[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 6, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17708-17710]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06961]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1034; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-00951-T;
Amendment 39-21483; AD 2021-07-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (601-3A, 601-3R, and 604
Variants) airplanes. This AD was prompted by a determination that
certain airplanes have outdated magnetic variation (MagVar) tables
inside navigation systems. This AD requires revising the existing
airplane flight manual (AFM) to update the Flight Management System
(FMS) and Inertial Reference System (IRS) limitations. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 11, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 11, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier, Inc., 200 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 2A3, Canada; North America toll-free telephone: 1-
866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone: 1-514-855-2999; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: https://www.bombardier.com. You
may view this service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
1034.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
1034; 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 final rule, any comments received, and other information. The
address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Dzierzynski, Aerospace
Engineer, Avionics and Electrical Systems Services Section, FAA, New
York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued TCCA AD CF-2020-24, dated July 10,
2020 (also referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (601-3A, 601-3R, and
604 Variants) airplanes. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on
the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1034.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier,
Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (601-3A, 601-3R, and 604 Variants) airplanes.
The NPRM published in the Federal Register on November 27, 2020 (85 FR
75966). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that certain airplanes
have outdated MagVar tables inside navigation systems. The NPRM
proposed to require revising the existing AFM to update the FMS and IRS
limitations. The FAA is issuing this AD to address outdated MagVar
tables inside navigation systems, which can affect the performance of
the navigation systems and result in the presentation of misleading
magnetic heading references on the Primary Flight Displays (PFDs) and
Multi-Function Displays (MFDs), positioning the airplane outside of the
terrain and obstacle protection provided by instrument flight
procedures and flight route designs (e.g., outdated MagVar tables can
lead to significantly inaccurate heading, course, and bearing
calculations). See the MCAI for additional background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The following presents the comment received
on the NPRM and the FAA's response.

Request To Update Calibration of the Navigational Aids

    Bombardier asked that the FAA update calibration of the required
navigational aids at key ground stations, which would then fully
address this potential unsafe condition. Bombardier stated that
adherence to the proposed AD only addresses the outdated magnetic
variation tables of affected airplane navigation systems; however, it
does not guarantee a complete mitigation of the unsafe condition due to
the larger issue of outdated calibration of the required navigational
aids.
    We acknowledge the commenter's concern. However, ADs are legally
enforceable rules that only address unsafe conditions on products, such
as airplanes, and cannot apply to navigational aids at ground stations.
This concern may be addressed by contacting the Navigation Program
Manager at the FAA Air Traffic Organization, internet: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/techops/navservices/contact/. We have not changed this AD in this
regard.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor
editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued the following service information, which
provides procedures for updating, among other systems, the FMS and IRS
of the applicable AFM. These documents are distinct since they apply to
different airplane configurations.

     Section 02-09, Navigation Systems Limitations, of Chapter
2--LIMITATIONS, of the Bombardier Challenger CL-604 AFM, PSP 604-1,
Revision 116, dated December 18, 2019.
     Section 02-09, Navigation Systems Limitations, of Chapter
2--LIMITATIONS, Bombardier Challenger CL-605 AFM, PSP 605-1, Revision
54, dated December 18, 2019.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 39 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85.............................              $0              $85           $3,315
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2021-07-06 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-21483; Docket No. FAA-
2020-1034; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-00951-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective May 11, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (601-3A,
601-3R, and 604 Variants), serial numbers 5301 through 5665
inclusive, and 5701 through 5988 inclusive, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 34, Navigation.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that certain airplanes
have outdated magnetic variation (MagVar) tables inside navigation
systems. The FAA is issuing this AD to address outdated MagVar
tables inside navigation systems, which can affect the performance
of the navigation systems and result in the presentation of
misleading magnetic heading references on the Primary Flight
Displays (PFDs) and Multi-Function Displays (MFDs), positioning the
airplane outside of the terrain and obstacle protection provided by
instrument flight procedures and flight route designs (e.g.,
outdated MagVar tables can lead to significantly inaccurate heading,
course, and bearing calculations).

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision

    Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the
existing AFM to incorporate the information specified in Section 02-
09, Navigation Systems Limitations, of Chapter 2--LIMITATIONS, of
the applicable Bombardier Challenger AFM specified in figure 1 to
paragraph (g) of this AD.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06AP21.000

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York 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 responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) TCCA AD CF-2020-24, dated July 10, 2020, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2020-1034.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Steven
Dzierzynski, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Electrical Systems
Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue,
Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 516-794-
5531; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Section 02-09, Navigation Systems Limitations, of Chapter
2--LIMITATIONS, of the Bombardier Challenger CL-604 Airplane Flight
Manual, PSP 604-1, Revision 116, dated December 18, 2019.
    (ii) Section 02-09, Navigation Systems Limitations, of Chapter
2--LIMITATIONS, Bombardier Challenger CL-605 Airplane Flight Manual,
PSP 605-1, Revision 54, dated December 18, 2019.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 200 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 2A3, Canada; North America toll-free telephone: 1-
866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone: 1-514-855-2999; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: https://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on March 19, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-06961 Filed 4-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


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

EPA Registration Division contact:

INSTRUCTIONS:  Please utilize this outline in preparing the pesticide petition.  In cases where the outline element does not apply, please insert "NA-Remove" and maintain the outline. Please do not change the margins, font, or format in your pesticide petition. Simply replace the instructions that appear in green, i.e., "[insert company name]," with the information specific to your action.

