[Federal Register: February 14, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 30)]
[Notices]
[Page 7024-7025]
[DOCID:fr14fe07-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

February 8, 2007.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC07-58-000.
    Applicants: Lockhart Power Company; Milliken & Company.
    Description: Milliken & Company and Lockhart Power Company submit a
joint application, under Section 203 of the FPA, for disclaimer of
jurisdiction or, in the alternative application for approval of
internal corporate reorganization.
    Filed Date: 2/2/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070206-0047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 23, 2007.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG07-38-000.
    Applicants: Post Oak Wind, LLC.
    Description: Post Oak Wind, LLC submits a notice of Self-
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 2/1/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070201-5018.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 22, 2007.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER99-4122-021; ER00-2268-021; ER99-4124-017
    Applicants: APS Energy Services Company; Pinnacle West Capital
Corporation; Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Pinnacle West Capital Corporation et al submit an
errata to the Notice of a Non-Material Change in Status of generation
capacity filed on 1/19/07.
    Filed Date: 02/05/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070206-0195.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER02-1330-007.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Co submits an errata to their
1/17/07 compliance filing, pursuant to FERC's 12/18/06 Order.
    Filed Date: 2/6/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070208-0094.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER04-47-003.
    Applicants: PB Financial Services, Inc.
    Description: PB Financial Services, Inc submits First Revised FERC
Rate Schedule 1, Substitute Original Sheet 1 and an Updated Triennial
Market Analysis.
    Filed Date: 2/5/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070206-0188.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1099-003.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission Operator Inc submits
its proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission and Energy
Markets Tariff, FERC Electric Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 2/5/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0109.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1453-002.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: PJM Interconnection LLC submits a corrected version
that addresses the errors found in its 1/9/07 filing of Wholesale
Market Participation Agreement.
    Filed Date: 1/31/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0067.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 21, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-127-002.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corp submits an
errata to its 1/29/06 compliance filing.
    Filed Date: 2/2/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0018.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 23, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-352-001.
    Applicants: S.D. Warren Company.
    Description: SD Warren Co submits a proposed Substitute Original
Sheet 1 reflecting a change in Section 6 re its 12/22/06 filing of a
petition for order.
    Filed Date: 2/2/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0097.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 23, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-357-001.
    Applicants: Fenton Power Partners I, LLC.
    Description: Fenton Power Partners I, LLC submits its response to
the Commission's additional Information Request.
    Filed Date: 2/2/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070202-5061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 23, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-389-001.
    Applicants: Power Provider, LLC.
    Description: Power Provider, LLC submits a request that the
effective cancellation date in its notice be revised from December 29
to December 30.
    Filed Date: 1/25/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070125-5010.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 15, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-475-001.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corp submits a
replacement clean Tariff Sheet 346A that contains the omitted portion
of proposed tariff Section 24.1.3 re the 1/27/07 compliance filing.
    Filed Date: 2/2/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0094.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 23, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-494-000.
    Applicants: Southern Company Services, Inc.
    Description: Southern Company Services, Inc on behalf Southern
Companies submits an errata to its 2/1/07 compliance filing in
accordance with Order 2006-B.
    Filed Date: 2/2/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0020.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 23, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-503-000.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.
    Description: Wisconsin Electric Power Co submits a Notice of
Cancellation of FERC Electric Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1, Revised
Wholesale Power Service Tariff--Schedule W.
    Filed Date: 2/2/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070206-0127.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 23, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-505-000.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.
    Description: Wisconsin Electric Power Co submits a Notice of
Cancellation of Standby Service Facilities Agreement with the City of
New London Utilities.
    Filed Date: 2/2/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070206-0129.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 23, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-506-000.
    Applicants: PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC.

    Description: PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC submits its Second
Substitute Original Sheet 2, to FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume
2.
    Filed Date: 2/2/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070206-0128.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 23, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-513-000.
    Applicants: Vermont Transco LLC.
    Description: Vermont Transco LLC submits revisions to the 1991
Transmission Agreement that reflects the unique public-private
partnership w/various entities located in Vermont.
    Filed Date: 2/5/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070206-0186.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-514-000.
    Applicants: G&G Energy, Inc.
    Description: G&G Energy, Inc submits a petition for acceptance of
initial tariff, waivers and blanket authority.
    Filed Date: 2/5/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070206-0187.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-515-000.
    Applicants: Domtar Corporation.
    Description: Domtar Corp submits a petition for market-based rate
authority, acceptance of initial rate schedule, waivers and blanket
authority.
    Filed Date: 2/5/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0093.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-517-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits a Transmission Interconnection Agreement with Great River
Energy and Northern States Power Co.
    Filed Date: 2/6/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0112.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-518-000.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas & Electric Company; Kentucky Utilities
Company.
    Description: Louisville Gas and Electric Co and Kentucky Utilities
Co submit two service agreements for Cost-Based Sales of Capacity and
Energy, Service Agreements 1 and 2, Original Volume No. 5.
    Filed Date: 2/6/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0096.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-519-000.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas and Electric Company; Kentucky Utilities
Company; LG&E Energy Marketing Inc.
    Description: Louisville Gas & Electric Company and Kentucky
Utilities Co submit amendments to their respective Tariffs for Cost-
Based Sales of Capacity and Energy Tariffs to include pro forma service
agreement to be effective 2/7/07.
    Filed Date: 2/6/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0110.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-520-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
submits an Amended & Restated Interconnection Agreement with the City
of Lebanon, Ohio.
    Filed Date: 2/6/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070207-0108.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 27, 2007.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following foreign
utility company status filings:
    Docket Numbers: FC07-8-000.
    Applicants: Spectra Energy Corp; Union Gas Limited.
    Description: Spectra Energy Corp submits a Notice of Self-
Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status.
    Filed Date: 02/01/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070206-0052.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 22, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-2539 Filed 2-13-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 229 (Thursday, December 2, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68407-68409]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26157]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0891]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Haro Strait, San Juan County, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary moving safety zone
for navigable waters within a 500-yard radius around the ZIM KINGSTON.
The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment from the potential hazards associated with the vessel
transit. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited
unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Puget
Sound.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from December 2,
2021 through 9 a.m. on December 6, 2021. For purposes of enforcement,
actual notice will be used from 10 a.m. on November 24, 2021 until
December 2, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0891 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Peter McAndrew, Sector Puget Sound Waterways
Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule, as the Coast Guard received initial
notification on October 31, 2021 of an anticipated vessel transit from
Victoria, BC to Vancouver, BC through US Waters by the ZIM KINGSTON. On
or around October 21, 2021, the ZIM KINGSTON lost containers overboard
and two containers subsequently caught on fire and may contain toxic
flammable gas or other hazardous materials. Immediate action is needed
to respond to the potential safety hazards associated with the ZIM
KINGSTON's transit. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM for this
temporary rule because the safety zone must be established by November
24, 2021 to protect waterway users.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable because immediate action is needed to
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from the
potential hazards associated with the vessel transit of the ZIM
KINGSTON.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port (COTP) Puget
Sound has determined that potential hazards associated with the transit
of the ZIM KINGSTON will be a safety concern for anyone within a 500-
yard radius of the vessel. This rule is needed to protect personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the
safety zone during the transit.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 10 a.m. November 24, 2021
through 9 a.m. December 6, 2021. The safety zone will cover all
navigable waters within 500 yards of the ZIM KINGSTON. The duration of
the zone is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment in these navigable waters while the vessel is in transit.
No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without
obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the fact that the
safety zone created by this rule is limited in size and duration.
Vessel traffic would be able to safely transit around this safety zone.
Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners
via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow
vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain

about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
safety zone for navigable waters within a 500-yard radius around the
ZIM KINGSTON between 10 a.m. November 24, 2021 through 9 a.m. December
6, 2021. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and
the marine environment from the potential hazards associated with the
vessel transit. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L[60] of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 1.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T13-0891 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T13-0891  Safety Zone; Haro Strait, San Juan County, WA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a moving safety zone: All
navigable waters within a 500-yard radius around the ZIM KINGSTON.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Puget Sound (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety
zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative by VHF Channel 16. Those in the safety zone must comply
with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced from 10 a.m.
November 24, 2021, through 9 a.m. December 6, 2021.

    Dated: November 24, 2021.
C.R. Cederholm,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting, Captain of the Port Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2021-26157 Filed 12-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 144 (Thursday, July 26, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35424-35427]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15997]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0036; FRL-9980-20]

1,1-Difluoroethane; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation amends an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance to allow for residues of 1,1-difluoroethane (CAS Reg. No. 75-
37-6) when used as an inert ingredient (aerosol propellant) in bird
repellent pesticide products applied to growing crops and raw
agricultural commodities after harvest and to animals. Pyxis Regulatory
Consulting, on behalf of Avian Enterprises Limited LLC, submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting an amendment to an existing requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of 1,1-difluoroethane when used in accordance with the
terms of the exemption.

DATES: This regulation is effective July 26, 2018. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 24, 2018,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0036, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael L. Goodis, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

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

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0036 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
September 24, 2018. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0036, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of March 21, 2018 (82 FR 12311) (FRL-9974-
76), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (IN-11082) by Pyxis
Regulatory Consulting (4110 136TH ST CT NW, Gig Harbor, WA 98332) on
behalf of Avian Enterprises Limited LLC (2000 Pontiac Drive, Sylvan
Lake, MI 48320). The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.910 and 40 CFR
180.930 be amended by modifying the current exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of 1,1-difluoroethane (CAS Reg.
No. 75-37-6) when used as an inert ingredient (propellant) in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops and to raw agricultural
commodities after harvest and to animals to allow for the additional
use in bird repellant pesticide formulations applied to growing crops,
raw agricultural commodities after harvest, and animals. That document
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Pyxis Regulatory
Consulting on behalf of Avian Enterprises Limited LLC, the petitioner,
which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. No
relevant comments were received on the notice of filing.

III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue . . . .''
    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for 1,1-difluoroethane including
exposure resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with 1,1-difluoroethane
follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by 1,1-difluoroethane as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in this
unit.
    In an acute inhalation toxicity study in rats for 1,1-
difluoroethane, the lethal concentration, LC50 is >475,500
parts per million (ppm) (oral equivalent approximately 235,399
milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)).
    No adverse toxic effects are observed in rats treated via
inhalation with 1,1-difluoroethane following subchronic exposure up to
100,000 ppm (oral equivalent approximately 82,600 mg/kg/day), chronic
exposure up to 25,000 ppm (oral equivalent approximately 20,649 mg/kg/
day) or developmental toxicity studies at doses up to 50,000 ppm (oral
equivalent approximately 41,300 mg/kg/day), the highest dose tested in
each exposure scenario.
    Although reproduction toxicity studies are not available with 1,1-
difluoroethane, EPA does not expect 1,1-difluoroethane to cause any
reproductive toxicity effects. Fetal susceptibility was not observed in
the developmental toxicity study via inhalation with rats treated with
1,1-difluoroethane as neither maternal nor developmental toxicity is
observed up to 50,000 ppm (oral equivalent approximately 41,300 mg/kg/
day), the highest dose tested. Additionally, no signs of systemic
toxicity or reproduction organ toxicity are observed following
subchronic and chronic exposures at 100,000 ppm (oral equivalent
approximately 82,600 mg/kg/day) and 25,000 ppm (oral equivalent
approximately 20,649 mg/kg/day), the highest doses tested,
respectively.
    Toxicity is not observed in the carcinogenicity/chronic toxicity
study via inhalation with rats treated with 1,1-difluoroethane up to
25,000 ppm (oral equivalent approximately 20,649 mg/kg/day), the
highest dose tested. Therefore, 1,1-difluoroethane is not expected to
be carcinogenic.
    Mutagenicity studies are available with 1,1-difluoroethane. The
bacterial reverse mutation test and the micronucleus test were
negative. The mammalian chromosomal aberration test in human
lymphocytes gave a weak positive response and the sex-linked recessive
lethal test in Drosophila melanogaster gave a positive response.

Based on the submitted studies the mutagenic potential of 1,1-
difluoroethane is equivocal.
    Neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies are not available for
review. However, evidence of neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity is not
observed in the submitted studies.
    The metabolism study was conducted with difluoromethane which is
structurally similar to 1,1-difluoroethane. Difluoromethane differs
only by a carbon atom and is considered a suitable surrogate chemical
as it would be expected to be metabolized in a fashion similar to1,1-
difluoroethane. Therefore, data from the metabolism study conducted
with difluoromethane are used to describe 1,1-difluoroethane
metabolism. Based on the metabolism study in rats treated with
difluoromethane, 1,1-difluoroethane is expected to be poorly absorbed
and rapidly metabolized. Of the absorbed dose, most is expected to be
metabolized and excreted via exhaled carbon dioxide and organics
followed by excretion in the urine and feces.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    The available toxicity studies indicate that 1,1-difluoroethane has
a very low overall toxicity. The lowest NOAEL in the database was
25,000 ppm (approximately 20,649 mg/kg/day human equivalent oral dose)
observed in a chronic/carcinogenicity toxicity study in rats via the
inhalation route of exposure. Since signs of toxicity were not observed
at levels well above the limit dose (1,000 mg/kg/day) an endpoint of
concern for risk assessment purposes was not identified. Therefore,
since no endpoint of concern was identified for the acute and chronic
dietary exposure assessment as well as for short- and intermediate-term
dermal and inhalation exposure, a qualitative risk assessment for 1,1-
difluoroethane was conducted.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to 1,1-difluoroethane, EPA considered exposure under the
proposed exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance, as well as the
existing exemptions and from other dietary sources of exposure. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from 1,1-difluoroethane in food as follows:
    Dietary exposure (food) to 1,1-difluoroethane can occur following
ingestion of foods with residues from treated crops or animals or from
the use of 1,1-difluoroethane as an aerosol propellent in consumer
products used in or on food. However, a dietary exposure assessment was
not conducted since no endpoint of concern was identified in the
available database.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. Since a hazard endpoint of
concern was not identified for the acute and chronic dietary
assessment, a quantitative dietary exposure risk assessment for
drinking water was not conducted, although exposures may be expected
from use on food crops and runoff in the ground water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
    1,1-Difluoroethane may be used in pesticide products and non-
pesticide products that may be used in and around the home. Based on
the discussion above, a quantitative residential exposure assessment
for 1,1-difluoroethane was not conducted.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    Based on the available data, 1,1-difluoroethane does not have a
toxic mechanism; therefore, section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) does not apply.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
    As part of its qualitative assessment, the Agency did not use
safety factors for assessing risk, and no additional safety factor is
needed for assessing risk to infants and children. Based on an
assessment of 1,1-difluoroethane, EPA has concluded that there are no
toxicological endpoints of concern for the U.S. population, including
infants and children.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    Because no toxicological endpoints of concern were identified, EPA
concludes that the exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance to
residues of 1,1-difluoroethane are safe, i.e., there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to
infants and children, from aggregate exposure to 1,1-difluoroethane
residues.

V. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

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

VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, the exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of 1,1-difluoroethane (CAS Reg. No. 75-37-6) contained in 40
CFR 180.910 and 180.930 are amended to add the use of 1,1-
difluoroethane in bird repellent pesticide formulations.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action amends exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance
under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these
types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled
``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
Because this action has been exempted from review under Executive Order
12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), nor is
it considered a regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13771,
entitled ``Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82
FR 9339, February 3, 2017). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to

Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are amended on the basis of a
petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance exemption in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: July 11, 2018.
Michael L. Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.910, revise the inert ingredient ``1,1-Difluoroethane
(CAS Reg. No. 75-37-6)'' in the table to read as follows:

Sec.  180.910  Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Inert ingredients                Limits                Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
1,1-Difluoroethane (CAS Reg.    In pesticide            Aerosol
 No. 75-37-6).                   formulations used for   propellant.
                                 insect control in
                                 food- and feed-
                                 handling
                                 establishments and
                                 animals; in bird
                                 repellent pesticide
                                 formulations.

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

0
3. In Sec.  180.930, revise the inert ingredient 1,1-Difluoroethane
(CAS Reg. No. 75-37-6) in the table to read as follows:

Sec.  180.930  Inert ingredients applied to animals; exemptions from
the requirement of a tolerance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Inert ingredients                Limits                Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
1,1-Difluoroethane (CAS Reg.    In pesticide            Aerosol
 No. 75-37-6).                   formulations used for   propellant.
                                 insect control in
                                 food- and feed-
                                 handling
                                 establishments and
                                 animals; in bird
                                 repellent pesticide
                                 formulations.

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

[FR Doc. 2018-15997 Filed 7-25-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 25, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 4880]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01450]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2009-0074]

Petition for Extension of Waiver of Compliance

    Under part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this
document provides the public notice that by letter dated October 31,
2022, Canadian National Railway Company (CN), the Transportation
Division of the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail,
and Transportation Workers, and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers
and Trainmen collectively petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) for an extension of a waiver of compliance from
certain provisions of the hours of service laws contained at title 49
United States Code (U.S.C.) section 21103(a). The relevant FRA Docket
Number is FRA-2009-0074.
    Specifically, petitioners requested an extension of the existing
relief from the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 21103(a)(4), which in part,
provides that a train employee may not be required or allowed to remain
or go on duty after that employee has initiated an on-duty period each
day for 6 consecutive days, unless that employee has had at least 48
hours off duty at the employee's home terminal. In support of the
request, petitioners explained that CN has operated these schedules of
6 consecutive on-duty periods followed by 24 hours off duty
successfully since 2002 and that the relief is ``very unlikely to have
had any impact on any recent safety trends.'' Petitioners further state
that CN's recent internal review of human factor-caused accidents has
determined that ``the absence of human factors incidents involving
persons covered under this waiver demonstrates that continued operation
under the waiver has not caused a problem with safety.''
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they
should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
    Communications received by March 27, 2023 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered if practicable.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
solicits comments from the public to better inform its processes. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of
regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
John Karl Alexy,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2023-01450 Filed 1-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P