[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 68 (Tuesday, April 11, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17379-17380]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07116]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 68 / Tuesday, April 11, 2017 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0233; Airspace Docket No. 17-AWA-1]

Amendment of Class C Airspace; Little Rock, AR

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule, technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies the Little Rock, AR, Class C airspace
area by amending the legal description to update the current airport
name and updated airport reference point (ARP) information to match the
FAA's aeronautical database and charted information. Additionally,
exclusion language is added to the legal description to ensure flight
safety and address any potential for confusion where the Class C and
restricted area R-2403B airspace areas overlap. This action does not
change the boundaries, altitudes, or operating requirements of the
Class C airspace area.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, June 22, 2017. The Director of the
FEDERAL REGISTER approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy Group,
Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington DC, 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it updates the airport name and ARP coordinates for the Bill and
Hillary Clinton National/Adams Field airport that is contained in the
Little Rock, AR, Class C airspace description and adds language
excluding a restricted area that overlaps the Class C airspace area.

History

    Class C airspace areas are designed to improve air safety by
reducing the risk of midair collisions in high volume airport terminal
areas and to enhance the management of air traffic operations in that
area. During a recent review of the Little Rock, AR, Class C airspace
area description, the FAA identified that the airport's name and ARP
geographic coordinates were incorrect. Additionally, the FAA identified
that neither the Little Rock Class C airspace nor the restricted area
R-2403B description addressed an overlap of the two airspace areas.
    This action updates the airport name and ARP geographic coordinates
in the Little Rock, AR, Class C description to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database and charted information. And, this action adds
exclusion language to the Little Rock Class C description for R-2403B,
when active, to ensure flight safety and avoid potential confusion
where the Little Rock Class C and R-2403B airspace areas overlap. This
change clarifies the Class C airspace when the restricted area is
active. There are no changes to the boundaries, altitudes, or air
traffic control procedures resulting from this action.
    Class C airspace designations are published in paragraph 4000 of
FAA Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15,
2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class
C airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15,
2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by amending the Little Rock, AR, Class C airspace area
description. The airport formerly known as ``Little Rock/Adams Field''
is renamed ``Bill and Hillary Clinton National/Adams Field'' and the
ARP geographic position for the airport is changed from ``lat. 34
[deg]43'44'' N., long. 92 [deg]13'29'' W.'' to ``lat. 34[deg]43'46''
N., long. 92[deg]13'29'' W.'' These amendments to the airport name and
ARP geographic coordinates reflect the current information in the FAA's
aeronautical database and on associated charts. Additionally, exclusion
language for R-2403B was added to read ``excluding that airspace within
R-2403B when active.'' This amendment was made to ensure flight safety
and reduce the potential for confusion where the class C and restricted
area airspace areas overlap.
    This action is an administrative change and does not affect the

boundaries, altitudes, or operating requirements of the airspace,
therefore, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) is
unnecessary.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of modifying the Little
Rock, AR, Class C airspace area by amending the legal description to
contain the current airport name and updating airport reference point
(ARP) information to match the FAA's aeronautical database and charted
information qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act, and its agency implementing regulations in
FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures''
regarding categorical exclusions for procedural actions at paragraph 5-
6.5a, which categorically excludes from full environmental impact
review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace
areas, airways, routes, and reporting points. Since this action does
not change the boundaries, altitudes, or operating requirements of the
Class C airspace area, this airspace action is not expected to result
in any significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAAO
1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, this
action has been reviewed for factors and circumstances in which a
normally categorically excluded action may have a significant
environmental impact requiring further analysis, and it is determined
that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of
an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71:

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.911A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3,
2016, effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 4000 Class C Airspace.

* * * * *

ASW AR C Little Rock, AR

Bill and Hillary Clinton National/Adams Field, AR
    (Lat. 34[deg]43'46'' N., long. 92[deg]13'29'' W.)

That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
4,300 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of the Bill and Hillary
Clinton National/Adams Field; and that airspace extending upward
from 1,500 feet MSL to and including 4,300 feet MSL within a 10-mile
radius of the Bill and Hillary Clinton National/Adams Field from the
030[deg] bearing from the airport clockwise to the 210[deg] bearing
from the airport and that airspace extending upward from 1,800 feet
MSL to and including 4,300 feet MSL within a 10-mile radius of the
airport from the 210[deg] bearing from the airport clockwise to the
310[deg] bearing from the airport and that airspace extending upward
from 2,100 feet MSL to and including 4,300 feet MSL from the
310[deg] bearing from the airport clockwise to the 030[deg] bearing
from the airport, excluding that airspace within R-2403B when
active.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 4, 2017.
Gemechu Gelgelu,
Acting Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
[FR Doc. 2017-07116 Filed 4-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 44 (Wednesday, March 6, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14539-14540]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05091]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0025; FRL-9379-3]

Notice of Receipt of Pesticide Products; Registration
Applications To Register New Uses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of applications to register new
uses for pesticide products containing currently registered active
ingredients pursuant to the provisions of section 3(c) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. This
notice provides the public with an opportunity to comment on the
applications.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 5, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number and the EPA Registration Number or EPA File Symbol of
interest as shown in the body of this document, 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 Confidential Business
Information (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.htm.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A contact person is listed at the end
of each registration application summary and may be contacted by
telephone, email, or mail. Mail correspondence to the Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person's
name, division, and mail code.

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. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Registration Applications

    EPA has received applications to register new uses for pesticide
products containing currently registered active ingredients. Pursuant
to the provisions of FIFRA section 3(c)(4), EPA is hereby providing
notice of receipt and opportunity to comment on these applications.
Notice of receipt of these applications does not imply a decision by
the Agency on these applications. For actions being evaluated under the
Agency's public participation process for registration actions, there
will be an additional opportunity for a 30-day public comment period on
the proposed decision. Please see the Agency's public participation Web
site for additional information on this process (http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/registration-public-involvement.html). EPA
received the following applications to register new uses for pesticide
products containing currently registered active ingredients:

