[Federal Register: July 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 130)]
[Notices]
[Page 39311-39313]
[DOCID:fr08jy10-137]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62431; File No. SR-ISE-2010-70]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Amounts That Direct Edge ECN, in
Its Capacity as an Introducing Broker for Non-ISE Members, Passes
Through to Such Non-ISE Members

July 1, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 30, 2010, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the
``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-
regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons,
and is approving the proposal on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to modify the amounts that Direct Edge ECN
(``DECN''), in its capacity as an introducing broker for non-ISE
Members, passes through to such non-ISE Members.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Internet Web site at http://www.ise.com, on the Commission's Internet
Web site at http://www.sec.gov, at ISE, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    DECN, a facility of ISE, operates two trading platforms, EDGX and
EDGA.\3\ On June 30, 2010, in SR-ISE-2010-69, the ISE filed for
immediate effectiveness a proposed rule change to amend DECN's fee
schedule for ISE Members \4\ to (i) eliminate a trading volume
threshold found in footnote 4 to the fee schedule; \5\ and (ii) add
clarifying material to explain how certain volume thresholds will be
adjusted during the month of July 2010.\6\ The changes made pursuant to
SR-ISE-2010-69 became operative on July 1, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This fee filing relates to the trading facility operated by
ISE and not EDGA Exchange, Inc. and EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA and
EDGX Exchanges'') [sic] Direct Edge ECN will cease to operate in its
capacity as an electronic communications network following the
commencement of operations of EDGA and EDGX Exchanges as national
securities exchanges.
    \4\ References to ISE Members in this filing refer to DECN
Subscribers who are ISE Members.
    \5\ On June 30, 2010, in SR-ISE-2010-69, the Exchange eliminated
the trading volume threshold found in footnote 4 of the DECN fee
schedule relating to Flags E and 5. Currently, the lower rate of
$0.000025 per share is contingent upon meeting a 1,000,000 share
volume threshold on a daily basis, measured monthly. The Exchange
eliminated the 1,000,000 share threshold in footnote 4 to the fee
schedule and added ``intentionally omitted'' to the footnote in
order to keep the current footnote numbering intact. The Exchange
believes that the elimination of such threshold will enable it to
avoid having to adjust the threshold calculation for the month of
July 2010. This will result in an administratively easier process
for both the Exchange and Members during the migration of symbols
from DECN to EDGA and EDGX Exchanges.
    \6\ EDGA and EDGX Exchanges expect to begin operating as
national securities exchanges on July 2, 2010. (See SR-EDGA-2010-04
and SR-EDGX-2010-04 for EDGA and EDGX Exchange fee schedules).
Following the launch date there will be a two week, phase-in period
during which securities currently trading on DECN will be moved from
DECN to EDGA and EDGX Exchanges. Once a symbol is migrated from DECN
to EDGA and EDGX Exchanges, it will no longer be available for
trading on DECN and will only be available for trading on the EDGA
and EDGX Exchanges. Once the EDGA and EDGX Exchanges begin trading
their first security, they will thus operate in conjunction with
DECN until all symbols are fully migrated.
    As a result of the phased migration of symbols from DECN to EDGA
and EDGX Exchanges, per SR-ISE-2010-69, three volume thresholds were
adjusted for the month of July 2010 only to reflect the portion of
the volume that occurs on DECN during the month. In that filing, the
Exchange placed clarifying language about how these rebates are
calculated in footnote numbers 1 and 2 to the DECN fee schedule.
First, the removal rate on EDGA (a rebate of $0.0002 per share) is
currently contingent on the attributed MPID adding (including
hidden) and/or routing a minimum average daily share volume,
measured monthly, of 50,000 shares on EDGA. Any attributed MPID not
meeting the aforementioned minimum is charged $0.0030 per share for
removing liquidity from EDGA (0.20% of dollar value for stocks
priced less than $1.00). However, per SR-ISE-2010-69, the Exchange
amended its fee schedule to provide that for the month of July 2010
only, the 50,000 average daily volume threshold will be multiplied
by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the sum of the daily
consolidated volumes for each DECN-traded symbol for all days that
such symbol is traded on the DECN during the month of July and the
denominator of which shall be the monthly consolidated volume for
all DECN-traded symbols during the month of July.
    Secondly, Members can qualify for a rebate of $0.0032 per share
for all liquidity posted on EDGX if they add or route at least
5,000,000 shares of average daily volume prior to 9:30 a.m. or after
4 p.m. (includes all flags except 6) AND add a minimum of 50,000,000
shares of average daily volume on EDGX in total, including during
both market hours and pre and post-trading hours. In SR-ISE-2010-69,
the Exchange amended its fee schedule for the month of July 2010
only to provide that these average daily volume thresholds
(5,000,000 and 50,000,000) will be multiplied by a fraction, the
numerator of which shall be the sum of the daily consolidated
volumes for each DECN-traded symbol for all days that such symbol is
traded on the DECN during the month of July and the denominator of
which shall be the monthly consolidated volume for all DECN-traded
symbols during the month of July.
    Third, the rebate for adding hidden orders is currently
contingent upon Members adding greater than 1,000,000 shares on a
daily basis, measured monthly. Members not meeting this minimum will
be charged $0.0030 per share. In SR-ISE-2010-69, for the month of
July 2010 only, the Exchange amended its fee schedule to provide
that the 1,000,000 monthly share volume threshold will be multiplied
by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the sum of the daily
consolidated volumes for each DECN-traded symbol for all days that
such symbol is traded on the DECN during the month of July and the
denominator of which shall be the monthly consolidated volume for
all DECN-traded symbols during the month of July.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its capacity as a member of ISE, DECN currently serves as an
introducing broker for the non-ISE Member subscribers of DECN to access
EDGX and EDGA. DECN, as an ISE Member and introducing broker, receives
rebates and is assessed charges from DECN for transactions it executes
on EDGX or EDGA in its capacity as introducing broker for non-ISE
Members. Since the amounts of charges were changed pursuant to SR-ISE-
2010-69, DECN wishes to make corresponding changes to the amounts it
passes through to non-

ISE Member subscribers of DECN for which it acts as introducing broker.
As a result, the per share amounts that non-ISE Member subscribers are
charged will be the same as the amounts that ISE Members are charged.
    ISE is seeking accelerated approval of this proposed rule change,
as well an effective date of July 1, 2010. ISE represents that this
proposal will ensure that both ISE Members and non-ISE Members (by
virtue of the pass-through described above) will in effect be charged
equivalent amounts and that the imposition of such amounts will begin
on the same July 1, 2010 start date.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\7\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\8\ in particular, in that
it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees and other charges among its members and other persons using
its facilities. In particular, this proposal will ensure that dues,
fees and other charges imposed on ISE Members are equitably allocated
to both ISE Members and non-ISE Members (by virtue of the pass-through
described above).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    This proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

III. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2010-70 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2010-70. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2010-70 and should be
submitted on or before July 29, 2010.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\9\
Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) \10\ of the Act, which requires that
the rules of a national securities exchange provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among members
and issuers and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered
its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15
U.S.C 78c(f).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described more fully above, ISE recently amended DECN's fee
schedule for ISE Members pursuant to SR-ISE-2010-69 (the ``Member Fee
Filing''). The changes to the DECN fee schedule made pursuant to the
Member Fee Filing became operative on July 1, 2010. DECN receives
rebates and is charged fees for transactions it executes on EGDX or
EDGA in its capacity as an introducing broker for its non-ISE member
subscribers. The current proposal, which will apply beginning on July
1, 2010, will allow DECN to pass through the revised fees and rebates
to the non-ISE member subscribers for which it acts an introducing
broker. The Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the
Act because it will establish fees and rebates for non-ISE member
subscribers that are equivalent to those established for ISE Member
subscribers in the Member Fee Filing.
    ISE has requested that the Commission find good cause for approving
the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after publication
of notice of filing thereof in the Federal Register. As discussed
above, the proposal will allow DECN to pass through to non-ISE member
subscribers the revised fees and rebates established for ISE Member
subscribers in the Member Fee Filing, resulting in equivalent fees and
rebates for ISE Member and non-member subscribers. In addition, because
the proposal will apply the revised fees and rebates beginning on July
1, 2010, the revised fees and rebates will have the same effective
date, thereby promoting consistency in the DECN's fee schedule.
Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2) of the Act, for approving the proposed rule change prior to
the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice of filing
thereof in the Federal Register.

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\11\ that the proposed rule change (SR-ISE-2010-70) is approved on
an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-16669 Filed 7-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48226-48227]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22472]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC17-13-000]

Commission Information Collection Activity (FERC-717); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is submitting its information collection, FERC-717, (Open Access
Same-Time Information System and Standards for Business Practices and
Communication Protocol) which will be submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for a review of the information collection
requirements. Any interested person may file comments directly with OMB
and should address a copy of those comments to the Commission as
explained below. The Commission published Notice in the Federal
Register in Docket No. IC17-13-000, (82 FR 37580, 8/11/2017) requesting
public comments. FERC received no comments in response to the Notice
and is indicating that in its submittal to the OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due November 16,
2017.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by OMB Control No. 1902-
0173, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be
reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Commission, in
Docket No. IC17-13-000 by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Ellen Brown may be reached by email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at
(202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-717, Open Access Same-Time information System and
Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0173.
    Type of Request: Three-year approval of the FERC-717 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: The Commission directs all public utilities that own,
control or operate facilities for transmitting energy in interstate
commerce to provide certain types of information regarding their
transmission operations on an Open Access Same-time Information System
(OASIS). The Commission does not believe that open-access
nondiscriminatory transmission services can be completely realized
until it removes real-world obstacles that prevent transmission
customers from competing effectively with the Transmission Provider.
One of the obstacles is unequal access to transmission information. The
Commission believes that transmission customers must have simultaneous
access to the same information available to the Transmission Provider
if truly nondiscriminatory transmission services are to be a reality.
    The Commission also established Standards of Conduct requiring that
personnel engaged in transmission system operations function
independently from personnel engaged in marketing functions. The
Standards of Conduct were designed to prevent employees of a public
utility (or any of its affiliates) engaged in marketing functions from
preferential access to OASIS-related information or from engaging in
unduly discriminatory business practices. Companies were required to
separate their transmission operations/reliability functions from their
marketing/merchant functions and prevent system operators from
providing merchant employees and employees of affiliates with
transmission-related information not available to all customers at the
same time through public posting on the OASIS.
    Type of Respondents: Transmission Owners and Transmission
Operators.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \1\ The Commission estimates an
adjustment in the annual public reporting burden for the FERC-717. The
adjustment is due to Transmission Providers being allowed to file
responses jointly or individually. The Transmission Provider may
delegate this responsibility to a Responsible Party such as another
Transmission Provider, an Independent System Operator, a Regional
Transmission Group, or a Regional Reliability Council. The number
comprise two separate entities: Transmission Owners and Transmission
Operators. The responses submitted are our best estimate of the
Transmission Operators and remaining individual Transmission Owners.
The rationale is that some Transmission Owners have elected to turn
over operational control of their collective transmission systems to
Transmission Operators, including RTOs/ISOs (as authorized in 18 CFR
37.5). These Transmission Operators offer OASIS access to the
collective systems facilitating a single OASIS transmission request
serving multiple transmission systems. As a result of

these efficiency gains, the lower respondent count is appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Burden is defined as 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. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, refer to 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of the efficiency gains, and an overestimate of the
respondents in our past request, we are submitting a more accurate
number of respondents. The estimate below reflects the work associated
with the current information collection requirements:

                   FERC-717, Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Annual  number
                                        Number of     of  responses   Total  number  Average burden hours and cost per    Total annual burden hours and
Information collection requirements    respondents         per        of  responses             response \2\                    total annual cost
                                                       respondent
                                                (1)             (2)     (1) * (2) =  (4)..............................  (3) * (4) = (5)
                                                                                (3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-717...........................             170               1             170  30 hrs.; $2,295..................  5,100 hrs.; $390,150.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission staff thinks that the average respondent for
this collection is similarly situated to the Commission, in terms of
salary plus benefits. Based upon FERC's 2017 annual average of
$158,754 (for salary plus benefits), the average hourly cost is
$76.50/hour.

