[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 116 (Monday, June 17, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27960-27962]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12769]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0463]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; City of Escanaba Fireworks, Little Bay De Noc,
Escanaba, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
all navigable waters within a 700-foot radius of 45[deg]44'15'' N
87[deg]02'54'' W on Little Bay De Noc in Escanaba, MI. The safety zone
is needed to protect personnel and vessels from potential hazards
created by the outfall of the fireworks display. Entry of vessels or
persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by
the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m. on July 6,
2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0463 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 the marine event coordinator, MSTC Kaleena Carpino,
Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI
at<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
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 because doing so would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. The final details for this event were
not known to the Coast Guard until there was insufficient time
remaining before the event to publish an NPRM. Delaying the effective
date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would be both
impracticable and contrary to the public interest because it would
inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect the public, vessels,
mariners, and property from the hazards associated with the fireworks
display on July 6, 2019.
    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 for the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraph, waiting for a 30 day notice period to run
would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

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 Lake
Michigan (COTP) will enforce a safety zone from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m.
on July 6, 2019, for a fireworks display on Little Bay De Noc in
Escanaba, MI. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan has determined that
this fireworks display will pose a significant risk to public safety
and property. Such hazards include premature and accidental
detonations, falling and burning debris, and collisions among spectator
vessels.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    With the aforementioned hazards in mind, the Captain of the Port
Lake Michigan has determined that this temporary safety zone is
necessary to protect persons and vessels during the fireworks display
in the waters of Little Bay De Noc in Escanaba, MI. This zone is
effective and will be enforced from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m. on July 6,
2019. The safety zone will be enforced for all navigable waters within
a 700-Foot radius of 45[deg]44'15.9'' N 87[deg]02'54.6'' W on Little
Bay De Noc.
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan
or his or her designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the
Port or his or her designated on-scene representative may be contacted
via VHF Channel 16.

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. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. 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), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-year of the safety zone. The safety
zone created by this rule will be relatively small and enforced for
only two hours. Under certain conditions, vessels may still transit
through the safety zone when permitted by the Captain of the Port.
Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via
VHF-FM marine channel 16 about 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
contact 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. If you believe this rule has
implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

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 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 lasting only 2 hours that
will prohibit entry within the established safety zone for the firework
display. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L[60](a) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementing Procedures 5090.1. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

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

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.T09-0463 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0463   Safety Zone; City of Escanaba Fireworks, Little
Bay De Noc, Escanaba MI.

    (a) Location all navigable waters within a 700-foot radius of
45[deg]44'15.9'' N 87[deg]02'54.6'' W on Little Bay De Noc in Escanaba,
MI.
    (b) Effective and enforcement period. The rule in this section is
effective and will be enforced from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m. on July 6,
2019.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan or a designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated
on-scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan to act on
his or her behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Lake Michigan or an on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF
Channel 16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in
the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an on-scene representative.

    Dated: June 12, 2019.
Thomas J. Stuhlreyer,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2019-12769 Filed 6-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


                             Technical Memorandum
   Health and Ecological Criteria Division/Ecological Risk Assessment Branch
                               November 3, 2020

Derivation of Acute and Chronic Nationally-Representative Criteria Values for Aluminum and Copper in Support of Multi-Sector General Permits for Industrial Stormwater Discharges

Background
The US EPA Office of Wastewater Management/Water Permit Division is generating nationally-representative aluminum and copper aquatic life values for use in Multi-Sector General Permits (MSGP) for industrial stormwater discharges. EPA is proposing in the 2020 MSGP to update the benchmarks for aluminum and copper to align with current acute and chronic aquatic life criteria for these chemicals, which vary based on specific water quality parameters (pH, hardness and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) for aluminum and temperature, pH, DOC, Ca, Mg, Na, K, SO4, Cl and alkalinity for copper).
In support of this effort, EPA Office of Water calculated water qualtiy criteria values for aluminum and copper based on water quality parameters measured in representative surface water samples collected from monitoring locations across the conterminous United States (CONUS). Acute and chronic criteria were calculated based on the input water chemistry parameters determined from these monitoring data. The 5[th], 10[th], 15[th], 20[th] and 25th percentile values of the acute and chronic water quality criteria for both metals are provided.
Data Summary and Analysis
Water quality data reported in the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) database and collected from surface waters within the conterminous US between 1984 and 2018 were evaluated for use in this analysis. The following water chemistry parameters (representing one day averages) were evaluated: calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), sodium (Na), sulfate (SO4), chloride (Cl), potassium (K), alkalinity, temperature, hardness, pH and DOC. EPA also included the following supporting information: sampling station ID number, sample date, sample season, state, EPA region, stream order, location name, latitude, longitude and ecoregion.
After initial compilation, data were evaluated for usability based of the following:
 Only data collected from locations that were sampled for a minimum of 10 days during three or more meteorological seasons, and with a minimum of two sampled days per season were included in the analysis, to ensure the adequate characterization of each location included in the analysis;
 Samples with incomplete or missing water chemistry parameters were excluded from the analysis;
 Water quality data were inspected to ensure that minimum and maximum values fell within expected ranges; datapoints falling outside these bounds were excluded; and,
 It was verified that all sample location data (within the conterminous US; state, EPA region and Ecoregion III) agreed with the latitude/longitude data at each station. ESRI ArcGIS Desktop 10.8.1 GIS software was used to QA the sample location data.
The final database included a total of 686 NWIS sample stations and 38,603 records (Attachment A). These USGS NWIS stations were mapped using Geographic Information System (ArcGIS Desktop 10.8.1) and shown in Figure 1.
For this analysis EPA employed the Aluminum Criteria Calculator R Code V2.0 and the Copper Biotic Ligand Model (BLM) V2.2.1 for criteria derivation. For information on the 2018 aluminum criteria and the 2007 copper criteria, please refer to publications "Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum  -  2018 (EPA-822-R-18-001)" and "Aquatic Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria - Copper 2007 Revision (EPA-822-R-07-001)", respectively.
The input files of water chemistry parameters were processed from the QA'd water chemistry dataset in spreadsheets. For all water quality records, the parameters serving as inputs to the Aluminum Criteria Calculator (pH, hardness and DOC) were compared to the bounded values of each parameter, and values outside of the model bounds were identified and flagged in the Aluminum Criteria Calculator output tabulations (Attachment A). In those instances where water chemistry data inputs fell outside of model bounds, caps will be placed on the inputs and reflected in the derived criteria (refer to the 2018 aluminum criteria document for details). The parameters serving as inputs to the copper BLM (temperature, pH, DOC, Ca, Mg, Na, K, SO4, Cl and alkalinity) were compared to the "Input Check Range" provided in the BLM Help section and parameter values outside of the "check range" were identified and flagged in the BLM output tabulations (Attachment A). Values outside the model bounds for copper were used to derive criteria values. The batch-processed Aluminum Criteria Calculator and the Copper Biotic Ligand Model outputs were checked on a random basis against model outputs for the water quality realizations.
The 5[th], 10[th], 15[th], 20[th] and 25th percentiles of the acute and chronic water quality criteria for both metals, based on modeled outputs for all 38,603 realizations in the QA'd water quality dataset, were calculated using the Percentiles function in Interactive Data Language (IDL, 2020). The Percentiles function calculates nonparametric (i.e., rank) percentiles, following the recommendations of Dierickx (2008) and Hyndman and Fan (1996). Percentiles calculated using the built-in MS Excel PERCENTILE function were also tabulated for comparison. For this large dataset, the results are virtually indistinguishable from the percentile values calculated using the more robust IDL function.

Results
The criteria derived for aluminum and copper are presented in Attachment A  (`National Data and Models Output'). The calculated percentiles for acute criteria (criterion maximum concentration; CMC) and chronic criteria (criterion continuous concentration; CCC) for aluminum and copper are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Calculated 5[th], 10[th], 15[th], 20[th] and 25[th] percentiles acute and chronic criteria for aluminum and copper (n=38,603).

                                  Percentile
                             Aluminum  CMC (ug/L)
                             Aluminum CCC (ug/L)
                              Copper CMC (ug/L)
                              Copper CCC (ug/L)
                                      5%
                                      680
                                      340
                                     2.87
                                     1.78
                                      10%
                                     1100
                                      460
                                     5.19
                                     3.22
                                      15%
                                     1400
                                      550
                                     7.18
                                     4.46
                                      20%
                                     1700
                                      620
                                     8.90
                                     5.53
                                      25%
                                     1900
                                      700
                                     10.66
                                     6.62

Figure 1. Map showing the locations of all NWIS stations included in this analysis (n=686).

References
Dierickx, T. 2008. Computing Percentiles  -  Are Your Values Correct? (http://www.data-for-all.com/documents/computing-percentiles.pdf)
Hyndman and Fan, 1996. Sample Quantiles in Statistical Packages. American Statistician. 50(4): 361-365.
Interactive Data Language (IDL). Harris Geospatial Solutions, Inc. 2020.
US EPA (2007). Aquatic Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria - Copper 2007 Revision. Office of Water Office of Science and Technology Washington, D.C. February 2007. EPA-822-R-07-001. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-02/documents/al-freshwater-copper-2007-revision.pdf
US EPA (2018). Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum  -  2018. Office of Water Office of Science and Technology Health and Ecological Criteria Division Washington, D.C. December 2018. EPA-822-R-18-001. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-12/documents/aluminum-final-national-recommended-awqc.pdf


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 207 (Monday, October 27, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 63916]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25543]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL14-80-000]

Calpine Construction Finance Company, L.P. v. Tampa Electric
Company; Notice of Effective Date of Withdrawal of Complaint

    1. On September 15, 2014, Calpine Construction Finance Company,
L.P. (Calpine Construction) filed a Notice of Withdrawal of Complaint
in the above-referenced docket.
    2. On September 24, 2014, Tampa Electric Company, filed comments
stating it does not oppose Calpine Construction's withdrawal of its
complaint.
    3. Pursuant to Rule 216 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure,\1\ the withdrawal of a pleading is effective at the end of
15 days from the date the withdrawal pleading was filed, if no motion
in opposition is filed and the Commission takes no action to disallow
the withdrawal within the 15-day period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.216(b) (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. No motion opposing the withdrawal was filed and the Commission
has taken no action to disallow the withdrawal. Accordingly, the
effective date of the withdrawal is September 30, 2014. This proceeding
is thereby terminated.

    Dated: October 21, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-25543 Filed 10-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


                    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                                                      OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY
                                                       AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

MEMORANDUM

Date:		24-March-2011

Subject:	Glyphosate.  Section 3 Registration for Application of the Potassium Salt of Glyphosate to Roundup Ready[(R)] Field Corn.  Human-Health Risk Assessment.

PC Codes:  103613 and 417300
DP Barcode:  D381826
Decision No.:  437140
Registration Nos.:  524-537; 524-549
Petition No.:  0F7741
Regulatory Action:  Section 3
Risk Assessment Type:  aggregate
Case No.:  178
TXR No.:  not applicable
CAS No.:  70901-20-1
MRID No.:  not applicable
40 CFR:  180.364

From:	Tom Bloem, Chemist
	Risk Assessment Branch 1; Health Effects Division (RAB1/HED; 7509P)\

Through:	Dana M. Vogel, Branch Chief
		George F. Kramer, Ph.D., Senior Chemist
		RABI/HED (7509P)

To:	James Tompkins/Hope Johnson RM 25
	Registration Division (RD; 7505P)

Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine) is a nonselective Group 9 herbicide that is currently registered for pre- and post-emergence application to a variety of fruit, vegetable, and field crops.  Tolerances are currently established for residues of glyphosate in/on various plant commodities at 0.2-400 ppm (40 CFR §180.364(a)) and for the combined residues of glyphosate and N-acetyl-glyphosate (expressed as glyphosate) in/on field corn, soybean, aspirated grain fractions, and livestock commodities at 0.1-310 ppm.  The Glyphosate Reregistration Eligibility Decision document was issued September 1993.

Monsanto indicated that they have developed a new variety of genetically-altered field corn (MON 87427 and MON87441) which enables properly timed glyphosate applications to provide tassel control.  Monsanto indicated that tassel control is desired as this will allow the generation of specific cross pollinations without the use of traditional methods to control self pollination.  This new variety of field corn is to be used only in seed corn production (Monsanto termed the process Round Hybridization System[(TM)] (RHS[(TM)])) and involves slightly later glyphosate application than that currently registered for field corn (same seasonal application rate; see Attachment 1 for proposed application scenario).

The petitioner has submitted adequate magnitude of the residue data which indicates that the currently established field corn forage and grain tolerances, as well as the currently established livestock tolerances, are adequate to cover the proposed new use.  However, the field corn forage tolerance, for the combined residues of glyphosate and N-acetyl-glyphosate (expressed as glyphosate), should be increased to 13 ppm (D383931, T. Bloem, 16-Mar-2011).

HED recently completed a human-health risk assessment associated with the application of glyphosate to glyphosate-tolerant sweet corn (D372052, T. Bloem et al., 31-Aug-2010).  This assessment yielded an aggregate exposure to glyphosate which did not exceed HED's level of concern.  HED concludes that a revised human-health risk assessment is unnecessary to support the current-proposed uses for the following reasons:

●No new toxicological data were submitted since the previous risk assessment (see D372052 (T. Bloem et al., 31-Aug-2010) for a summary of the toxicological data).
●The previous dietary exposure analysis assumed tolerance-level residues and 100% crop treated and the current action result in an increase in only the field corn forage tolerance (livestock feed item).
●Since no new toxicological data were submitted and a revised dietary exposure analysis is unnecessary, the previous conclusions concerning the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) Safety Factor remain valid.
●The proposed new field corn application scenario does not necessitate a revised occupational exposure assessment (assessment conducted as part of the currently registered field corn application scenario remains valid).

Recommendation:  Provided the petitioner submits revised Sections B and F (see below), HED concludes that the toxicological, residue chemistry, and occupational/residential exposure databases support a conditional registration for the proposed application of glyphosate to field corn.  An unconditional registration may be established upon submission of data which adequately addresses the toxicological deficiencies specified below.

Summary of Deficiencies:

Acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies.
Immunotoxicity study.
●Section B:  HED requests that the supplemental labels be altered to indicate the following:  (1) the minimum spray volume for ground and aerial application is >2 gallons per acre (GPA); (2) postemergent directions should indicate that they apply to field corn up to the V8 crop stage and that a maximum of 2.3 lb ae/acre/season may be applied; and (3) preharvest interval (PHI) of 30 days for forage and 7 days for grain and stover.
●Section F:  HED requests that a revised Section F be submitted proposing a 13-ppm field corn forage tolerance for the combined residues of glyphosate and N-acetyl-glyphosate (expressed as glyphosate).

Attachment 1:  Proposed Application Scenarios and Requested Changes to the Proposed Labels

T. Bloem:S10945:Potomac Yard 1:703-605-0217:7509P:RAB1
Attachment 1:  Proposed Application Scenarios and Requested Changes to the Proposed Labels.

The petitioner submitted proposed supplemental labels for Roundup WeatherMAX[(R)] (EPA Reg. No. 524-537) and Roundup Power MAX[(R)] (Reg. No. 524-549); both of these products are soluble-concentrate (SC) formulations consisting of glyphosate as the potassium salt at 4.51 lb ae/gallon.  The submitted supplemental labels indicate that the application scenarios are for use in research field trials and for seed production of corn hybrids using the RHS[(TM)] system.  Table 1 is a summary of the proposed application scenarios.  The proposed use directions are similar to that currently registered with the exception of the tassel control instructions (V8-V13); maximum seasonal application rate is the same.  HED requests that the supplemental labels be altered to indicate the following (a revised Section B is requested):  (1) the minimum spray volume for ground and aerial application is >2 GPA; (2) postemergent directions should indicate that they apply to field corn up to the V8 crop stage and that a maximum of 2.3 lb ae/acre/season may be applied; and (3) PHI of 30 days for forage and 7 days for grain and stover.

Table 1:  Summary of Proposed Roundup Ready[(R)] Field Corn Application Scenario.
                                  Formulation
                                (EPA Reg. No.)
                                 App. Timing
                                   App. Rate
                                 (lb ae/acre)
                          Max. App. Rate (lb ae/acre)
                        Use Directions and Limitations
Roundup WeatherMAX[(R)] (EPA Reg. No. 524-537; SC; 4.51 lb ae/gal)

Roundup Power MAX[(R)] (EPA Reg. No. 524-549; SC; 4.51 lb ae/gal)
preplant, at planting, preemergence
                                 not specified
                                     3.72
-For use in research field trails and for seed production of corn hybrids using RHS[(TM)].
-Allow a minimum of 10 days between postemergent applications.

postemergence
                                   0.56-0.78
                                 not specified

tassel control (V8-V13 or 100 growing degree units; before flowering)
                                   0.39-1.13
                                     2.26

preharvest
                                     0.78
                                 not specified

postharvest
                                 not specified
                                 not specified

maximum seasonal application rate
                                      --
                                     5.98