concluded that it is most appropriate to report risk for the following population subgroups: the general U.S. population, all infants (<1 year old), children 1-2, children 3-5, children 6-12, youth 13-19, adults 20-49, females 13-49, and adults 50-99 years old.

For a chronic dietary exposure assessment, an estimate of the residue level in each food or food-form (e.g., orange or orange juice) on the food commodity residue list is multiplied by the average daily consumption estimate for that food/food form to produce a residue intake estimate.  The resulting residue intake estimate for each food/food form is summed with the residue intake estimates for all other food/food forms on the commodity residue list to arrive at the total average estimated exposure.  Exposure is expressed in mg/kg body weight/day and as a percent of the cPAD.  This procedure is performed for each population subgroup.

For an acute exposure assessment, individual one-day food consumption data are used on an individual-by-individual basis.  The reported consumption amounts of each food item can be multiplied by a residue point estimate and summed to obtain a total daily pesticide exposure for a deterministic exposure assessment, or "matched" in multiple random pairings with residue values and then summed in a probabilistic assessment.  The resulting distribution of exposures is expressed as a percentage of the aPAD on both a user (i.e., only those who reported eating relevant commodities/food forms) and a per-capita (i.e., those who reported eating the relevant commodities as well as those who did not) basis.  In accordance with HED policy, per capita exposure and risk are reported for analyses performed at all levels of refinement.  However, for deterministic assessments, any significant differences in user vs. per capita exposure and risk are specifically identified and noted in the risk assessment.

VI.  Toxicological Information

The acute dietary endpoint is based on decreased body weight and motor activity (horizontal and vertical activity and time in central quadrant) in males observed in the acute neurotoxicity study in rats. The chronic dietary endpoint is based on hyalinization of the liver in males in the chronic toxicity/ carcinogenicity study in rat. These endpoints are applicable to all populations including infants and children. The FQPA safety factor is reduced to 1X as there there is no evidence of increased susceptibility in developing and young animals, and there are no residual uncertainties concerning pre- or post-natal toxicity. The toxicity and exposure databases for fomesafen are complete.

In accordance with the EPA Final Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (March 29, 2005), the CARC classified fomesafen as "Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans."  This decision was based on the weight-of-evidence which supports activation of peroxisome proliferator activated receptor alpha (PPARα) as the mode of action for fomesafen-induced hepatocarcinogenesis in mice.  The quantification of cancer risk is not required.

 A summary of the endpoints and points of departure selected for dietary risk assessment may be found in Table 2 below.

Table 2.  Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Fomesafen for Use in Dietary Human Health Risk Assessments
Exposure/ Scenario
Point of Departure
Uncertainty/FQPA Safety Factors
RfD, PAD, Level of Concern for Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological Effects
Acute Dietary (General Population, including Infants and Children)
NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Acute RfD = 1 mg/kg/day

aPAD = 1 mg/kg/day
Acute neurotoxicity test in rat
LOAEL = 250 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight and motor activity (horizontal and vertical activity and time in central quadrant) in males
Chronic Dietary (All Populations)
NOAEL = 0.25 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD = 0.0025 mg/kg/day

cPAD = 0.0025 mg/kg/day
Chronic toxicity/ carcinogenicity in rat LOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day based on hyalinization of the liver in males
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
Classification:  The CARC classified fomesafen as "Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans."
Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data and  used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures.  NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level.  LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level.  UF = uncertainty factor.  UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies).  UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).  UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL.  UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment.  UFDB = to account for the absence of key data (i.e., lack of a critical study).  FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor.  PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic).  RfD = reference dose.

VII.  Results/Discussion

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

Results of Acute Dietary Exposure Analysis

All acute dietary (food and drinking water) risk estimates are below the level of concern for the general U.S. population and all population subgroups assessed.  The acute exposure for food plus drinking water to the general U.S. population and all population subgroups was <1% of the aPAD at the 95[th] percentile of exposure.

Results of Chronic Dietary Exposure Analysis

All chronic dietary (food and drinking water) risk estimates are below the level of concern for the general U.S. population and all population subgroups assessed.  The chronic dietary risk estimate for the general U.S. population is 32% of the cPAD. The population subgroup with the highest exposure is all infants (<1 year old) at 0.001915 mg/kg/day, which utilized 77% of the cPAD.

 Table 3.  Summary of Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure and Risk for Fomesafen.
                              Population Subgroup
                                 Acute Dietary
                               (95th Percentile)
                                Chronic Dietary
                                     Cancer

                          Dietary Exposure (mg/kg/day)
                                     % aPAD
                                Dietary Exposure
                                  (mg/kg/day)
                                    % cPAD*
                                Dietary Exposure
                                  (mg/kg/day)
                                      Risk
 General U.S. Population
                                    0.002999
                                     <1
                                    0.000787
                                       32

 All Infants (<1 year old)*
                                    0.009060
                                     <1
                                    0.001915
                                       77
                                      N/A
                                      N/A
 Children 1-2 years old
                                    0.004827
                                     <1
                                    0.001267
                                       51

 Children 3-5 years old
                                    0.003915
                                     <1
                                    0.001085
                                       43

 Children 6-12 years old
                                    0.002951
                                     <1
                                    0.000755
                                       30

 Youth 13-19 years old
                                    0.002455
                                     <1
                                    0.000588
                                       24

 Adults 20-49 years old
                                    0.002858
                                     <1
                                    0.000766
                                       31

 Adults 50-99 years old
                                    0.002597
                                     <1
                                    0.000754
                                       30

 Females 13-49 years old
                                    0.002938
                                     <1
                                    0.000760
                                       30

*The subpopulation with the highest risk estimate

 VIII.  Characterization of Inputs/Outputs

HED has conducted a highly conservative, health protective assessment for the existing and proposed new uses of fomesafen sodium.  Tolerance-level residues on foods along with 100% crop treated were used in the acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments.  In addition, DEEM default processing factors were used.  Drinking water estimates were based on a conservative modeling approach. Various refinements could be made to the assessments; however, as there are no risk estimates of concern, no refinements were incorporated.

 IX.  Conclusions

 Unrefined acute and chronic dietary (food and drinking water) exposure assessments were performed for fomesafen sodium which assumed tolerance-level residues and 100% crop treated.  The dietary analyses for fomesafen resulted in dietary risk estimates that are below the Agency's level of concern for acute and chronic dietary exposures.  The acute exposure for food plus drinking water to the general U.S. population and all population subgroups was <1% of the aPAD at the 95[th] percentile of exposure. The chronic exposure for food plus drinking water to the general U.S. population is 32% of the cPAD.  The subgroup with the highest chronic exposure and risk estimate is infants (<1 year old) at 0.001915 mg/kg/day, which represents 77% of the cPAD.

 HED is confident that this dietary assessment does not underestimate risk to the general U.S. population or any population subgroup.

 X.  List of Attachments

Attachment 1:  DEEM-FCID(TM) Acute Residue Input File.
Attachment 2:  DEEM-FCID(TM) Acute Results File.
Attachment 3:  DEEM-FCID(TM) Chronic Residue Input File.
Attachment 4:  DEEM-FCID(TM) Chronic Results File.

Attachment 1:  DEEM-FCID(TM) Acute Residue Input File.

Filename: C:\Documents and Settings\ddrew\My Documents\DEEM_Version_3_16\ResidueFiles\fomesafen acute12.r08
Chemical: Fomesafen sodium
RfD(Chronic): .0025 mg/kg bw/day  NOEL(Chronic): .25 mg/kg bw/day
RfD(Acute): 1 mg/kg bw/day  NOEL(Acute):  100 mg/kg bw/day
Date created/last modified: 06-20-2013/13:43:34       Program ver. 3.16, 03-08-d
Comment: with surface water EDWC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   EPA     Crop                                   Def Res     Adj.Factors   Comment
   Code     Grp  Commodity Name                    (ppm)       #1    #2
---------- ---- -------------------------------  ----------  ------ ------  -------
0103296000 1C   Potato, chips                      0.025000   1.000  1.000
0103297000 1C   Potato, dry (granules/ flakes)     0.025000   6.500  1.000
0103297001 1C   Potato, dry (granules/ flakes)-b   0.025000   6.500  1.000
0103298000 1C   Potato, flour                      0.025000   6.500  1.000
0103298001 1C   Potato, flour-babyfood             0.025000   6.500  1.000
0103299000 1C   Potato, tuber, w/peel              0.025000   1.000  1.000
0103299001 1C   Potato, tuber, w/peel-babyfood     0.025000   1.000  1.000
0103300000 1C   Potato, tuber, w/o peel            0.025000   1.000  1.000
0103300001 1C   Potato, tuber, w/o peel-babyfood   0.025000   1.000  1.000
0600347000 6    Soybean, seed                      0.050000   1.000  1.000
0600349000 6    Soybean, soy milk                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0600349001 6    Soybean, soy milk-babyfood or in   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0600350000 6    Soybean, oil                       0.050000   1.000  1.000
0600350001 6    Soybean, oil-babyfood              0.050000   1.000  1.000
0601043000 6A   Bean, snap, succulent              0.050000   1.000  1.000
0601043001 6A   Bean, snap, succulent-babyfood     0.050000   1.000  1.000
0601349500 6AB  Soybean, vegetable                 0.050000   1.000  1.000
0602037000 6B   Bean, lima, succulent              0.050000   1.000  1.000
0602255000 6B   Pea, succulent                     0.025000   1.000  1.000
0602255001 6B   Pea, succulent-babyfood            0.025000   1.000  1.000
0603030000 6C   Bean, black, seed                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603032000 6C   Bean, broad, seed                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603034000 6C   Bean, cowpea, seed                 0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603035000 6C   Bean,  great northern, seed        0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603036000 6C   Bean, kidney, seed                 0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603038000 6C   Bean, lima, seed                   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603039000 6C   Bean, mung, seed                   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603040000 6C   Bean, navy, seed                   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603041000 6C   Bean, pink, seed                   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603042000 6C   Bean, pinto, seed                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603098000 6C   Chickpea, seed                     0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603098001 6C   Chickpea, seed-babyfood            0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603099000 6C   Chickpea, flour                    0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603182000 6C   Guar, seed                         0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603182001 6C   Guar, seed-babyfood                0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603203000 6C   Lentil, seed                       0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603256000 6C   Pea, dry                           0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603256001 6C   Pea, dry-babyfood                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603258000 6C   Pea, pigeon, seed                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603348000 6C   Soybean, flour                     0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603348001 6C   Soybean, flour-babyfood            0.050000   1.000  1.000
0801374000 8A   Tomatillo                          0.025000   1.000  1.000
0801375000 8A   Tomato                             0.025000   1.000  1.000
0801375001 8A   Tomato-babyfood                    0.025000   1.000  1.000
0801376000 8A   Tomato, paste                      0.025000   5.400  1.000
0801376001 8A   Tomato, paste-babyfood             0.025000   5.400  1.000
0801377000 8A   Tomato, puree                      0.025000   3.300  1.000
0801377001 8A   Tomato, puree-babyfood             0.025000   3.300  1.000
0801378000 8A   Tomato, dried                      0.025000  14.300  1.000
0801378001 8A   Tomato, dried-babyfood             0.025000  14.300  1.000
0801379000 8A   Tomato, juice                      0.025000   1.500  1.000
0801380000 8A   Tomato, Tree                       0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802270000 8B   Pepper, bell                       0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802270001 8B   Pepper, bell-babyfood              0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802271000 8B   Pepper, bell, dried                0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802271001 8B   Pepper, bell, dried-babyfood       0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802272000 8BC  Pepper, nonbell                    0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802272001 8BC  Pepper, nonbell-babyfood           0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802273000 8BC  Pepper, nonbell, dried             0.025000   1.000  1.000
0901075000 9A   Cantaloupe                         0.025000   1.000  1.000
0901399000 9A   Watermelon                         0.025000   1.000  1.000
0901400000 9A   Watermelon, juice                  0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902135000 9B   Cucumber                           0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902308000 9B   Pumpkin                            0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902309000 9B   Pumpkin, seed                      0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902356000 9B   Squash, summer                     0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902356001 9B   Squash, summer-babyfood            0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902357000 9B   Squash, winter                     0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902357001 9B   Squash, winter-babyfood            0.025000   1.000  1.000
2003128000 20C  Cottonseed, oil                    0.025000   1.000  1.000
2003128001 20C  Cottonseed, oil-babyfood           0.025000   1.000  1.000
8601000000 86A  Water, direct, all sources         0.051800   1.000  1.000
8602000000 86B  Water, indirect, all sources       0.051800   1.000  1.000

Attachment 2:  DEEM-FCID(TM) Acute Results File.

U.S. EPA                                                    Ver. 3.16, 03-08-d
DEEM-FCID ACUTE Analysis for FOMESAFEN SODIUM            NHANES 2003-2008 2-Day
Residue file: fomesafen acute12.r08               Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.
Analysis Date: 06-20-2013/13:46:35    Residue file dated: 06-20-2013/13:43:34
NOEL (Acute) = 100.000000 mg/kg body-wt/day
RAC/FF intake summed over 24 hours
Run Comment: "with surface water EDWC"
===============================================================================

Summary calculations--per capita:

---   95th Percentile----   ---   99th Percentile----     ---99.9th Percentile----
 Exposure  % aRfD     MOE    Exposure  % aRfD     MOE    Exposure  % aRfD     MOE
---------- ------- -------- ---------- ------- -------- ---------- ------- --------
Total US Population:
  0.002999    0.30   33349    0.004871    0.49   20531    0.009056    0.91   11042
All Infants:
  0.009060    0.91   11037    0.012121    1.21    8250    0.017781    1.78    5623
Children 1-2:
  0.004827    0.48   20715    0.007006    0.70   14272    0.016315    1.63    6129
Children 3-5:
  0.003915    0.39   25539    0.005715    0.57   17498    0.009036    0.90   11067
Children 6-12:
  0.002951    0.30   33891    0.004553    0.46   21962    0.006963    0.70   14361
Youth 13-19:
  0.002455    0.25   40733    0.004031    0.40   24807    0.006020    0.60   16610
Adults 20-49:
  0.002858    0.29   34984    0.004247    0.42   23544    0.006065    0.61   16487
Adults 50-99:
  0.002597    0.26   38503    0.003921    0.39   25502    0.006049    0.60   16531
Female 13-49:
  0.002938    0.29   34035    0.004253    0.43   23513    0.005965    0.60   16765

Attachment 3:  DEEM-FCID(TM) Chronic Residue Input File.

Filename: C:\Documents and Settings\ddrew\My Documents\DEEM_Version_3_16\ResidueFiles\fomesafen chronic12.r08
Chemical: Fomesafen sodium
RfD(Chronic): .0025 mg/kg bw/day  NOEL(Chronic): .25 mg/kg bw/day
RfD(Acute): 1 mg/kg bw/day  NOEL(Acute):  100 mg/kg bw/day
Date created/last modified: 06-20-2013/13:36:32       Program ver. 3.16, 03-08-d
Comment: with surface water EDWC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   EPA     Crop                                   Def Res     Adj.Factors   Comment
   Code     Grp  Commodity Name                    (ppm)       #1    #2
---------- ---- -------------------------------  ----------  ------ ------  -------
0103296000 1C   Potato, chips                      0.025000   1.000  1.000
0103297000 1C   Potato, dry (granules/ flakes)     0.025000   6.500  1.000
0103297001 1C   Potato, dry (granules/ flakes)-b   0.025000   6.500  1.000
0103298000 1C   Potato, flour                      0.025000   6.500  1.000
0103298001 1C   Potato, flour-babyfood             0.025000   6.500  1.000
0103299000 1C   Potato, tuber, w/peel              0.025000   1.000  1.000
0103299001 1C   Potato, tuber, w/peel-babyfood     0.025000   1.000  1.000
0103300000 1C   Potato, tuber, w/o peel            0.025000   1.000  1.000
0103300001 1C   Potato, tuber, w/o peel-babyfood   0.025000   1.000  1.000
0600347000 6    Soybean, seed                      0.050000   1.000  1.000
0600349000 6    Soybean, soy milk                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0600349001 6    Soybean, soy milk-babyfood or in   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0600350000 6    Soybean, oil                       0.050000   1.000  1.000
0600350001 6    Soybean, oil-babyfood              0.050000   1.000  1.000
0601043000 6A   Bean, snap, succulent              0.050000   1.000  1.000
0601043001 6A   Bean, snap, succulent-babyfood     0.050000   1.000  1.000
0601349500 6AB  Soybean, vegetable                 0.050000   1.000  1.000
0602037000 6B   Bean, lima, succulent              0.050000   1.000  1.000
0602255000 6B   Pea, succulent                     0.025000   1.000  1.000
0602255001 6B   Pea, succulent-babyfood            0.025000   1.000  1.000
0603030000 6C   Bean, black, seed                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603032000 6C   Bean, broad, seed                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603034000 6C   Bean, cowpea, seed                 0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603035000 6C   Bean,  great northern, seed        0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603036000 6C   Bean, kidney, seed                 0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603038000 6C   Bean, lima, seed                   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603039000 6C   Bean, mung, seed                   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603040000 6C   Bean, navy, seed                   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603041000 6C   Bean, pink, seed                   0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603042000 6C   Bean, pinto, seed                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603098000 6C   Chickpea, seed                     0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603098001 6C   Chickpea, seed-babyfood            0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603099000 6C   Chickpea, flour                    0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603182000 6C   Guar, seed                         0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603182001 6C   Guar, seed-babyfood                0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603203000 6C   Lentil, seed                       0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603256000 6C   Pea, dry                           0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603256001 6C   Pea, dry-babyfood                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603258000 6C   Pea, pigeon, seed                  0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603348000 6C   Soybean, flour                     0.050000   1.000  1.000
0603348001 6C   Soybean, flour-babyfood            0.050000   1.000  1.000
0801374000 8A   Tomatillo                          0.025000   1.000  1.000
0801375000 8A   Tomato                             0.025000   1.000  1.000
0801375001 8A   Tomato-babyfood                    0.025000   1.000  1.000
0801376000 8A   Tomato, paste                      0.025000   5.400  1.000
0801376001 8A   Tomato, paste-babyfood             0.025000   5.400  1.000
0801377000 8A   Tomato, puree                      0.025000   3.300  1.000
0801377001 8A   Tomato, puree-babyfood             0.025000   3.300  1.000
0801378000 8A   Tomato, dried                      0.025000  14.300  1.000
0801378001 8A   Tomato, dried-babyfood             0.025000  14.300  1.000
0801379000 8A   Tomato, juice                      0.025000   1.500  1.000
0801380000 8A   Tomato, Tree                       0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802270000 8B   Pepper, bell                       0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802270001 8B   Pepper, bell-babyfood              0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802271000 8B   Pepper, bell, dried                0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802271001 8B   Pepper, bell, dried-babyfood       0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802272000 8BC  Pepper, nonbell                    0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802272001 8BC  Pepper, nonbell-babyfood           0.025000   1.000  1.000
0802273000 8BC  Pepper, nonbell, dried             0.025000   1.000  1.000
0901075000 9A   Cantaloupe                         0.025000   1.000  1.000
0901399000 9A   Watermelon                         0.025000   1.000  1.000
0901400000 9A   Watermelon, juice                  0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902135000 9B   Cucumber                           0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902308000 9B   Pumpkin                            0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902309000 9B   Pumpkin, seed                      0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902356000 9B   Squash, summer                     0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902356001 9B   Squash, summer-babyfood            0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902357000 9B   Squash, winter                     0.025000   1.000  1.000
0902357001 9B   Squash, winter-babyfood            0.025000   1.000  1.000
2003128000 20C  Cottonseed, oil                    0.025000   1.000  1.000
2003128001 20C  Cottonseed, oil-babyfood           0.025000   1.000  1.000
8601000000 86A  Water, direct, all sources         0.032300   1.000  1.000
8602000000 86B  Water, indirect, all sources       0.032300   1.000  1.000

Attachment 4:  DEEM-FCID(TM) Chronic Results File.

U.S. EPA                                                        Ver. 3.16, 03-08-d
DEEM-FCID Chronic analysis for FOMESAFEN SODIUM            NHANES 2003-2008 2-day
Residue file name: C:\Documents and Settings\ddrew\My Documents\DEEM_Version_3_16\ResidueFiles\fomesafen chronic12.r08
                                                 Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.
Analysis Date 06-20-2013/13:37:46     Residue file dated: 06-20-2013/13:36:32
Reference dose (RfD, Chronic) = .0025 mg/kg bw/day
COMMENT 1: with surface water EDWC
===============================================================================
                    Total exposure by population subgroup
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                    Total Exposure
                                         -----------------------------------
          Population                         mg/kg             Percent of
           Subgroup                       body wt/day             Rfd
--------------------------------------   -------------       ----------------
Total US Population                         0.000787                31.5%
Hispanic                                    0.000768                30.7%
Non-Hisp-White                              0.000805                32.2%
Non-Hisp-Black                              0.000659                26.4%
Non-Hisp-Other                              0.000902                36.1%
Nursing Infants                             0.000702                28.1%
Non-Nursing Infants                         0.002457                98.3%
Female 13+ PREG                             0.000744                29.7%
Children 1-6                                0.001133                45.3%
Children 7-12                               0.000715                28.6%
Male 13-19                                  0.000565                22.6%
Female 13-19/NP                             0.000611                24.4%
Male 20+                                    0.000722                28.9%
Female 20+/NP                               0.000797                31.9%
Seniors 55+                                 0.000740                29.6%
All Infants                                 0.001915                76.6%
Female 13-50                                0.000760                30.4%
Children 1-2                                0.001267                50.7%
Children 3-5                                0.001085                43.4%
Children 6-12                               0.000755                30.2%
Youth 13-19                                 0.000588                23.5%
Adults 20-49                                0.000766                30.6%
Adults 50-99                                0.000754                30.1%
Female 13-49                                0.000760                30.4%


[Federal Register: April 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 68)]
[Notices]
[Page 17895-17896]
[DOCID:fr10ap07-72]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0036; FRL-8296-6]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission To OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Magnetic Tape
Manufacturing Operations (Renewal); EPA ICR Number 1678.06, OMB Control
Number 2060-0326

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on, or before May 10, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2006-0036, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
2201T , 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2)
OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leonard Lazarus, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On October 5, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR 58853) EPA sought
comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no
comments. Additional comments regarding this ICR should be submitted to
EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0036, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov, in person viewing at the

Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The
EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov
, to submit, or view public comments, access the

index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. When in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically, or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA

receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to
http://www.regulations.gov.

