[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33183-33185]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11680]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2022-0002]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: New or modified Base (1-percent annual chance) Flood
Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)
boundaries or zone designations, and/or regulatory floodways
(hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on
the indicated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities
listed in the table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance
Study (FIS) reports, currently in effect for the listed communities.

DATES: Each LOMR was finalized as in the table below.

ADDRESSES: Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the
LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these
modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers
of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication.
The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has
resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to
section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.
    The currently effective community number is shown and must be used
for all new policies and renewals.
    The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the
floodplain management measures that the community is required either to
adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain
qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP).
    This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.
    This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet
the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP. The changes in
flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to
review the final flood hazard information available at the address
cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service
Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Chief executive officer of                                                         Community
        State and county          Location and case No.             community             Community map repository     Date of modification      No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona: