UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on January 9, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2002-14049

______________________________________________________________________

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).

Applications and/or Requests of  Federal Express Corporation  (FedEx)
filed December 9, 2003, and supplemented December 15, 2003; Northwest
Airlines, Inc. (Northwest) filed December 9, 2003 and supplemented
December 15, 2003; Polar Air Cargo, Inc. (Polar) filed December 10,
2003, and supplemented December 15, 2003; United Parcel Service Co.
(UPS) filed December 15, 2003, for:

	Interim use of fifth-freedom frequencies for service in the Seoul-Hong
Kong market.

By Notice of Action Taken, in the above referenced docket, on December
10, 2003, the Department granted Evergreen International Airlines
(Evergreen) and Kalitta Air, LLC (Kalitta) waivers from the startup
dates for their combined four fifth-freedom frequencies allocated for
Seoul-Hong Kong Service.  That Notice also permitted Federal Express
Corporation (FedEx) to continue using its existing two pendente lite
frequencies for Seoul-Hong Kong service through March 10, 2004, and
stated that we would issue a Notice regarding use of the remaining two
frequencies soon, noting that Northwest, FedEx, and Polar had expressed
interest in using the frequencies.  On December 11, 2003, the Department
issued a procedural notice regarding the remaining two frequencies.

FedEx seeks two additional frequencies; Northwest seeks one frequency;
Polar seeks two frequencies to supplement its existing long-term
frequencies in the market; and UPS seeks two frequencies.  Each carrier
acknowledges that it operates in the market now on a blind-sector basis;
that it can immediately begin using the interim frequencies; and that
grant of additional authority would enhance its operations and would
improve its competitive position.

Northwest, Polar, and UPS filed answers, opposing the applications of
the other applicants.  Northwest and Polar filed consolidated replies.

Northwest argues that Polar should not be granted frequencies while
Northwest has no access to the local market; that FedEx should not be
permitted to monopolize the available temporary frequencies; that UPS
operates daily Hong Kong-Seoul service while Northwest operates a single
weekly Hong Kong-Seoul flight; and that UPS controls the second-most
Hong Kong fifth-freedom frequencies after Federal Express.

Polar argues that FedEx and UPS can already offer services between Seoul
and Hong Kong via their hubs in the Philippines and that an award to
either carrier would only serve to supplement that service via the
Philippine hubs.  It argues that FedEx and Northwest would use the
frequencies to support only one-way operations.  Polar maintains that it
will use the frequencies to operate between Seoul and Hong Kong on a
round-trip basis and notes that Seoul is a hub for its operations.

UPS argues that it would maximize U.S. carrier service by being a third
carrier in the market that can provide general air freight.  It argues
that of the applicants, it is the only one that operates Hong Kong-Seoul
routing on a round-trip basis and maintains that an award to any other
applicant will waste half of the instant authorization.

Applicant rep: G. Bailey Leopard, Jr.  (FedEx)(<PHONE_NUMBER>; Megan Rae
Rosia (Northwest)<PHONE_NUMBER>;

	          Jeffrey N. Manley (Polar)<PHONE_NUMBER>; and David L.
Vaughan (UPS)<PHONE_NUMBER>

 DOT analyst: Linda Senese,<PHONE_NUMBER>

DISPOSITION

XX Granted:  one frequency to Northwest and one frequency to Polar (see
Remarks below)

Each allocated frequency is effective:  January  9, 2004, through March
10, 2004.

XX Denied:  Balance of requests (See Remarks below)

Action taken by:  Susan McDermott

	                Deputy Assistant Secretary for

     Aviation and International Affairs

________________________________________________________________________
___________________________

Remarks:   The matter before the Department involves immediate
replacement for interim authority for two Hong Kong-Seoul fifth-freedom
frequencies.  Our focus here is thus much narrower than it would be in a
proceeding where we were deciding selections and allocations for the
long term.  Here, we are seeking a temporary solution for a specific
problem—i.e., that two carriers we selected in the long-term
proceeding have not yet begun service and might not do so for a period
of some weeks.  Thus, the type of service that we anticipated would be
present in the market by this time is not yet available to the public.
Our goal is to provide, to the extent possible, comparable public
benefit during this interim period.

Against this background, we have decided to award one frequency each to
Northwest and Polar through March 10, 2004.  We will thereby be awarding
authority to two carriers whose cargo operations concentrate on the type
of cargo service—i.e., general all-cargo services—that most closely
corresponds to that of the long-term award holders, Kalitta and
Evergreen, whose entry has been delayed.  We will also, by awarding this
interim authority to two different carriers in addition to our earlier
award of two interim frequencies to FedEx, be adding to shipper options
and promoting competition.  In the circumstances presented, we have
determined that this result best serves the public interest.

Since we expect Kalitta and Evergreen to be in a position to begin
services to Seoul on or before March 10, 2004, we will require them to
inform the Department, Northwest, and Polar at least two weeks prior to
their inaugurating service so that Northwest and Polar can take down
their services in a timely fashion.

________________________________________________________________________
___________________________

We found that our action was consistent with Department policy; and
grant of the waiver was consistent with the public interest.  To the
extent not granted, 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.

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

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

Evergreen’s waiver from the startup condition for the first-year
frequency is effective through March 10, 2004; Evergreen’s waiver from
the startup condition for the second-year frequency is effective through
April 23, 2004, or until the date on which Evergreen begins service with
each of these frequencies, whichever occurs earlier.  Kalitta’s waiver
from the startup for both frequencies is effective through March 10,
2004, or until the date on which Kalitta begins service with each of
these frequencies, whichever is earlier.

 The December 11 Notice invited any other carrier parties to the
2002/2003 Hong Kong Fifth-Freedom All-Cargo Frequency Proceeding willing
and able promptly to implement service on an interim basis with one or
both of the available fifth-freedom frequencies to file an application
by noon December 15, 2003.  The Notice directed that comments on all
requests and applications should be filed by noon December 17 and any
replies should be filed by noon December 18, 2003.

 We recognize that Evergreen has received a startup waiver for one of
its frequencies through April 23, 2004.  Evergreen is under an
obligation to report periodically on its progress on inaugurating
services.  Should it appear that this one frequency will in fact remain
available after March 10, 2004, we will address the matter of its
interim use at a later date.

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


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

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I am very passionate about these products. I started using tobacco products when I was just a teenager and got addicted fairly young. After 19 years of smoking cigarettes I have been tobacco free for 4 months now. I tried many other products to help me quit, gum, patches, pills, etc. But these vapor products are the only things that have helped me kick the tobacco habit. And since I started using vapor products I feel my quality of life has grown. I feel better, smell better, taste more. My lung capacity is increasing more and more. My energy level has risen. Just everything about me is better. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 26, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30005-30008]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12634]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2015-0276]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Swim Around Charleston; Charleston, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary moving
safety zone during the Swim Around Charleston, a swimming race
occurring on the Wando River, the Cooper River, Charleston Harbor, and
the Ashley River, in Charleston, South Carolina. The Swim Around
Charleston is scheduled on Saturday, September 26, 2015. The temporary
moving safety zone is necessary to protect swimmers, participant
vessels, spectators, and the general public during the event. Persons
and vessels would be prohibited from entering the safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated
representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 25, 2015. Requests for public meetings must be
received by the Coast Guard on or before August 1, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions on
submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these
three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Ruleman, Sector
Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone
(843)-740-3184, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl
Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason

for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and
material online at http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when
you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or
mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the
Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We
recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we
can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2015-0276 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2015-0276 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the proposed rule is the Coast Guard's
authority to establish regulated navigation areas and other limited
access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
    The purpose of the proposed rule is to ensure the safety of the
swimmers, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public
during the Swim Around Charleston.

C. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    On Saturday, September 26, 2015, the Swim Around Charleston is
scheduled to take place on the Wando River, the Cooper River,
Charleston Harbor, and the Ashley River, in Charleston, South Carolina.
The Swim Around Charleston will consist of a 12 mile swim that starts
at Remley's Point on the Wando River, crosses the main shipping channel
of Charleston Harbor, and finishes at the I-526 bridge and boat landing
on the Ashley River.
    The proposed rule would establish a temporary moving safety zone of
50 yards in front of the lead safety vessel preceding the first race
participant, 50 yards behind the safety vessel trailing the last race
participants, and at all times extend 100 yards on either side of
safety vessels. The temporary moving safety zone would be enforced from
12:00 p.m. until 6:00 p.m. on September 26, 2015.
    Persons and vessels would be prohibited from entering or transiting
through the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port
Charleston or a designated representative. Persons and vessels would be
able to request authorization to enter or transit through the safety
zone by contacting the Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at
(843) 740-7050, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel
16.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The economic impact of this proposed rule is not significant for
the following reasons: (1) The safety zone would only be enforced for a
total of six hours; (2) the safety zone would move with the participant
vessels so that once the swimmers clear a portion of the waterway, the
safety zone would no longer be enforced in that portion of the
waterway; (3) although persons and vessels would not be able to enter
or transit through the safety zone without authorization from the
Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, they
would be able to operate in the surrounding area during the enforcement
period; (4) persons and vessels would still be able to enter or transit
through the safety zone if authorized by the Captain of the Port
Charleston or a designated representative; and (5) the Coast Guard
would provide advance notification of the safety zone to the local
maritime community by Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to
Mariners.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within that portion of the
Wando River, the Cooper River, Charleston Harbor, and the Ashley River
in Charleston, South Carolina encompassed within the

safety zone from 12:00 p.m. until 6:00 p.m. on Saturday, September 26,
2015. For the reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning and Review
section above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. If you think that
your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as
a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic
impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why
you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would
economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520.).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the ``For Further
Information Contact'' section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves a special local regulation issued in conjunction with a
regatta or marine parade. This rule is categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant
Instruction. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add a temporary Sec.  165.T07-0276 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0276  Safety Zone; Swim Around Charleston, Charleston,
SC.

    (a) Regulated areas. The following regulated area is a moving
safety zone: all waters 50 yards in front of the lead safety vessel
preceding the first race participants, 50 yards behind the safety
vessel trailing the last race participants, and at all times extend 100
yards on either side of safety vessels. The Swim Around Charleston
swimming race consists of a 12 mile course that starts at Remley's
Point on the Wando River in approximate position 32[deg]48'49'' N.,
79[deg]54'27'' W., crosses the main shipping channel under the main
span of the Ravenel Bridge, and finishes at the I-526 bridge and boat
landing on the Ashley River in approximate position 32[deg]50'14'' N.,
80[deg]01'23'' W. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard

Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers, and
other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, state, and
local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port
Charleston in the enforcement of the regulated areas.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering or transiting through the regulated areas unless authorized by
the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.
    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter or transit through the
regulated areas may contact the Captain of the Port Charleston by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated representative via VHF
radio on channel 16, to request authorization. If authorization to
enter or transit through the regulated areas is granted by the Captain
of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, all persons and
vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions
of the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.
    (d) Effective date. This rule is effective on Saturday, September
26, 2015, and will be enforced from 12:00 p.m. until 6:00 p.m.

    Dated: May 1, 2015.
G.L. Tomasulo,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2015-12634 Filed 5-22-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 237 (Thursday, December 10, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76640-76644]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30510]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0465; FRL-9936-91]

Polyester Polyol Polymers; Tolerance Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic
acid, octadecanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid,
docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate; D-
glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-propanediol,
docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-
propanediol, octadecanoate; fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-
propanediol and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with sorbitol and stearic acid; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with 1,3-propanediol, sorbitol
and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers
with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; and fatty acids, C18-
unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and
sorbitol when used as inert ingredients in a pesticide chemical
formulation. Spring Trading Co., on behalf of Croda Inc., submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid,
octadecanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate;
D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate; D-glucitol,
polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-propanediol, docosanoate; D-
glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-propanediol,
octadecanoate; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers
with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and stearic
acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with
sorbitol and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers,
polymers with 1,3-propanediol, sorbitol and stearic acid; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and
sorbitol; and fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers
with docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and sorbitol on food or feed
commodities.

DATES: This regulation is effective December 10, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 8, 2016,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0465, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The 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 Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lewis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. Can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0465 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
February 8, 2016. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0465, by one of
the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of August 26, 2015 (80 FR 51763) (FRL-9931-
74), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the receipt of a pesticide petition (PP IN-10830)
filed by Spring Trading Company, 203 Dogwood Trl., Magnolia, TX 77354
(on behalf of Croda,

Inc., 315 Cherry Ln., New Castle, DE 19720). The petition requested
that 40 CFR 180.960 be amended by establishing an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of D-glucitol, polymer with
decanedioic acid, octadecanoate (CAS Reg. No. 68562-93-6); D-glucitol,
polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate (CAS Reg. No. 943440-33-3);
D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate (CAS Reg. No.
1681043-28-6); D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-
propanediol, docosanoate (CAS Reg. No. 1681043-31-1); D-glucitol,
polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-propanediol, octadecanoate (CAS
Reg. No. 1681043-33-3); fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers,
polymers with docosanoic acid and sorbitol (CAS Reg. No. 1685270-83-0);
fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic
acid, 1,3-propanediol and stearic acid (CAS Reg. No. 1685270-84-1);
fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with sorbitol and
stearic acid (CAS Reg. No. 1685270-99-8); fatty acids, C18-
unsatd., dimers, polymers with 1,3-propanediol, sorbitol and stearic
acid (CAS Reg, No. 1685271-01-5); fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and sorbitol (CAS Reg. No.
1685271-02-6); and fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers,
polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and sorbitol. That
document included a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner
and solicited comments on the petitioner's request. No comments were
received by the Agency in response to the notice of filing. Section
408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an exemption from the
requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the exemption is
``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean
that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all
anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there
is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through drinking
water and use in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue . . .'' and
specifies factors EPA is to consider in establishing an exemption.

III. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings

    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be shown that the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably foreseeable
circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human health. In order
to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the inert in
conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert ingredient
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate
exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action and considered its validity, completeness and reliability
and the relationship of this information to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. In the case of certain chemical substances that
are defined as polymers, the Agency has established a set of criteria
to identify categories of polymers expected to present minimal or no
risk. The definition of a polymer is given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and the
exclusion criteria for identifying these low-risk polymers are
described in 40 CFR 723.250(d).
    D-Glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid, octadecanoate; D-
glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate; D-glucitol,
polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with
decanedioic acid and 1,3-propanediol, docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer
with decanedioic acid and 1,3-propanediol, octadecanoate; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and
sorbitol; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with
docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and stearic acid; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with sorbitol and stearic
acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with 1,3-
propanediol, sorbitol and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-
unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; and fatty
acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid,
1,3-propanediol and sorbitol conform to the definition of a polymer
given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and meet the following criteria that are
used to identify low-risk polymers.
    1. The polymer is not a cationic polymer nor is it reasonably
anticipated to become a cationic polymer in a natural aquatic
environment.
    2. The polymer does contain as an integral part of its composition
the atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
    3. The polymer does not contain as an integral part of its
composition, except as impurities, any element other than those listed
in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii).
    4. The polymer is neither designed nor can it be reasonably
anticipated to substantially degrade, decompose, or depolymerize.
    5. The polymer is manufactured or imported from monomers and/or
reactants that are already included on the TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory or manufactured under an applicable TSCA section 5 exemption.
    6. The polymer is not a water absorbing polymer with a number
average molecular weight (MW) greater than or equal to 10,000 Daltons.
    Additionally, the polymer also meets as required the following
exemption criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).
    7. The polymer's minimum number average molecular weight is greater
1,000 Daltons. The oligomer content is less than 10% (w/w) below a
number average molecular weight of 500 and less than 25% (w/w) below a
number average molecular weight of 1,000.
    Thus, D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid, octadecanoate; D-
glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate; D-glucitol,
polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with
decanedioic acid and 1,3-propanediol, docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer
with decanedioic acid and 1,3-propanediol, octadecanoate; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and
sorbitol; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with
docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and stearic acid; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with sorbitol and stearic
acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with 1,3-
propanediol, sorbitol and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-
unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; and fatty
acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid,
1,3-propanediol and sorbitol meet the criteria for a polymer to be
considered low risk under 40 CFR 723.250. Based on their conformance to
the criteria in

this unit, no mammalian toxicity is anticipated from dietary,
inhalation, or dermal exposure to these polymers.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    For the purposes of assessing potential exposure under this
exemption, EPA considered that these polymers could be present in all
raw and processed agricultural commodities and drinking water, and that
non-occupational non-dietary exposure was possible. The minimum number
average molecular weight of each of these polymers is 1,100 Daltons.
Generally, polymers of this size would be poorly absorbed through the
intact gastrointestinal tract or through intact human skin. Since these
polymers conform to the criteria that identify a low-risk polymer,
there are no concerns for risks associated with any potential exposure
scenarios that are reasonably foreseeable. The Agency has determined
that a tolerance is not necessary to protect the public health.

V. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of
Toxicity

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency
consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of
a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found that these polymers to share a common mechanism
of toxicity with any other substances, and these polymers does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For
the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
these polymers do not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

VI. Additional Safety Factor for the Protection of Infants and Children

    Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the data base unless EPA concludes
that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children. Due to the expected low toxicity of these polymers, EPA has
not used a safety factor analysis to assess the risk. For the same
reasons the additional tenfold safety factor is unnecessary.

VII. Determination of Safety

    Based on the conformance to the criteria used to identify a low-
risk polymer, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty of no
harm to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to residues of D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic
acid, octadecanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid,
docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid, docosanoate; D-
glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-propanediol,
docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-
propanediol, octadecanoate; fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-
propanediol and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with sorbitol and stearic acid; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with 1,3-propanediol, sorbitol
and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers
with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; and fatty acids, C18-
unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and
sorbitol.

VIII. Other Considerations

A. Existing Exemptions From a Tolerance

    There are no existing tolerance exemptions for this polymer.

B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

C. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established a MRL for D-glucitol, polymer with
decanedioic acid, octadecanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic
acid, docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid,
docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-
propanediol, docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and
1,3-propanediol, octadecanoate; fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-
propanediol and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with sorbitol and stearic acid; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with 1,3-propanediol, sorbitol
and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers
with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; and fatty acids, C18-
unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and
sorbitol.

IX. Conclusion

    Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting residues of D-glucitol,
polymer with decanedioic acid, octadecanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with
decanedioic acid, docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic
acid, docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-
propanediol, docosanoate; D-glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and
1,3-propanediol, octadecanoate; fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-
propanediol and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd.,
dimers, polymers with sorbitol and stearic acid; fatty acids,
C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with 1,3-propanediol, sorbitol
and stearic acid; fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers
with docosanoic acid and sorbitol; and fatty acids, C18-
unsatd., dimers, polymers with docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and
sorbitol from the requirement of a tolerance will be safe.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under

Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order
13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997). This action does not contain any information collections subject
to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

XI. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 23, 2015.
Susan Lewis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. In Sec.  180.960, add alphabetically the polymers to the table to
read as follows:

Sec.  180.960  Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Polymer                              CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
D-Glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid,                   943440-33-3
 docosanoate, minimum number average molecular weight
 (in amu) 1,100.......................................
D-Glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid,                  1681043-28-6
 docosanoate, minimum number average molecular weight
 (in amu) 1,100.......................................
D-Glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid,                    68562-93-6
 octadecanoate, minimum number average molecular
 weight (in amu) 1,100................................
D-Glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-          1681043-31-1
 propanediol, minimum number average molecular weight
 (in amu) 1,100.......................................
D-Glucitol, polymer with decanedioic acid and 1,3-          1681043-33-3
 propanediol, octadecanoate, minimum number average
 molecular weight (in amu) 1,100......................

                              * * * * * * *
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with             1685270-83-0
 docosanoic acid and sorbitol, minimum number average
 molecular weight (in amu) 1,100......................
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with             1685271-02-6
 docosenoic acid and sorbitol, minimum number average
 molecular weight (in amu) 1,100......................
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with             1685271-04-8
 docosenoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and sorbitol,
 minimum number average molecular weight (in amu)
 1,100................................................
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with             1685270-84-1
 docosanoic acid, 1,3-propanediol and stearic acid,
 minimum number average molecular weight (in amu)
 1,100................................................
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with 1,3-        1685271-01-5
 propanediol, sorbitol and stearic acid...............
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with             1685270-99-8
 sorbitol and stearic acid, minimum number average
 molecular weight (in amu) 1,100......................

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2015-30510 Filed 12-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 187)]
[Notices]
[Page 59707]
[DOCID:fr28se10-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR10-111-000]

Public Service Company of Colorado; Notice of Rate Election

September 21, 2010.
    Take notice that on September 17, 2010, Public Service Company of
Colorado (PSCo) filed a Rate Election pursuant to section
284.123(b)(1)(ii) of the Commission's regulations. PSCo proposes to
utilize rates that are the same as those contained in PSCo's
transportation rate schedules for comparable intrastate service on file
with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (Colorado PUC).
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate 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 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line 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 on Monday, October 4, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-24232 Filed 9-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 244 (Tuesday, December 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 92812-92813]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30547]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC17-47-000.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Power and Light Company, Wisconsin Public
Service Corporation, Madison Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Joint Application under Section 203 of the Federal
Power Act of Wisconsin Power and Light Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/13/16.
    Accession Number: 20161213-5296.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/3/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER17-38-001.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Amendment to Order Nos. 827 and 828
Compliance Filing to be effective 10/14/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/13/16.
    Accession Number: 20161213-5243.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-219-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Answer to Protests and Comments of PacifiCorp under
ER17-219.
    Filed Date: 12/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20161214-5024.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/4/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-351-000; ER17-354-000.
    Applicants: American Falls Solar, LLC, American Falls Solar II,
LLC.
    Description: Supplement to November 11, 2016 American Falls Solar,
LLC and American Falls Solar, LLC tariff filings.
    Filed Date: 12/12/16.
    Accession Number: 20161212-5277.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-536-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: GIA and Amended DSA Center
Install EGT WDT1429 to be effective 12/14/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/13/16.
    Accession Number: 20161213-5251.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-537-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: First Amendment to GIA and
DSA and Cancellation of Letter Agreement to be effective 12/14/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/13/16.
    Accession Number: 20161213-5252.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-539-000.
    Applicants: Wildwood Solar I, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: MBR Application and Tariff to
be effective 12/15/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20161214-5070.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/4/17.
    Docket Numbers: ER17-540-000.
    Applicants: Wildwood Solar II, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: MBR Application and Tariff to
be effective 12/15/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20161214-5072.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/4/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-541-000.
    Applicants: Wildwood Solar I, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Co-Tenancy and Shared
Facilities Agreement to be effective 12/15/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20161214-5073.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/4/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-542-000.
    Applicants: Wildwood Solar II, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Co-Tenancy and Shared
Facilities Agreement to be effective 12/15/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20161214-5074.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/4/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-543-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Piketon, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Duke Energy SAM NOS Filing
to be effective 2/13/2017.
    Filed Date: 12/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20161214-5086.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/4/17.

    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: December 14, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-30547 Filed 12-19-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40319-40320]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14628]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0977]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Regulations
Restricting the Sale and Distribution of Cigarettes and Smokeless
Tobacco To Protect Children and Adolescents

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by July
21, 2016.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0312.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Regulations Restricting the Sale and Distribution of Cigarettes and
Smokeless Tobacco To Protect Children and Adolescents OMB Control
Number 0910-0312--Extension

    This is a request for an extension of OMB approval for the
information collection requirements contained in FDA's regulations for
cigarettes and smokeless tobacco containing nicotine. The regulations
that are codified at 21 CFR part 1140 are authorized by section 102 of
the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control
Act) (Pub. L. 111-31). Section 102 of the Tobacco Control Act required
FDA to publish a final rule regarding cigarettes and smokeless tobacco
identical in its provisions to the regulation issued by FDA in 1996 (61
FR 44396, August 28, 1996), with certain specified exceptions including
that subpart C (which included 21 CFR 897.24) and 897.32(c) be removed
from the reissued rule (section 102(a)(2)(B)). The reissued final rule
was published in the Federal Register of March 19, 2010 (75 FR 13225).
    This collection includes reporting information requirements for
Sec.  1140.30 which directs persons to notify FDA if they intend to use
a form of advertising that is not addressed in the regulations. The
requirements are as follows:

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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   1140.30..........................  Reporting..................  Directs persons to notify FDA if they
                                                                        intend to use a form of advertising that
                                                                        is not originally described in the March
                                                                        19, 2010, final rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Federal Register of January 12, 2016 (81 FR 1428), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Number of
                   21 CFR Section                        Number of      responses per     Total annual   Average  burden    Total hours
                                                        respondents       respondent       responses      per  response
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1140.30--Scope of Permissible Forms of Labeling and              300                1              300                1              300
 Advertising........................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The burden hour estimates for this collection of information were
based on industry-prepared data and information regarding cigarette and
smokeless tobacco product advertising expenditures.
    Section 1140.30 requires manufacturers, distributors, and
retailers: (1) To observe certain format and content requirements for
labeling and advertising and (2) to notify FDA if they intend to use an
advertising medium that is not listed in the regulations. The concept
of permitted advertising in Sec.  1140.30 is sufficiently broad to
encompass most forms of advertising. FDA estimates that approximately
300 respondents will submit an annual notice of alternative
advertising, and the Agency has estimated it should take 1 hour to
provide such notice. Therefore, FDA estimates that the total time
required for this collection of information is 300 hours.

    Dated: June 16, 2016.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-14628 Filed 6-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 240 (Monday, December 14, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 80696-80698]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27324]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0991; Project Identifier AD-2020-00478-Q]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Garmin International GMN-00962 GTS
Processor Units (GTS 825, GTS 855, GTS 8000)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Garmin International (Garmin) GMN-00962 GTS processor units
(GTS 825, GTS 855, GTS 8000). This proposed AD was prompted by reports
of GTS processor units issuing resolution advisories (RAs) when no risk
of collision or loss of separation exists between the airplanes
involved. This proposed AD would require updating the software version
of the affected GTS Processor units. The FAA is proposing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 28,
2021.

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 https://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.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Garmin
International, Garmin Aviation Support, 1200 E 151st Street, Olathe, KS
66062; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; website: https://fly.garmin.com/fly-garmin/support/. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust
St., Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0991; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Rau, Aviation Safety Engineer,
Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Wichita, KS 67209; phone:
(316) 946-4149; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites 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-2020-0991;
Project Identifier AD-2020-00478-Q'' at the beginning of your comments.
The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal,
explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting
data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date
and may amend this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Paul
Rau, Aviation Safety Engineer, Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, 1801 Airport
Road, Wichita, KS 67209. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.

Background

    In 2017, the FAA received seven reports of false RAs involving
aircraft equipped with Garmin GMN-00962 GTS processor configured for
traffic collision avoidance system II (TCAS II) (configuration marketed
as GTS-8000 units). The Garmin GMN-00962 GTS processor units are
marketed by Garmin as the GTS 825, GTS 855 or GTS 8000, with the
marketing name representing the traffic system configuration.
    A false RA occurs when there is no risk of collision or loss of
separation of the airplanes. The FAA review of available air traffic
data identified additional false RA incidents occurring at rates as
frequent as once every 420 flight hours in congested airspace. These
false RAs result from the GTS Processor software potentially
calculating incorrect range rates. This results in traffic advisories
or RAs being generated when targets are greater than 10 nautical miles
(NM) away. A TCAS event involving three or more airplanes can result in
mid-air collision by increasing the risk that the TCAS, in resolving
the false RA with the initial airplane, will create an actual loss of
separation with a third airplane.
    This condition, if not addressed, could result in an RA being
generated when no risk of loss of separation or risk of collision
exists between the airplanes involved, which can lead to a mid-air
collision with a third airplane.
    The affected GTS processor units were installed on the airplanes
listed below during production; however, the affected units may have
been installed on other airplane models as a supplemental type
certificate. Although the names found in parenthesis may not be listed
on the type certificate, the manufacturer may use those names as
marketing names for the airplanes.
     Textron Aviation Inc. (type certificate previously held by
Cessna Aircraft Company) Model 525 (Cessna Citation M2), Model 525B
(Cessna Citation CJ3+), Model Model 680 Sovereign, Model 680A Latitude,
and Model 700 (Cessna Citation Longitude);
     Embraer S.A. Model EMB-500 (Phenom 100) and Model EMB-505
(Phenom 300); and
     Learjet Inc. Model 45 (Learjet 70) and Model 45 (Learjet
75).

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of
these same type design.

Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Garmin Service Bulletin No. 2065, Revision A,
dated May 7, 2020; and Garmin Service Bulletin No. 1948, Revision B,
dated March 26, 2020. These service bulletins contain procedures for
uploading the software update to the GMN-00962 GTS Processor units (GTS
825, GTS 855, GTS 8000).

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require updating the GTS processor unit
software within 12 months.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 700 appliances installed on airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
              Action                        Labor cost            Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update GTS processor software.....  4 work-hours x $85 per                 $0             $340         $238,000
                                     hour = $340.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is 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

    The FAA has 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) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would 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:

Garmin International: Docket No. FAA-2020-0991; Project Identifier
AD-2020-00478-Q.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by January 28, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Garmin International GMN-00962 GTS processor
units, part number 011-02571-0( ), with software version 3.13 or
earlier, except software version 3.12.1. These units are marketed as
the GTS 825, GTS 855, or GTS 8000.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 3445, AIR COLLISION
AVOIDANCE SYSTEM (TCAS).

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by the GTS processor unit issuing false
resolution advisories (RAs) when no risk of collision or loss of
separation exists between the airplanes involved. A traffic
collision avoidance system (TCAS) event involving three or more
airplanes can result in mid-air collision by increasing the risk
that the TCAS, in resolving the false RA between the initial
airplane, will create an actual loss of separation with a third
airplane. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent these false RAs,
which can lead to a mid-air collision with a third airplane.

(f) Required Action and Compliance

    Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, update the
GTS processor software to a version that is not 3.13 or earlier.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Wichita ACO Branch, 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 certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in Related Information.
    (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.

(h) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Paul Rau,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, 1801 Airport
Road, Wichita, KS 67209; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or d780beb4bfbea3b6fa94988497b1b6b6f9b0b8a1.
    (2) For service information that is relevant to this AD, contact
Garmin International, Garmin Aviation Support, 1200 E 151st Street,
Olathe, KS 66062; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; website: https://fly.garmin.com/fly-garmin/support/.

    Issued on December 7, 2020.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-27324 Filed 12-11-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 164)]
[CORRECTIONS]
[Page 48742]
[DOCID:fr24au07-160]

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Parts 232, 239, 270, and 274

[Release Nos. 33-8823; IC-27884; File Number S7-05-07]
RIN 3235-AJ59

Extension of Interactive Data Voluntary Reporting Program on the
Edgar System To Include Mutual Fund Risk/Return Summary Information

Correction

    In rule document E7-13738 beginning on page 39290 in the issue of
Tuesday, July 17, 2007, make the following corrections:
    1. On page 39291, in the third column, in the last paragraph, in
the eighth line, ``Form N 1A'' should read ``Form N-1A''.
    2. On page 39293, in the first column, in the last paragraph, in
the sixth line, ``Form N 1A'' should read ``Form N-1A''.
    3. On page 39293, in the third column, in the first full paragraph,
in the tenth line, ``Form N 1A'' should read ``Form N-1A''.

Sec.  232.401  [Corrected]

    4. On page 39299, in the second column, in Sec.  232.401(a), in the
eleventh line, ``Form N 1A'' should read ``Form N-1A''.
    5. On the same page, in the same column, in Sec.
232.401(b)(1)(iv), in the third and fourth lines, ``Form N 1A'' should
read ``Form N-1A''.

PART 274  [Corrected]

    6. On page 39300, in the third column, in amendatory instruction 8,
in the second line, ``Form N 1A'' should read ``Form N-1A''.

[FR Doc. Z7-13738 Filed 8-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D


Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Office of Research and
Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Research Triangle
Park, NC. EPA 620/R–03/001.

 Fenn, M.E. and Blubaugh, T.J. (2005). Winter Deposition of Nitrogen and
Sulfur in the Eastern Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area, USDA
Forest Service.

 Galloway, J. N.; Cowling, E. B. (2002). Reactive nitrogen and the
world: 200 years of change. Ambio 31: 64–71.

 Bricker, Suzanne B., et al., (1999). National Estuarine Eutrophication
Assessment, Effects of Nutrient Enrichment in the Nation’s Estuaries,
National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
September, 1999.

 Smith, W.H. (1991). “Air pollution and Forest Damage.” Chemical
Engineering News, 69(45): 30-43.

 Gawel, J.E.; Ahner, B.A.; Friedland, A.J.; and Morel, F.M.M. (1996).
“Role for heavy metals in forest decline indicated by phytochelatin
measurements.” Nature, 381: 64-65.

 Cotrufo, M.F.; DeSanto, A.V.; Alfani, A.; et al. (1995). “Effects of
urban heavy metal pollution on organic matter decomposition in Quercus
ilix L. woods.” Environmental Pollution, 89: 81-87.

 Niklinska, M.; Laskowski, R.; Maryanski, M. (1998). “Effect of heavy
metals and storage time on two types of forest litter: basal respiration
rate and exchangeable metals.” Ecotoxicological Environmental Safety,
41: 8-18.

 U.S. EPA (2009). Integrated Science Assessment for Particulate Matter
(Final Report). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-08/139F, 2009. Section <IP_ADDRESS>.

 Mason, R.P. and Sullivan, K.A. (1997). “Mercury in Lake Michigan.”
Environmental Science & Technology, 31: 942-947.  (from Delta Report
“Atmospheric deposition of toxics to the Great Lakes”).

 Landis, M.S. and Keeler, G.J. (2002). “Atmospheric mercury deposition
to Lake Michigan during the Lake Michigan Mass Balance Study.”
Environmental Science & Technology, 21: 4518-24.

 U.S. EPA. (2000). EPA453/R-00-005, “Deposition of Air Pollutants to
the Great Waters: Third Report to Congress,” Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

 National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) (1999).  “The Role of
Monitoring Networks in the Management of the Nation’s Air Quality.”

 Callender, E. and Rice, K.C. (2000). “The Urban Environmental
Gradient: Anthropogenic Influences on the Spatial and Temporal
Distributions of Lead and Zinc in Sediments.” Environmental Science &
Technology, 34: 232-238.

 Rice, K.C. (1999). “Trace Element Concentrations in Streambed
Sediment Across the Conterminous United States.” Environmental Science
& Technology, 33: 2499-2504.

 Ely, JC; Neal, CR; Kulpa, CF; et al. (2001). “Implications of
Platinum-Group Element Accumulation along U.S. Roads from
Catalytic-Converter Attrition.” Environ. Sci. Technol. 35: 3816-3822.

 U.S. EPA. (1998). EPA454/R-98-014, “Locating and Estimating Air
Emissions from Sources of Polycyclic Organic Matter,” Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

 U.S. EPA. (1998). EPA454/R-98-014, “Locating and Estimating Air
Emissions from Sources of Polycyclic Organic Matter,” Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

 Simcik, M.F.; Eisenreich, S.J.; Golden, K.A.; et al. (1996).
“Atmospheric Loading of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons to Lake
Michigan as Recorded in the Sediments.” Environmental Science and
Technology, 30: 3039-3046.

 Simcik, M.F.; Eisenreich, S.J.; and Lioy, P.J. (1999). “Source
apportionment and source/sink relationship of PAHs in the coastal
atmosphere of Chicago and Lake Michigan.” Atmospheric Environment, 33:
5071-5079.

 Arzayus, K.M.; Dickhut, R.M.; and Canuel, E.A. (2001). “Fate of
Atmospherically Deposited Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in
Chesapeake Bay.” Environmental Science & Technology, 35, 2178-2183.

 Park, J.S.; Wade, T.L.; and Sweet, S. (2001). “Atmospheric
distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and deposition to
Galveston Bay, Texas, USA.” Atmospheric Environment, 35: 3241-3249.

 Poor, N.; Tremblay, R.; Kay, H.; et al. (2002).  “Atmospheric
concentrations and dry deposition rates of polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) for Tampa Bay, Florida, USA.”  Atmospheric
Environment 38: 6005-6015.

 Arzayus, K.M.; Dickhut, R.M.; and Canuel, E.A. (2001). “Fate of
Atmospherically Deposited Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in
Chesapeake Bay.” Environmental Science & Technology, 35, 2178-2183.

 U.S. EPA. (2000). EPA453/R-00-005, “Deposition of Air Pollutants to
the Great Waters: Third Report to Congress,” Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

 Van Metre, P.C.; Mahler, B.J.; and Furlong, E.T. (2000). “Urban
Sprawl Leaves its PAH Signature.” Environmental Science & Technology,
34: 4064-4070.

 Cousins, I.T.; Beck, A.J.; and Jones, K.C. (1999). “A review of the
processes involved in the exchange of semi-volatile organic compounds
across the air-soil interface.” The Science of the Total Environment,
228: 5-24.

 Tuhackova, J. et al. (2001). Hydrocarbon deposition and soil microflora
as affected by highway traffic. Environmental Pollution, 113: 255-262.

