10458 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 37 / Tuesday, February 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule to 

approve Virginia’s regional haze 

progress report SIP revision does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: February 11, 2014. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III 

[FR Doc. 2014–04087 Filed 2–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0008; FRL–9906–77] 

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions 

Filed for Residues of Pesticide 

Chemicals in or on Various 

Commodities 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: This document announces the 

Agency’s receipt of several initial filings 

of pesticide petitions requesting the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various commodities. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 27, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number and the pesticide petition 

number (PP) of interest as shown in the 

body of this document, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at 

http://www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois 

Rossi, Registration Division (RD) 

(7505P), email address: RDFRNotices@

epa.gov; main telephone number: (703) 

305–7090; Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. As part of the mailing 

address, include the contact person’s 

name, division, and mail code. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

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 email. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the document by docket ID 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 37 / Tuesday, February 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules 10459 

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. 

3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to 

achieve environmental justice, the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of any group, including minority and/or 

low-income populations, in the 

development, implementation, and 

enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies. To help 

address potential environmental justice 

issues, the Agency seeks information on 

any groups or segments of the 

population who, as a result of their 

location, cultural practices, or other 

factors, may have atypical or 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health impacts or environmental 

effects from exposure to the pesticides 

discussed in this document, compared 

to the general population. 

II. What action is the agency taking? 

EPA is announcing its receipt of 

several pesticide petitions filed under 

section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), (21 U.S.C. 

346a), requesting the establishment or 

modification of regulations in 40 CFR 

part 180 for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various food 

commodities. The Agency is taking 

public comment on the requests before 

responding to the petitioners. EPA is not 

proposing any particular action at this 

time. EPA has determined that the 

pesticide petitions described in this 

document contain the data or 

information prescribed in FFDCA 

section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not 

fully evaluated the sufficiency of the 

submitted data at this time or whether 

the data support granting of the 

pesticide petitions. After considering 

the public comments, EPA intends to 

evaluate whether and what action may 

be warranted. Additional data may be 

needed before EPA can make a final 

determination on these pesticide 

petitions. 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a 

summary of each of the petitions that 

are the subject of this document, 

prepared by the petitioner, is included 

in a docket EPA has created for each 

rulemaking. The docket for each of the 

petitions is available online at http://

www.regulations.gov. 

As specified in FFDCA section 

408(d)(3), (21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3)), EPA is 

publishing notice of the petition so that 

the public has an opportunity to 

comment on this request for the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticides in 

or on food commodities. Further 

information on the petition may be 

obtained through the petition summary 

referenced in this unit. 

New Tolerance 

1. PP 3E8211. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0255). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Road East, 

Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to establish tolerances in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

fungicide metrafenone, (3-bromo-6- 

methoxy-2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4- 

trimethoxy-6-methylphenyl)methanone, 

in or on apricot at 0.7 parts per million 

(ppm); cherry, subgroup 12–12A at 2.0 

ppm; fruit, small, vine climbing, except 

fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F at 4.5 

ppm; hop, dried cones at 70.0 ppm; 

peach, subgroup 12–12B at 0.7 ppm; 

and vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.5 

ppm. The residues of parent 

metrafenone in/on cherry, hops, peach, 

cucumber, cantaloupe, and squash raw 

agricultural commodities (RAC) samples 

were quantitated using a liquid 

chromatography/mass spectrometer/

mass spectrometer (LC/MS/MS) multiresidue QuEChERS method (BASF 

Study No. 398340). An independent 

laboratory validation demonstrated good 

performance of the QuEChERS method. 

2. PP 3E8215. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0797). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Road East, 

Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to establish tolerances in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

fungicide boscalid, 3- 

pyridinecarboxamide,2-chloro-N-(4′- 

chloro[1,1′-biphenyl]-2-yl), in or on 

herb, subgroup 19A at 190 ppm; and 

dill, seed at 300 ppm. In plants, the 

parent residue is extracted using an 

aqueous organic solvent mixture 

followed by liquid/liquid partitioning 

and a column clean up. Quantitation is 

by GC using MS (GC/MS). In livestock, 

the residues are extracted with 

methanol. The extract is treated with 

enzymes in order to release the 

conjugated glucuronic acid metabolite. 