    Dated: October 11, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-22472 Filed 10-16-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 34 (Monday, February 22, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8658-8663]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03608]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1012; FRL-9941-38]

Pyriproxyfen; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation increases the currently established tolerance
for residues of pyriproxyfen in or on tea from 0.02 parts per million
(ppm) to 15 ppm. Sumitomo Chemical Company, Ltd., c/o Valent U.S.A.
Corporation, requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective February 22, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 22, 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-2011-1012, 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-2011-1012 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
April 22, 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-2011-1012, 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 December 2, 2015 (80 FR 75449) (FRL-
9939-55), 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
#4E8326) by Sumitomo Chemical Company, Ltd., c/o Valent U.S.A.
Corporation, 1600 Riviera Avenue, Suite 200, Walnut Creek, CA 94596.
The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.510 be amended to increase the
currently established tolerance for residues of pyriproxyfen in/on tea
from 0.02 ppm to 15.0 parts per million (ppm). That document referenced
a summary of the petition prepared by Sumitomo Chemical Company, Ltd.,
c/o Valent U.S.A. Corporation, the registrant, which is available in
the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no substantive
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, the
petitioned-for tolerance for residues of pyriproxyfen in/on tea (15.0
ppm) must be corrected to 15 ppm, consistent with current practices for
setting tolerances. The reason for this change is explained in Unit
IV.D.

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 pyriproxyfen including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with pyriproxyfen 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.
    Pyriproxyfen elicits low acute toxicity by oral, dermal,
inhalation, and ocular routes of exposure. Pyriproxyfen is not a skin
irritant and was negative in the dermal sensitization study in guinea
pigs. Based on repeated dose studies in mice, rats, and dogs the liver,
kidney, and hematopoietic system are the primary targets of
pyriproxyfen. Neurotoxicity, in the form of reduced motor activity,
occurred only at a doses well above those required to elicit toxicity
in the liver, kidney, and hematopoietic system indicating the nervous
system is not a principle target. There was no evidence of prenatal or
postnatal sensitivity or increased susceptibility in developmental
toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, and in a 2-generation
reproduction toxicity study in rats. An immunotoxicity study showed no
adverse effects on the immune system. No significant systemic toxicity
was observed in the 21-day dermal toxicity study in rats. In a 28-day
inhalation study, salivation in females and sporadic decreased body
weight gains in males was observed at 1 milligram/Liter (mg/L);
however, these effects were not considered biologically relevant. There
is no evidence for carcinogenicity to humans based on the absence of
carcinogenicity in mice and rats. Pyriproxyfen is negative for
mutagenic activity in a battery of mutagenicity studies conducted with
both the parent and/or metabolites. Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by pyriproxyfen
as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the LOAEL
from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov on
pp. 10-18 in the document titled ``Pyriproxyfen. Human Health Risk
Assessment for the Petition to Increase the Established Tolerance in/on
Tea with a U.S. Registration for Imported Pyriproxyfen-treated Tea.''
in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1012.

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 pyriproxyfen used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

 Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Pyriproxyfen for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Point of departure and
         Exposure/Scenario             uncertainty/safety    RfD, PAD, LOC for risk    Study and toxicological
                                             factors               assessment                  effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (All populations)....       An appropriate endpoint attributable to a single oral dose was not
                                        identified in the toxicology database, including the developmental and
                                                            reproduction toxicity studies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All                 NOAEL = 35.1 mg/kg/day  Chronic RfD = 0.35 mg/  Subchronic (41321716) and
 populations).\1\                    UFA = 10x.............   kg/day.                 chronic (43210503)--rat
                                     UFH = 10x.............  cPAD = 0.35 mg/kg/day.   (co-critical). LOAEL =
                                     FQPA SF = 1x..........                           141.28 mg/kg/day based on
                                                                                decreased body weight and
                                                                                body weight gain, anemia,
                                                                                and increased relative
                                                                                liver weight with elevated
                                                                                cholesterol and
                                                                                phospholipid levels.
Incidental oral short-term (1-30     NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day.  LOC for MOE = 100.....  Rat developmental toxicity
 days).                              UFA = 10x.............                           (44985002). Maternal LOAEL
                                     UFH = 10x.............                           = 300 mg/kg/day based on
                                                                                decreased body weight,
                                                                                body weight gain, and food
                                                                                consumption, and increased
                                                                                water consumption.
Incidental oral intermediate-term    NOAEL = 35.1 mg/kg/day  LOC for MOE = 100.....  Subchronic (41321716) and
 (1-6 months).\1\                    UFA = 10x.............                           chronic (43210503)--rat
                                     UFH = 10x.............                           (co-critical). LOAEL =
                                                                                141.28 mg/kg/day based on
                                                                                decreased body weight and
                                                                                body weight gain, anemia,
                                                                                and increased relative
                                                                                liver weight with elevated
                                                                                cholesterol and
                                                                                phospholipid levels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal short- and intermediate-term  Based on the systemic toxicity NOAEL of 1,000 mg/kg/day (limit dose) in the
 (1-30 days and 1-6 months).            21 day dermal toxicity study in rats, quantification of dermal risks is
                                       not required. In addition, no developmental concerns (toxicity) were seen
                                                              in either rats or rabbits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal long-term (6 months-          NOAEL = 35.1 mg/kg/day  LOC for MOE = 100.....  Subchronic (41321716) and
 lifetime).\1\                       DAF = 30% \2\.........                           chronic (43210503)--rat
                                     UFA = 10x.............                           (co-critical). LOAEL =
                                     UFH = 10x.............                           141.28 mg/kg/day based on
                                                                                decreased body weight and
                                                                                body weight gain, anemia,
                                                                                and increased relative
                                                                                liver weight with elevated
                                                                                cholesterol and
                                                                                phospholipid levels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation short- and intermediate-    Based on the absence of biologically relevant toxicity at 1.0 mg/L, the
 term (1-30 days and 1-6 months).         quantification of inhalation risks is not required. In addition, no
                                        developmental concerns (toxicity) were seen in either rats or rabbits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation long-term (6 months-      NOAEL = 35.1 mg/kg/day  LOC for MOE = 100.....  Subchronic (41321716) and
 lifetime).\1\                       UFA = 10x.............                           chronic (43210503)--rat
                                     UFH = 10x.............                           (co-critical). LOAEL =
                                                                                141.28 mg/kg/day based on
                                                                                decreased body weight and
                                                                                body weight gain, anemia,
                                                                                and increased relative
                                                                                liver weight with elevated
                                                                                cholesterol and
                                                                                phospholipid levels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)..         No evidence of carcinogenicity in mice and rats (TXR 0012966).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data
  and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally
  relevant human exposures. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect
  level. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential
  variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). DAF = dermal absorption factor.
\1\ The NOAEL and LOAEL for the co-critical studies were based on the female endpoints from the chronic and sub-
  chronic rat studies, respectively. Females demonstrated greater or equivalent sensitivity to oral pyriproxyfen
  exposure relative to males; therefore, selection of two female endpoints accounted for effects observed in the
  males and preserved consistency between the NOAEL and LOAEL.
\2\ DAF estimated by comparing the rat developmental LOAEL of 300 mg/kg/day to the 21-day rat dermal study NOAEL
  of 1,000 mg/kg/day (No NOAEL) = 300/1,000 = 30%.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pyriproxyfen, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing pyriproxyfen tolerances in 40
CFR 180.510. EPA assessed dietary exposures from pyriproxyfen 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
pyriproxyfen; 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 2003-2008
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed 100
percent crop treated (PCT) and tolerance-level residues.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that pyriproxyfen 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 pyriproxyfen. 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 pyriproxyfen in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of pyriproxyfen. 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 Tier 1 Rice Model and the Generic Estimated Exposure
Concentration (GENEEC) model the estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of pyriproxyfen for chronic exposure assessments
are estimated to be 2.98 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and
0.006 ppb for ground water.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 2.98 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 nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
    Pyriproxyfen is currently registered for flea and tick control
(home environment and pet treatments) as well as products for ant and
roach control (indoor and outdoor applications). Formulations include
carpet powders, foggers, aerosol sprays, liquids (shampoos, sprays, and
pipettes for pet treatments), granules, bait (indoor and outdoor), and
impregnated materials (pet collars). EPA assessed residential exposure
using the following assumptions: Although there is the potential for
short-term residential handler dermal and inhalation exposure as well
as short or intermediate-term post-application exposure from the
registered uses of pyriproxyfen, there are no short or intermediate-
term dermal or inhalation PODs and quantitative assessments were not
conducted.
    Based on the registered use patterns, the following post-
application scenarios were assessed: Short- and intermediate-term hand-
to-mouth exposures for 1 to <2 year olds from treated carpets and
flooring and petting treated animals (shampoos, sprays, spot-on
treatments and collars); long-term hand-to-mouth exposures for 1 to <2
year olds from treated carpets and flooring and petting treated
animals; and long-term dermal exposures from treated carpets, flooring,
and pets.
    Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found pyriproxyfen to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and pyriproxyfen does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action; therefore, EPA has assumed that
pyriproxyfen 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. Based on the available data,
there is no quantitative and qualitative evidence of increased
susceptibility observed following in utero pyriproxyfen exposure to
rats and rabbits or following prenatal/postnatal exposure in the 2-
generation reproduction study.
    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 pyriproxyfen is complete.
    ii. There is no indication that pyriproxyfen 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 pyriproxyfen 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 pyriproxyfen in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-

