[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 213 (Wednesday, November 4, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68261-68265]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27887]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0034; FRL-9912-40]

Nicosulfuron; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
nicosulfuron in or on sorghum, grain, forage; sorghum, grain, grain;
and sorghum, grain, stover. E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective November 4, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 4, 2016,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0034, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lewis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0034 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
January 4, 2016. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior

notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request,
identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0034, by one of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of July 19, 2013 (78 FR 43117) (FRL-9392-
9), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
2F8132) by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, 1007 Market Street,
Wilmington, DE 19898. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.454 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide
nicosulfuron, 3-pyridinecarboxamide, 2-((((4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-
yl)aminocarbonyl)aminosulfonyl))-N,N-dimethyl, in or on sorghum, forage
at 0.4 parts per million (ppm); sorghum, grain at 0.8 ppm; and sorghum,
stover at 0.05 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, the registrant, which
is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the proposed commodity definitions, revised the proposed
tolerance level for ``sorghum, grain, forage'', and corrected the
typographical error in the chemical name of nicosulfuron in the
tolerance expression. Also, EPA has removed the expired emergency
exemption tolerances for Bermuda grass, forage and Bermuda grass, hay.
The reasons for these changes are explained in Unit IV.C.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for nicosulfuron including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with nicosulfuron follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    Nicosulfuron has low acute toxicity by oral, dermal, and inhalation
routes of exposure. It is moderately irritating to the eye, non-
irritating to the skin, and is not a skin sensitizer. In repeated dose
studies by the oral route, nicosulfuron is minimally toxic, and rodents
are particularly insensitive to its effects. Chronic dietary
administrations to rats and mice did not produce any adverse effects at
the highest dose tested (HDT). Chronic dietary administration to dogs
produced mild effects (increased relative liver and kidney weights of
males) at the HDT.
    Nicosulfuron showed no developmental effects in rats, and no
adverse effects were observed in the rat reproductive study. In the
rabbit developmental study, abortions occurred at the doses that caused
other maternal toxicity effects. There are no indications of neurotoxic
or immunotoxic effects elicited by nicosulfuron in animal studies; this
includes recently submitted acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies
and an immunotoxicity study. There is no evidence of mutagenicity.
    Nicosulfuron is classified as ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to
Humans'' based on lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in rats and mice
studies and lack of mutagenic effects in the in vitro and in vivo
genotoxicity studies.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by nicosulfuron as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document ``Nicosulfuron: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Use on ALS Inhibitor Tolerant Sorghum,'' pp.
24-27 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0034.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://

www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for nicosulfuron used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

 Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Nicosulfuron for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Point of departure
        Exposure/scenario            and  uncertainty/    RfD, PAD, LOC for     Study and toxicological effects
                                      safety factors       risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations)  NOAEL= 125 mg/kg/day  Chronic RfD = 1.25   Chronic oral toxicity--Dog.
                                   UFA = 10x...........   mg/kg/day.          LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based on
                                   UFH = 10x...........  cPAD = 1.25 mg/kg/    increased relative liver and
                                   FQPA SF = 1x........   day.                 kidney weights in males.
                                                                              Supported by rabbit developmental
                                                                               toxicity study (NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/
                                                                               day, LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. mg/kg/day =
  milligram/kilogram/day. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. cPAD = chronic population adjusted dose. RfD
  = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH =
  potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to nicosulfuron, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing nicosulfuron tolerances in 40
CFR 180.454. EPA assessed dietary exposures from nicosulfuron in food
as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies for nicosulfuron; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA's 2003-2008
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed that
nicosulfuron residues were present at tolerance levels in all
commodities for which tolerances have been established or proposed, and
that 100% of those crops were treated with nicosulfuron.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that nicosulfuron does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for nicosulfuron. Tolerance level residues and/or
100 PCT were assumed for all food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for nicosulfuron in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of nicosulfuron. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM-
GW), the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
nicosulfuron for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are
estimated to be 2.8 ppb for surface water and 19.2 ppb for ground
water. Based on the Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW)
model, the EDWC of nicosulfuron for chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments are estimated to be 1.42 ppb.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 19.2 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Nicosulfuron is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found nicosulfuron to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and nicosulfuron does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
nicosulfuron does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. No evidence of increased
sensitivity or susceptibility in the developing or young animal was
observed in the current database. No treatment-related

effects were seen for maternal or developmental toxicity up to and
including the HDT in the rat prenatal developmental study, and no
adverse effects were noted in the rat reproductive study. Although
increases in abortions and post-implantation losses were observed in
the rabbit developmental study, those effects occurred at the same
doses as other maternal toxicity, indicating that they were a secondary
effect of maternal toxicity, rather than a developmental or
reproductive effect.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1x. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for nicosulfuron is complete.
    ii. There is no indication that nicosulfuron is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that nicosulfuron results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to nicosulfuron in drinking water. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by nicosulfuron.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
nicosulfuron is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
nicosulfuron from food and water will utilize <1% of the cPAD for the
general U.S. population and all population subgroups including infants
and children. There are no residential uses for nicosulfuron.
    3. Short- and intermediate-term risks. Short- and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account short- and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level). Because there are no
residential uses, no short- or intermediate-term aggregate risk
assessments were conducted.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, nicosulfuron is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to nicosulfuron residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (Method DuPont-32277, a high
performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectroscopy (HPLC/
MS/MS)) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method
may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

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

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    The Agency is revising the proposed commodity definitions of
``sorghum, forage'' to ``sorghum, grain, forage''; ``sorghum, grain''
to ``sorghum, grain, grain''; and ``sorghum, stover'' to ``sorghum,
grain, stover'' for consistency with EPA's Food and Feed Commodity
Vocabulary. The proposed tolerance level of 0.4 ppm for ``sorghum,
forage'' is revised to 0.3 ppm for ``sorghum, grain, forage'' based on
analysis of the residue field trial data using the Organization for the
Economic Cooperation and Development's tolerance calculation procedure.
The tolerance expression is revised to correct the typographical error
in the chemical name for nicosulfuron.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of nicosulfuron,
2-[[[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino] carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-N,N-
dimethyl-3-pyridinecarboxamide, including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on sorghum, grain, forage at 0.3 ppm; sorghum, grain,
grain at 0.8 ppm; and sorghum, grain, stover at 0.05 ppm.
    In addition, as a housekeeping measure, the Agency is removing the
expired emergency exemption tolerances on ``Bermuda grass, forage'' and
``Bermuda grass, hay''. The tolerances expired on December 31, 2011.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d)
in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule
does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor
does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898,
entitled ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: October 21, 2015.
G. Jeffrey Herndon,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.454, revise paragraph (a) introductory text and add
alphabetically the following commodities to the table and revise
paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.454  Nicosulfuron; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
herbicide nicosulfuron, including its metabolites and degradates, in or
on the commodities in the following table. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified in the following table is to be determined
by measuring only nicosulfuron, 2-[[[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-
pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-N,N-dimethyl-3-
pyridinecarboxamide.

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

                                * * * * *
Sorghum, grain, forage.....................................          0.3
Sorghum, grain, grain......................................          0.8
Sorghum, grain, stover.....................................         0.05
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-27887 Filed 11-3-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 204 (Monday, October 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64508-64509]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25918]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0529; FRL-9523-4]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Mercury (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before November 21,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0529, to: (1) EPA online, using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On August 9, 2012 (77 FR 47631), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to both EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0529, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The
EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov to either submit or view public comments, access
the index

listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in
the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified
above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether
submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public
viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA receives them and without
change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material,
Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI), or other information
whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further
information about the electronic docket, go to www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart E) (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 0113.11, OMB Control Number 2060-0097.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on November 30, 2012.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to either conduct or
sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending
at OMB.
    Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General
Provisions of the NESHAP at 40 CFR part 61, subpart A, and any changes,
or additions to the Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 61, subpart E.
    Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit a one-
time-only report of any physical or operational changes, initial
performance tests, and periodic reports and results. Owners or
operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and
duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of
an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system
is inoperative. Reports are also required semiannually.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 160
hours per response. ``Burden'' means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners or operators of stationary
sources which process mercury ore to recover mercury
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 107.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, semiannually and annually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 20,490.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $1,984,018, which includes $1,984,018
in labor costs, no capital/startup costs and no operating and
maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the burden hours in
this ICR compared to the previous ICR. This is due to two
considerations: (1) The regulations have not changed over the past
three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three
years; and (2) the growth rate for the industry is very low, negative
or non-existent, so there is no significant change in the overall
burden.
    There is an increase in costs for both the respondents and the
Agency from the most recently approved ICR. The increase in burden cost
is due to an increase in labor rates. This ICR uses updated labor rates
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to calculate burden costs.

John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-25918 Filed 10-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 95)]
[Notices]
[Page 28673]
[DOCID:fr17my06-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-242-000]

Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Application

May 10, 2006.
    Take notice that on May 3, 2006, Dominion Transmission, Inc. (DTI),
120 Tredegar Street, Richmond, VA 23219, filed in Docket No. CP06-242-
000, an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act
(NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's Regulations, for authorization
to drill a new storage injection/withdrawal (I/W) well within the
existing limits of the Oakford Storage Complex (Oakford Complex) in
Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania at a total estimated cost of
approximately $565,000, all as more fully set forth in the application
which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Matthew R. Bley, Manager, Gas Transmission Certificates, Dominion
Transmission, Inc. 120 Tredegar Street, Richmond, VA 23219, at (804)
819-2877 or fax<PHONE_NUMBER> and e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing''
link at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission strongly encourages

intervenors to file electronically. Persons unable to file
electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest
or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: May 31, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-7488 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 97)]
[Notices]
[Page 23851-23852]
[DOCID:fr21my09-33]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. DI09-8-000]

General Power Engineering Associates, Inc.; Notice of Declaration
of Intention and Soliciting Comments, Protests, and/or Motions To
Intervene

May 13, 2009.
    Take notice that the following application has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Declaration of Intention.
    b. Docket No: DI09-8-000.
    c. Date Filed: April 27, 2009.
    d. Applicant: General Power Engineering Associates, Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Gulf Stream Hydro Project.
    f. Location: The proposed Gulf Stream Hydro Project will be located
in the Atlantic Ocean in an area contained by

boundaries beginning southeast of Boca Raton, Florida at 26[deg]18 N by
80[deg]05 W, north to 27[deg]00 N by 80[deg]05 W, east to 27[deg]00 N
by 79[deg]35 W, south to 26[deg]18 N by 79[deg]35 W, and west to the
starting point 26[deg]18 N by 80[deg]05 W, with a transmission cable
connected to a land switchyard located in Palm Beach County, near
Lantana, Florida.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Section 23(b)(1) of the Federal Power Act, 16
U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  817(b).
    h. Applicant Contact: David J. Parker, 6681 33rd Street East, Bldg.
C1, Sarasota, FL 34243; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Any questions on this notice should be addressed
to Henry Ecton,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or E-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and/or motions: June 15,
2009.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and/or interventions may be
filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. Any questions,
please contact the Secretary's Office. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii)
and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://
www.ferc.gov under the ``e-Filing link.
    Please include the docket number (DI09-8-000) on any comments,
protests, and/or motions filed.
    k. Description of Project: The proposed Gulf Stream Hydro Project
will include: (1) Two tethered floating pairs of 1 MW turbine-
generators, submerged beyond a depth of 30 meters; (2) a submerged
cable to take power and control signals to and from a switch-yard near
Lantana, Florida; and (3) appurtenant facilities. The proposed project
will be connected to an interstate grid. It will occupy Federal lands.
    When a Declaration of Intention is filed with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, the Federal Power Act requires the Commission to
investigate and determine if the interests of interstate or foreign
commerce would be affected by the project. The Commission also
determines whether or not the project: (1) Would be located on a
navigable waterway; (2) would occupy or affect public lands or
reservations of the United States; (3) would utilize surplus water or
water power from a government dam; or (4) if applicable, has involved
or would involve any construction subsequent to 1935 that may have
increased or would increase the project's head or generating capacity,
or have otherwise significantly modified the project's pre-1935 design
or operation.
    l. Locations of the Application: Copies of this filing are on file
with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This
filing may be viewed on the Web at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link, select ``Docket'' and follow the
instructions. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTESTS'', and/
or ``MOTIONS TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Docket Number of
the particular application to which the filing refers. A copy of any
motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the
Applicant specified in the particular application.
    p. Agency Comments--Federal, State, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-11793 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 19011]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7508]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14361-000]

 Spartanburg Water System; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On February 6, 2012, Spartanburg Water System (Spartanburg) filed
an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of
the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of a
hydropower project located on the South Pacolet River, in Spartanburg
County, South Carolina. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if
issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license
application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not
authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities
or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the
owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) An existing 673-foot-
long concrete dam, owned by Spartanburg; (2) a reservoir with a surface
area of 1,534.0 acres and a storage capacity of 32,000 acre-feet; (3)
an existing 4.5-foot-diameter, 48-foot-long outlet pipe; (4) a
powerhouse containing two generating units with a total capacity of
530.0 kilowatts (kW), discharging directly into the dam's existing
tailrace; and (5) a 1,300-foot-long, 12 kilo-volt (KV) transmission
line. The project would have an estimated average annual generation of
2,420 megawatt-hours (MWh) and the project power would be sold.
    Applicant Contact: Ms. Sue Schneider, General Manager, Spartanburg
Water, 200 Commerce Street, P.O. Box 251, Spartanburg, South Carolina
29304.<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Michael Spencer<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202) 502-
6093.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14361-000) in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 22, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-7508 Filed 3-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P