The residues are then isolated by liquid/ 

liquid partition followed by column 

chromatography (CC). The hydroxylated 

metabolite is acetylated followed by a 

column clean-up. The parent and 

acetylated metabolite are quantitated by 

GC with electron capture detection (GC/ 

ECD). 

3. PP 3E8216. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0798). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Road East, 

Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to establish tolerances in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

fungicide pyraclostrobin, carbamic acid, 

[2-[[[1-(4-chlorophenyl)-1H-pyrazol-3- 

yl]oxy]methyl]phenyl]methoxy-, methyl 

ester and its desmethoxy metabolite 

(methyl-N-[[[1-(4-chlorophenyl)-1Hpyrazol-3-yl]oxy]methyl] 

phenylcarbamate) (BF 500–3); expressed 

as parent compound, in or on herb, 

subgroup 19A at 85 ppm; and dill, seed 

at 100 ppm. In plants, the method of 

analysis is aqueous organic solvent 

extraction, column clean up and 

quantitation by LC/MS/MS. In animals, 

the method of analysis involves base 

hydrolysis, organic extraction, column 

clean up and quantitation by LC/MS/MS 

or derivatization (methylation) followed 

by quantitation by GC/MS. 

4. PP 3E8223. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 

0110). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Road East, 

Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to establish tolerances in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

molluscicide metaldehyde, 2,4,6,8- 

tetramethyl-1,3,5,7-tetroxocane, in or on 

clover, forage at 0.5 ppm; clover, hay at 

0.5 ppm; ginseng at 0.05 ppm; vegetable 

legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A at 

0.8 ppm; pea and bean, succulent 

shelled, subgroup 6B at 0.2 ppm; 

vegetable, foliage of legume, except 

soybean, subgroup 7A at 1.5 ppm; 

tomato subgroup 8–10A at 0.24 ppm; 

and fruit, citrus, group 10–10 at 0.26 

ppm. Clover, forage and clover, hay are 

proposed as tolerances with regional 

registrations. A GC/MS analytical 

method has been developed for 

analyzing residues of metaldehyde in 

food crops including all of the crops 

identified above. The limit of 

quantitation (LOQ) for the method is 

0.05 ppm. 

5. PP 4F8229. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 

0124). BASF Corporation, 26 Davis 

Drive, P.O. Box 13528, Research 

Triangle Park, NC 27709–3528, requests 

to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 

180 for residues of the herbicide 

saflufenacil, 2-chloro-5-[3,6-dihydro-3- 

methyl-2,6-dioxo-4-(trifluoromethyl)- 

1(2H)-pyrimidinyl]-4-fluoro-N- 

[[methyl(1- 

methylethyl)amino]sulfonyl]benzamide, 

and its metabolites N-[2-chloro-5-(2,6- 

dioxo-4-(trifluoromethyl)-3,6-dihydro1(2H)-pyrimidinyl)-4-fluorobenzoyl]-N′- 

isopropylsulfamide and N-[4-chloro-2- 

fluoro-5- 

({[(isopropylamino)sulfonyl]amino} 

carbonyl)phenyl]urea, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of 

saflufenacil, in or on olive at 0.03 ppm. 

Adequate enforcement methodology, 

LC/MS/MS methods, for plant and 

livestock commodities are available to 

enforce the tolerance expression. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
10460 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 37 / Tuesday, February 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Amended Tolerance 

1. PP 2E8138. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0653). Bayer CropScience LP, P.O. Box 

12014, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 

requests to amend their previously 

requested tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 

by establishing: An increased tolerance 

for the fungicide tebuconazole, in or on 

orange, juice from 0.15 ppm to 0.7 ppm; 

a decreased tolerance in or on orange, 

oil from 400 ppm to 200 ppm; the 

proposed tolerance for orange, whole 

fruit remained the same at 1 ppm. An 

enforcement method for plant 

commodities has been validated on 

various commodities. It has undergone 

successful EPA validation and has been 

submitted for inclusion in Pesticide 

Analytical Method, Volume II (PAM II). 

The animal method has also been 

approved as an adequate enforcement 

method. 

2. PP 3E8211. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0255). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Road East, 

Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to remove the existing 

tolerance in 40 CFR 180.624 for residues 

of the fungicide metrafenone, (3-bromo6-methoxy-2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4- 

trimethoxy-6-methylphenyl) 

methanone, in or on grape at 4.5 ppm, 

upon establishment of the proposed 

tolerances listed in paragraph 1. under 

‘‘New Tolerance.’’ 

3. PP 3E8215. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0797). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Road East, 

Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to update the existing crop 

groups in 40 CFR 180.589 for residues 

of the fungicide boscalid, 3- 

pyridinecarboxamide,2-chloro-N-(4′- 

chloro[1,1′-biphenyl]-2-yl), by changing 

them from ‘‘fruit, stone, group 12 at 3.5 

ppm’’ to ‘‘fruit, stone, group 12–12 at 

3.5 ppm’’; and ‘‘nut, tree, group 14 at 

0.70 ppm’’ to ‘‘nut, tree, group 14–12 at 

0.70 ppm’’; and, in addition, remove the 

existing tolerance for ‘‘pistachio at 0.70 

ppm.’’ 

4. PP 3E8216. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0798). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Road East, 

Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to update the existing crop 

groups in 40 CFR 180.582 for residues 

of the fungicide pyraclostrobin, 

carbamic acid, [2-[[[1-(4-chlorophenyl)- 

1H-pyrazol-3-yl]oxy]methyl] 

phenyl]methoxy-, methyl ester and its 

desmethoxy metabolite (methyl-N-[[[1- 

(4-chlorophenyl)-1H-pyrazol-3- 

yl]oxy]methyl] phenylcarbamate) (BF 

500–3); expressed as parent compound, 

by changing them from ‘‘fruit, stone, 

group 12 at 2.5 ppm’’ to ‘‘fruit, stone, 

group 12–12 at 2.5 ppm’’; and ‘‘nut, tree, 

group 14 at 0.04 ppm’’ to ‘‘nut, tree, 

group 14–12, except pistachio at 0.04 

ppm. 

5. PP 3E8223. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 

0110). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Road East, 

Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to amend 40 CFR 180.523 by 

removing the established tolerances for 

residues of the molluscicide 

metaldehyde, 2,4,6,8-tetramethyl1,3,5,7-tetroxocane, in or on fruit, citrus, 

group 10 at 0.26 ppm; and tomato at 

0.24 ppm, upon establishment of the 

proposed tolerances listed in paragraph 

4. under ‘‘New Tolerance.’’ 

6. PP 4E8243. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 

0143). Taminco US, Inc., Two Windsor 

Plaza, Suite 411, Allentown, PA 18195, 

requests to amend 40 CFR 180.132 by 

amending a time-limited import 

tolerance for residues of the fungicide 

thiram, in or on banana at 0.8 ppm. The 

time-limited tolerance is proposed for 

extension to March 31, 2015. Banana 

samples were analyzed according to 

Analytical Method No. Meth-100, 

Revision #4, ‘‘Determination of Thiram 

in Raw Agricultural Commodities, 

Processed Commodities and Other Plant 

Material.’’ Detection and quantitation 

for thiram (as CS2) were conducted 

using GC employing sulfur-specific 

flame photometric detection (FPD). The 

limit of quantitation (LOQ) was 0.05 

ppm. 

7. PP 3F8200. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0264). Y–TEX Corporation, 1825 Big 

Horn Avenue, P.O. Box 1450, Cody, WY 

82414, requests to amend their 

previously requested tolerance in 40 

CFR part 180 by establishing an 

increased tolerance for the combined 

residues of the insecticide avermectin 

B1 (a mixture of avermectins containing 

greater than or equal to 80% avermectin 

B1a (5-O-demethyl avermectin A1) and 

less than or equal to 20% avermectin 

B1b (5-O-demethyl-25-de(1- 

methylpropyl)-25-(1-methylethyl) 

avermectin A1)) and its delta-8,9-isomer, 

in or on milk from 0.005 ppm to 0.01 

ppm. The analytical method is titled 

‘‘Determination of Macrocyclic Lactone 

Residues in Animal Tissues and Milk,’’ 

referenced as Method No. AATM–R–53, 

Revision 9, Agrisearch Analytical Pty 

Ltd, August 2011. The method involves 

mixing the sample with acetonitrile, 

evaporation, filtration, partition, 

extraction and cleanup with analysis by 

high performance liquid 

chromatography (HPLC)—fluorescence 

detection. The method has undergone 

independent laboratory validation as 

required by Pesticide Registration 

Notice 96–1. 

New Tolerance Exemption 

PP IN–10654. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 

0073). Ecolab, Inc., EPA Company 

Number 1677, 370 N. Wabasha Street, 

St. Paul, MN 55102, requests to 

establish an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of sulfuric acid, (CAS No. 7664–93–9), 

for use as an inert ingredient in 

antimicrobial pesticide formulations 

applied to food-contact surfaces in 

public eating places, dairy processing 

equipment and food processing 

equipment and utensils in accordance 

with 40 CFR 180.940(a). The petitioner 

believes no analytical method is needed 

because it is not required for the 

establishment of a tolerance exemption 

for inert ingredients. 

Amended Tolerance Exemption 

PP IN–10544. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0210). Spring Trading Co., 10805 W. 

Timberwagon Circle, Spring, TX 77380– 

4030, on behalf of Akzo Nobel Surface 

Chemistry, LLC, 525 West Van Buren, 

Chicago, IL 60607–3823, is requesting a 

change in the 40 CFR sections under 

which the requested tolerance 

exemptions would be established from 

180.920, 180.930, or 180.960 to 180.910, 

180.930, 180.940(a) or 180.960. Their 

initial Notice of Filing (NOF) published 

in the Federal Register of July 19, 2013 

(78 FR 43115) (FRL–9392–9), where 

EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 

408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, 

announcing the filing of a pesticide 

petition (IN–10544). The petitioner is 

now requesting, pursuant to section 

408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 21 U.S.C. 

346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part 180 to 

amend the exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for [alpha]- 

alkyl-[omega]-hydroxypoly 

(oxypropylene) and/or poly 

(oxyethylene) polymers where the alkyl 

chain contains a minimum of six 

carbons under 40 CFR 180.910, 180.930, 

180.940(a) or 180.960 in or on the raw 

agricultural commodities after harvest 

or growing crops, animals and food 

contact surface sanitizing solutions and 

[alpha]-alkyl-[omega]-hydroxypoly 

(oxypropylene) and/or poly 

(oxyethylene) polymers where the alkyl 

chain contains a minimum of six 

carbons, minimum number average 

molecular weight (in amu) 1,100 to 

include: Alcohols, cetyl oleyl, 

ethoxylated, propoxylated (CAS No. 

116810–31–2). An analytical method is 

not required for enforcement purposes 

since the Agency is establishing an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance without any numerical 

limitation. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 37 / Tuesday, February 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules 10461 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, 

Agricultural commodities, Feed 

additives, Food additives, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: February 12, 2014. 

Daniel J. Rosenblatt, 

Acting Director, Registration Division, Office 

of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2014–03861 Filed 2–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Chapter 2 

[Docket No. DARS–2014–0012] 

Review of Statutory and Regulatory 

Requirements 

AGENCY: DARS, Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Notice of extension of public 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Defense Procurement and 

Acquisition Policy (DPAP) gives notice 

that the comment period announced in 

the February 12, 2014 (79 FR 8402) 

notice of request for public comments 

on DPAP’s review of statutory and 

regulatory requirements, will be 

extended an additional 40 days until 

April 23, 2014. DPAP is currently 

conducting an assessment to identify 

impacts experienced by industry 

resulting from contracting statutes. 

DATES: Submit written comments to the 

address shown below on or before April 

23, 2014. Comments received will be 

considered by DoD in the formation of 

a recommendation to the Secretary of 

Defense if a revision to the definition is 

necessary and appropriate. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to: Mr. 

Michael Canales, Room 5E621, 3060 

Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–3060. Comments may also be 

submitted by fax at (703) 614–1254, or 

by email at michael.j.canales4.civ@

mail.mil. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Michael Canales, DPAP/CPIC, by 

telephone at (703) 695–8571, or by 

email at michael.j.canales4.civ@

mail.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

purpose of the assessment is to support 

an internal Department of Defense (DoD) 

effort to reduce compliance impacts that 

do not achieve the benefits intended by 

contracting statutes. As part of this 

assessment, DPAP would like to receive 

the views of interested parties 

identifying particular impacts 

associated with specific contracting 

statutes. There is an extensive body of 

law and regulation that govern the 

Department’s business. We are seeking 

to better understand the impact 

experienced by industry resulting from 

requirements based on statute. Our 

initial review identified approximately 

400 DFARS requirements based solely 

on statute. The Director, DPAP, is 

soliciting public input to identify 

particular impacts associated with 

specific contracting statutes, with 

reference to— 

• Particular impacts associated with 

specific contracting statutes; 

• Why the identified impact does not 

achieve the intended benefit of the 

identified legislation, or why the 

intended benefit is not helpful to the 

Department; and 

• Any recommendations for 

alternative approaches to achieve the 

intended benefit of the identified 

legislation. 

We are also interested in candidate 

DFARS and component supplements 

requirements that, although not based in 

statute, warrant similar consideration. 

Manuel Quinones, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

[FR Doc. 2014–04067 Filed 2–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

49 CFR Part 177 

[Docket Number PHMSA–2007–28119 (HM– 

247)] 

RIN 2137–AE37 

Hazardous Materials: Cargo Tank 

Motor Vehicle Loading and Unloading 

Operations 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Withdrawal of notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM). 

SUMMARY: PHMSA is closing this 

rulemaking proceeding under this 

docket having reconsidered our 

proposal for additional regulations 

associated with cargo tank motor 

vehicle (CTMV) loading or unloading 

operations. This action is based on the 

findings of the regulatory assessment, 

comments to docket of this rulemaking, 

and completion of a supplementary 

policy analysis on how best to address 

the safety risks of bulk loading and 

unloading operations. As an alternative 

to new regulatory requirements, PHMSA 

will be issuing a guidance document to 

provide best practices for CTMV loading 

and unloading operations; and will be 

conducting research to better 

understand the wide range of human 

factors that contribute to hazardous 

materials incidents including those 

associated with CTMV loading and 

unloading operations. 

DATES: Effective February 25, 2014, the 

proposed rule published in the Federal 

Register on March 11, 2011 at 76 FR 

13313 is withdrawn. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dirk 

Der Kinderen, Office of Hazardous 

Materials Safety, Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration, telephone (202–366– 

8553. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

II. Regulatory Assessment 

III. Comments on the NPRM 

A. Scope 

B. Risk Assessment 

C. Operating Procedures 

D. Training and Qualification 

E. Recordkeeping 

F. Compliance 

IV. Reconsideration of the NPRM 

A. Guidance 

B. Outreach Campaign 

C. Human Factors Study 

D. Memorandum of Understanding 

V. Conclusion 

I. Background 

On March 11, 2011, PHMSA 

published an NPRM under Docket 

PHMSA–2007–28119 (76 FR 13313) 

(HM–247) to amend the hazardous 

materials regulations (HMR; 49 CFR 

Parts 171–180) by requiring each person 

who engages in CTMV loading or 

unloading operations to perform a risk 

assessment of its loading and unloading 

operations and develop and implement 

safe operating procedures based upon 

the results of the risk assessment. 

PHMSA also proposed additional 

personnel training and qualification 

requirements for persons who perform 

these operations. 

In the NPRM, PHMSA discussed the 

safety problem associated with CTMV 

loading and unloading operations, 

including: 

• A summary of loading and 

unloading incident data; 

• National Transportation Safety 

Board (NTSB) and Chemical Safety 

Board (CSB) safety recommendations 

issued to PHMSA as a result of accident 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS