Rules and Regulations. Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

Agency: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT)
Action: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
Citation: 71 FR (No. 85) · FR Doc. 06-4154 · RIN 2120-AA64 · Docket No. FAA-2006-24639; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-171-AD · 14 CFR 39

Summary

The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Honeywell COM units and transponders, installed on but not limited to certain transport category airplanes. This proposed AD would require a revision to the Normal Procedures section of the Airplane Flight Manual to advise the flightcrew to check the status of the transponder after changing the air traffic control (ATC) code. This proposed AD would also require replacing certain identification plate(s) with new plate(s), testing certain COM units or transponders as applicable, and corrective action if necessary. For certain airplanes, this proposed AD would require replacing the transponders of certain COM units with new or modified transponders. For certain other airplanes, this proposed AD would require installing a modification into certain transponders. This proposed AD results from the transponder erroneously going into standby mode if the flightcrew takes longer than five seconds when using the rotary knob of the radio management unit to change the ATC code. We are proposing this AD to prevent the transponder of the COM unit from going into standby mode, which could increase the workload on the flightcrew and result in improper functioning of the traffic alert and collision avoidance system.

Dates

We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 19, 2006.

Supplementary Information

Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-24639; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-171-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone (800) 647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion We have received a report indicating that the transponder erroneously goes into standby mode if the flightcrew takes longer than five seconds when using the rotary knob of the radio management unit to change the air traffic control (ATC) code. (This error will not occur if the keyboard is used to change the ATC code.) This error occurs on certain Honeywell RCZ communication (COM) units that contain elementary surveillance transponders. When the transponder goes into standby mode, the secondary surveillance radar (SSR) symbol and the airplane's position disappear from the ATC ground radar display. Also, the traffic alert and collision avoidance systems (TCAS) onboard the airplane and other nearby airplanes are compromised. Current operational procedures typically do not instruct the flightcrew to re-check the transponder status after changing the ATC code. The transponder erroneously going into standby mode, if not corrected, could increase the workload on the flightcrew and result in improper functioning of the TCAS. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0048, dated January 27, 2006; and Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A0017, dated January 23, 2006. For COM units RCZ-833J part numbers (P/Ns) 7510700-763 and -863; RCZ-833K P/Ns 7510700-765 and -875; RCZ-851J P/N 7510700-813; RCZ-851K P/N 7510700-815; and RCZ-854J P/Ns 7510700-725 and -825, Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0048 describes doing the following procedures: • Replacing the product signature plate, identification plate, and modification plate with new plates. • Marking all the modifications installed in the COM unit on the new modification plate. • Testing the COM unit. • Reporting certain information to the manufacturer. Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0048 also specifies prior or concurrent accomplishment of Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0047, Revision 001, dated July 29, 2005. Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0047 describes procedures for installing MOD AT into the COM unit and testing the COM unit. MOD AT involves replacing the XS-852E/F mode S transponder, P/N 7517400-911 or -912, of the applicable COM unit with a new or modified XS-852E/F mode S transponder that has MOD V installed. Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0047 also refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A6015, Revision 001, dated July 29, 2005, as an additional source of service information for modifying the XS-852E/F mode S transponder by installing MOD V into the transponder. For mode S transponders XS-856A P/Ns 7517400-865 and -885; XS-856B P/Ns 7517400-866 and -886; and XS-857A P/Ns 7517400-876 and -896, Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A0017 describes doing the following procedures: • Replacing the modification plate of the transponder with a new plate. • Marking all the modifications installed in the transponder on the new modification plate of the transponder. • Testing the transponder. • Reporting certain information to the manufacturer. Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A0017 also specifies prior or concurrent accomplishment of Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A6016, dated August 30, 2005. Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A6016 describes procedures for installing MOD Y into the transponder and testing the transponder. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require revising the Normal Procedures section of the applicable Airplane Flight Manual to advise the flightcrew to check the status of the transponder after changing the ATC code. This AD would also require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences Between Proposed AD and Service Bulletins.” Differences Between Proposed AD and Service Bulletins Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0048 recommends testing certain COM units; however, the service bulletin does not specify what corrective action to take if the COM unit fails the test. This proposed AD would require, before further flight after the test, reinstalling MOD V into the transponder of the COM unit, in accordance with Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A6015. Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A0017 recommends testing certain transponders; however, the service bulletin does not specify what corrective action to take if the transponder fails the test. This proposed AD would require, before further flight after the test, reinstalling MOD Y into the transponder, in accordance with Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A6016. Operators should note that, although the Accomplishment Instructions of the referenced service bulletins describe procedures for submitting a comment sheet related to service bulletin quality and a sheet recording compliance with the service bulletin, this proposed AD would not require those actions. Costs of Compliance There are about 1,365 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 1,023 airplanes of U.S. registry. Of those airplanes, about 603 airplanes are equipped with RCZ-833J/K, -851J/K, or 854J COM units and about 420 airplanes are equipped with XS-856A/B or -857A mode S transponders. The following table provides the estimated costs, at an average labor rate of $80 per hour, for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost AFM revision 1 None $80 1,023 $81,840. Part identification, testing, and replacement for RCZ-833J/K, -851J/K, and -854J COM units 3 $35 $275 603 $165,825. Part identification, testing, and installation of software for XS-856A/B and -857A mode S transponders 3 to 8 1 $175 $415 to $815 1 420 $174,300 to $342,300. 1 1 Depending on test procedure. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Honeywell International, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2006-24639; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-171-AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 19, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to the Honeywell parts identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, approved under Technical Standard Order TSO-C112, installed on but not limited to Bombardier Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes; Cessna Model 550 and 560 airplanes; Cessna Model 650 airplanes; Dassault Model Mystere-Falcon 900 and Falcon 900EX airplanes; Dassault Model Falcon 2000 and Falcon 2000EX airplanes; EMBRAER Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR airplanes; EMBRAER Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes; Learjet Model 45 airplanes; Lockheed Model 282-44A-05 (C-130B) airplanes; Lockheed Model 382G series airplanes; Raytheon Model Hawker 800 (including variant U-125A), 800XP, and 1000 airplanes; certificated in any category. (1) Communication (COM) unit RCZ-833J part numbers (P/Ns) 7510700-763 and -863; RCZ-833K P/Ns 7510700-765 and -875; RCZ-851J P/N 7510700-813; RCZ-851K P/N 7510700-815; and RCZ-854J P/Ns 7510700-725, and -825. (2) Mode S transponder XS-856A P/Ns 7517400-865 and -885; XS-856B P/Ns 7517400-866 and -886; and XS-857A P/Ns 7517400-876 and -896. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from the transponder erroneously going into standby mode if the flightcrew takes longer than five seconds when using the rotary knob of the radio management unit to change the air traffic control code. We are issuing this AD to prevent the transponder of the COM unit from going into standby mode, which could increase the workload on the flightcrew and result in improper functioning of the traffic alert and collision avoidance system. Compliance (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision (f) For all airplanes: Within 5 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the Normal Procedures section of the applicable AFM to include the following statement: “After completion of any 4096 ATC Code change (also referred to as Mode A Code), check the status of the transponder. If the transponder indicates that it is in standby mode, re-select the desired mode ( i.e. , the transponder should be in the active mode).” This may be done by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM. Accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (h) or (j), as applicable, of this AD terminates the requirement of this paragraph. Replacement of Identification Plates for Certain COM Units (g) For airplanes equipped with any COM unit identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this AD: Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, replace the product signature plate, identification plate, and MOD plate of the COM unit with new plates and test the COM unit, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0048, dated January 27, 2006. If the COM unit fails the test, before further flight, reinstall MOD V into the transponder of the COM unit in accordance with Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A6015, Revision 001, dated July 29, 2005. Replacement of Certain Transponders (h) For airplanes equipped with any COM unit identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this AD: Before or concurrently with the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, replace the XS-852E/F mode S transponder of the COM unit with a new or modified XS-852E/F mode S transponder that has MOD V installed, in accordance with Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0047, Revision 001, dated July 29, 2005. After accomplishing the replacement required by this paragraph, the AFM revision required by paragraph (f) of this AD may be removed from the AFM. Note 1: Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7510700-23-A0047, Revision 001, dated July 29, 2005, refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A6015, Revision 001, dated July 29, 2005, as an additional source of service information for installing MOD V into an XS-852E/F mode S transponder. Replacement of Identification Plate for Certain Transponders (i) For airplanes equipped with any transponder identified in paragraph (c)(2) of this AD: Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, replace the modification plate of the transponder with a new plate and test the transponder, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A0017, dated January 23, 2006. If the transponder fails the test, before further flight, reinstall MOD Y into the transponder as specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Installation of MOD Y Into Certain Transponders (j) For airplanes equipped with any transponder identified in paragraph (c)(2) of this AD: Before or concurrently with the actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD, install MOD Y into the applicable mode S transponder, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 7517400-23-A6016, dated August 30, 2005. After accomplishing the replacement required by this paragraph, the AFM revision required by paragraph (f) of this AD may be removed from the AFM. Parts Installation (k) For all airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install any part identified in paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) on any airplane, unless the applicable software modification has been installed in the transponder in accordance with paragraph (h) or (j) of this AD, as applicable. No Reporting Requirement (l) Although the service bulletins referenced in this AD specify to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (m)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 25, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-6651 Filed 5-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-24667; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-009-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Goodyear Aviation Tires, Part Number 217K22-1, Installed on Various Transport Category Airplanes, Including But Not Limited to Bombardier Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 Airplanes; and Gulfstream Model G-1159, G-1159A, G-1159B, G-IV, GIV-X, GV, and GV-SP Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain aviation tires installed on various transport category airplanes. This proposed AD would require a one-time inspection of the nosewheel tires to determine if they are within a designated serial number range, and replacement if necessary. This proposed AD results from reports of tread separations and tread-area bulges on the nosewheel tires. We are proposing this AD to prevent tread separation from a nosewheel tire during takeoff or landing, which could result in compromised nosewheel steering or ingestion of separated tread by an engine, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane on the runway or in the air. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 19, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax: (202) 493-2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional Aircraft Division, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Technical Publications Dept., P.O. Box 2206, Savannah, Georgia 31402-2206; or Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, 1144 E. Market Street, Akron, OH 44316-0001; as applicable, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick Miller, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Flight Test Branch, ACE-117C, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Room 107, Des Plaines, IL 60018; telephone (847) 294-7518; fax (847) 294-7834. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-24667; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-009-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov , or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone (800) 647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion We have received reports of tread separations and tread-area bulges on certain Goodyear Aviation nosewheel tires that are within a designated serial number range. Investigation revealed that the nosewheel tires have poor adhesion properties, which could cause tread loss during takeoff or landing. This condition, if not corrected, could result in compromised nosewheel steering or ingestion of separated tread by an engine, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane on the runway or in the air. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Goodyear Aviation Service Bulletin SB-2005-32-004, Revision 5, dated December 22, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for inspecting the nosewheel tires for the affected serial numbers, and for replacing affected tires. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. We have also reviewed the following Gulfstream Alert Customer Bulletins. These Alert Customer Bulletins, all dated October 12, 2005, are additional sources of service information for identifying the affected serial numbers and replacing the tires if necessary. Gulfstream Alert Customer Bulletins Gulfstream model Alert customer bulletin G-1159 (G-II) and G-1159B (G-IIB) series airplanes G-II and G II-B, Number 30. G-1159A (G-III) series airplanes G-III, Number 16. G-IV (G-IV, G300, G400) series airplanes G-IV, Number 34; G300, Number 34; and G400, Number 34. GIV-X (G350, G450) series airplanes G350, Number 3; and G450, Number 3. GV series airplanes GV, Number 24. GV-SP (G550, G500) series airplanes G500, Number 5; and G550, Number 5. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the Goodyear Aviation service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information.” Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information Although the Goodyear Aviation service bulletin specifies a compliance time of 14 days for replacing affected tires, this proposed AD would require a compliance time of 60 days for doing the replacement. Most have complied with the proposed requirements, and the majority of the affected tires have been removed from service. Therefore, a compliance time of 60 days would ensure that the remainder of the tires are removed from service within a time that does not compromise safety. Although the Goodyear Aviation service bulletin specifies to return tires to the manufacturer, this proposed AD would not require that action. Explanation of Service Bulletin Revisions This proposed AD would give credit to operators for previous accomplishment of the original release of Goodyear Aviation Service Bulletin SB-2005-32-004, dated October 11, 2005, but not for accomplishment of revisions 1 through 4 of the service bulletin. Revisions 1 through 4 of the service bulletin were internal to Goodyear and were not released to operators. Costs of Compliance There are about 1,282 Gulfstream airplanes and about 104 Bombardier airplanes that use the affected tires in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 1,035 Gulfstream airplanes, and about 104 Bombardier airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed inspection for the affected serial numbers would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $91,120, or $80 per airplane. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Transport Category Airplanes: Docket No. FAA-2006-24667; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-009-AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 19, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Goodyear Aviation Tires, Part Number 217K22-1, identified in Goodyear Aviation Service Bulletin SB-2005-32-004, Revision 5, dated December 22, 2005; installed on various transport category airplanes, certificated in any category, including but not limited to Bombardier Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes; and Gulfstream Model G-1159, G-1159A, G-1159B, G-IV, GIV-X, GV, and GV-SP series airplanes. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from reports of tread separations and tread-area bulges on the nosewheel tires. We are issuing this AD to prevent tread separation from nosewheel tires during takeoff or landing, which could result in compromised nosewheel steering or ingestion of separated tread by an engine, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane on the runway or in the air. Compliance (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Inspection to Determine Serial Number, and Replacement (f) Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD: Inspect the nosewheel tires to determine whether an affected serial number (S/N) is installed, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Goodyear Aviation Service Bulletin SB-2005-32-004, Revision 5, dated December 22, 2005; and, except as provided by paragraph (g) of this AD, replace any tire with an affected S/N before further flight in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. Note 1: The Gulfstream Alert Customer Bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD are additional sources of service information for identifying the affected serial numbers and replacing the tires as applicable. Table 1.—Gulfstream Alert Customer Bulletins Gulfstream model Alert customer bulletin Date G-1159 (GII) and G-1159B (GIIB)series airplanes G-II and G II-B, Number 30 October 12, 2005. G-1159A (GIII) series airplanes G-III, Number 16 October 12, 2005. G-IV (G-IV, G300, G400) series airplanes G-IV, Number 34; G300, Number 34; and G400, Number 34 October 12, 2005. GIV-X (G450, G350) series airplanes G350, Number 3; and G450, Number 3 October 12, 2005. GV series airplanes GV, Number 24 October 12, 2005. GV-SP (G550, G500) series airplanes G500, Number 5; and G550, Number 5 October 12, 2005. Special Flight Permit (g) A special flight permit may be issued in accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) for one flight to operate the airplane to a location where the requirements of this AD can be accomplished, provided no bulge is present on the tire with the affected S/N. Parts Installation (h) After the effective date of this AD, no person may install on any airplane a nosewheel tire that has an S/N in the affected range identified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Goodyear Aviation Service Bulletin SB-2005-32-004, Revision 5, dated December 22, 2005. No Parts Return (i) Although Goodyear Aviation Service Bulletin SB-2005-32-004, Revision 5, dated December 22, 2005, specifies to return tires to the manufacturer, this AD does not require that action. Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Original Issue of Service Bulletin (j) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with Goodyear Aviation Service Bulletin SB-2005-32-004, dated October 11, 2005, are acceptable for compliance with the requirements of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (k)(1) The Manager, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 26, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-6650 Filed 5-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 30 CFR Part 917 [KY-250-FOR] Kentucky Regulatory Program AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment period and opportunity for public hearing on proposed amendment. SUMMARY: We are announcing receipt of a proposed amendment to the Kentucky regulatory program (hereinafter, the “Kentucky program”) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Kentucky submitted three separate items proposing revisions pertaining to prepayment of civil penalties, easements of necessity for reclamation on bankruptcy sites, and various statutes to eliminate outdated language. Kentucky intends to revise its program to be consistent with the corresponding Federal regulations and SMCRA. This document gives the times and locations that the Kentucky program and this submittal are available for your inspection, the comment period during which you may submit written comments, and the procedures that we will follow for the public hearing, if one is requested. DATES: We will accept written comments until 4 p.m., e.s.t., June 2, 2006. If requested, we will hold a public hearing on May 30, 2006. We will accept requests to speak until 4 p.m., e.s.t., on May 18, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by “KY-250-FOR/Administrative Record No. 1642” by any of the following methods: • E-mail: bkovacic@osmre.gov. • Mail/Hand Delivery: William J. Kovacic, Lexington Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 2675 Regency Road, Lexington, Kentucky 40503. Telephone: (859) 260-8400. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency docket number “KY-250-FOR/Administrative Record No. KY-1642” for this rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Comment Procedures” section in this document. You may also request to speak at a public hearing by any of the methods listed above or by contacting the individual listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Docket: You may review copies of the Kentucky program, this submission, a listing of any scheduled public hearings, and all written comments received in response to this document at OSM's Lexington Field Office at the address listed above during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. You may receive one free copy of the submission by contacting OSM's Lexington Field Office. In addition, you may receive a copy of the submission during regular business hours at the following location: Department for Natural Resources, 2 Hudson Hollow Complex, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601. Telephone: (502) 564-6940. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William J. Kovacic, Telephone: (859) 260-8400. E-mail: bkovacic@osmre.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background on the Kentucky Program II. Description of the Submission III. Public Comment Procedures IV. Procedural Determinations I. Background on the Kentucky Program Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its program includes, among other things, “a State law which provides for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the requirements of this Act * * *; and rules and regulations consistent with regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to this Act.” See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Kentucky program on May 18, 1982. You can find background information on the Kentucky program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and conditions of approval of the Kentucky program in the May 18, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR 21434). You can also find later actions concerning Kentucky's program and program amendments at 30 CFR 917.11, 917.12, 917.13, 917.15, 917.16, and 917.17. II. Description of the Submission By letter dated March 28, 2006, Kentucky sent us a proposed amendment to its program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq. ) at its own initiative ([KY-250-FOR], administrative record No. KY-1642). The full text of the program amendment is available for you to read at the location listed above under ADDRESSES . A summary of the proposed changes follows. The first proposed change was mandated by the Supreme Court of Kentucky in the case of Commonwealth of Kentucky, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet v. Kentec Coal Co., Inc., No. 2003-SC-000622-DG. The Court issued an opinion on September 22, 2005, in which it found that the provisions of 405 KAR [Kentucky Administrative Regulations] 7:092 that required a corporate permittee to prepay an assessed civil penalty to get a due process hearing on the penalty amount was an unconstitutional violation of equal protection provisions of the State and Federal constitutions. The court also held that the assessment of the penalty against Kentec without prepayment and without consideration of the permittee's inability to pay was a violation of Section 2 of the Kentucky Constitution and an unreasonable and arbitrary exercise of the Kentucky Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet's (cabinet) authority. The Office of Legal Services filed a petition for rehearing that was denied by the court on December 22, 2005. The Department for Natural Resources' Division of Mine Reclamation and Enforcement, in response to this ruling, has altered the provisions on its notices of assessment of civil penalties to comply with the ruling. The Division uses the following statement of appeal rights on the assessment notices: “Should you decide not to negotiate, you have three (3) options remaining to resolve the proposed assessment. You may (1) choose not to contest the amount of the proposed assessment or the violation in which case a final order of the Secretary will be entered. Note: if an administrative hearing as to the fact of the violation was properly requested under 405 KAR 7:092, the final order will only determine the amount of the penalty and not the fact of the violation; (2) request an assessment conference to contest the proposed assessment; Note: The Kentucky Bar Association has determined that the appearance of an individual who is not a licensed attorney, on behalf of a third person, corporation or another entity, at a penalty assessment conference constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. Corporations or other entities must be represented by counsel at penalty assessment conferences. Individuals may represent themselves; or (3) request an administrative hearing instead of an assessment conference. See 405 KAR 7:092, Section 6. Prepayment of the proposed assessment is no longer required.” [emphasis added] The Office of Administrative Hearings has also altered language on the Penalty Assessment Conference Officer's Report that advises permittees of their rights to an administrative hearing. That language reads as follows: “Any person issued a proposed penalty assessment may request an administrative hearing to contest the Conference Officer's recommended penalty or the fact of the violation or both by filing with the Office of Administrative Hearings, 35-36 Fountain Place, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601, a petition under Section 6 of 405 KAR 7:092. The Cabinet may also request under Section 5 of 405 KAR 7:092 an administrative hearing to contest the Conference Officer's recommended penalty. [Permittee] should take notice that given the decision by the Supreme Court of Kentucky in Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet v. Kentec, 2005 WL 2316191, __ S.W.3d __, (2005), the provisions of 405 KAR 7:092, Section 6 (2)(b) requiring prepayment of the proposed penalty ARE NO LONGER IN EFFECT and [Permittee] DOES NOT need to prepay the recommended penalty amount in the event it decides to request a Formal Administrative Hearing. If a request for an administrative hearing is not filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings within thirty (30) days of mailing of this Report and Recommendation, the Secretary shall enter an order providing: (a) that [Permittee] has waived all rights to an administrative hearing on the amount of the proposed assessment; (b) that the fact of violation is deemed admitted; and (c) that the penalty assessment contained in this Report and Recommendation is deemed accepted and is due and payable to the Cabinet within thirty (30) days after the entry of the final order. If a petition requesting a hearing as to the fact of the violation has been timely filed pursuant to Section 7 of 405 KAR 7:092, the finding set forth in clause (b) of the preceding sentence shall be omitted from the Secretary's order and the penalty assessment contained in this Report and Recommendation shall be due and payable within thirty (30) days of the mailing of the final order affirming the fact of a violation.” [emphasis added] This is the second time the Supreme Court of Kentucky has ruled that prepayment requirements used by the cabinet for due process hearings regarding surface mining violations are unconstitutional under the Kentucky Constitution. The ruling in Franklin v. Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, 799 S.W.2d 1 (Ky. 1990) held that a similar prepayment requirement that applied to all persons violated the equal protection clauses of the State and Federal constitutions. Kentucky undertook a major revamp of its hearing procedures in response to that ruling and put the current hearings process in place. That process, insofar as the prepayment requirement is concerned, has now been found unconstitutional. The second proposed change is Senate Bill 219, recently passed by the General Assembly and delivered to the Governor for his signature. The bill creates an easement of necessity to conduct reclamation operations by entities who have assumed the reclamation obligations of a bankrupt permittee and where the rights of entry held by the permittee have been terminated. The terms only apply to those areas where only reclamation is being performed. It does not apply to areas where coal removal is planned by a successor to the permittee. The legislation calls for payment of a sum certain to rights holders and allows the parties to take any disputes about the sufficiency of the payment to court for an adjudication of an appropriate amount. The provisions of Senate Bill 219 will expire on July 15, 2008, and will likely be signed into law. The third proposed change is Senate Bill 136 which deletes certain language from Chapter 350 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS), the chapter containing the Kentucky surface mining laws. This bill eliminates language in: KRS 350.060 relating to the two-acre exemption and to permit renewal applications that were not timely filed; KRS 350.075 calling for submission of regulations before August 1, 1986; KRS 350.090 relating the exceptions for applications or renewals submitted in compliance with KRS 350.060(2); KRS 350.093 dealing with bond coverage exceptions for third party actions; KRS 350.445 that deals with roads above highwalls that “support coal mining activities;” and KRS 350.285 relating to removal of coal on private lands. Each of these amendments to statutes eliminates language from the chapter that is outdated or was disapproved by OSM in previous years. III. Public Comment Procedures Under the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), we are seeking your comments on whether the submission satisfies the applicable program approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If we approve the amendment, it will become part of the Kentucky program. We cannot ensure that comments received after the close of the comment period (see DATES ) or at locations other than those listed above (see ADDRESSES ) will be considered or included in the Administrative Record. Written Comments Send your written comments to OSM at the address given above. Your written comments should be specific, pertain only to the issues proposed in this rulemaking, and include explanations in support of your recommendations. Electronic Comments Please submit Internet comments as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Please also include “Attn: KY-250-FOR/Administrative Record No. KY-1642” and your name and return address in your Internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation that we have received your Internet message, contact the Lexington Field Office at (859) 260-8400. Availability of Comments We will make comments, including names and addresses of respondents, available for public review during normal business hours. We will not consider anonymous comments. If individual respondents request confidentiality, we will honor their request to the extent allowable by law. Individual respondents who wish to withhold their name or address from public review, except for the city or town, must state this prominently at the beginning of their comments. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public review in their entirety. Public Hearing If you wish to speak at the public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4 p.m., e.s.t. on May 18, 2006. If you are disabled and need special accommodations to attend a public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . We will arrange the location and time of the hearing with those persons requesting the hearing. If no one requests an opportunity to speak, we will not hold the hearing. To assist the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we request, if possible, that each person who speaks at a public hearing provide us with a written copy of his or her comments. The public hearing will continue on the specified date until everyone scheduled to speak has been given an opportunity to be heard. If you are in the audience and have not been scheduled to speak and wish to do so, you will be allowed to speak after those who have been scheduled. We will end the hearing after everyone scheduled to speak and others present in the audience who wish to speak, have been heard. Public Meeting If only one person requests an opportunity to speak, we may hold a public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with us to discuss the submission, please request a meeting by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . All such meetings are open to the public and, if possible, we will post notices of meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES . We will make a written summary of each meeting a part of the administrative record. IV. Procedural Determinations Executive Order 12630—Takings This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulations. Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Planning and Review This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866. Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice Reform The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that, to the extent allowable by law, this rule meets the applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual language of State regulatory programs and program amendments since each such program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met. Executive Order 13132—Federalism This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of the purposes of SMCRA is to “establish a nationwide program to protect society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations.” Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be “in accordance with” the requirements of SMCRA. Section 503(a)(7) requires that State programs contain rules and regulations “consistent with” regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA. Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the potential effects of this rule on Federally-recognized Indian tribes and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct effects 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. The basis for this determination is that our decision is on a State regulatory program and does not involve a Federal program involving Indian tribes. Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect the Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 which requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required. National Environmental Policy Act This rule does not require an environmental impact statement because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ). Paperwork Reduction Act This rule does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq. ). Regulatory Flexibility Act The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. ). The State submittal that is the subject of this rule is based on counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small entities. In making the determination as to whether this rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, geographic regions, or Federal, State or local governmental agencies; and (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule. Unfunded Mandates This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate. List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 917 Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining. Dated: April 4, 2006. H. Vann Weaver, Acting Regional Director. [FR Doc. E6-6654 Filed 5-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 30 CFR Part 942 RIN 1029-AC50 Tennessee Federal Program AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period and notice of hearing. SUMMARY: We are extending the public comment period on the proposed Tennessee Federal Program rule published on April 6, 2006. The comment period is being extended in order to afford the public more time to comment and to allow enough time to hold a public hearing which has been requested by several individuals. We are also notifying the public of the date, time, and location for the public hearing. DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received on or before 4 p.m., local time on June 30, 2006. The public hearing will be held on June 1, 2006, at 7 p.m. local time. ADDRESSES: Written or Electronic Comments: you may submit comments identified by RIN 1029-AC50, by any of the following methods: • E-Mail: tdieringer@osmre.gov . Include docket number 1029-AC50 in the subject line of the message. • Mail/Hand-Delivery/Courier: Knoxville Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 710 Locust Street, 2nd Floor, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see “III. Public Comment Procedures” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of the proposed rule published on April 6, 2006. Public Hearing: The public hearing will be held at Holiday Inn Select Downtown, 525 Henley Street, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902, telephone: 865-522-2800, on June 1, 2006, at 7 p.m. local time. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Dieringer, Field Office Director, Telephone: 865-545-4103; e-mail: tdieringer@osmre.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 6, 2006 (71 FR 17682), we published a proposed rule that would revise the Tennessee Federal Program. The revisions would: (1) Provide regulations establishing trust funds or annuities to fund the treatment of long-term postmining pollutional discharges; (2) delete the minimum requirements of eighty percent (80%) ground cover for certain postmining land uses and provide that herbaceous ground cover be limited to that necessary to control erosion and support the postmining land use; and (3) exempt areas developed for wildlife habitat, undeveloped land, recreation, or forestry from the requirements that bare areas shall not exceed one-sixteenth ( 1/16 ) acre in size and total not more than ten percent (10%) of the area seeded. We have received several requests for a public hearing on the proposed rule. We are extending the public comment period in order to afford the public more time to comment and to allow enough time to schedule and hold the hearing. The date, time, and location for the public hearing may be found under DATES and ADDRESSES above. The hearings will be open to anyone who would like to attend and/or testify. The primary purpose of the public hearing is to obtain your comments on the proposed rule so that we can prepare a complete and objective analysis of the proposal. The purpose of the hearing officer is to conduct the hearing and receive the comments submitted. Comments submitted during the hearing will be responded to in the preamble to the final rule, not at the hearing. We appreciate all comments but those most useful and likely to influence decisions on the final rule will be those that either involve personal experience or include citations to and analyses of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, its legislative history, its implementing regulations, case law, other State or Federal laws and regulations, data, technical literature, or relevant publications. At the hearing, a court reporter will record and make a written record of the statements presented. This written record will be made part of the administrative record for the rule. If you have a written copy of your testimony, we encourage you to give us a copy. It will assist the court reporter in preparing the written record. Any disabled individual who needs reasonable accommodation to attend the public hearing is encouraged to contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Dated: April 25, 2006. H. Vann Weaver, Acting Regional Director. [FR Doc. E6-6653 Filed 5-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0230; FRL-8060-9] Inert Ingredients; Proposed Revocation of Tolerance Exemptions with Insufficient Data for Reassessment AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This document proposes under section 408(e)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to revoke the existing exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of certain inert ingredients because there are insufficient data to make the determination of safety required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2), or because they are redundant and, therefore, are not necessary. In addition, EPA has identified substances within certain of these tolerance exemptions that meet the definition of low-risk polymers and is proposing to establish new tolerance exemptions for them. The revocation actions proposed in this document contribute towards the Agency's tolerance reassessment requirements under FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996. By law, EPA is required by August 2006 to reassess the tolerances that were in existence on August 2, 1996. The regulatory actions proposed in this document pertain to the proposed revocation of 129 tolerance exemptions which would be counted as tolerance reassessment toward the August 2006 review deadline. DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0230, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • Mail : Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502C), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. • Hand Delivery : OPP Regulatory Public Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone number is (703) 305-5805. • Important Note: OPP will be moving to a new location the first week of May 2006. As a result, from Friday, April 28 to Friday, May 5, 2006, the OPP Regulatory Public Docket will NOT be accepting any deliveries at the Crystal Mall #2 address and this facility will be closed to the public. Beginning on May 8, 2006, the OPP Regulatory Public Docket will reopen at 8:30 a.m. and deliveries will be accepted in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA 22202. The mail code for the mailing address will change to (7502P), but will otherwise remain the same. The OPP Regulatory Public Docket telephone number and hours of operation will remain the same after the move. Instructions : Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0230. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line 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 regulations.gov or e-mail. The Federal 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 regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the 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 docket are listed in the docket index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 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 in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket at the location identified under “Delivery” and “Important Note.” The hours of operation for this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is (703) 305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kerry Leifer, Registration Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8811; e-mail address: leifer.kerry@epa.gov . 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. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: • Crop production (NAICS code 111). • Animal production (NAICS code 112). • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311). • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532). This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability provisions in Unit II. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. Submitting CBI . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. Tips for preparing your comments . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number. iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. II. Background and Statutory Findings A. What Action is the Agency Taking? 1. Revocation because of insufficient data . EPA is now in the process of reassessing all inert ingredient exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance (“tolerance exemptions”) established prior to August 2, 1996, as required by FFDCA section 408(q). Under FFDCA section 408(q), tolerance reassessment may lead to regulatory action under FFDCA section 408(e)(1). When taking action under FFDCA section 408(e)(1), EPA may leave a tolerance exemption in effect only if the Agency determines that the tolerance exemption is safe. EPA is proposing to revoke 129 inert ingredient tolerance exemptions because insufficient data are available to the Agency to make the safety determination required by FFDCA section 408(c)(2). In making the FFDCA reassessment safety determination, EPA considers the validity, completeness, and reliability of the data that are available to the Agency, FFDCA section 408 (b)(2)(D), and the available information concerning the special susceptibility of infants and children (including developmental effects from in utero exposure), FFDCA section 408 (b)(2)(C). Data gaps exist for these inert ingredients in areas critical to reassessment. Without these data, the assessment of possible effects to infants and children cannot be made. Thus, EPA has insufficient data to make the safety finding of FFDCA section 408(c)(2) and is proposing to revoke the inert ingredient tolerance exemptions identified in this document. In developing risk assessment documents for inert ingredient tolerance exemptions, EPA currently reviews data submitted to the Agency as well as information from reputable, publicly available sources. For example, studies may be available in professional (peer-reviewed) journals, and chemical assessments may be available on the Internet from U.S. Government agencies (e.g., EPA, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, National Institutes of Health, Food and Drug Administration (FDA)) and international organizations (e.g., World Health Organization, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)). In some cases, representatives from chemical and pesticide manufacturing industry associations endeavored to locate data to support reassessment of surfactant chemicals. Nonetheless, sufficient valid and reliable data were not available to make the requisite FFDCA safety finding. EPA could not have made the requisite FFDCA safety finding unless, at the very least, a set of basic toxicity studies had been available to the Agency. It is possible that the tests agreed to under OECD's Screening Information Data Set (SIDS) program would have sufficed. Especially important to inert ingredient reassessment is an acceptable repeat-dose study. The preferred test for repeat-dose toxicity is the “Combined Repeated Dose Toxicity Study with the Reproduction/Developmental Toxicity Screening Test” (OECD Test Guideline 422). More information about the OECD SIDS and EPA's High Production Volume (HPV) programs is found at http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemrtk/sidsappb.htm . In some cases, the full OECD SIDS may not have been necessary because EPA has available a limited number of studies and information on some of the inert ingredients in question (e.g., acute toxicity studies). In other cases, the limited toxicity information available to the Agency may indicate a need for further testing. EPA always recommends that parties interested in supporting an inert ingredient consult with the Agency prior to embarking on a testing strategy in order to determine existing data gaps and if testing certain chemicals within a multi-chemical exemption would serve to represent the entire exemption. The Agency is proposing to revoke one other inert ingredient because it does not have sufficient data, as discussed earlier. The inert ingredient's two tolerance exemptions in 40 CFR 180.1001(c) and (e) were inadvertently removed from the CFR between the 1999 and 2003 editions. Since that time, 180.1001(c) and (e) have been renamed as 40 CFR 180.910 and 189.930, respectively. These tolerance exemptions were omitted from the CFR by mistake, therefore, they are considered to be active tolerance exemptions under 40 CFR 180.910 and 180.930 that are subject to reassessment as required by the FFDCA section 408(q). The tolerance exemption under 40 CFR 180.910 reads as follows: “α-Alkyl(C ¹² -C ¹⁵ )-ω- hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate, ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 3 moles.” The name of the tolerance exemption under 40 CFR 180.930 differs slightly but not substantively, and reads as follows: “α-Alkyl (C ¹² -C ¹⁵ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate and its ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 3 moles.” As stated in this unit, this inert ingredient does not has sufficient data and EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerance exemptions in 40 CFR 180.910 and 180.930. In summary, the safety finding required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2) cannot be made for certain inert ingredient tolerance exemptions due to insufficient data. Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke under FFDCA section 408(e)(1) the tolerance exemptions identified at the end of this document under 40 CFR 180.910, 180.920, 180.930, and 180.940, with the revocations effective 2 years after the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register . EPA is planning to hold two identical public meetings about this proposed action on inert ingredient tolerance exemptions with insufficient data for reassessment. EPA will review its reassessment progress for inert ingredients, describe the Agency's data finding efforts, discuss data needs and the screening level studies that may suffice, and other topics that may prove useful to those who are considering developing data in support of these inert ingredients. Both identical public meetings will be held on Tuesday, May 23, 2006, at the Office of Pesticide Program's new office building located at One Potomac Yard, 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA, 22202. The first meeting will be held from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. and the second meeting will be from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. In order to ensure adequate space for attendees, the Agency requests an RSVP from those who are interested in attending the public meetings. Please RSVP to Karen Angulo at either (703) 306-0404 or angulo.karen@epa.gov , and indicate whether you prefer the morning or afternoon meeting and the number of attendees in your group. The formal announcement of these public meetings appears elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register . 2. Five new tolerance exemptions for polymer chemicals —i. Exemptions . Several of the tolerance exemptions discussed in this unit include numerous chemicals. While EPA does not have sufficient data to make the safety finding for all of the chemicals within these multi-chemical exemptions, EPA has identified certain chemicals within these exemptions that meet the criteria specified in accordance with the Toxic Substances Control Act for defining a low-risk polymer under 40 CFR 723.250. Polymers that are eligible for exemption under 40 CFR 723.250 will not present an unreasonable risk of injury to human health and the environment. Therefore, EPA is proposing to establish five tolerance exemptions under 40 CFR 180.960. ii. 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.” Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to these chemicals and any other substances and these chemicals do not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that these chemicals 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 the policy statements released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs concerning common mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative . iii. Determination of safety for U.S. population, infants and children . Dietary (food and drinking water) and residential risks are not of concern for chemicals that meet the criteria specified for defining a low-risk polymer in 40 CFR 723.250. Therefore, EPA finds that exempting these polymer chemicals in 40 CFR 180.960 will be safe for the general population including infants and children. iv. Analytical enforcement methodology . An analytical method is not required for the new tolerance exemption for enforcement purposes because the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. 3. Revocations for administrative reasons . The Agency has identified seven tolerance exemptions that can be revoked for administrative reasons, as described in this unit. i. The Agency has determined that two tolerance exemptions describe chemicals and substances that do not exist, and can be revoked on the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register . a. The first exemption is “Ethyl vinyl acetate (CAS Reg. No. 24937-78-8)” under 40 CFR 180.930. This chemical name is wrong; the correct name associated with this CAS Reg. No. is “Ethylene, polymer with vinyl acetate.” This CAS Reg. No. already has a tolerance exemption under 40 CFR 180.960 (polymers), therefore, the tolerance exemption under 40 CFR 180.930 is unnecessary and can be revoked. b. The second exemption is for “α-(Methylene (4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- o -phenylene)bis-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) having 6-7.5 moles of ethylene oxide per hydroxyl group.” This name is in error because it describes a chemical that does not exist. Therefore, the tolerance exemption under 40 CFR 180.930 can be revoked. ii. The Agency has identified five tolerance exemptions that can be revoked because they are redundant. These redundant tolerance exemptions are unnecessary and can be revoked on the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register . a. The tolerance exemption “Sodium mono- and dimethyl naphthalenesulfonate; molecular weight (in amu) 245-260” under 40 CFR 180.920 is unnecessary because there is an identically named exemption in 40 CFR 180.910. b. The tolerance exemptions “Sodium butyl naphthalenesulfonate” under 40 CFR 180.920 and 180.930 can be revoked because they are included in the broader tolerance exemptions “Sodium mono-, di-, and tributyl naphthalenesulfonates” in 40 CFR 180.910 and 180.930. c. Similarly, the two tolerance exemptions called “α-[ p -(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl) phenyl]-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p -(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl) phenol with an average of 4-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide; ...” under 40 CFR 180.910 and 180.930 can be revoked because they are included in the broader tolerance exemptions that are also in 40 CFR 180.910 and 180.930 that have “α-[ p -(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p -(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a range of 1-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide;....” B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action? A “tolerance” represents the maximum level for residues of pesticide chemicals legally allowed in or on raw agricultural commodities and processed foods. Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, as amended by FQPA, Public Law 104-170, authorizes the establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerance requirements, modifications in tolerances, and revocation of tolerances for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities and processed foods. Without a tolerance or exemption, food containing pesticide residues is considered to be unsafe and therefore “adulterated” under FFDCA section 402(a), 21 U.S.C. 342(a). Such food may not be distributed in interstate commerce (21 U.S.C. 331(a)). For a food-use pesticide to be sold and distributed, the pesticide must not only have appropriate tolerances under FFDCA, but also must be registered under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq .). Food-use pesticides not registered in the United States must have tolerances in order for commodities treated with those pesticides to be imported into the United States. C. When do These Actions Become Effective? 1. EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerance exemptions identified in this document that have insufficient data effective 2 years after the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register . Any commodities listed in this proposal treated with pesticide products containing the inert ingredients and in the channels of trade following the tolerance revocations, shall be subject to FFDCA section 408(1)(5), as established by FQPA. Under this section, any residues of these pesticide chemicals in or on such food shall not render the food adulterated so long as it is shown to the satisfaction of FDA that: i. The residue is present as the result of an application or use of the pesticide at a time and in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA. ii. The residue does not exceed the level that was authorized at the time of the application or use to be present on the food under a tolerance or exemption from tolerance. Evidence to show that food was lawfully treated may include records that verify the dates when the pesticide was applied to such food. 2. EPA is proposing the establishment of new tolerance exemptions under 40 CFR 180.960 effective on the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register . 3. EPA is proposing to revoke for administrative reasons the redundant and incorrect tolerance exemptions identified in this document under 40 CFR 180.910, 180.920, and 180.930 effective on the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register . D. What is the Contribution to Tolerance Reassessment? By law, EPA is required by August 2006 to reassess the tolerances and exemptions from tolerances that were in existence on August 2, 1996. This document proposes to revoke 129 inert ingredient tolerance exemptions, which will be counted in a final rule as a tolerance reassessment toward the August 2006 review deadline under FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by FQPA in 1996. III. Are the Proposed Actions Consistent with International Obligations? The tolerance revocation in this proposal is not discriminatory and is designed to ensure that both domestically produced and imported foods meet the food safety standard established by FFDCA. The same food safety standards apply to domestically produced and imported foods. EPA is working to ensure that the U.S. tolerance reassessment program under FQPA does not disrupt international trade. EPA considers Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) in setting U.S. tolerances and in reassessing them. MRLs are established by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, a committee within the Codex Alimentarius Commission, an international organization formed to promote the coordination of international food standards. It is EPA's policy to harmonize U.S. tolerances with Codex MRLs to the extent possible, provided that the MRLs achieve the level of protection required under FFDCA. EPA's effort to harmonize with Codex MRLs is summarized in the tolerance reassessment section of individual Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) documents. EPA has developed guidance concerning submissions for import tolerance support which was published in the Federal Register of June 1, 2000 (65 FR 35069) (FRL-6559-3). This guidance will be made available to interested persons. Electronic copies are available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov . On the Home Page select “Laws, Regulations, and Dockets,” then select “Regulations and Proposed Rules” and then look up the entry for this document under “ Federal Register —Environmental Documents.” You can also go directly to the “ Federal Register ” listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr . IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews This proposed rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of FFDCA 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 proposed rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq ., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). 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); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). 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), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq .), the Agency previously assessed whether establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerances, raising of tolerance levels, expansion of exemptions, or revocations might significantly impact a substantial number of small entities and concluded that, as a general matter, these actions do not impose a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. These analyses for tolerance establishments and modifications, and for tolerance revocations were published on May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950) and on December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020) (FRL-5753-1), respectively, and were provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. Taking into account this analysis, and available information concerning the pesticides listed in this proposed rule, the Agency hereby certifies that this proposed action will not have a significant negative economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Specifically, the Agency has concluded in a memorandum dated May 25, 2001 that for import tolerance revocation there is a negligible joint probability of certain defined conditions holding simultaneously which would indicate an RFA/Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) concern and require more analysis. (This Agency document is available in the docket of this proposed rule). Furthermore, for the pesticides named in this proposed rule, the Agency knows of no extraordinary circumstances that exist as to the present proposal that would change the EPA's previous analysis. Any comments about the Agency's determination should be submitted to EPA along with comments on the proposal, and will be addressed prior to issuing a final rule. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” “Policies that have federalism implications” is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects 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.” This proposed rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States. This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this proposed rule does not have any “tribal implications” as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” “Policies that have tribal implications” is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.” This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: April 27, 2006. Lois Rossi, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as follows: PART 180—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. § 180.910 [Amended] 2. In § 180.910, the table is amended by removing the following entries: a. α-Alkyl (C ⁹ -C ¹⁸ -ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) with poly(oxyethylene) content of 2-30 moles. b. α-( p -Alkylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of alkylphenol (alkyl is a mixture of propylene tetramer and pentamer isomers and averages C ¹³ ) with 6 moles of ethylene oxide. c. α-Alkyl (C ⁶ -C ¹⁴ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxypropylene) block copolymer with polyoxyethylene; polyoxypropylene content is 1-3 moles; polyoxyethylene content is 4-12 moles; average molecular weight (in amu) is approximately 635. d. α-( p - tert -Butylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles. e. α-( o , p -Dinonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-14 moles. f. α-( o , p -Dinonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) produced by condensation of 1 mole of dinonylphenol (nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer) with an average of 4-14 or 140-160 moles of ethylene oxide. g. Dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid, amine salts. h. α-( p -Dodecylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of dodecylphenol (dodecyl group is a propylene tetramer isomer) with an average of 4-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide; if a blend of products is used, the average number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 4-14 or 30-70. i. Ethylene oxide adducts of 2,4,7,9-tetramethyl-5-decynediol, the ethylene oxide content averages 3.5, 10, or 30 moles. j. α-Lauryl-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene), average molecular weight (in amu) of 600. k. α-Lauryl-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate, sodium salt; the poly(oxyethylene) content is 3-4 moles. l. Manganous oxide. m. α-( p -Nonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly (oxyethylene) content averages 4-14 moles or 30 moles. n. α-( p -Nonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate, ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4 moles. o. Polyglyceryl phthalate ester of coconut oil fatty acids. p. Poly(methylene- p - tert -butylphenoxy)- poly(oxyethylene) ethanol; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles. q. Poly(methylene- p -nonylphenoxy)poly(oxyethylene) ethanol; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles. r. Secondary alkyl (C ¹¹ -C ¹⁵ ) poly(oxyethylene) acetate, sodium salt; the ethylene oxide content averages 5 moles. s. Sodium diisobutylnapthalenesulfonate. t. Sodium dodecylphenoxybenzenedisulfonate. u. Sodium isopropylisohexylnaphthalenesulfonate. v. Sodium lauryl glyceryl ether sulfonate. w. Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl (C ⁸ -C ¹⁶ ) phenoxybenzenedisulfonate mixtures containing not less than 70% of the monoalkylated product. x. Sodium mono- and dimethylnaphthalenesulfonates, molecular weight (in amu) 245-260. y. Sodium mono-, di-, and tributyl naphthalenesulfonates. z. Sodium mono-, di-, and triisopropyl naphthalenesulfonate. aa. Sodium N -oleoyl- N -methyltaurine. bb. Sodium sulfite. cc. α-[ p -(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p -(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a range of 1-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide: if a blend of products is used, the average range number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 1-14 or 30-70. dd. α-[ p -(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl) phenyl]-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p -(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl) phenol with an average of 4-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide; if a blend of products is used, the average number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 4-14 or 30-70. ee. Tridecylpoly(oxyethylene) acetate, sodium salt; where the ethylene oxide content averages 6-7 moles. § 180.920 [Amended] 3. In § 180.920, the table is amended by removing the following entries: a. α-Alkyl (C ¹² -C ¹⁸ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) copolymers with poly(oxypropylene); polyoxyethylene content averages 3-12 moles and polyoxypropylene content 2-9 moles. b. α-Alkyl (C ¹² -C ¹⁵ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfosuccinate, isopropylamine and N -hydroxyethyl isopropylamine salts of; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 3-12 moles. c. α-Alkyl(C ¹⁰ - ¹² )-ω-hydroxpoly(oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) copolymer; poly(oxyethylene) content is 11-15 moles; poly(oxyproplene) content is 1-3 moles. d. α-Alkyl(C ¹² -C ¹⁸ )-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene/oxypropylene) hetero polymer in which the oxyethylene content averages 13-17 moles and the oxypropylene content averages 2-6 moles. e. α-Alkyl (C ¹⁰ -C ¹⁶ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)poly(oxypropylene) mixture of di- and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the combined poly(oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) content averages 3-20 moles. f. α-Alkyl (C ¹² -C ¹⁸ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene/oxypropylene) hetero polymer in which the oxyethylene content is 8-12 moles and the oxypropylene content is 3-7 moles. g. α-Alkyl (C ¹² -C ¹⁵ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene/oxypropylene) hetero polymer in which the oxyethylene content is 8-13 moles and the oxypropylene content is 7-30 moles. h. α-Alkyl (C ²¹ -C ⁷¹ )-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) in which the poly(oxyethylene) content is 2 to 91 moles and molecular weight range from 390 to 5,000. i. n -Alkyl(C ⁸ -C ¹⁸ )amine acetate. j. Amine salts of alkyl (C ⁸ -C ²⁴ ) benzenesulfonic acid (butylamine, dimethylaminopropylamine, mono- and diisopropylamine, mono- , di-, and triethanolamine). k. N -(Aminoethyl) ethanolamine salt of dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid. l. N , N -Bisα-ethyl-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) alkylamine; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 3 moles; the alkyl groups (C ¹⁴ -C ¹⁸ ) are derived from tallow, or from soybean or cottonseed oil acids. m. N , N -Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)alkylamine, where the alkyl groups (C ⁸ -C ¹⁸ ) are derived from coconut, cottonseed, soya, or tallow acids. n. N , N -Bis 2-(ω-hydroxypolyoxyethylene) ethyl) alkylamine; the reaction product of 1 mole N , N -bis(2-hydroxyethyl)alkylamine and 3-60 moles of ethylene oxide, where the alkyl group (C ⁸ -C ¹⁸ ) is derived from coconut, cottonseed, soya, or tallow acids. o. N , N -Bis-2-(ω-hydroxypolyoxyethylene/polyoxypropylene) ethyl alkylamine; the reaction product of 1 mole of N , N -bis(2-hydroxyethyl alkylamine) and 3-60 moles of ethylene oxide and propylene oxide, where the alkyl group (C ⁸ -C ¹⁸ ) is derived from coconut, cottonseed soya, or tallow acids. p. Butoxytriethylene glycol phosphate. q. Cyclohexanol. r. α-(Di-sec-butyl)phenylpoly(oxypropylene) block polymer with poly(oxyethylene); the poly(oxypropylene) content averages 4 moles, the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 5 to 12 moles, the molecular. s. Disodium 4-isodecyl sulfosuccinate. t. Dodecylphenol. u. α-Dodecylphenol-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene/oxypropylene) hetero polymer where ethylene oxide content is 11-13 moles and oxypropylene content is 14-16 moles, molecular weight (in amu) averages 600 to 965. v. Isopropylbenzenesulfonic acid and its ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts. w. (3-Lauramidopropyl) trimethylammonium methyl sulfate. x. Linoleic diethanolamide (CAS Reg. No. 56863-02-6). y. Methyl bis(2-hydroxyethyl)alkyl ammonium chloride, where the carbon chain (C ⁸ -C ¹⁸ ) is derived from coconut, cottonseed, soya, or tallow acids. z. α,α′-[Methylenebis]-4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- o -phenylene bis[ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)] having 6-7.5 moles of ethylene oxide per hydroxyl group. aa. Methylnapthalenesulfonic acid—formaldehyde condensate, sodium salt. bb. Methyl poly(oxyethylene) alkyl ammonium chloride, where the poly(oxyethylene) content is 3-15 moles and the alkyl group (C ⁸ -C ¹⁸ ) is derived from coconut, cottonseed, soya, or tallow acids. cc. Methyl violet 2B. dd. Morpholine salt of dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid. ee. Napthalenesulfonic acid-formaldehyde condensate, ammonium and sodium salts. ff. Partial sodium salt of N -lauryl-α-iminodipropionic acid. gg. Poly(methylene- p -nonylphenoxy)poly(oxypropylene) propanol; the poly(oxy-propylene) content averages 4-12 moles. hh. Primary n -alkylamines, where the alkyl group (C ⁸ -C ¹⁸ ) is derived from coconut, cottonseed, soya, or tallow acids. ii. Sodium butyl naphthalenesulfonate. jj. Sodium 1,4-dicyclohexyl sulfosuccinate. kk. Sodium 1,4-dihexyl sulfosuccinate. ll. Sodium 1,4-diisobutyl sulfosuccinate. mm. Sodium 1,4-dipentyl sulfosuccinate. nn. Sodium 1,4-ditridecyl sulfosuccinate. oo. Sodium mono- and dimethyl naphthalenesulfonate; molecular weight (in amu) 245-260. pp. Sulfosuccinic acid ester with N -(2,-hydroxy-propyl) oleamide, ammonia and isopropylamine salts of. qq. Tall oil diesters with polypropylene glycol (CAS Reg. No. 68648-12-4). rr. N , N , N ′, N ′′-Tetrakis-(2-hydroxypropyl) ethylenediamine. ss. α-[ p -(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding sodium salts of the phosphate esters; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 6 to 10 moles. § 180.930 [Amended] 4. In § 180.930, the table is amended by removing the following entries: a. α-Alkyl (C ⁹ -C ¹⁸ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene): the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 2-20 moles. b. α-Alkyl (C ¹² -C ¹⁵ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene/oxypropylene) hetero polymer in which the oxyethylene content is 8-13 moles and the oxypropylene content is 7-30 moles. c. α-Alkyl (C ⁸ 8-C ¹⁰ ) hydroxypoly(oxypropylene) block polymer with polyoxyethylene; polyoxypropylene content averages 3 moles and polyoxyethylene content averages 5-12 moles. d. α-Alkyl (C ⁶ -C ¹⁴ )-ω-hydroxypoly(oxypropylene) block copolymer with polyoxyethylene; polyoxypropylene content is 1-3 moles; polyoxyethylene content is 7-9 moles; average molecular weight (in amu) approximately 635. e. α-( p -Alkylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of alkylphenol (alkyl is a mixture of propylene tetramer and pentamer isomers and averages C ¹³ ) with 6 moles of ethylene oxide. f. Amine salts of alkyl (C ⁸ -C ²⁴ ) benzenesulfonic acid (butylamine; dimethylamino propylamine; mono- and diisopropyl- amine; and mono- , di-, and triethanolamine). g. α-( p - tert -Butylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles. h. α-( o , p -Dinonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-14 moles. i. α-( o , p -Dinonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene), produced by the condensation of 1 mole of dinonylphenol (nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer) with an average of 4-14 moles of ethylene oxide. j. Dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid, amine salts. k. α-( p -Dodecylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of dodecylphenol (dodecyl group is a propylene tetramer isomer) with an average of 4-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide; if a blend of products is used, the average number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 4-14 or 30-70 moles. l. Ethylene oxide adducts of 2,4,7,9-tetramethyl-5-decynediol, the ethylene oxide content averages 3.5, 10, or 30 moles. m. Ethyl vinyl acetate (CAS Reg. No. 24937-78-8). n. α-Lauryl-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene), average molecular weight (in amu) of 600. o. α-Lauryl-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene), sulfate, sodium salt; the poly(oxyethylene) content is 3-4 moles. p. Manganous oxide. q. α-(Methylene (4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- o -phenylene)bis-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) having 6-7.5 moles of ethylene oxide per hydroxyl group. r. Mono-, di-, and trimethylnapthalenesulfonic acids-formaldehyde condensates, sodium salts. s. Naphthalenesulfonic acid and its sodium salt. t. α-( p -Nonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-14 moles. u. α-( p -Nonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate, and its ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4 moles. v. α-( p -Nonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate, and its ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-14 or 30-90 moles of ethyiene oxide. w. Polyglyceryl phthalate esters of coconut oil fatty acids. x. Poly(methylene- p tert -butylphenoxy)poly(oxyethylene) ethanol; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles. y. Poly(methylene- p -nonylphenoxy)poly(oxyethylene) ethanol; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles. z. Poly(methylene- p -nonylphenoxy)poly(oxypropylene) propanol; the poly(oxypropylene) content averages 4-12 moles. aa. Secondary alkyl (C ¹¹ -C ¹⁵ ) poly(oxyethylene) acetate, sodium salt; the ethylene oxide content averages 5 moles. bb. Sodium butylnaphthalenesulfonate. cc. Sodium diisobutylnaphthalenesulfonate. dd. Sodium isopropylisohexylnaphthalenesulfonate. ee. Sodium isopropylnaphthalenesulfonate. ff. Sodium monoalkyl and diakyl (C ⁸ -C ¹³ ) phenoxybenzenedisulfonate mixtures containing not less than 70% of the monoalkylated product. gg. Sodium mono- and dimethylnaphthalenesulfonate, molecular weight (in amu) 245-260. hh. Sodium mono-, di-, and tributylnaphthalenesulfonates. ii. Sodium N -oleoyl- N -methyl taurine. jj. α-[ p -(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p (1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a range of 1-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide: if a blend of products is used, the average range number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 1-14 or 30-70. kk. α-[ p -(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p -(1,1,-3,3-tetramethylbutyl) phenol with an average of 4-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide; if a blend of products is used, the average number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 4-14 or 30-70. ll. Tridecylpoly(oxyethylene) acetate sodiums salt; where the ethylene oxide content averages 6-7 moles. § 180.940 [Amended] 5. Section 180.940 is amended as follows: a. The table in paragraph (a) is amended by removing the following entries: i. α-Alkyl(C ¹⁰ -C ¹⁴ )-ω- hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) average molecular weight (in amu), 768 to 837. ii. α-Alkyl(C ¹² -C ¹⁸ )-ω hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) average molecular weight (in amu), 950 to 1120. b. The table in paragraph (b) is amended by removing the following entries: i. α-Lauroyl-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) with an average of 8-9 moles ethylene oxide, average molecular weight (in amu), 400. ii. Oxirane, methyl-, polymer with oxirane, ether with (1,2-ethanediyldinitrilo)tetrakis [propanol] (4:1). c. The table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing the following entries: i. α-Alkyl(C ¹⁰ -C ¹⁴ )-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) poly (oxypropylene) average molecular weight (in amu), 768 to 837. ii. α-Alkyl(C ¹¹ -C ¹⁵ )-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) with ethylene oxide content 9 to 13 moles. iii. α-Alkyl(C ¹² -C ¹⁵ )-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) polyoxypropylene, average molecular weight (in amu), 965. iv. α-Alkyl(C ¹² -C ¹⁸ )-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) average molecular weight (in amu), 950 to 1120. v. α-Lauroyl-ω-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) with an average of 8-9 moles ethylene oxide, average molecular weight (in amu), 400. vi. Naphthalene sulfonic acid, sodium salt. vii. Naphthalene sulfonic acid sodium salt, and its methyl, dimethyl and trimethyl derivatives. viii. Naphthalene sulfonic acid sodium salt, and its methyl, dimethyl and trimethyl derivatives alkylated at 3% by weight with C ⁶ -C ⁹ linear olefins. ix. Oxirane, methyl-, polymer with oxirane, ether with (1,2-ethanediyldinitrilo)tetrakis [propanol] (4:1). 6. In § 180.960, the table is amended by alphabetically adding the following entries: § 180.960 Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance. Polymer CAS No. * * * * * α-( o , p -Dinonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by condensation of 1 mole of dinonylphenol (nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer) with an average of 140-160 moles of ethylene oxide 9014-93-1 * * * * * α-( p -Dodecylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of dodecylphenol (dodecyl group is a propylene tetramer isomer) with an average of 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide 9014-92-0 26401-47-8 * * * * * α-( p -Nonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 30 moles None α-( p -Nonylphenyl)-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate, and its ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 30-90 moles of ethylene oxide None * * * * * α-[ p -(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p -(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a range of 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide 9036-19-5 9002-93-1 * * * * * [FR Doc. 06-4154 Filed 5-2-06; 8:45 am] [blocked]