    Title: NESHAP for Magnetic Tape Manufacturing Operations (40 CFR
Part 63, Subpart EE).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1678.06, OMB Control Number 2060-0326.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2007. Under
OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. An
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 OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register, or by other appropriate means,
such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable.
The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Owners or operators of magnetic tape manufacturing
operations must make the following one-time-only reports: notification
of the date of construction or reconstruction; notification of the
anticipated and actual dates of startup; notification of any physical,
or operational change to an existing facility which may increase the
regulated pollutant emission rate; notification of the date of the
initial performance test; and the results of the initial performance
test. Owners, or operators also are required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility. Each owner, or operator of an
affected magnetic tape coating operation shall install, calibrate,
maintain, and operate a monitoring device that continuously measures
control device efficiency. Recordkeeping requirements include records
of the freeboard ratio, compliance monitoring system (CMS) maintenance
and calibration, performance tests, material balance calculation, and
hazardous air pollutant (HAP) usage.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 200
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose, or provide information to, or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes

of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners or operators of magnetic tape
manufacturing operations.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 6.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, on occasion, semiannually,
quarterly.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 3,395.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $264,722, which includes $11,000
annualized capital cost, $36,000 O&M costs, and $217,722 labor costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the labor hours, or
cost in this ICR compared to the previous ICR. This is due to two
considerations. First, the regulations have not changed during the past
three years and are not anticipated to change in the next three years.
Second, the growth rate for the industry is very low, negative, or non-
existent, so there is no significant change in the overall burden.
Because there are no changes in the regulatory requirements and there
is no significant industry growth, the labor hours and cost figures in
the previous ICR are used in this ICR, and there is no change in burden
to industry.

    Dated: March 30, 2007.
Oscar Morales,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E7-6712 Filed 4-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 52)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13049-13050]
[DOCID:fr18mr10-22]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0049; Airspace Docket No. 08-AWA-1]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Modification of Class B Airspace; Charlotte, NC

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action provides the graphic chart for the proposed rule
published in the Federal Register of March 3, 2010, regarding the
modification of Class B airspace, Charlotte, NC. This correction adds
the chart that was inadvertently omitted from the NPRM.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 3, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace and Rules
Group, Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Correction

    In proposed rule FR Doc. 2010-4377, beginning on page 9538 in the
issue of March 3, 2010, make the following correction: On page 9544 in
the first column, add the attached graphic chart before the Issue Date
line.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP18MR10.004

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 9, 2010.
Edith V. Parish,
Manager, Airspace and Rules Group.
[FR Doc. 2010-5879 Filed 3-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 22, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 162)]
[Notices]
[Page 46977]
[DOCID:fr22au07-64]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OR07-17-000]

CCPS Transportation, LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory
Order

August 15, 2007.
    Take notice that, on August 13, 2007, CCPS Transportation, LLC
(CCPS), pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2) (2007), tendered for
filing to the Commission a petition to issue a declaratory order
confirming the proposed capacity allocation and rate structure for the
planned expansion of the Spearhead Pipeline, which will increase
Spearhead's average annual capacity to carry crude petroleum between
Flanagan, Illinois and Cushing, Oklahoma by 65,000 barrels per day.
Subject to the Commission's approval of this petition, the Spearhead
expansion is targeted to go into service in the first quarter of 2009.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated
below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or
protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve
motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time, August 31, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-16505 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 8, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 172)]
[Notices]
[Page 46292-46293]
[DOCID:fr08se09-157]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Hazardous Materials-Automated Cargo Communication for Efficient
and Safe Shipments HM-ACCESS) Initiative; Public Meeting

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice is to advise interested persons that PHMSA will
conduct a public meeting to receive input and guidance for the upcoming
Proof-of-Concept Study on the use of

electronic data sharing in lieu of paper hazardous materials shipping
documents.

DATES: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 9 a.m.-3:30 p.m. and Wednesday October
14, 2009 9 a.m.-3:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the DOT Headquarters, West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    Notification: Persons planning to attend should send an e-mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>including their name and contact information
(company/address/telephone).
    Conference Call Capability/Live Meeting Information: Due to the
nature and length of the meeting, remote access/call-in capability will
not be provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ryan Paquet, P.G., Assistant
Director, Office of International Standards, Office of Hazardous
Materials Safety, Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590;
(202) 366-0656.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The primary purpose of this public meeting
will be to discuss the forthcoming HM-ACCESS Proof of Concept Study and
specify requirements to be included in the Study's statement of work.
In holding this public meeting, PHMSA seeks to receive feedback from a
wide audience, representing myriad portions of the HM industry,
including HM shippers, transporters, freight forwarders, emergency
responders, other government agencies, technology providers, etc.
    PHMSA's HM-ACCESS initiative aims to identify and eliminate
barriers to the use of paperless tracking and hazard communications
technologies, thereby (1) improving the availability and accuracy of
hazard information; (2) improving the speed by which information is
available to emergency responders when incidents occur; (3) and
allowing U.S. companies to compete more effectively in the global
economy by using the best tools available.
    Spurred by competitive demands, just-in-time delivery requirements,
and the globalization of supply chains, the transportation and
logistics industries have embraced modern communication technologies;
yet hazardous materials transport remains in a world of paper. The HM
sector has harnessed many of the same technologies for streamlining
commercial interchange, but information about shipments and packages is
conveyed by markings on the package, placards on the vehicle, and
shipping papers. Paper-based communication is slow, limits the
information available, and is fraught with the potential for error.
Inefficiencies and errors in the handling of hazardous materials
produce increased risk throughout the transport chain due to increased
storage time, mishandling, and ineffective or inaccurate hazard
communication. Moreover, paper-based communication may be least
effective at the very time when hazard communication is most critical--
in the immediate aftermath of a transportation incident.
    We expect the integration of electronic transfer of shipping
information to be generational. A number of hazardous materials
carriers, vessel, rail, and air transport organizations have stated
that they are ready to begin utilizing electronic shipping paper
technology, subject only to regulatory authorization. In the highway
mode, the larger, technologically-advanced companies may be prepared to
implement electronic systems, but widespread use among the industry is
a longer-term proposition. In any case, however, no part of the HM
transportation sector can transition to new hazard communication
systems without ensuring that emergency response officials are prepared
and equipped to receive the hazard information at least as quickly and
reliably as under the current system.
    Discussion points include:
    1. What are shipping papers used for?
    2. What information from a shipping paper should be immediately
conveyed to emergency responders in the event of an incident?
    3. What work has been/is being done on standardizing shipping paper
information?
    4. When electronic shipping papers are used, how is required
information shared with emergency responders (professional, volunteer,
urban, rural, etc.)? How is it shared with compliance inspectors/
officers?
    5. What benefits will electronic shipping papers have for companies
shipping HM? HM transporters? Freight forwarders? Emergency responders?
Other government agencies?
    6. What challenges will electronic shipping papers create for
companies shipping HM? HM transporters? Freight forwarders? Emergency
responders? Other government agencies?
    7. What existing efforts (government or private) are related to HM-
ACCESS? Can these efforts be coordinated?
    For more information on the HM-ACCESS and to check for updates on
information related to this public meeting visit PHMSA's HM-ACCESS Web
site at http://hazmat.dot.gov/HM-ACCESS/index.html.

R. Ryan Posten,
Acting Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety.
[FR Doc. E9-21415 Filed 9-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-60-M


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 85 (Tuesday, May 3, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26485-26487]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09793]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 3, 2016 / Proposed
Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-6139; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-061-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and
-900ER series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by fuel system
reviews conducted by the manufacturer. This proposed AD would require
modifying the fuel quantity indicating system (FQIS) to prevent
development of an ignition source inside the center fuel tank due to
electrical fault conditions. This proposed AD would also provide
alternative actions for cargo airplanes. We are proposing this AD to
prevent ignition sources inside the center fuel tank, which, in
combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank
explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 17, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
6139; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Regimbal, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6506; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-6139;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-061-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 because of those comments.
    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

    The FAA has examined the underlying safety issues involved in fuel
tank explosions on several large transport airplanes, including the
adequacy of existing regulations, the service history of airplanes
subject to those regulations, and existing maintenance practices for
fuel tank systems. As a result of those findings, we issued a
regulation titled ``Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review,
Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements''
(66 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). In addition to new airworthiness standards
for transport airplanes and new maintenance requirements, this rule
included Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (``SFAR 88''),
Amendment 21-78. Subsequently, SFAR 88 was amended by: Amendment 21-82
(67 FR 57490, September 10, 2002; corrected at 67 FR 70809, November
26, 2002) and Amendment 21-83 (67 FR 72830, December 9, 2002; corrected
at 68 FR 37735, June 25, 2003, to change ``21-82'' to ``21-83'').
    Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design approval
(i.e., type certificate (TC) and supplemental type certificate (STC))
holders to substantiate that their fuel tank systems can prevent
ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This requirement applies to type
design approval holders for large turbine-powered transport airplanes
and for subsequent modifications to those airplanes. It requires them
to perform design reviews and to develop design changes and maintenance
procedures if their designs do not meet the new fuel tank safety
standards. As explained in the preamble to the rule, we intended to
adopt airworthiness directives to mandate any changes found necessary
to address unsafe conditions identified as a result of these reviews.
    In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four
criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel
tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of
operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable
conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address
the failure types under evaluation: Single failures, combination of
failures, and unacceptable (failure) experience. For all three failure
criteria, the evaluations included consideration of previous actions
taken that may mitigate the need for further action.
    We have determined that the actions identified in this proposed AD
are necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel
tanks, which, in combination with flammable

fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss
of the airplane.

Model 737NG FQIS Design

    The design of the in-tank FQIS components and wiring has the
potential for a latent FQIS electrical fault condition inside the fuel
tank combined with an electrical hot short condition connecting a high
power source to the FQIS wiring to cause an ignition source in a fuel
tank.
    Under the policy contained in FAA Policy Memo PS-ANM100-2003-112-15
[http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgPolicy.nsf/0/DC94C3A46396950386256D5E006AED11?OpenDocument&Highlight=anm-100-2003-112-15], the FAA determined that this ignition source risk combined
with the fleet average flammability for the center wing tank on Model
737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes created
an unsafe condition for the center fuel tank. Applying that same
policy, the FAA determined that due to a lower fleet average
flammability, that same unsafe condition does not exist in the main
(wing) tanks of these airplanes.

Related Rulemaking

    On March 21, 2016, we issued AD 2016-07-07, Amendment 39-18452 (81
FR 19472, April 5, 2016), for certain Boeing Model 757-200, -200PF, -
200CB, and -300 series airplanes. AD 2016-07-07 requires similar
actions to those proposed in this NPRM. AD 2016-07-07 addressed the
numerous public comments that were submitted on the proposal.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require modifying the FQIS to prevent
development of an ignition source inside the center fuel tank due to
electrical fault conditions. As an alternative for cargo airplanes,
this proposed AD would provide the alternative to modify the airplane
by separating FQIS wiring routed between the FQIS processor and the
center fuel tank, provided repetitive BITE checks (checks of built-in
test equipment) of the FQIS are also performed.

Costs of Compliance

    There are approximately 1,393 U.S.-registered Model 737-600, -700,
-700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes in service. All of those
airplanes are currently operated as passenger airplanes. Beginning with
line number 2620, however, Boeing has delivered airplanes with
flammability reductions means (FRM)/nitrogen generation system (NGS)
installed. We estimate that 831 affected airplanes on the U.S. Register
were delivered without FRM installed, but we do not know the number of
airplanes that have had FRM installed post-production. However, because
of the requirement in 14 CFR 121.1117 to install FRM on U.S. air-
carrier passenger airplanes by the end of 2017, it is likely that no
U.S. airplanes would actually be affected by this proposed AD. For any
affected airplane, we estimate the following costs to comply with this
proposed AD:

                                        Estimated Costs--Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                 Action                                Labor cost                  Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification............................  1,200 work-hours x $85 per hour =           $200,000         $302,000
                                           $102,000.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                      Estimated Costs--Alternative Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                            Labor cost                Parts cost        Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BITE check..........................  1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85              $0   $85 per check (4 checks
                                       per check.                                         per year, $340 per
                                                                                year).
Wire separation.....................  230 work-hours x $85 per hour =          $10,000   $29,550.
                                       $19,550.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2016-6139; Directorate Identifier
2015-NM-061-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 17, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -
700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes, certificated in any
category, excluding airplanes equipped with a flammability reduction
means (FRM) approved by the FAA as compliant with the Fuel Tank
Flammability Reduction (FTFR) rule (73 FR 42444, July 21, 2008)
requirements of section 25.981(b) or section 26.33(c)(1) of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 25.981(b) or 14 CFR
26.33(c)(1)).

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by fuel system reviews conducted by the
manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent ignition sources
inside the center fuel tank, which, in combination with flammable
fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent
loss of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Modification

    Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, modify the
fuel quantity indicating system (FQIS) to prevent development of an
ignition source inside the center fuel tank due to electrical fault
conditions, using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.

(h) Alternative Actions for Cargo Airplanes

    For airplanes used exclusively for cargo operations: As an
alternative to the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD, do the
actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, using
methods approved in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (i) of this AD. To exercise this alternative, operators
must perform the first inspection required under paragraph (h)(1) of
this AD within 6 months after the effective date of this AD. To
exercise this alternative for airplanes returned to service after
conversion of the airplane from a passenger configuration to an all-
cargo configuration more than 6 months after the effective date of
this AD, operators must perform the first inspection required under
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD prior to further flight after the
conversion.
    (1) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, record
the existing fault codes stored in the FQIS processor and then do a
BITE check (check of built-in test equipment) of the FQIS. If any
nondispatchable fault code is recorded prior to the BITE check or as
a result of the BITE check, before further flight, do all applicable
repairs and repeat the BITE check until a successful test is
performed with no nondispatchable faults found, using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD. Repeat these actions thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 650 flight hours. Modification as specified in paragraph
(h)(2) of this AD does not terminate the repetitive BITE check
requirement of this paragraph.
    (2) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, modify
the airplane by separating FQIS wiring that runs between the FQIS
processor and the center tank wing spar penetrations, including any
circuits that might pass through a main fuel tank, from other
airplane wiring that is not intrinsically safe, using methods
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. To be approved, the
repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Jon Regimbal,
Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 15, 2016.
Victor Wicklund,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-09793 Filed 5-2-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P