[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 60 (Friday, March 28, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17436-17441]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07006]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0926; FRL-9907-61]

S-metolachlor; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation amends tolerances for residues of S-
metolachlor in or on corn, field, forage; corn, field, stover; corn,
pop, stover; corn, sweet, forage; and corn, sweet, stover. Syngenta
Crop Protection, LLC, requested these tolerances under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective March 28, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before May 27, 2014, 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-2012-0926, 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), EPA West 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 (202)
566-1744, 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: Lois Rossi, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 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-2012-0926 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
May 27, 2014. 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-2012-0926, 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. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of January 16, 2013 (78 FR 3377) (FRL-9375-
4), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
2F8155) by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro,
NC 27419. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.368 be amended by
revising previously established tolerances for residues of the
herbicide S-metolachlor, S-2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-
methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide, in or on corn, field, forage at 20
parts per million (ppm); corn, stover at 40 ppm; and corn, sweet,
forage at 40 ppm. These tolerances were proposed in order to amend
tolerances previously established on these commodities at 6.0 ppm. That
document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Syngenta Crop
Protection, LLC, the registrant, which is available in the docket,
http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response
to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the proposed tolerance level for corn, field, forage and has
corrected the proposed commodity definition, corn stover, to the
following commodity designations: Corn, field, stover; corn, pop,
stover; and corn, sweet, stover. The reasons for these changes are
explained in Unit IV.C.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish 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. . .
.''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), 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 S-metolachlor including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with S-metolachlor
follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    The existing toxicological database is primarily comprised of
studies conducted with metolachlor. However, bridging studies indicate
that the metolachlor toxicology database can be used to assess toxicity
for S-metolachlor. In subchronic (metolachlor and S-metolachlor) and
chronic (metolachlor) toxicity studies in dogs and rats, decreased body
weight and

body weight gain were the most commonly observed effects. No systemic
toxicity was observed when metolachlor was administered dermally. There
was no evidence of neurotoxic effects in the available toxicity
studies, and there is no evidence of immunotoxicity in the submitted
rat immunotoxicity study. Prenatal developmental studies in the rat and
rabbit with both metolachlor and S-metolachlor revealed no evidence of
a qualitative or quantitative susceptibility in fetal animals. A 2-
generation reproduction study with metolachlor in rats showed no
evidence of parental or reproductive toxicity. There are no residual
uncertainties with regard to pre- and/or postnatal toxicity.
    Metolachlor has been evaluated for carcinogenic effects in the
mouse and the rat. Metolachlor did not cause an increase in tumors of
any kind in mice. In rats, metolachlor caused an increase in benign
liver tumors in rats, but this increase was seen only at the highest
dose tested and was statistically significant compared to controls only
in females. There was no evidence of mutagenic or cytogenetic effects
in vivo or in vitro. Based on this evidence, EPA has concluded that
metolachlor does not have a common mechanism of carcinogenicity with
acetochlor and alachlor, compounds that are structurally similar to
metolachlor. Taking into account the qualitatively weak evidence on
carcinogenic effects and the fact that the increase in benign tumors in
female rats occurs at a dose 1,500 times the chronic reference dose
(cRfD), EPA has concluded that the cRfD is protective of any potential
cancer effect.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by S-metolachlor as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document: ``S-Metolachlor, PP2F8115.
Human Health Risk Assessment for the petition for higher tolerances on
Corn, field, forage; Corn, sweet, forage; and Corn stover'' at pp. 34-
46 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0926.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm. A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for S-metolachlor used for human risk assessment is discussed
in Unit III. of the final rule published in the Federal Register of
September 17, 2010 (75 FR 56897, p. 56899) (FRL-8842-3).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to S-metolachlor, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing S-metolachlor
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368. Both the acute and chronic analyses
assume tolerance-level residues on all crops with established, pending,
or proposed tolerances for metolachlor and/or S-metolachlor. In cases
where separate tolerance listings occur for both metolachlor and S-
metolachlor on the same commodity, the higher value of the two is used
in the analyses. Therefore, EPA assessed dietary exposures from S-
metolachlor in food as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified
for S-metolachlor. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the United States Department of
Agriculture's (USDA) Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII), 1994-1996 and 1998. As to residue levels in food,
EPA assumed tolerance-level residues for all uses, 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all commodities, and default processing factors.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA's
Nationwide CSFII, 1994-1996 and 1998. As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed tolerance-level residues for all uses, 100 PCT for all
commodities, and default processing factors.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a non-linear RfD approach is appropriate for assessing
cancer risk to S-metolachlor. Cancer risk was assessed using the same
exposure estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii.
    iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment
for S-metolachlor. Tolerance level residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for S-metolachlor in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of S-metolachlor. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST),
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS), Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models, and
the USGA National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program monitoring
data, the Agency calculated conservative estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of S-metolachlor and metolachlor originating
from ground water and surface water sources. EDWCs for metolachlor and
S-metolachlor were calculated for both the parent compound, as well as
the ethanesulfonic acid (ESA) and oxanilic acid (OA) degradates.
    For surface water, PRZM/EXAMS and FIRST Version1.1.1 models were
used for EDWCs for the parent S-metolachlor and the ESA and OA
degradates, respectively. The SCI-GROW model was used to predict the
maximum acute and chronic concentrations present in shallow
groundwater. Current NAWQA monitoring data were also used to determine
EDWCs. Based on monitoring and modeling data, total EDWCs for acute and
chronic exposures from surface water are 219 parts per billion

(ppb) and 119 ppb, respectively. Groundwater EDWCs are 126 ppb for
acute and chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 219 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 126 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking 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., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). S-metolachlor is
currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Residential lawns or turf by professional
applicators. S-metolachlor is labeled for use on commercial (sod farm)
and residential warm-season turf grasses and other non-crop land
including golf courses, sports fields, and ornamental gardens. Since S-
metolachlor is not registered for homeowner purchase or use, the only
potential short-term residential risk scenario anticipated is
postapplication hand-to-mouth exposure of children playing on treated
lawns. S-metolachlor incidental oral exposure is assumed to include
hand-to-mouth, object-to-mouth, and incidental soil ingestion
exposures. No intermediate-term risk scenarios are anticipated for the
existing and proposed uses of S-metolachlor.
    Small children are the population group of concern. Although the
type of site that S-metolachlor may be used on varies from golf courses
to ornamental gardens, the scenario chosen for risk assessment
(residential turf use) represents what the Agency considers the likely
upper-end of possible exposure. Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may
be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
    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.'' EPA has not found S-
metolachlor to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and S-metolachlor does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that S-metolachlor does
not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

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
SF when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a
different factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. No increase in
susceptibility was seen in developmental toxicity studies in the rat
and rabbit or in the reproductive toxicity studies in the rat. Toxicity
to offspring was observed at dose levels the same or greater than those
causing maternal or parental toxicity. Based on the results of
developmental and reproductive toxicity studies, there is not a concern
for increased qualitative and/or quantitative susceptibility following
in utero exposure to metolachlor or S-metolachlor.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for S-metolachlor is complete to evaluate
the safety of the tolerance.
    The last rule for S-metolachlor, published in the Federal Register
of August 15, 2012 (77 FR 48902) (FRL-9356-9), noted that
immunotoxicity and acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies were
required. However, since that time, EPA has reviewed the available
hazard and exposure information for S-metolachlor and metolachlor and
has determined that based on the weight of the evidence approach the
acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies are no longer required.
Additionally, an immunotoxicity study has been submitted to EPA since
the last published rule. No signs of immunotoxicity were noted in this
study at any dose level.
    ii. There is no indication that S-metolachlor is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional uncertainty factors to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that S-metolachlor results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to S-metolachlor in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess postapplication incidental
oral exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by S-metolachlor.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to S-metolachlor will occupy 1.5% of the aPAD for all infants less than
1 year old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
S-metolachlor from food and water will utilize 11.6% of the cPAD for
all infants less than 1 year old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic

residential exposure to residues of S-metolachlor is not expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). S-metolachlor
is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to S-metolachlor.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 680 for
children 1-2 years old. Because EPA's level of concern for S-
metolachlor is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however, S-
metolachlor is not registered for any use patterns that would result in
intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for S-
metolachlor.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As explained in Unit
III.A., EPA has concluded that the cRfD is protective of cancer
effects. As previously discussed, the chronic risk assessment indicated
that aggregate exposure to S-metolachlor does not pose a risk of
concern.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to S-metolachlor residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodologies are available to enforce the
tolerance expression, including: a gas chromatography with nitrogen
phosphorous detector (GC/NPD) method (Method I) for determining
residues in or on crop commodities; and a gas chromatography with mass
spectroscopy detector (GC/MSD) method (Method II) for determining
residues in livestock commodities.
    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

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

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    Based on the available forage residue data submitted with the
petition, EPA revised the proposed tolerance on corn, field, forage
from 20 ppm to 40 ppm. The available data indicate that 20 ppm would
not be sufficient to cover likely residues in corn, field, forage at
approved application rates; a tolerance at 40 ppm is supported by the
available residue data. Additionally, the proposed tolerance for corn
stover has been revised to the following commodity entries: Corn,
field, stover; corn, pop, stover; and corn, sweet, stover. This
revision was made in order to accurately capture the correct commodity
terminology for regulated corn stover commodities.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are amended for residues of S-metolachlor, S-
2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-
methylethyl)acetamide, from 6.0 ppm to 40 ppm in or on the following
commodities: Corn, field, forage; corn, field, stover; corn, pop,
stover; corn, sweet, forage; and corn, sweet, stover.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances 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 final rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain
any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This final rule 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 final rule. In addition, this final rule does not impose any
enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (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 of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. 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: March 21, 2014.
Lois Rossi,
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.  180.368, revise the following entries in the table in
paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.368  Metolachlor; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Parts per
                        Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Corn, field, forage.....................................              40
Corn, field, stover.....................................              40

                                * * * * *
Corn, pop, stover.......................................              40
Corn, sweet, forage.....................................              40

                                * * * * *
Corn, sweet, stover.....................................              40

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-07006 Filed 3-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 86)]
[Notices]
[Page 24346-24347]
[DOCID:fr02my08-148]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2007-29251]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Withdrawal of Notice
for Emergency Approval of a New Information Collection: Commercial
Vehicle Driver Survey: Truck Driver Hours of Service and Fatigue
Management

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice; withdrawal of notice for emergency information
collection request.

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

SUMMARY: The FMCSA published a notice in the Federal Register on March
21, 2008 (73 FR 15253), requesting an emergency approval of a proposed
new information collection that would be used to analyze the impact of
the new Hours-of-Service regulations on drivers and the effects of
these regulations on driver fatigue. The new information collection
would also acquire general demographic information regarding the
commercial motor vehicle driving population. The FMCSA has determined

that this information collection request will not be conducted at this
time.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Carroll, Senior
Transportation Specialist, MC-RRR, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, 6th Floor, West Building, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on: April 28, 2008.
Terry Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Research and Information Technology.
 [FR Doc. E8-9690 Filed 5-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 13 (Tuesday, January 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3366-3367]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00792]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC20-30-000.
    Applicants: Innovative Solar 42, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of Innovative Solar 42, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/10/20.
    Accession Number: 20200110-5265.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/31/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG20-63-000.
    Applicants: Oklahoma Wind, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Oklahoma Wind, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/10/20.
    Accession Number: 20200110-5251.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/31/20.

    Docket Numbers: EG20-64-000.
    Applicants: Sooner Wind, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Sooner Wind, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/10/20.
    Accession Number: 20200110-5255.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/31/20.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER15-705-004.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance filing City and County
of San Francisco IA and TFAs (SA 284) to be effective 7/23/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200113-5076.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-705-005.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing City and County
of San Francisco TIA and TFAs (SA 284) to be effective 7/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200113-5084.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-108-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 3127R1 Montana-Dakota NITSA NOA--
Deficiency Response to be effective 12/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 1/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200113-5106.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-410-001.
    Applicants: High Desert Power Project, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to 3 to be effective 11/
20/2019.
    Filed Date: 1/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200113-5046.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-688-001.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Other Transmission
Service Agreements under the OATT to be effective 3/23/2020.
    Filed Date: 1/10/20.
    Accession Number: 20200110-5222.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-691-001.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Rate Schedule No. 216
to be effective 3/23/2020.

    Filed Date: 1/10/20.
    Accession Number: 20200110-5225.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-695-001.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Rate Schedule Nos. 121
and 129 to be effective 3/23/2020.
    Filed Date: 1/10/20.
    Accession Number: 20200110-5234.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-772-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of Rate
Schedule Nos. 172 and 173 to be effective 3/23/2020.
    Filed Date: 1/10/20.
    Accession Number: 20200110-5237.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/31/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-773-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Progress, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Service Agreements (Nos. 75,
et al.) of Duke Energy Progress, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/10/20.
    Accession Number: 20200110-5256.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/31/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-774-000.
    Applicants: Tucson Electric Power Company.
    Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: Concurrence to CAISO RS No. 6046
to be effective 1/14/2020.
    Filed Date: 1/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200113-5050.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-775-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: 3618 Little Blue Wind, LLC GIA to
be effective 12/19/2019.
    Filed Date: 1/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200113-5063.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-776-000.
    Applicants: Appalachian Power Company, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: PJM Transmission Owners submit
revisions to OATT, Sch. 12 re: Economic Projects to be effective 3/13/
2020.
    Filed Date: 1/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200113-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/3/20.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern Time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 13, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-00792 Filed 1-17-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: June 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 118)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 34964-34966]
[DOCID:fr21jn10-27]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0319; FRL-9164-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Amendment to Consumer Products and Architectural and
Industrial Maintenance Coatings Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania concerning
amendments to the Pennsylvania Consumer Products and Architectural and
Industrial Maintenance Coatings Regulations. The revision amends 25 Pa.
Code Chapter 130, Subchapters B and C (relating to consumer products
and architectural and industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings) in order
to reduce volatile organic compounds (VOCs). This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 21, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2010-0319 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0319, Cristina Fernandez, Office of Air
Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2010-0319. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be

able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468,
400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On March 11, 2009, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection (PADEP) submitted a revision to its SIP for amendments to 25
Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapters B and C (relating to consumer
products and AIM coatings). This SIP revision amends 25 Pa. Code
Chapter 130, Subchapters B by adding VOC content limits for an
additional 11 categories of consumer products and revising the VOC
content limits for one category of consumer products currently
regulated. The revision also adds definitions for approximately 30 new
terms, including those that relate to the newly regulated product
categories and amends definitions for approximately 75 existing terms
in order to provide clarity. Additionally, the term ``VOC--volatile
organic compound'' is added to Subchapter B.
    The SIP revision changes the definition of the term ``VOC--volatile
organic compound'' in Subchapter C (relating to AIM coatings) to mirror
the definition of the term in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 121 (relating to
definitions). This revision will make the most currently VOC exempt
compounds available as tools to reduce ozone formation.
    The standards and requirements contained in Pennsylvania's consumer
products rule are consistent with the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC)
model rule. The OTC consumer products model rule was based on the
existing rules developed by the California Air Resources Board, which
were analyzed and modified by the OTC workgroup to address VOC
reduction needs in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR). Implementing this
rule will result in SIP emission reductions in VOC to support the
attainment demonstrations, and reductions in ground-level ozone in
other areas of the OTR.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    This SIP revision consists of the following amendments:
    1. Adds and/or amends definitions, terms, and sections in 25 Pa.
Code Chapter 130, Subchapters B and C for clarity, style, format, and
consistency with the OTC Model Rule and Federal definitions.
    2. Adds and/or amends sections in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130,
Subchapter B in order to incorporate future changes in test procedures,
delete an unnecessary reference to a California regulatory provision,
delete and move definitions and terms, allow for the sell-through of
product manufactured prior to applicable effective dates, update the
product dating, establish the lowest applicable VOC limit requirements,
require additional information on product containers, and establish
requirements for a variance or alternative control plan (ACP).
    3. Establishes under 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter B,
applicability to any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or
manufactures consumer products on and after applicable compliance
dates.
    4. Establishes under 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter B, the
percentage of VOC by weight that cannot be exceeded for consumer
products that are sold, supplied, offered for sale or manufactured for
sale in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and lists exemptions from the
VOC limits. The rule also contains requirements for the following: (1)
Products registered under FIFRA, (2) products requiring dilution, (3)
sell-through of products, (4) aerosols adhesives, (5) charcoal lighter
materials, and (6) floor wax strippers.
    5. Establishes under 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter B,
exemptions for the following: (1) Products for shipment and use outside
the Commonwealth, (2) antiperspirants and deodorants, (3) products
registered under FIFRA, (4) air fresheners, (5) adhesives, (6) bait
station insecticides, and (7) fragrances.
    6. Establishes under 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter B,
applicability for ACPs for consumer products and criteria for
innovative products exemption and requirements for waiver requests. The
rule also contains grounds for requesting a variance, as well as
applicability for ACPs for consumer products. ACPs for consumer
products are provided by allowing responsible parties the option to
voluntarily enter into separate ACP agreements for the consumer
products mentioned above. In addition, the rule contains the following
administrative requirements: (1) Product dating, (2) most restrictive
limit, (3) labeling, and (4) recordkeeping and reporting, as well as
test methods for demonstrating compliance.
    7. Establishes under 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter C, the
meaning of ``VOC--volatile organic compound,'' unless the context
clearly indicates otherwise.
    Further details of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's regulation
revisions can be found in a Technical Support Document prepared for
this proposed rulemaking action.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA has determined that the revisions made to 25 Pa. Code Chapter
130, Subchapters B and C meet the SIP revision requirements of the CAA
and is proposing to approve the amendments to Pennsylvania's Consumer
Products and AIM Coatings Regulations. This revision will result in the
reduction of VOC emissions in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered before taking final action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely proposes to approve State law as
meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule, pertaining to Pennsylvania's amendment
to 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapters B and C (relating to
Pennsylvania's Consumer Products and AIM Coatings Regulations), does
not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply
in Indian country located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal
law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: June 7, 2010.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2010-14777 Filed 6-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 79 (Thursday, April 23, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22729-22730]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08629]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14797-001]

California Department of Water Resources; Notice of Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting 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: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 14797-001.
    c. Date filed: November 20, 2019.
    d. Applicant: California Department of Water Resources.
    e. Name of Project: Devil Canyon Project.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The proposed Devil Canyon Project is currently licensed as
part of the South SWP Project (P-2426). The applicant proposes to
relicense the Devil Canyon Project separately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    f. Location: Along the East Branch of the California Aqueduct, in
San Bernardino County, California. The project occupies 220.98 acres of
United States lands administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, as part of the San Bernardino National Forest.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Gwen Knittweis, Chief, Hydropower License
Planning and Compliance Office, California Department of Water
Resources, P.O. Box 924836, Sacramento, California 94236-0001; (916)
557-4554; [email protected]
    i. FERC Contact: Kyle Olcott at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests and
requests for cooperating agency status: 60 days from the issuance date
of this notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene and protests and requests for cooperating agency
status using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should
include docket number P-14797-001.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor 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.
    k. This application has been accepted, but is not ready for
environmental analysis at this time.
    l. The project consists of: (1) A 249-foot-tall, 2,230-foot-long
zoned earth and rockfill dam impounding a 995-acre reservoir; (2)
intake structures and two 1.3-mile-long steel penstocks; (3) a
powerhouse with four turbine-generating units; (4) a switchyard with
four step-up transformers; and (5) appurtenant facilities. The
project's estimated annual generation is 836 gigawatt-hours.
    m. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC Online
Support.
    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, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. Anyone may submit a protest or a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18
CFR 385.210, 385.211, and 385.214. In determining the appropriate
action to take, the Commission will consider all protests 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 protests
or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
deadline date for the particular application.
    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE;'' (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.
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.
    o. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according
to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as
appropriate.

Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments--July 2020
Request Additional Information (if necessary)--September 2020
Issue Scoping Document 2--October 2020
Issue notice of ready for environmental analysis--October 2020
Commission issues EA--April 2021
Comments on EA--May 2021
    Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

    Dated: April 16, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-08629 Filed 4-22-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 19, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 12)]
[Notices]
[Page 3141-3142]
[DOCID:fr19ja06-131]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53106; File No. SR-FICC-2005-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Revise the Fee Structures of the Government Securities Division and
the Mortgage-Backed Securities Division

January 11, 2006.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on December 22, 2005, the
Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'') filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change
described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared
primarily by FICC. FICC filed the proposed rule change pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \2\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder
\3\ whereby the proposal became effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    FICC is revising the fee structures of its Government Securities
Division (``GSD'') and Mortgage-Backed Securities Division (``MBSD'').

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, FICC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. FICC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these
statements.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by FICC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(A) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change updates certain provisions of the fee
structures of the GSD and the MBSD. The fee structures are modified as
follows:
1. GSD Fee Structure Revisions
    (a) Trade Submission. The charge for submitting trade data to the
GSD is revised from $.50 per submission to $.30 per submission.
    (b) Communication Corrections. Language pertaining to the
implementation of a new communications framework is deleted since FICC
plans to utilize the communications feature of its parent company, The
Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation.
    (c) Netting Fee. The fixed component of the netting fee is revised
from $.43 per side to $.16 per side. The fixed netting fee along with
an existing variable component of $.012 per $1 million par value will
be extended to apply to the netting of outstanding fail obligations
with current settlement activity.
2. MBSD Fee Structure Revisions
    (a) Broker Trade Processing. The charge for Broker Give-up Trade
Creates is revised from $.25 per side to $.20 per side.
    (b) Dealer Trade Processing. The monthly charge for Dealer Trade
Creates for SBO Destined Trades is revised as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Current      Revised
            Number of trade creates                charge       charge
                                                    (MM)         (MM)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-2,500.......................................        $2.00        $1.68
2,501-5,000...................................         1.85         1.56
5,001-7,500...................................         1.70         1.43
7,501-10,000..................................         1.60         1.35
10,001-12,500.................................         1.45         1.22
12,501 & over.................................         1.30         1.09
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, the charges for both Dealer Trade-for-Trade Trade Creates and
Dealer Option Trade Creates are revised from $2.50 per side to $2.25
per side.
    (c) Electronic Pool Notification (``EPN'') Message Processing Fees.
MBSD's EPN Message Processing Fees are modified as follows:
    (1) The fee for a Notification Send from the Opening of Business to
1 p.m. is revised from $.25 per million current

face value to $.15 per million current face value.
    (2) The fee for a Notification Send from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. is
revised from $1.25 per million current to $.75 per million current face
value.
    (3) The fee for a Notification Receive from Opening of Business to
1 p.m. is revised from $.50 per million current face value to $.40 per
million current face value.
    (4) The fee for a Notification Receive from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. or 2
p.m. to 3 p.m. is revised from $.25 per million current face value to
$.20 per million current face value.
    (5) The fee for (i) a Notification Send from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. or 3
p.m. to Close of Business and (ii) a Notification Receive from 3 p.m.
to Close of Business remains unchanged.
    FICC believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of section 17A of the Act \5\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to FICC because it clarifies and
updates FICC's fee schedule. As such, it provides for the equitable
allocation of fees among its participants and aligns fees for services
with the associated cost to deliver the service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    FICC does not believe that the proposed rule change will have an
impact or impose any burden on competition.

(C) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not yet
been solicited or received. FICC will notify the Commission of any
written comments received by FICC.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective upon filing
pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \6\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
\7\ thereunder because the rule establishes a due, fee, or other
charge. At any time within sixty days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
) or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-FICC-2005-21 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FICC-2005-21. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filings also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of FICC
and on FICC's Web site at http://www.ficc.com. All comments received

will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-FICC-2005-21 and should be submitted on
or before February 9, 2006.
    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant
to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-539 Filed 1-18-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P