TEMPLATE:

[Corteva Agriscience EPA Company No.: 62719]

[Insert petition number]

	EPA has received a pesticide petition ([IN-11655]) from [Corteva Agriscience], [9330 Zionsville Road  -  Indianapolis, IN  46268] requesting, pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part 180 by establishing a tolerance for residues of	 	[cloquintocet-mexyl (acetic acid, [(5-chloro-8-quniolinyl)oxy]-, 1-methylhexyl ester)(CAS Reg. No. 99607-70-2) and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinlinoxyacetic acid)] for use as a safener in combination with the active ingredient tolpyralate herbicide] in or on the raw agricultural commodity [wheat, grain] at [0.1] parts per million (ppm), [wheat, forage] at [0.2] parts per million (ppm), [wheat, hay] at [0.5] parts per million (ppm), [wheat, straw] at [0.1] parts per million (ppm), [barley, grain] at [0.1] parts per million (ppm), [barley, hay] at [0.1] parts per million (ppm), [barley, straw] at [0.1] parts per million (ppm), [teff, grain] at [0.1] parts per million (ppm), [teff, forage] at [0.2] parts per million (ppm), [teff, hay] at [0.5] parts per million (ppm), [teff, straw] at [0.1] parts per million (ppm).  [Specifically, the proposed amendment is to add a reference to the herbicide active ingredient tolpyralate to the tolerances which are already established under 40 CFR 180.560 for use of cloquintocet-mexyl in conjunction with other herbicides.  This petition will not change the magnitude of the established values but instead specifics a new use partner with tolpyralate.] EPA has determined that the petition contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in section 408 (d)(2) of  FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data supports granting of the petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

	1. Plant metabolism. [The metabolism of cloquintocet-mexyl in grains has been covered in previous EPA tolerance decisions, with more detailed discussion in Federal Register 70, 74679, December 16, 2005, (FRL-7753-4). Per D313217 EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0555-0004: The nature of the residue in wheat, barley, livestock, and rotational crops is adequately understood. The HED Metabolism Assessment Review Committee (MARC) previously determined for the purpose of the conditional registration that the residues of concern for the tolerance expression and risk assessment for plants, livestock, and rotational crops are cloquintocet-mexyl and its {acid} metabolite.]

	2. Analytical method. [Adequate enforcement methodology is available to enforce the tolerance expression (Federal Register 76, 38035 June 29, 2011; (FRL-8877-2)).  There are two enforcement methods available.  The High Performance Liquid Chromatography with Ultraviolet Detection (HPLC-UV) method REM 138.01 is for the determination of cloquintocet-mexyl (parent) and the HPLC-UV Method REM 138.10 allows determination of its acid metabolite (also known as CGA-153433).]

	3. Magnitude of residues. [The residue data in support of the proposed tolerance amendment in barley and wheat were generated from one Magnitude of Residue study on barley and one Magnitude of Residue study on wheat.  Both barley and wheat crops were treated with an end-use suspension concentrate liquid formulation containing the herbicide tolpyralate. The barley study also included the safener cloquintocet-mexyl (CQM). For barley, eighteen field trials were completed in areas of the U.S. and Canada where barley is grown commercially, within NAFTA zones 5, 7, 7A, 9, 11 and 14. For wheat, twenty-two field trials were completed in within NAFTA zones 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11 and 14.  Applications were targeted at rates of 0.0357 lb ai/A (40 g ai/ha) tolpyralate in both wheat and barley trials and included 0.0178 lb ai/A (20 g ai/ha) Cloquintocet-mexyl in barley trials.

Samples for barley hay, grain and straw were collected from all trial plots at crop maturity. Barley hay was harvested at a nominal 21-day PHI, at 19 to 23 DAT. Barley grain and straw was harvested at crop maturity, at a nominal 50-day PHI, at 47 to 56 DAT. For wheat, forage, hay, grain and straw samples were collected from all trial plots at early crop maturity. Wheat forage samples were harvested at a 7-day and also at 21-day PHI (19 to 23 DAT), hay samples were allowed to dry for 1 to 9 days until moisture levels were typical for commercial hay. Wheat grain and straw were harvested at a 50-day PHI, 47 to 53 DAT. For both barley and wheat there were an additional two decline trials in barley hay, grain and straw samples and wheat forage, hay and straw samples were also collected. Barley hay samples were cut 14, 18, 21, 24-25, and 28 DAA to assess residue decline.  Decline grain and straw samples were collected 40, 43-45, 50, 54-55, and 58-61 DAA. Wheat forage decline samples were collected 1, 3, 6-7, 9, and 21 DAA.  Wheat hay decline samples were cut 13-14, 16-17, 21, 23-24, and 28-29 DAA, and wheat grain and straw samples were collected 39-40, 45-46, 49-50, 53, and 57-62 DAA. Barley samples were analyzed for cloquintocet-mexyl and its metabolite cloquintocet acid as well as the herbicide tolpyralate and its metabolite MT-2153.  Wheat samples were analyzed for the herbicide tolpyralate and its metabolite MT-2153.  Performance of the method for analysis of tolpyralate and its metabolite, MT-2153, and the method for analysis of cloquintocet-mexyl and its acid metabolite, cloquintocet acid, was verified within both barley and wheat studies and an LOQ of 0.01 ppm and an LOD of 0.003 ppm were reported.

In barley and wheat, overall residues of cloquintocet-mexyl, its metabolite cloquintocet acid, herbicide tolpyralate and its acid MT-2153 were predominantly below quantifiable or detectable levels. For barley grain, residues were non-detectible for all analytes in all samples. maximum tolpyralate residue in grain collected 47-56 DAA was <LOD (0.003 ppm) (mean of per-trial averages = 0.01 ppm), and maximum MT-2153 residue in grain was <LOQ (0.01 ppm) (mean of per-trial averages = 0.01 ppm). Maximum cloquintocet-mexyl residue in grain collected 47-56 DAA was <LOQ (0.01 ppm) (mean of per-trial averages = 0.01), and maximum 5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid (cloquintocet acid) residue in grain was <LOQ (0.01 ppm) (mean of per-trial averages = 0.01 ppm).  In barley straw, maximum tolpyralate residue in straw collected 47-56 DAA was 0.0691 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0147 ppm), and maximum MT-2153 residue in straw was  0.115 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0157 ppm).  Maximum cloquintocet-mexyl residue in straw collected 47-56 DAA was <LOD (0.003 ppm) (mean of per-trial averages = 0.01 ppm), and maximum 5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid residue in straw was 0.0315 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0145 ppm). In barley hay, maximum tolpyralate residue in hay collected 19-23 DAA was 0.190 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0297 ppm), and maximum MT-2153 residue in hay was 0.166 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0286 ppm). Maximum cloquintocet-mexyl residue in hay collected 19-23 DAA was 0.0118 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0101 ppm), and maximum 5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid residue in hay was 0.0745 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0165 ppm). Decline information for barley was obtained from two trial sites where hay, grain and straw samples were collected. Barley hay samples were cut 14, 18, 21, 24-25, and 28 DAA to assess residue decline.  Tolpyralate residues in hay decreased from 0.0804 ppm at 14 DAA to <LOQ at 28 DAA.  MT-2153 residues in hay decreased from 0.0748 ppm at 14 DAA to <LOQ ppm at 28 DAA.  Cloquintocet-mexyl residues in hay were <LOD at all sampling events.  5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid residues in hay were fairly stable (slightly above or slightly below the LOQ) across the 14 day sampling period, and showed a slight decline over the total 28 day period. Barley grain and straw samples were collected 40, 43-45, 50, 54-55, and 58-61 DAA to assess residue decline.  Tolpyralate, MT-2153, cloquintocet-mexyl, and 5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid residues in grain were <LOD, <LOD, <LOD, and ND, respectively, at all sampling events.  Tolpyralate residues in straw were at the LOQ (0.0104 ppm) at 40 DAA and declined to <LOQ at 45 DAA. Cloquintocet-mexyl residues in straw were <LOD and ND, respectively, at all sampling events.  MT-2153 residues in straw were <LOQ at all sampling events, but declined slightly across the 21 day sampling period.  5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid residues in straw decreased slightly from 0.0188 ppm at 40 DAA to <LOQ at 50 DAA.

In wheat, residues were below LOD (ND) in most of the treated samples. In wheat grain, maximum tolpyralate residue in grain collected 47-58 DAA was <LOD (0.003 ppm) (mean of per-trial averages = <LOQ (0.0100 ppm)), and maximum MT-2153 residue in grain was <LOQ (0.0100 ppm) (mean of per-trial averages = <LOQ (0.0100 ppm)).  In wheat straw, maximum tolpyralate residue in straw collected 47-58 DAA was 0.0236 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0106 ppm), and maximum MT-2153 residue in straw was 0.0166 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0105 ppm). In wheat forage, maximum tolpyralate residue in forage collected 6-8 DAA was 0.458 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0555 ppm), and maximum MT-2153 residue in forage was 0.0740 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0166 ppm). Maximum tolpyralate residue in forage collected 20-23 DAA was 0.0161 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0105, and maximum MT-2153 residue in forage was 0.0106 ppm (mean of per-trial averages =  <LOQ (0.0100 ppm). In wheat hay, maximum tolpyralate residue in hay collected 20-23 DAA was 0.0445 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0133 ppm), and maximum MT-2153 residue in hay was 0.0374 ppm (mean of per-trial averages = 0.0126 ppm). Decline information for wheat was obtained from two trial sites where wheat forage, grain and hay samples were collected. Forage samples were collected at 1, 3, 6-7, 9, and 21 DAA to assess residue decline.  Decline hay samples were cut 13-14, 16-17, 21, 23-24, and 28-29 DAA, and decline grain and straw samples were collected 39-40, 45-46, 49-50, 53, and 62 DAA. Mean tolpyralate residues in forage decreased from 3.02 ppm at 1 DAA to <LOQ ppm at 21 DAA.  Tolpyralate residues in hay decreased from 0.0134 ppm at 1 DAA to <LOQ ppm at 28 DAA. Tolpyralate residues in grain were <LOQ.   Tolpyralate residues in straw decreased from 0.0233 ppm at 40 DAA to <LOQ ppm at 62 DAA. Mean MT-2153 residues in forage decreased from 0.221 ppm at 1 DAA to <LOQ ppm at 21 DAA.   MT-2153 residues in hay decreased from 0.0115 ppm at 1 DAA to <LOQ ppm at 28 DAA.  MT-2153 residues in grain were <LOQ.  MT-2153 residues in straw decreased from 0.0259 ppm at 40 DAA to <LOQ ppm at 62 DAA. Plots were established to examine the need for processing data within both the barley and wheat studies with exaggerated rates of 3X and 5X plots however quantifiable residues were not detected within the raw agricultural commodities (cereal grain) therefore the need for processing data was determined not to be necessary. The results from processing trials show that after one foliar application of Tolpyralate 400 SC at a 5x rate of 0.179 lb ai/A +- 5% (equivalent to 200 g ai/ha) containing cloquintocet-mexyl safener at a rate of 0.0890 lb ai/A +-5% (equivalent to 100 g ai/ha) made 50 days prior to normal crop maturity, maximum tolpyralate, MT-2153,  cloquintocet-mexyl, and 5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid (cloquintocet acid) residues in the grain were <LOQ.]