 U.S. EPA. (1999).  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,
1990-2010.  Prepared for U.S. Congress by U.S. EPA, Office of Air and
Radiation, Office of Policy Analysis and Review, Washington, DC,
November; EPA report no. EPA410-R-99-001.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 Winner, W.E., and C.J. Atkinson. (1986). “Absorption of air pollution
by plants, and consequences for growth.” Trends in Ecology and
Evolution 1:15-18.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 Tingey, D.T., and Taylor, G.E. (1982). Variation in plant response to
ozone: a conceptual model of physiological events.  In M.H. Unsworth &
D.P. Omrod (Eds.), Effects of Gaseous Air Pollution in Agriculture and
Horticulture. (pp.113-138). London, UK: Butterworth Scientific.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 Ollinger, S.V., Aber, J.D., Reich, P.B. (1997). Simulating ozone
effects on forest productivity: interactions between leaf canopy and
stand level processes. Ecological Applications, 7, 1237-1251.

 Winner, W.E. (1994). Mechanistic analysis of plant responses to air
pollution. Ecological Applications, 4(4), 651-661.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 Chappelka, A.H., Samuelson, L.J.  (1998).  Ambient ozone effects on
forest trees of the eastern United States: a review.  New Phytologist,
139, 91-108.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 Fox, S., Mickler, R. A. (Eds.). (1996).  Impact of Air Pollutants on
Southern Pine Forests, Ecological Studies. (Vol. 118, 513 pp.) New York:
Springer-Verlag.

 De Steiguer, J., Pye, J., Love, C. (1990). Air Pollution Damage to U.S.
Forests.  Journal of Forestry, 88(8), 17-22.

 Pye, J.M. (1988). Impact of ozone on the growth and yield of trees: A
review. Journal of Environmental Quality, 17, 347-360.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 McBride, J.R., Miller, P.R., Laven, R.D. (1985). Effects of oxidant air
pollutants on forest succession in the mixed conifer forest type of
southern California.  In:  Air Pollutants Effects On Forest Ecosystems,
Symposium Proceedings, St. P, 1985,  p. 157-167.

 Miller, P.R., O.C. Taylor, R.G. Wilhour. (1982). Oxidant air pollution
effects on a western coniferous forest ecosystem. Corvallis, OR: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory
(EPA600-D-82-276).

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 Grulke, N.E. (2003). The physiological basis of ozone injury assessment
attributes in Sierran conifers. In A. Bytnerowicz, M.J. Arbaugh, & R.
Alonso (Eds.), Ozone air pollution in the Sierra Nevada: Distribution
and effects on forests. (pp. 55-81). New York, NY: Elsevier Science,
Ltd.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006.

 Kopp, R. J., Vaughn, W. J., Hazilla, M., Carson, R. (1985).
Implications of environmental policy for U.S. agriculture: the case of
ambient ozone standards.  Journal of Environmental Management, 20,
321-331.

 Adams, R. M., Hamilton, S. A., McCarl, B. A.  (1986).  The benefits of
pollution control: the case of ozone and U.S. agriculture.  American
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 34, 3-19.

 Adams, R. M., Glyer, J. D., Johnson, S. L., McCarl, B. A.  (1989).  A
reassessment of the economic effects of ozone on U.S. agriculture.
Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 39, 960-968.

 Abt Associates, Inc.  (1995).  Urban ornamental plants: sensitivity to
ozone and potential economic losses.  U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park.  Under contract to
RADIAN Corporation, contract no. 68-D3-0033, WA no. 6.  pp. 9-10.

 White, D., Kimerling, A.J., Overton, W.S. (1992). Cartographic and
geometric component of a global sampling design for environmental
monitoring. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems, 19, 5-22.

 Smith, G., Coulston, J., Jepsen, E.,  Prichard, T. (2003). A national
ozone biomonitoring program—results from field surveys of ozone
sensitive plants in Northeastern forests (1994-2000). Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment, 87, 271-291.

 Coulston, J.W., Riitters, K.H., Smith, G.C. (2004). A preliminary
assessment of the Montréal process indicators of air pollution for the
United States. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 95, 57-74.

 U.S. EPA. (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants. EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF.

 U.S. EPA (2006). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants. EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF.

 Smith, G., Coulston, J., Jepsen, E.,  Prichard, T. (2003). A national
ozone biomonitoring program—results from field surveys of ozone
sensitive plants in Northeastern forests (1994-2000). Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment, 87, 271-291.

 U.S. EPA. (1991). Effects of organic chemicals in the atmosphere on
terrestrial plants. EPA/600/3-91/001.

 Cape JN, ID Leith, J Binnie, J Content, M Donkin, M Skewes, DN Price AR
Brown, AD Sharpe. (2003). Effects of VOCs on herbaceous plants in an
open-top chamber experiment. Environ. Pollut. 124:341-343.

q

u

²

¸

 hR

H* hR

 hR

H* hR

 hR

H* hR

 hR

 hR

h^

h^

¨

±

Ú

Ý

Þ

ß

“

”

•

Ý

“

ᔏ荨派ᘀ遨빣㘀脈㰀Viskari E-L. (2000). Epicuticular wax of
Norway spruce needles as indicator of traffic pollutant deposition.
Water, Air, and Soil Pollut. 121:327-337.

 Ugrekhelidze D, F Korte, G Kvesitadze. (1997). Uptake and
transformation of benzene and toluene by plant leaves. Ecotox. Environ.
Safety 37:24-29.

 Kammerbauer H, H Selinger, R Rommelt, A Ziegler-Jons, D Knoppik, B
Hock. (1987). Toxic components of motor vehicle emissions for the spruce
Picea abies. Environ. Pollut. 48:235-243.


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 249 (Friday, December 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61768-61769]
[FR Doc No: 2017-28191]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3391-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of an Emergency
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-3391-EM), dated September 18,
2017, and related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued December 6, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident
period for this emergency is closed effective November 15, 2017.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance

(Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation
Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-28191 Filed 12-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P