application exposure of children as well as incidental oral exposure of
toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by pyriproxyfen.

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,
pyriproxyfen 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
pyriproxyfen from food and water will utilize 12% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. A long-term post-application residential assessment was
performed for toddlers only since they are anticipated to have higher
exposures than adults from treated home environments and pets due to
their behavior patterns. The total chronic dietary and residential
aggregate MOE is 230 for children 1 to <2 years old. As this MOE is
greater than 100, the chronic aggregate risk does not exceed EPA's
level of concern.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Pyriproxyfen
is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to pyriproxyfen.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 2,200 for
children 1 to <2 years old, the population subgroup receiving the
greatest exposure. Because EPA's level of concern (LOC) for
pyriproxyfen is a MOE of 100 or below, this MOE is not of concern.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
    Pyriproxyfen is currently registered for uses that could result in
intermediate-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined
that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and
water with intermediate-term residential exposures to pyriproxyfen.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for
intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded that the combined
intermediate-term food, water, and residential exposures result in an
aggregate MOE of 760 for children 1 to <2 years old, the population
subgroup receiving the greatest exposure. Because EPA's LOC for
pyriproxyfen is a MOE of 100 or below, this MOE is not of concern.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, pyriproxyfen is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to pyriproxyfen residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (Gas Chromatography with Nitrogen-
Phosphorous Detection; GC/NPD) 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.
    No Codex MRL for residues of pyriproxyfen is established in/on tea
commodities.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances

    Although the petitioner requested a tolerance for 15.0 ppm, the
Agency is establishing a tolerance at 15 ppm, consistent with the
current practices regarding significant figures for tolerance setting.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, 40 CFR 180.510 is being amended to increase the
currently established tolerance for residues of pyriproxyfen in/on tea
from 0.02 ppm to 15 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action 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 action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action 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 action 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 action 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 action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(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 (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: February 4, 2016.
Susan Lewis,
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.  180.510, revise the entry for tea in the table in paragraph
(a)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.510  Pyriproxyfen; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *

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

                                * * * * *
Tea....................................................              15

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-03608 Filed 2-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P