    1. EPA Registration Numbers: 100-617 and 100-618. Docket ID
Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0051. Applicant: Syngenta Crop Protection
LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419-8300. Active Ingredient:
Propiconazole. Product Type: Fungicide. Proposed Use: Rapeseed
subgroup 20A. Contact: Erin Malone,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. EPA Registration Number: 264-1065. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-
OPP-2012-0107. Applicant: Bayer CropScience, P.O. Box 12014, 2 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Active
Ingredient: Spirotetramat. Product Type: Insecticide. Proposed Uses:
Banana and plantain; bushberry subgroup, crop subgroups 13-07B and
13-07H including aronia berry, bearberry, bilberry, blueberry
(highbush and lowbush), Chilean guava, cloudberry, cranberry,
currant (black, buffalo, native, and red), elderberry, European
barberry, gooseberry, edible honeysuckle, jostaberry, juneberry,
muntries, lingonberry, partridgeberry, salal, sea buckthorn,
including cultivars, varieties and/or hybrids of these; additional
citrus fruits, crop group 10-10 including Australian lime (desert,
finger, and round), Brown River finger lime, Japanese summer
grapefruit, Mediterranean mandarin, Mount White lime, New Guinea
wild lime, Russell River lime, sweet lime, tachibana orange, Tahiti
lime, trifoliate orange, uniq fruit including cultivars, varieties,
and/or hybrids of these; coffee; pineapple; additional pome fruits,
crop group 11-10 including azarole, Chinese quince, Japanese quince,
medlar, tejocote including cultivars, varieties, and/or hybrids of
these; pomegranate; bulb vegetables, crop subgroup

3-07A including daylily (bulb), fritillaria (bulb), garlic (bulbs of
common, great-headed, serpent), lily (bulb), onion (bulbs of common,
Chinese, pearl, potato), shallot (bulb) plus cultivars, varieties
and/or hybrids of these; bulb vegetables, crop subgroup 3-07B
including Chinese chive (fresh leaves), chive (fresh leaves),
elegans hosta, fritillaria (leaves), kurrat, leek, wild leek, lady's
leek, Beltsville bunching onion, fresh onion, green onion, macrostem
onion, tree onion tops, Welsh onion tops, shallot fresh leaves plus
cultivars, varieties and/or hybrids of these; additional fruiting
vegetables, crop group 8-10 including African eggplant, bush tomato,
cocona, currant tomato, garden huckleberry, goji berry, martynia,
naranjilla, okra, pea eggplant, roselle, scarlet eggplant, sunberry,
tree tomato, pepper (cayenne, chili, habanero, jalapeno, pablano,
pimento, serrano), including cultivars, varieties and/or hybrids of
these; globe artichoke; taro leaves; and watercress. Contact: Rita
Kumar,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. EPA Registration Numbers: 279-3052 and 279-3158. Docket ID
Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0056. Applicant: FMC Corporation, 1735
Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103. Active Ingredient: Clomazone.
Product Type: Herbicide. Proposed Uses: Brassica, head and stem,
subgroup 5A; rhubarb, and southern pea. Contact: Erik Kraft, (703)
308-9358, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    4. EPA Registration Numbers: 400-436 (technical), 400-518, and
400-521. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0949. Applicant: Chemtura
Corporation, 199 Benson Road, Middlebury, CT 06749. Active
ingredient: Triflumizole. Product Type: Fungicide. Proposed Uses:
Tomato; Pome Fruit, Group 11-10; Small Fruit, Vine Climbing, except
Fuzzy Kiwifruit, Subgroup 13-07F; and Low Growing Berry, Subgroup
13-07G. Contact: Tamue L. Gibson,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    5. EPA Registration Numbers: 62719-373 (technical), 62719-374
(MUP) and 62719-375. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0911.
Applicant: Chemtura Corporation, 199 Benson Road, Middlebury, CT
06749. Active Ingredient: Quinoxyfen. Product Type: Insecticide.
Proposed Uses: Fruiting Vegetable, Group 8-10; Small Fruit, Vine
Climbing, except Fuzzy Kiwifruit, Subgroup 13-07F; and Low Growing
Berry, Subgroup 13-07G. Contact: Tamue L. Gibson,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pest.

    Dated: February 22, 2013.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-05091 Filed 3-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 26, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4276-4278]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01464]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP16-28-000]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Intent To Prepare
an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Line QP, Line Q, and Queen
Storage Project Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Line QP, Line Q, and Queen
Storage Project involving construction and operation of facilities by
National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (National Fuel) in Forest and
Warren Counties, Pennsylvania. National Fuel indicates the project
would abandon capacity by sale a natural gas storage system and
associated pipeline that is no longer needed by the company and would
provide that capacity to other gathering system suppliers in
Pennsylvania. Additionally, National Fuel proposes to replace a
compromised portion of the pipeline associated with the storage system
and install new pipeline to maintain National Fuel's distribution
capability. The Commission will use this EA in its decision-making
process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience
and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. You can make a difference by providing us with
your specific comments or concerns about the project. Your comments
should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable
alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.
Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues they
need to evaluate in the EA. To ensure that your comments are timely and
properly recorded, please send your comments so that the Commission
receives them in Washington, DC on or before February 19, 2016.
    If you sent comments on this project to the Commission before the
opening of this docket on December 3, 2015, you will need to file those
comments in Docket No. CP16-028-000 to ensure they are considered as
part of this proceeding.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company
representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company
would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if
the Commission approves the project, that approval conveys with it the
right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to
produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation
proceedings where compensation would be determined in accordance with
state law.
    National Fuel provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the
FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do
I Need To Know?'' This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked
questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate
in the Commission's proceedings. It is also available for viewing on
the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov).

Public Participation

    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit
your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at
(202) 502-8258 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please carefully follow these
instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief,
text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
``eRegister.'' If you are filing a comment on a particular project,
please select ``Comment on a Filing'' as the filing type; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number
(CP16-028-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A,
Washington, DC 20426.

Summary of the Proposed Project

    National Fuel seeks authorization to abandon by sale all of its
facilities comprising its Queen Storage Field, including the base gas
in the field, its Queen Compressor Station, and a segment of its Line
Q, approximately 5.5 miles in length, beginning at the Queen Compressor
Station and traversing northwest to a location just south of the
Allegheny River (the ``Line Q Segment''). Also, National Fuel seeks
authorization to construct and operate approximately 5 miles of new 4-
inch-diameter plastic pipeline (``Line QP'') beginning at a point just
north of the Allegheny River, and traversing southeast along or
adjacent to the existing Line Q right-of-way, to a point approximately
2,000 feet west of the Queen Compressor Station.
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in
the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to all those
receiving this notice in the mail and are available at www.ferc.gov
using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call
(202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to
the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 45.3
acres of land for the pipeline. Following construction, National Fuel
would maintain about 20.5 acres for permanent operation of the
project's facilities; the remaining acreage would be restored and
revert to former uses.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\2\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. We will
consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:
     Geology and soils;
     land use;
     water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     cultural resources;
     vegetation and wildlife;
     air quality and noise;
     endangered and threatened species;
     public safety; and
     cumulative impacts.
    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    The EA will present our independent analysis of the issues. The EA
will be available in the public record through eLibrary. Depending on
the comments received during the scoping process, we may also publish
and distribute the EA to the public for an allotted comment period. We
will consider all comments on the EA before making our recommendations
to the Commission. To ensure we have the opportunity to consider and
address your comments, please carefully follow the instructions in the
Public Participation section, beginning on page 2.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction by law
and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of
this project to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the
EA.\3\ Agencies that would like to request cooperating agency status
should follow the instructions for filing comments provided under the
Public Participation section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 1501.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and to
solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested
Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on
historic properties.\4\ We will define the project-specific Area of
Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPO as the project
develops. On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a minimum
encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (examples include
construction right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor
stations, and access roads). Our EA for this project will document our
findings on the impacts on historic properties and summarize the status
of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Currently Identified Environmental Issues

    We have already identified an issue we think deserves attention
based on a preliminary review of the proposed facilities and the
environmental information provided by National Fuel. The proposed
replacement of Line Q and installation of Line QP would involve an open
cut crossing of the Allegheny River in segments that may contain
sensitive freshwater mussels. We encourage comments on this issue as
well as other issues you feel should be addressed in the EA.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list federal, state, and local government
representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and
public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other interested
parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also includes
all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's regulations)
who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used
temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within certain
distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits comments on
the project. We will update the environmental mailing list as the
analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related to
this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project.
    If we publish and distribute the EA, copies of the EA will be sent
to the environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you
would prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please
return the attached Information Request (appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in
the ``Document-less Intervention Guide'' under the ``e-filing'' link on
the Commission's Web site. Motions to intervene are more fully
described at http://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site at www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP16-
28). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: January 20, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-01464 Filed 1-25-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33871-33872]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11929]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Assessment and
Draft General Conformity Determination for the Proposed Terminal Area
Plan and Air Traffic Procedures at Chicago O'Hare International Airport

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces that the
Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) and Draft General Conformity
Determination for the Proposed Terminal Action Plan and Air Traffic
Procedures for Chicago O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, Illinois
is available for public review and comment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deb Bartell, Manager, Chicago Airports
District Office<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Draft EA analyzes and discloses the
potential environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Terminal
Area Plan and Air Traffic Procedures at Chicago O'Hare International
Airport, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act.
    The FAA will host Public Workshops on the Draft document. An in-
person Public Workshop on the Draft EA will be held at Monty's Elegant
Banquets at 703 South York Road, Bensenville, IL 60106 from 6:00 p.m.
to 9:00 p.m. (Central Daylight Time) on July 12, 2022. A virtual Public
Workshop will be held via Zoom at 6:00 p.m. (Central Daylight Time) on
July 14, 2022. Registration for the virtual meeting is available on the
FAA website, found here: https://www.faa.gov/airports/great_lakes/TAPandATEA/.
    Representatives of FAA and its consultants will provide information
about the Draft EA. Spanish language translators will be available at
the Public Workshops. If you need the assistance of a translator, other
than Spanish, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> by July 5, 2022.

    The comment period is open as of Thursday, June 2, 2022 and closes
Monday, July 18, 2022 at midnight. All comments are to be submitted to
FAA, care of HMMH, as noted below. Written comments must be postmarked,
and emails must be sent by no later than midnight (Central Daylight
Time), Monday, July 18, 2022.
    The Draft EA is available for review online (https://www.faa.gov/airports/great_lakes/TAPandATEA/) and notices have been provided to
local libraries through July 18, 2022:
    The FAA requests that comments be submitted online at https://www.faa.gov/airports/great_lakes/TAPandATEA/. Court reporters will be
available to record verbal comments at the Public Workshops and copies
of comment forms will also be available at the in-person meeting.

    Issued in Des Plaines, IL.

    Dated: May 31, 2022.
Debra L. Bartell,
Manager, Chicago Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 2022-11929 Filed 6-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


Nathalie Simon/DC/USEPA/US

03/11/2008 01:35 PM

To

"Schwab, Margo"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Johansson, Robert" <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Janet Cakir/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Darryl Weatherhead/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <EMAIL_ADDRESS>Bryan Hubbell, Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Al McGartland/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ronn Dexter/DC/USEPA/US, Elizabeth Kopits/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Cynthia Morgan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Thomas Gillis/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

final draft of the ozone CEA appendix

As promised, here is the final draft of the Ozone CEA Appendix.


[Federal Register: September 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 173)]
[Notices]
[Page 51485-51486]
[DOCID:fr07se07-103]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56339; File No. SR--NASDAQ-2007-042]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To
Modify the Entry and Annual Fees Paid by a Company That Lists on Nasdaq
Upon Emerging From Bankruptcy

August 30, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On April 13, 2007, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposal to modify the entry and annual fees paid by a
company that lists on Nasdaq upon emerging from bankruptcy. The
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change on June 28,
2007. The proposal was published for comment in the Federal Register on
July 25, 2007.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the proposal.
This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment
No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56092 (June 18,
2007), 72 FR 40915.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to modify the fees charged to companies that
list upon emerging from bankruptcy. Specifically, Nasdaq proposes to
waive the entry fee (including the application fee) \4\ that such
companies would otherwise be required to pay. In addition, for
companies listing on the NASDAQ Global Market (including the NASDAQ
Global Select Market), Nasdaq proposes to charge the company the
minimum annual listing fee applicable to companies on that market
(currently $30,000) for the first (prorated) year that