B. Toxicological Profile [The Agency has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. The Agency has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by cloquintocet-mexyl as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in the final rules published on August 2, 2016, June 29, 2011, March 31, 2010, March 5, 2008, December 16, 2005 and June 22, 2000.        Relevant cloquintocet-mexyl endpoints are: 1) an Acute RfD = aPAD = 1.0 mg/kg/day for Females 13 to 49 years only and no appropriate endpoint for acute dietary assessment with the general population and 2) Chronic RfD = cPAD = 0.04 mg/kg/day.  Each of these endpoints uses the typical separate intra and inter-species 10X uncertainty factors (UF), plus an additional database uncertainty factor of 10X.]

	1. Acute toxicity.  [Cloquintocet-mexyl has low acute oral, dermal and inhalation toxicity (Acute Toxicity Category III) and is slightly irritating to eyes. It is not a skin irritant. However, it is a skin sensitizer (per Federal Register 81, 50630 August 2, 2016; (FRL-9947-78).]

	2. Genotoxicty. [Cloquintocet-mexyl was negative in all genotoxicity tests and is considered by the Agency to not be genotoxic, per Federal Register 81, 50630 August 2, 2016. (FRL-9947-78).]

	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. [There is no evidence of developmental or reproductive toxicity for cloquintocet-mexyl (Federal Register 81, 50630 August 2, 2016. (FRL-9947-78). Previously assessed data demonstrate no increased sensitivity of rats or rabbits to in utero or early post-natal exposure to cloquintocet-mexyl. NOAELs for maternal/paternal toxicity were either less than or equal to the NOAELs for fetal or reproductive toxicity (per D313217, EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0555-0004, November 29, 2005). The Agency has concluded that there is no concern for increased susceptibility in offspring to cloquintocet-mexyl, and the additional FQPA 10-fold safety factor for the protection of infants and children has been reduced to 1X based on the available data (per Federal Register 73, 11816 March 5, 2008. (FRL-8350-8)).]

	4. Subchronic toxicity. [Per Per D313217, EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0555-0004, November 29, 2005, the systemic toxicity of cloquintocet-mexyl has been reviewed and is understood by the Agency; the primary target organs for subchronic exposure are the liver and the renal system. In a 90-day feeding study in rats, increased incidence of urinary bladder hyperplasia and increased serum bilirubin were observed in males at doses >1000 ppm (equivalent to 64 mg/kg/day). This observation was supported by a 28-day oral gavage study in rats where renal papillary necrosis and inflammation with fibrosis were observed at doses >100 mg/kg/day. In a 28-day dermal toxicity study in rats, mottled or reddish livers accompanied by histopathological changes including necrosis and fibrosis were observed in two of five females exposed to 1000 mg/kg/day of cloquintocet-mexyl. In a 90-day feeding study in dogs, liver toxicity was evidenced by observations of liver necrosis and perivascular inflammatory cell infiltration. In the one-year dog study, increased relative liver weight and increased chronic interstitial nephritis were observed.]

	5. Chronic toxicity. [In accordance with the US EPA Proposed EPA weight of evidence Categories, August 1999, the HIARC classified cloquintocet-mexyl as "not likely to be a human carcinogen", per Federal Register 81, 50630 August 2, 2016. (FRL-9947-78).  Per D313217, EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0555-0004, November 29, 2005, in the two-year chronic toxicity study in rats, no renal or liver toxicity was reported; however, there was an increase in lymphoid hyperplasia of the thymus in male rats and an increase in thyroid follicular epithelial hyperplasia in female rats at 73 mg/kg/day.]

	6. Animal metabolism. [Per D313217, EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0555-0004, November 29, 2005, metabolism studies in rats indicated approximately 40% of the administered dose of cloquintocet-mexyl was absorbed through the gastrointestinal tract and subsequently excreted via the urine. Fecal excretion accounted for approximately 60% of the administered dose. The chemical was rapidly eliminated via feces and urine within 48 hours post-dosing.]

	7. Metabolite toxicology. [The main metabolite for cloquintocet-mexyl is 5-chloro-8-quin-linoxyacetic acid and testing on the metabolite is part of the toxicology database for cloquintocet-mexyl (per Federal Register 81, 50630 August 2, 2016. (FRL-9947-78).]

	8. Endocrine disruption. [The Agency is required under the FFDCA, as amended by FQPA, to develop a screening program to determine whether certain substances (including all pesticide active and other ingredients) "may have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by a naturally occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine effects as the Administrator may designate". Following the recommendations of its Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC), the Agency determined that there was scientific basis for including, as part of the program, the androgen and thyroid hormone systems, in addition to the estrogen hormone system (per D313217, EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0555-0004, November 29, 2005). A special study has been conducted to investigate a histological finding of hyperplasia of thyroid gland epithelium noted in the female rat in the standard life time combined chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity study (Federal Register 65, 20972 April 19, 2000). No effect was noted on the level of thyroid hormones at any of the treatment levels.]

C. Aggregate Exposure [The proposed use of cloquintocet-mexyl with tolpyralate will cause no numerical change to the tolerances for the specific barley and wheat commodities sought. Therefore, the last risk assessment conducted by the Agency in March 17, 2016 is considered applicable.

	1. Dietary exposure. [Per D406460 of March 17, 2016, the acute dietary endpoint is applicable to the population subgroup females 13- 49 years old only. The chronic dietary endpoint applies to all population subgroups including infants and children.]

	i. Food. [Per D406460 of March 17, 2016, both acute and chronic dietary exposure analyses for cloquintocet-mexyl are Tier 1 assessments (assuming 100% crop treated and tolerance level residues), because no additional data have been used to refine the analysis.

	ii. Drinking water. [Per D406460 of March 17, 2016, EFED has previously provided computer-generated estimated environmental concentrations EECS for the combined residues of cloquintocet-mexyl and the acid metabolite using the GENEEC and SCI-GROW water models.  EFED reported that the highest EECs from the current and proposed uses were the GENEEC estimates acute (peak) and chronic (56-year mean) concentrations of cloquintocet-mexyl and CGA-153433 in water at 0.186 ppb and 0.005 ppb, respectively.

 Acute Dietary (food and drinking water) For acute exposure, food and drinking water exposures were considered in previous assessment D406460. The estimated dietary exposure (food and water) for females aged 13-49 years old accounts for <1% of the aPAD.  Values less than 100% are below the Agency's level of concern.

 Chronic Dietary (food and drinking water) For chronic exposure, food and drinking water exposures were considered in previous assessment D406460. The chronic dietary endpoint applies to all population subgroups including infants and children.  Food and water exposure occupies <1% of the cPAD for the US population and 1% of the cPAD for children 3-5 years old, the subgroup with the highest exposure. Values less than 100% are below the Agency's level of concern.]

	2. Non-dietary exposure. [Since there are no residential uses of cloquintocet-mexyl, additional risk assessments beyond food and water are not required.]

D. Cumulative Effects

	[Unlike other pesticides which EPA has followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, the Agency has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to cloquintocet-mexyl and any other active substance, and the chemical does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. The Agency has previously assumed that cloquintocet-mexyl does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances.]

E. Safety Determination

	1. U.S. population. [The aggregate risk assessments support a finding that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population from aggregate exposure to cloquintocet-mexyl or its metabolite for exposure from use with tolpyralate on barley or wheat.  This is based on fact that barley and wheat uses are already covered by the existing Tier 1 assessment for cloquintocet-mexyl which assumes 100% percent crop treated.  Per D406460, EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0843-0004, March 17, 2016 the estimated dietary (food and water) exposure for female aged 13-49 is <1% of the acute PAD and the chronic dietary assessment for the US general population also indicates <1% of the cPAD; hence there are no risk concerns.]

	2. Infants and children. [The FQPA Safety Factor Committee (SFC) met on March 6, 2000 to evaluate the hazard and exposure data for cloquintocet-mexyl and recommended that the FQPA factor be reduced to 1X.  This is supported by the toxicity data base for cloquintocet-mexyl being complete (i.e. developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits; 2-generation reproduction study in rats) and there is no indication of quantitative or qualitative increased susceptibility of rats or rabbits in the toxicity data.  In addition the EPA has recently stated (Federal Register 61, 16017 March 31, 2010. (FRL-8816-3): The dietary (food and drinking water) exposure assessments will not underestimate the potential exposures for infants and children from the use of cloquintocet-mexyl (currently there are no proposed residential uses and therefore non-occupational exposure is not expected.).  The risk assessments for exposure to cloquintocet-mexyl or its metabolite when used with tolpyralate on barley or wheat are considered indicate there were no risk concerns for infants and children.  This is because this type of use is already covered by the existing Tier 1 assessment for cloquintocet-mexyl which assumes 100% percent crop treated (D406460, EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0843-0004, March 17, 2016).  Food and water exposure occupies 1% of the cPAD for children 3-5 years old, the subgroup with the highest exposure.

F. International Tolerances

	[Per the USDA FASOnline, USDA Pesticide Database (http://www.mrldatabase.com/ ), Australia, Russia, Japan have established harmonized MRLs for cloquintocet-mexyl of 0.1 ppm in wheat and barley grain.  No Codex MRLs are established for cloquintocet-mexyl.]


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 139 (Thursday, July 21, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43464-43467]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15553]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 61

[EPA-R10-OAR-2022-0374; FRL-9881-01-R10]

National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants;
Delegation of Authority to Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
fully approve a delegation request submitted by the Washington State
Department of Health (WDOH) for full delegation of authority to
implement and enforce the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for radionuclide air emissions. The EPA granted WDOH partial
delegation of authority to implement and enforce these standards
effective July 5, 2006. The WDOH has addressed the partial approval
issues, has updated its adoption of the applicable Federal standards to
address all current Federal requirements, and has submitted to the EPA
a request for full delegation of these standards.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 22, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2022-0374, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from https://www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
electronically submit any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which
is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.)
must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and should include discussion of all
points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments
or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on
the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional
submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information
about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making
effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim McAuley, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. WDOH's Delegation Request
III. EPA Action
    A. What authorities are included?
    B. What authorities are excluded?
IV. Implications
V. Summary of Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR part 63, subpart E, authorize the EPA to
delegate to State and local agencies authority to implement and enforce
the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs)
if specified requirements are met. The NESHAPs are codified in 40 CFR
parts 61 and 63. One option for such delegation is ``straight
delegation,'' under which a State or local agency requests delegation
based on Federal rules adopted unchanged into State or local rules.
Criteria for

straight delegations are set forth in 40 CFR 63.91(d). There are two
basic requirements for straight delegation. First, the requesting
agency must show it has adequate authority and resources to implement
and enforce the specified NESHAP. This criterion must be met for
straight delegation as well as for all other types of delegation under
CAA section 112(l). Second, for straight delegation, the requesting
agency must show that it has adopted the Federal NESHAPs for which it
is requesting delegation unchanged into State or local law.
    Effective July 5, 2006, the EPA granted WDOH partial approval and
delegation to implement and enforce the radionuclides NESHAPs in the
State of Washington, specifically, 40 CFR part 61, subparts A, B, H, I,
K, Q, R, T, and W (Radionuclides NESHAPs) as in effect on July 1, 2004
(71 FR 32276, June 5, 2006). The EPA granted WDOH partial rather than
full approval and delegation of the Radionuclides NESHAPs because WDOH
did not at that time have express authority to recover criminal fines
for certain actions, as required by 40 CFR 70.11(a)(3)(iii) and 40 CFR
63.91(d)(3)(i)(A). The EPA also approved a streamlined mechanism by
which WDOH could receive partial approval and delegation of newly
promulgated or revised Radionuclides NESHAPs as provided in 40 CFR
63.91(a)(1) and (d)(2).

II. WDOH's Delegation Request

    The WDOH submitted a request for full approval and delegation of
the Radionuclides NESHAPs on February 3, 2012. The WDOH also submitted
additional updates to its request in letters dated April 10, 2017,
August 11, 2017, September 18, 2016 and February 25, 2022. In its
request, WDOH explained that it has since adopted regulations that,
together with its existing criminal enforcement authority, address the
basis for the EPA granting partial rather than full approval and
delegation in 2006. Specifically, WDOH adopted regulations prohibiting
the making of a false material statement, representation, or
certification in any required submission. See Washington Administrative
Code (WAC) 246-247-080(12). The WDOH also adopted regulations
prohibiting any person from rendering inaccurate any required
monitoring device or method. See WAC 246-247-075(14). The WDOH's
submission included a letter from the Washington Attorney General's
office confirming that WDOH now has criminal authorities meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR 70.11.
    In addition, WDOH's submittal showed that it has updated its
adoption by reference of the Radionuclides NESHAPs, without change, to
include the Federal rules in effect as of July 1, 2021. See WAC 246-
247-035. The WDOH also committed to undertaking updates to its adoption
by reference of the Radionuclides NESHAPs as needed to ensure they
remain consistent with the Federal regulations.
    The WDOH's submission also included an updated agreement with the
Washington Department of Ecology under which WDOH is required to make
entries into EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System for Air
(ICIS-Air).

III. EPA Action

A. What authorities are included?

    Based on WDOH's request for full approval and delegation, the EPA
has determined that WDOH has addressed the partial approval issue
discussed in the EPA's 2006 partial approval and delegation of the
Radionuclides NESHAPs, and that WDOH continues to meet the other
requirements for straight delegation of the Radionuclides NESHAPs.
First, together with the authority to pursue criminal penalties for
knowing violations provided by the Revised Code of Washington (RCW)
70A.15.3130 and 70A.15.3150,\1\ WDOH now has all the criminal
authorities required by 40 CFR 70.11(a)(3)(iii) and 63.91(d)(3)(i).\2\
Second, WDOH has updated its regulations, specifically, its
incorporation by reference of the Radionuclides NESHAPs as of July 1,
2021, so that it can fully implement and enforce the Radionuclides
NESHAPs as currently in effect. See WAC 246-247-035. Finally, WDOH has
confirmed that it continues to meet all other criteria of 40 CFR 63.91
that provided the basis for its 2006 partial delegation. See 40 CFR
63.91(a)(1) and (d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Previously codified at RCW 70.94.422 and 70.94.430.
    \2\ The EPA has previously determined that virtually identical
provisions meet the requirements of 40 CFR 70.11(a)(3)(iii) with
respect to the Washington Department of Ecology. See 66 FR 16, pp.
17-18 (January 2, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, except as provided in Section III.B. of this preamble,
the EPA is granting full approval and delegation to WDOH of authority
to implement and enforce the Radionuclides NESHAPs as in effect on July
1, 2021. Radionuclides NESHAPs that are promulgated or revised
substantively after that date are not delegated to WDOH. These remain
the responsibility of the EPA.
    Included in this full approval and delegation is the authority to
approve:
    1. ``Minor changes to monitoring'' \3\ including the use of the
specified monitoring requirements and procedures with minor changes in
methodology as described in 40 CFR 61.14(g)(1)(i);
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For purposes of this paragraph, the terms in quotations have
the meaning assigned to them in 40 CFR 63.90.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. ``Intermediate changes to monitoring;''
    3. ``Minor changes to recordkeeping/reporting;''
    4. ``Minor changes in test methods,'' including the use of a
reference method with minor changes in methodology as described in 40
CFR 61.13(h)(1)(i); and
    5. Waiver of the requirement for emission testing because the owner
or operator of a source has demonstrated by other means to WDOH's
satisfaction that the source is in compliance with the standard as
described in 40 CFR 61.13(h)(1)(iii).
    Any authorities not addressed in this letter and not identified in
any delegated subpart of the Radionuclides NESHAPs as authorities that
cannot be delegated shall be considered delegated. See 67 FR 3106,
January 23, 2002, p. 3109, footnote 3.
    In previously granting partial approval and delegation, we noted
that WDOH does, as a matter of State law, have additional regulations
and requirements that sources of radionuclide air emissions must meet.
As discussed in more detail below, those additional authorities and
requirements are not part of this full approval and delegation.

B. What authorities are excluded?

    The EPA is not delegating authorities under 40 CFR part 61 that
specifically indicate they cannot be delegated, that require rulemaking
to implement, that affect the stringency of the standard, equivalency
determinations, or where national oversight is the only way to ensure
national consistency. The following Table 1 identifies specific
authorities within 40 CFR part 61, subparts A, B, H, I, K, Q, R, T, and
W, that the EPA is excluding from this delegation.

   Table 1--Part 61 Authorities Excluded From Approval and Delegation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Section                            Authorities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
61.04(b)..........................  Waiver of recordkeeping.
61.04(c)..........................  Delegations to state and local
                                     agencies.
61.05(c)..........................  Waivers/exemptions.
61.11.............................  Waiver of compliance.
61.12(d)..........................  Approval of alternative means of
                                     emission limitation.
61.13(h)(1)(ii)...................  Approval of alternatives to test
                                     methods (except as provided in 40
                                     CFR 61.13(h)(1)(i)).
61.14(d)..........................  Combined effluents.
61.14(g)(1)(ii)...................  Approval of alternatives to
                                     monitoring that do not qualify as
                                     ``Minor changes to monitoring,''
                                     ``Intermediate changes to
                                     monitoring,'' or ``Minor changes to
                                     recordkeeping/reporting.\4\
61.16.............................  Availability of information.
61.23(b)..........................  Subpart B--Radon Emissions from
                                     Underground Uranium Mines
                                     Alternative; compliance
                                     demonstration to COMPLY-R.
61.93(b)(2)(iii), (c)(2)(iii).....  Subpart H--Emissions of
                                     Radionuclides Other than Radon from
                                     DOE Facilities.
61.107(b)(2)(iii), (d)(2)(iii)....  Subpart I--Radionuclide Emissions
                                     from Federal Facilities Other than
                                     NRC Licensees and Not Covered by
                                     Subpart H.
61.125(a).........................  Subpart K--Radionuclide Emissions
                                     from Elemental Phosphorus Plants.
61.206(c), (d), and (e)...........  Subpart R--Radon Emission from
                                     Phosphogypsum Stacks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Implications

    As with the previous partial delegation and approval and consistent
with other delegations to the State of Washington, under this full
delegation and approval:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For purposes of this Table, the terms in quotations have the
meaning assigned to them in 40 CFR 63.90.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Sources in Washington subject to the delegated Radionuclides
NESHAPs should continue to direct questions and compliance issues to
WDOH except with respect to those authorities that are not delegated
(those noted in Section III.B. of this preamble). For those authorities
noted in Section III.B of this preamble, affected sources should
continue to work with the EPA as their primary contact and submit
materials directly to the EPA, copying WDOH on all submittals,
questions, and requests.
    2. Sources subject to the Radionuclides NESHAPs continue to be
required to send required notifications, reports and requests to WDOH
for WDOH's action and to provide copies to the EPA. For authorities
that are excluded from this delegation (see Section III.B of this
preamble), sources should continue to send required notifications,
reports, and requests to the EPA and to provide copies to WDOH.
    3. Any records or reports provided to or otherwise obtained by WDOH
relating to the Radionuclides NESHAPs should be made available to the
EPA upon request. In accordance with 40 CFR 61.16 and 63.15, the
availability to the public of information provided to or otherwise
obtained by the EPA in connection with this delegation shall be
governed by 40 CFR part 2. The EPA may request notifications and
reports from owners/operators and/or WDOH.
    4. The WDOH must continue to maintain a record of all approved
alternatives to all monitoring, testing, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements and provide this list of alternatives to the EPA at least
semi-annually, or at a more frequent basis if requested by the EPA. The
EPA may audit the WDOH-approved alternatives and disapprove any that it
determines are inappropriate, after discussion with WDOH. If changes
are disapproved, WDOH must notify the source that it must revert to the
original applicable monitoring, testing, recordkeeping, and/or
reporting requirements. Also, in cases where the source does not
maintain the conditions which prompted the approval of the alternatives
to the monitoring testing, recordkeeping, and/or reporting
requirements, WDOH must require the source to revert to the original
monitoring, testing, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements, or more
stringent requirements, if justified.
    5. The WDOH shall require affected facilities to use the methods
specified in 40 CFR part 61 in performing source tests pursuant to the
regulations. See 40 CFR 61.7.
    6. Enforcement of these delegated Radionuclides NESHAPs in WDOH's
jurisdiction will be the primary responsibility of WDOH. Nevertheless,
the EPA may exercise its concurrent enforcement authority pursuant to
sections 112(l)(7) and 113 of the CAA and 40 CFR 63.90(d)(2) with
respect to sources which are subject to the Radionuclides NESHAPs.
    7. Implementation and enforcement of the delegated NESHAP are
subject to the Environmental Performance Partnership Agreement between
the State of Washington and the EPA and its successor documents. The
Agreement defines roles and responsibilities, including timely and
appropriate enforcement response and the maintenance of ICIS-Air via
the Exchange Network. Your agency will ensure that all relevant source
notification and report information is entered as provided in the
Agreement into the specified EPA database system to meet your
recordkeeping/reporting requirements.
    8. This full approval and delegation delegates to WDOH authority to
implement and enforce the Radionuclides NESHAPs, as in effect on July
1, 2021. Radionuclides NESHAPs that that are promulgated or revised
substantively after that date are not delegated to WDOH.
    9. This approval and delegation does not extend to any additional
State standards or requirements, including other State standards or
requirements regulating radionuclide air emissions. Section 116 of the
CAA provides that, with some exceptions not applicable here, nothing in
the CAA precludes or denies the right of any State or political
subdivision thereof to adopt or enforce any standard or limitation
respecting emissions of air pollutants or any requirement respecting
control or abatement of air pollution so long as the State requirement
is not less stringent than a standard or limitation in effect under an
applicable implementation plan or under section 111 or 112 of the CAA.
Washington State standards that are more stringent than the
Radionuclides NESHAPs are enforceable as provided under State law, but
are not enforceable under the CAA or in any way part of this full
approval and delegation of the Radionuclides NESHAPs to WDOH.
    10. The WDOH may receive full approval and delegation of newly

promulgated or revised Radionuclides NEHAPs by the following
streamlined process: (1) WDOH will send a letter to the EPA requesting
delegation for such new or revised Radionuclides NESHAPs which WDOH has
adopted by reference into Washington regulations, reference its
previous demonstration, and reaffirm that it still meets the criteria
for any full approval and delegation of the NESHAPs; (2) the EPA will
send a letter of response back to WDOH granting approval of the
delegation request (or explaining why the EPA cannot grant the
request), and publish notice of the EPA's approval in the Federal
Register; (3) WDOH does not need to send a response back to the EPA.
    11. Although WDOH is not obligated to request or receive future
delegations of the Radionuclides NESHAPs, the EPA encourages WDOH, on
an annual basis if the Federal standards have changed, to revise its
rules to incorporate by reference newly promulgated or revised
Radionuclides NESHAPs and request updated delegation of those
standards.

V. Summary of Proposed Action

    The EPA proposes to fully approve WDOH's request for approval and
delegation of authority to implement and enforce the Radionuclides
NESHAPs. Pursuant to the authority of section 112(l) of the CAA, this
approval is based on the EPA's finding that State law, regulations, and
agency resources meet the requirements for full straight program
approval and delegation of authority as specified in 40 CFR 63.91. The
purpose of this full approval and delegation is to acknowledge WDOH's
ability to implement a Radionuclides NESHAPs program within the State
of Washington (except with respect to Indian country, as discussed in
Section VI. of this preamble, and to continue the transfer of primary
implementation and enforcement responsibility for this program from the
EPA to WDOH. Although the EPA will look to WDOH as the lead for
implementing delegated Radionuclides NESHAPs for its sources, the EPA
retains authority under section 113 of the CAA to enforce any
applicable emission standard or requirement, if needed. With this
approval, WDOH may request newly promulgated or revised Radionuclides
NESHAPs by way of a streamlined process.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator has the authority to approve
NESHAP delegation requests that comply with CAA section 112(l) and
applicable Federal regulations. In reviewing NESHAP delegation
requests, the EPA's role is to approve State choices, provided that
they meet the criteria and objectives of the CAA and the EPA's
implementing regulations. Accordingly, this proposed action would
merely approve the State's request as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements under the CAA beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practical and legally permissible methods,
under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    This proposed full approval and delegation of the Radionuclides
NESHAPs would not apply to sources or activities located in Indian
country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151.\5\ Consistent with previous
Federal program approvals or delegations, the EPA will continue to
implement the NESHAPs in Indian country in Washington because WDOH has
not adequately demonstrated authority over sources and activities
located within the exterior boundaries of Indian reservations and in
other areas of Indian country. In those areas of Indian country, this
proposed rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The
one exception is within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian
Reservation, also known as the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup
Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress
explicitly provided State and local agencies in Washington authority
over activities on non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Under this definition, the EPA treats as reservations trust
lands validly set aside for the use of a Tribe even if the trust
lands have not been formally designated as a reservation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 61

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Radionuclides, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: July 15, 2022.
Casey Sixkiller,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2022-15553 Filed 7-20-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: January 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 17)]
[Notices]
[Page 3816]
[DOCID:fr26ja07-63]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Docket No. RP07-133-000]

Egan Hub Storage, LLC; Notice of Proprosed Changes in FERC Gas
Tariff

January 17, 2007.
    Take notice that on January 12, 2007, Egan Hub Storage, LLC (Egan
Hub) tendered for filing as a part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First
Revised Volume No. 1, the revised tariff sheets listed on Appendix A to
the filing, to reflect a corporate identity change effective January 1,
2007. This effective date coincides with the date Egan Hub's new parent
corporation, Spectra Energy Corp., was divested from Egan Hub's former
parent company, Duke Energy Corporation.
    Egan Hub states that copies of its filing have been served upon all
affected customers of Egan Hub and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible 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 email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-1149 Filed 1-25-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P