such a company is listed \5\ and for each of the subsequent two full
calendar years.\6\ Finally, Nasdaq proposes that a company that emerges
from bankruptcy and relists during the same year that it has previously
paid an annual fee will not be required to pay a second annual fee for
that year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Nasdaq's entry fee includes a $5,000 non-refundable
application fee. The proposed waiver would also waive this part of
the fee.
    \5\ Nasdaq prorates the annual fee for the year a company lists,
based on the month in which the company lists.
    \6\ All domestic companies on the NASDAQ Capital Market pay the
same annual fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fee waivers are justified
by the unique circumstances faced by companies emerging from
bankruptcy. According to the Exchange, these companies typically are
not raising any new capital at the time of listing, so the payment of
entry and listing fees is more burdensome than for companies that are
listing upon an initial public offering. Also, because of the desire in
bankruptcy proceedings to ensure that creditors are paid as much as
possible, the Exchange believes these companies are much more sensitive
to both the initial and continued costs associated with listing. As
such, the Exchange believes the proposed fees are reasonable and
equitably allocated.
    The Exchange has represented that the proposed rule change would
not affect its commitment of resources to its regulatory oversight of
the listing process or its other regulatory programs. Nasdaq reports
that historically it has not listed a large number of companies
emerging from bankruptcy in any given year.\7\ Moreover, Nasdaq stated
that it would still conduct a complete review of these companies for
compliance with Nasdaq listing standards in the same manner as any
other company applying for listing on Nasdaq. The company must
successfully complete that review process and demonstrate compliance
with the initial listing requirements prior to being approved for
listing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Nasdaq listed four companies upon their emergence from
bankruptcy from January 1, 2006, through March 31, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\8\ In particular, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\9\ which
requires that an exchange have rules that provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and other persons using its facilities. The Commission also
finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,\10\ which requires, inter alia, that the rules of a national
securities exchange be designed to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
and not designed to permit unfair discrimination between issuers. The
Commission has not received any comments on the proposal. This order
approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that a company who relists upon emerging from
bankruptcy has usually paid either an entry fee to the Exchange or a
similar initial listing fee to another national securities exchange at
the time of its initial listing. In addition, with respect to the
application of the minimum annual listing fee to a company which lists
upon emergence from bankruptcy and the waiver of the annual fee for a
company that emerges from bankruptcy and relists during the same year
that it has previously paid an annual fee, the Commission notes that
this fee reduction or waiver is a temporary one, designed to enable
recently bankrupt companies to manage the costs associated with
listing, consistent with the desire in bankruptcy proceeding to ensure
that creditors are paid as much as possible. For these reasons, the
Exchange believes that reduction or waiver of the Exchange's fees in
these cases is equitable.
    The Commission also notes that the Exchange has represented that
the waiver of entry fees and the reduction or waiver of annual listing
fees in these limited circumstances should not affect its commitment of
resources to its regulatory oversight of the listing process or its
other regulatory programs.
    Further, the proposed fee changes would not have any impact on
whether a company is actually eligible to list on the Exchange. The
Commission expects, and the Exchange has represented, that a full and
independent review of compliance with Nasdaq listing standards will be
conducted for any company seeking to take advantage of the proposed fee
changes, in the same manner as for any company that applies for listing
on the Exchange.
    In light of these arguments, the Commission agrees that the
proposed waiver and fee cap, which are retroactively effective to April
13, 2007, the date of the filing of the proposed rule change, do not
constitute an inequitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges, do not permit unfair discrimination between issuers, and
are generally consistent with the Act.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\11\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR--NASDAQ-2007-042),
as modified by Amendment No. 1, be, and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-17669 Filed 9-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 165 (Tuesday, August 26, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50869-50872]
[FR Doc No: 2014-20257]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0587; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-219-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-13-
09 for all Airbus Model A330-200 and -300 series airplanes. AD 2011-13-
09 currently requires revising the maintenance program to incorporate
new limitations and maintenance tasks for certain certification
management requirements (CMRs). Since we issued AD 2011-13-09, we have
determined that more restrictive maintenance requirements and
airworthiness limitations are necessary. This proposed

AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program to
incorporate new maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations.
We are proposing this AD to prevent safety-significant latent failures
that would, in combination with one or more other specific failures or
events, result in a hazardous or catastrophic failure condition.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 10,
2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61
93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0587; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2014-0587;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-219-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On June 14, 2011, we issued AD 2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76
FR 37255, June 27, 2011). AD 2011-13-09 requires actions intended to
address an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A330-200 and -300
series airplanes.
    Since we issued AD 2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76 FR 37255,
June 27, 2011), we have determined that more restrictive maintenance
requirements and airworthiness limitations are necessary.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0245, dated October 2, 2013 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model
A330-200 and -300 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    The airworthiness limitations are currently distributed in the
Airbus A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS).
    The mandatory instructions and airworthiness limitations
applicable to the Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR) are
specified in Airbus A330 ALS Part 3, which is approved by the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).
    The revision 04 of Airbus A330 ALS Part 3 introduces more
restrictive maintenance requirements and/or airworthiness
limitations. Failure to comply with this revision constitutes an
unsafe condition.
    For the reason described above, this new AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2010-0264 (http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_ad_2010_0264.pdf), which is superseded, and requires the
implementation of the maintenance requirements as specified in
Airbus A330 ALS Part 3 revision 04.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0587.

Relevant Service Information

Airbus has issued A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 3--
Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR), Revision 04, dated August
27, 2013. The actions described in this service information are
intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Difference Between MCAI and This Proposed AD

    The EASA MCAI specifies that if there are findings from the ALS
inspection tasks, corrective actions must be accomplished in accordance
with Airbus maintenance documentation. However, this proposed AD does
not include that requirement. Operators of U.S.-registered airplanes
are required by general airworthiness and operational regulations to
perform maintenance using methods that are acceptable to the FAA. We
consider those methods to be adequate to address any corrective actions
necessitated by the findings of ALS inspections required by this
proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 76 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    The ALS revision required by AD 2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76
FR 37255, June 27, 2011), and retained in this proposed AD takes about
1 work-hour per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour.
Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that were
required by AD 2011-13-09 is $85 per product.
    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on

these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S.
operators to be $6,460, or $85 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-13-
09, Amendment 39-16732 (76 FR 37255, June 27, 2011), and adding the
following new AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2014-0587; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-
219-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by October 10, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76 FR
37255, June 27, 2011).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223,
-223F -243, -243F, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342,
and -343 airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer
serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Periodic
inspections.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that more restrictive
maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations are
necessary. We are issuing this AD to prevent safety-significant
latent failures that would, in combination with one or more other
specific failures or events, result in a hazardous or catastrophic
failure condition.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Revision of the Maintenance Program

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76 FR 37255, June 27, 2011). Within
90 days after August 1, 2011 (the effective date of AD 2011-13-09):
Revise the maintenance program, which ensures the continuing
airworthiness of each operated airplane, by incorporating Airbus
A330 ALS, Part 3--Certification Maintenance Requirements, Revision
03, dated July 29, 2010. Within the times specified in the Airbus
A330 ALS, Part 3--Certification Maintenance Requirements, Revision
03, dated July 29, 2010, comply with all applicable maintenance
requirements and associated airworthiness limitations included in
Airbus A330 ALS, Part 3--Certification Maintenance Requirements,
Revision 03, dated July 29, 2010, except as provided by paragraphs
(h) and (i) of this AD.

(h) Retained Exceptions to the Certification Maintenance Requirements
(CMR) Tasks

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76 FR 37255, June 27, 2011). At the
latest of the times specified in paragraph (h)(1), (h)(2), or (h)(3)
of this AD: Do the first accomplishment of Airbus A330 CMR Task
213100-00001-2-C, Pressure Control Monitoring, of Airbus A330 ALS,
Part 3--Certification Maintenance Requirements, Revision 03, dated
July 29, 2010.
    (1) Before the accumulation of 48,000 total flight hours.
    (2) Within 48,000 flight hours after the most recent
accomplishment of Airbus A330 Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR)
Task 21.31.00/05.
    (3) Within 3 months after August 1, 2011 (the effective date of
AD 2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76 FR 37255, June 27, 2011).

(i) Retained Exceptions to the CMR Tasks

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76 FR 37255, June 27, 2011). At the
latest of the times specified in paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3)
of this AD: Do the first accomplishment of Airbus A330 CMR Tasks
242000-00005-1-C, AC Generation;<PHONE_NUMBER>1-1-C, DC Generation;
and<PHONE_NUMBER>2-1-C, DC Generation; of Airbus A330 ALS, Part 3--
Certification Maintenance Requirements, Revision 03, dated July 29,
2010.
    (1) Before the accumulation of 12,000 total flight hours.
    (2) Within 12,000 flight hours after the most recent
accomplishment of Airbus A330 MRBR Task 24.20.00/17, 24.30.00/04, or
24.30.00/05 respectively.
    (3) Within 3 months after August 1, 2011 (the effective date of
AD 2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76 FR 37255, June 27, 2011).

(j) Retained Limitation of Alternative Inspections or Intervals

    This paragraph restates the limitation specified in paragraph
(j) of AD 2011-13-09, Amendment 39-16732 (76 FR 37255, June 27,
2011). After accomplishing the action required by paragraph (g) of
this AD, no alternative inspections or inspection intervals may be
used, other than those specified in Airbus A330 ALS, Part 3--
Certification Maintenance Requirements, Revision 03, dated July 29,
2010, unless the inspections or intervals are approved as an
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (m) of this AD.

(k) New Requirements of This AD: Revise the Maintenance or Inspection
Program

    (1) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise
the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate
Airbus A330 ALS Part 3--Certification Maintenance Requirements,
Revision 04, dated August 27, 2013. Within the applicable compliance
time defined in the ``Record of Revisions'' section of Airbus A330
ALS Part 3--Certification Maintenance

Requirements, Revision 04, dated August 27, 2013, except as provided
by paragraph (k)(2) of this AD, accomplish all applicable
maintenance tasks. Accomplishing these actions terminates the
requirements of paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j) of this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph 3 of the ``Record of Revisions'' section of
Airbus A330 ALS Part 3--Certification Maintenance Requirements,
Revision 04, dated August 27, 2013, specifies accomplishing the
actions ``from 27 August 2013,'' this AD requires compliance within
the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

(l) No Alternative Inspections or Intervals

    After accomplishing the action required by paragraph (k)(1) of
this AD, no alternative inspections or inspection intervals may be
used, other than those specified in Airbus A330 ALS, Part 3--
Certification Maintenance Requirements, Revision 04, dated August
27, 2013, except as provided by paragraph (k)(2) of this AD, unless
the inspections or intervals are approved as an AMOC in accordance
with the procedures specified in paragraph (m) of this AD.

(m) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International 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 International Branch, send it
to ATTN: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch,
ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(n) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2013-0245, dated October 2,
2013, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0587.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 18, 2014.
Kevin Hull,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-20257 Filed 8-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 185 (Monday, September 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58821-58822]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23420]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2197-100]

Alcoa Power Generating Inc.; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Temporary License Variance to Drawdown
Narrows

Reservoir to 20 feet in November/December 2012 for about 18 days.
    b. Project No.: 2197-100.
    c. Date Filed: August 29, 2012.
    d. Applicant: Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Yadkin River Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Yadkin/Pee Dee River in
Montgomery, Stanly, Davidson, Rowan, and Davie Counties, North
Carolina.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 USC 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mark Gross, Vice President, Operations Alcoa
Power Generating Inc., Yadkin Division, PO Box 576, Badin, NC 28009-
0576, Telephone No.<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Mrs. Anumzziatta Purchiaroni,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests, October 3, 2012. All documents may be filed electronically
via the Internet. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. If unable to be filed electronically, documents may be
paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and seven copies should be
mailed to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Commenters can submit brief comments
up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment
system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must
include your name and contact information at the end of your comments.
    Please include the project number (P-2197-100) on any comments,
motions, or recommendations filed.
    k. Description of proposed amendment: Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
(APGI) filed a request for a temporary variance from the operating
guidelines of their license to allow a one-time drawdown of Narrows
Reservoir up to 20 feet. The purpose of the drawdown is to allow APGI
to implement a remediation plan, which requires placing a cover system
over polychlorinated biphenyl impacted sediments located in the
southern portion of Narrows Reservoir. APGI stated that it anticipates
that the duration of the remediation project would be for about 7
weeks, starting in early November 2012. APGI indicated that the period
includes about 18 days to draw the reservoir down, maintaining a low
stage for about 7 to 14 days, and 18 days to refill the reservoir. APGI
stated that it would be able to comply with all the operating
requirements of its license during the event.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will
consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file
a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may
become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to
intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for
the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the license surrender.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: September 17, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-23420 Filed 9-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 1, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75000-75002]
[FR Doc No: 2023-24123]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2023-N-0008]

Request for Nominations on Public Advisory Panels of the Medical
Devices Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
requesting that any industry organizations interested in participating
in the selection of nonvoting industry representatives to serve on
certain panels of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee (MDAC or the
Committee) in the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH)
notify FDA in writing. FDA is also requesting nominations for nonvoting
industry representatives to serve on certain device panels of the MDAC
in the CDRH. A nominee may either be self-nominated or nominated by an
organization to serve as a nonvoting industry representative.
Nominations will be accepted for current and upcoming vacancies
effective with this notice.

DATES: Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests must send a letter stating that interest to the FDA by
December 1, 2023 (see sections I and II of this document for further
details). Concurrently, nomination materials for prospective candidates
should be sent to FDA by December 1, 2023.

ADDRESSES: All statements of interest from industry organizations
interested in participating in the selection process of nonvoting
industry representative nomination should be sent to Margaret Ames (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). All nominations for nonvoting
industry representatives should be submitted electronically by
accessing the FDA Advisory Committee Membership Nomination Portal:
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/FACTRSPortal/FACTRS/index.cfm or
by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5103,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Information about becoming a member of an
FDA advisory committee can also be obtained by visiting FDA's website
at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret Ames, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5213, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Agency is requesting nominations for
nonvoting industry representatives to the panels listed in table 1.

I. Medical Devices Advisory Committee

    The Committee reviews and evaluates data on the safety and
effectiveness of marketed and investigational devices and makes
recommendations for their regulation. The panels of the Medical Devices
Advisory Committee engage in a number of activities to fulfill the
functions the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) envisions
for device advisory panels. With the exception of the Medical Devices
Dispute Resolution Panel, each panel, according to its specialty area,
advises the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner) regarding
recommended classification or reclassification of devices into one of
three regulatory categories; advises on any possible risks to health
associated with the use of devices; advises on formulation of product
development protocols; reviews premarket approval applications for
medical devices; reviews guidelines and guidance documents; recommends
exemption of certain devices from the application of portions of the
FD&C Act; advises on the necessity to ban a device; and responds to
requests from the Agency to review and make recommendations on specific
issues or problems concerning the safety and effectiveness of devices.
With the exception of the Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel,
each panel, according to its specialty area, may also make appropriate
recommendations to the Commissioner on issues relating to the design of
clinical studies regarding the safety and effectiveness of marketed and
investigational devices. The Committee also provides recommendations to
the Commissioner or designee on complexity categorization of in vitro
diagnostics under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of
1988.

                      Table 1--Panels and Functions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Panels                              Function
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dental Products Panel...........  Reviews and evaluates data concerning
                                   the safety and effectiveness of
                                   marketed and investigational products
                                   for use in dentistry, endodontics, or
                                   bone physiology relative to the oral
                                   and maxillofacial area and makes
                                   appropriate recommendations to the
                                   Commissioner.
Ear, Nose, and Throat Devices     Reviews and evaluate data concerning
 Panel.                            the safety and effectiveness of
                                   marketed and investigational ear,
                                   nose, and throat devices and makes
                                   appropriate recommendations to the
                                   Commissioner.
General and Plastic Surgery       Reviews and evaluate data concerning
 Devices Panel.                    the safety and effectiveness of
                                   marketed and investigational general
                                   and plastic surgery devices and makes
                                   appropriate recommendations to the
                                   Commissioner.
Hematology and Pathology Devices  Reviews and evaluates data concerning
 Panel.                            the safety and effectiveness of
                                   marketed and investigational in vitro
                                   devices for use in clinical
                                   laboratory medicine including
                                   pathology, hematology,
                                   histopathology, cytotechnology, and
                                   molecular biology and makes
                                   appropriate recommendations to the
                                   Commissioner.
Orthopedic and Rehabilitation     Reviews and evaluates data concerning
 Devices Panel.                    the safety and effectiveness of
                                   marketed and investigational
                                   orthopedic and rehabilitation devices
                                   and makes appropriate recommendations
                                   to the Commissioner.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Qualifications

    Persons nominated for the device panels should be full-time
employees of firms that manufacture products that would come before the
panel, or consulting firms that represent manufacturers, or have
similar appropriate ties to industry.

III. Selection Procedure

    Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests should send a letter stating that interest to the FDA contact
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) within 30 days of publication of
this document (see DATES). Within the subsequent 30 days, FDA will send
a letter to each organization that has expressed an interest, attaching
a complete list of all such organizations, and a list of all nominees
along with their current resumes. The letter will also state that it is
the responsibility of the interested organizations to confer with one
another and to select a candidate, within 60 days after the receipt of
the FDA letter, to serve as the nonvoting member to represent industry
interests for a particular device panel. The interested organizations
are not bound by the list of nominees in selecting a candidate.
However, if no individual is selected within 60 days, the Commissioner
will select the nonvoting member to represent industry interests.

IV. Application Procedure

    Individuals may self-nominate and/or an organization may nominate
one or more individuals to serve as a nonvoting industry
representative. Nomination must include a current, complete
r[eacute]sum[eacute] or curriculum vitae for each nominee including
current business address and telephone number, email address if
available, and a signed copy of the Acknowledgement and Consent form
available at the FDA Advisory Committee Membership Nomination Portal
(see ADDRESSES) within 30 days of publication of this document (see
DATES). Nominations must also specify the advisory panel for which the
nominee is recommended. Nominations must also acknowledge that the
nominee is aware of the nomination unless self-nominated. FDA will
forward all nominations to the organizations expressing interest in
participating in the selection process for the particular device panels
listed in table 1. (Persons who nominate themselves as nonvoting
industry representatives will not participate in the selection
process.)
    FDA seeks to include the views of women and men, members of all
racial and ethnic groups, and individuals with and without disabilities
on its advisory committees, and therefore encourages nominations of
appropriately qualified candidates from these groups.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5

U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: October 27, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-24123 Filed 10-31-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


1 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES, AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 07/ 08/ 03 MEMORANDUM Subject: EPA Id # 059102. Chlorpyrifos methyl: Current status of toxicity data gaps and bridging studies from chlorpyrifos.

TXR # 0051734 DP Barcode No.: D289974 Submission No.: S634988 PC Code: 059102 From: John Doherty Reregistration Branch III Health Effects Division 7509C To: Jackie Mosby and Margaret Rice Reregistration Branch II/ SRRD 7508C Through: Jess Rowland Chairperson Hazard Identification Assessment Review Committee ( HIARC) Health Effects Division 7509C and Donna Davis Reregistration Branch III Health Effects Division 7509C and Catherine Eiden Branch Senior Scientist Reregistration Branch III Health Effects Division 7509C The Health Effects Division ( HED) has reconsidered the available toxicology data base for chlorpyrifos methyl ( CPM) to see if studies submitted for the active ingredient, chlorpyrifos ( CPY), can be used to address the data gaps identified in the CPM Toxicology Chapter for the RED dated April 19, 2000.

The Reregistration Branch III ( RRBIII) met on April 14, 2003 with the Co Chairs of Health Chlorpyrifos methyl/ bridging/ D289974/ 2003 2 Effects Division ( HED) Hazard Identification Assessment Review Committee, Jess Rowland and Elizabeth Doyle, to discuss and compare the relative toxicity to laboratory animals of CPY versus CPM. Of these two chemicals, CPY has a more extensive and for many studies a more current toxicity data base than the structurally, closely related chemical CPM. It was concluded that if anything, CPM would be less toxic than CPY based on comparison of cholinesterase inhibition particularly in rats and as would be predicted based on structure activity relationships. Thus, the extensive data base for CPY may serve as a surrogate for CPM. Only data gaps for CPY should now be considered as data gaps for CPM. As additional studies are submitted for CPY, they will also serve to address CPM data gaps, with the exception of the acute studies.

For risk assessment purposes, it was recommended that CPM continue to be regulated based on its current selection of endpoints and continued use of the 10 X uncertainty factor. It is noted that CPY currently has a 10 X FQPA uncertainty factor based on potential increased susceptibility to infants and children.

Comments.

1. The decision that CPM is regarded as less toxic than CPY is illustrated in Table I which shows the doses selected for the acute and chronic dietary endpoints.

Table 1. Comparison of selected studies in the toxicity data bases and other factors to support bridging of data from CPY to CPM.

Parameter Chlorpyrifos ( CPY) Chlorpyrifos Methyl ( CPM) Comments Completeness of the data base. Essentially complete. Most studies are modern. 17 data gaps and many studies are older.

Structure No electronic structure available in files.

CPM has methyl groups in place of the ethyl groups on the phosphorous. Replacement of methyl groups may alter the metabolism and stability and make one chemical a more potent inhibitor of ChE than the other.

Key Endpoint Selection Acute Dietary RfD ( endpoint dose). NOAEL = 0.5 mg/ kg LOAEL = 1 mg/ kg based on ChE inhibition in a special rat ChE study to determine the time to peak effect of inhibition. ( 1998, 44648101) NOAEL = 1 mg/ kg LOAEL = 12.5 mg/ kg based on ChE inhibition in the dams in a development toxicity study.

( 1992 ,44680603) The selected dose levels are based on different types of studies but still supports implication that CPY is more potent a ChE inhibitor than CPM. Chlorpyrifos methyl/ bridging/ D289974/ 2003 Parameter Chlorpyrifos ( CPY) Chlorpyrifos Methyl ( CPM) Comments 3 Chronic Dietary RfD ( endpoint dose) NOAEL = 0.03 mg/ kg/ day Based on the comparison of several studies and no single LOAEL is assigned. Refer to HIARC report for list of studies used. NOAEL = 0.1 mg/ kg/ day. LOAEL = 1.0 mg/ kg/ day based on ChE inhibition. ( 1991, 42269001) Doses are not that different and still supports implication that CPY is more potent a ChE inhibitor than CPM.

Total uncertainty factor. 1000 10 X FQPA for increased susceptibility 1000 10 X for data base uncertainty factor Also includes 10 X intraspecies and 10 X for interspecies.

Acute Toxicity  Caution  studies for both chemicals are very old.

Acute Oral LD50 = 163 mg/ kg

137 mg/ kg  Vehicle not specified. ( 1963, Acc # 112115) LD50 = 2140 ( 1530 2900) mg/ kg

1090 ( 694 1710) mg/ kg  Corn oil ( 1969, Acc # 242152) Caution large difference may be deceiving since strain of rat and other conditions may not be similar.

Acute Dermal LD50 = 202 mg/ kg ( rat) ( not identified in one liners) LD50 > 2000 mg/ kg ( 1964, Acc # 242152) Indicates CPY is more toxic then CPM Neurotoxicity Testing Delayed type neurotoxicity  hens Not neurotox at 50, 100 or 110 mg/ kg/ day in hens ( 00097144, 00405106) Acute study ( 1979, 00029503) is considered equivocal at higher doses but 13 week study ( 1984, 00145060) did not show delayed type neuro toxicity at 500 mg/ kg/ day. Toxicity to hens is greater for CPY than for CPM.

Subchronic and Chronic Toxicity in Rats Subchronic  rat LOAEL < 0.025 mg/ kg/ day for ChE.

( 1985, 40436406) NOAEL = 0.1 mg/ kg/ day LOAEL = 1 mg/ kg/ day based on ChE inhibition by dietary route. ( 1990, 44906902, 45048301) Supports implication that CPY is a more potent ChE inhibitor than CPM.

Chronic  rat NOAEL = 0.132 mg/ kg/ day LOAEL = 0.33 mg/ kg/ day based on plasma ChE.

( 1990, 42172802) NOAEL = 0.1 mg/ kg/ day LAOEL = 1 mg/ kg/ day based on both plasma and RBC ChE ( 1975, 00028752)

Developmental and Reproductive Studies.

Developmental  rat NOAEL = 0.1 mg/ kg/ day LOAEL = 3 mg/ kg/ day based on ChE inhibition in dams.

( 1983, 00130400) NOAEL = 1 mg/ kg LOAEL = 12.5 mg/ kg based on ChE inhibition in the dams.

( 1992 ,44680603) Supports implication that CPY is a more potent ChE inhibitor than CPM. Chlorpyrifos methyl/ bridging/ D289974/ 2003 Parameter Chlorpyrifos ( CPY) Chlorpyrifos Methyl ( CPM) Comments 4 Mutagenicity Testing and Concern ( if any)

Data base Apparently complete and without a mutagenicity concern. Data base considered adequate  one study positive with metabolic activation. Neither chemical has a mutagenicity concern.

2. The current status of the data gaps for CPM is shown in Table 2. The following comments should be noted.

( a). Acute toxicity. The acute toxicity data bases for both CPY and CPM are based on studies conducted in the 1960s and early 1970s. Thus, the acute oral, dermal, inhalation and irritation studies should be repeated for both chemicals and cannot be bridged. It is strongly advised that these acute toxicity studies ( except for the irritation studies) be conducted concurrently using all the same parameters.

( b). Subchronic inhalation. The subchronic inhalation study with CPY ( 1988, 40908401) did not demonstrate a NOAEL. Thus this study should not be bridged to support CPM.

( c) Rabbit developmental toxicity study. The rabbit developmental toxicity study ( 1987, 404354408) is considered a data gap for CPY and therefore cannot be bridged to support the uses of CPM.

( d) Dermal absorption. The dermal absorption factor for CPY is set at 3% based on the weight of evidence of the toxicity data for CPY. The HIARC report ( May 17, 1999) also assigned 3% as the dermal absorption factor for CPY using CPY as a comparative model.

Table 2. Status of Data Gaps for CPM.

Study Type Reason for Chlorpyrifos Methyl Data Gap Bridge #

870.1100. Acute oral toxicity. 1969 study. Old technical preparation used. Newer methods of synthesis may change toxicity. No ( a)

870.1200. Acute dermal toxicity 1964 study. Old technical preparation used. Newer methods of synthesis may change toxicity. No ( a)

870.1300. Acute inhalation toxicity No valid study with current technical grade.

870.2400. Primary ocular irritation 1974 study. Old technical preparation used. Newer methods of synthesis may change toxicity. No ( a)

870.2500. Primary dermal irritation 1964 study. Old technical preparation used. Newer methods of synthesis may change toxicity. No ( a)

870.2600. Dermal sensitization. 1985 Study ( 44906901 and 4498001) is classified as unacceptable. No ( a) Chlorpyrifos methyl/ bridging/ D289974/ 2003 Study Type Reason for Chlorpyrifos Methyl Data Gap Bridge #

5 870.6100. Acute delayed type neurotoxicity  hens 1979 acute study is " equivocal" with some evidence of sciatic nerve at higher doses. A 1984 13 week study with CPM does not show effect at 500 mg/ kg/ day ( classified as Acceptable). Yes 00097144 and 00405106 870.6200. Acute neurotoxicity screen. No CPM study. CPY study has time to peak effect. Yes ( 1992, 42669101)

870.6200. Subchronic neurotoxicity screen No CPM study. CPY study did not include ChE assessments and was acceptable for FOB and motor activity etc only. An acceptable CPM subchronic study ( 1990, 44906902 and 45048301) established the NOAEL and LOAELs for plasma, RBC and brain ChE for CPM. Yes  for FOB, motor activity etc. ( 1993, 42929801)

870.3200. Subchronic dermal No CPM study. Yes ( 1988, 40972801)

870.3250. Subchronic inhalation No CPM study. No ( b)

870.4100. Chronic non rodent ( dog) 1974 CPM study ( 00029477). Study is considered unacceptable for ChE assessment. No ( c)

870.3700. Developmental toxicity  rabbits 1976 CPM study ( 00030758). According to the HIARC report ( 5/ 17/ 99), this study is considered a data gap because of several deficiencies. No ( d)

870.3800. Multigeneration reproduction study. 1975 CPM study ( 00030757). According to the HIARC report ( 5/ 17/ 99), this study is considered a data gap because of several deficiencies including that only 2 doses were assessed. Note: A replacement study ( MRID No.: 45826201) has been received and is currently under review by the contractor ( due 9/ 30/ 03). Yes ( 1991, 41930301)

870.6300. Developmental neurotoxicity  rat No CPM study. Yes ( 1998, 44556901, 44661001, 44787301)

870.7485. General metabolism  rat ( 1971, 0029484). Study classified as unacceptable and not upgradeable. Uses only two males in a preliminary study. Yes ( e) ( 1987, 40458901)

870.7600. Dermal absorption. 1995 Study ( 44913001). In vitro studies are not acceptable for demonstration of dermal absorption. Yes ( f)

# The MRID number fo the study with CPY that is considered acceptable for bridging to support CPM is identified. ( a) The acute studies for both CPY and CPM are based on very old data and should be repeated for each chemical. Note the Acc # for all the acute studies is 242152. ( b) The study ( 1988, 40908401) with CPY did not demonstrate a NOAEL and is therefore a data gap for both CPY and CPM. Chlorpyrifos methyl/ bridging/ D289974/ 2003 6 ( c) The dog studies with both CPY and CPM were conducted at approximately the same time ( early seventies) and the study with CPY demonstrated much variability in the ChE assessments and thus contributing to problems in bridging the study. This remains a gap for both CPY and CPM. ( d) The rabbit developmental toxicity study ( 1987, 404354408) is considered a data gap for CPY and therefore cannot be bridged to support the uses of CPM. ( e) The differences in toxicity between CPY and CPM may be related to differences in the pharmacokinetics for each chemical but it is not necessary to prove this difference at this time. ( f) The dermal absorption of 3% for CPY was based on a weight of the evidence approach that includes a study with humans. The HIARC ( refer to report dated May 17, 1999) used the CPY approach as a model and also assigned 3% as the dermal absorption factor for CPM.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 67 (Friday, April 7, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 20883]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07346]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL OP-OFA-064]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed March 27, 2023 10 a.m. EST Through April 3, 2023 10 a.m. EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

    Notice: Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make
public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's
comment letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20230044, Final, USFS, OR, Youngs Rock Rigdon, Review Period
Ends: 05/22/2023, Contact: Hilary Henry<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20230045, Draft, FERC, WA, Goldendale Energy Storage Project,
Comment Period Ends: 06/06/2023, Contact: Office of External Affairs
866-208-3372.
EIS No. 20230046, Final, USFS, CA, North Yuba Landscape Resilience
Project, Review Period Ends: 05/23/2023, Contact: John Brokaw 530-265-
4531.
EIS No. 20230047, Final, USA, CA, Training and Public Land Withdrawal
Extension, Fort Irwin, California, Review Period Ends: 05/08/2023,
Contact: Renita Wickes<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 3, 2023.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2023-07346 Filed 4-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P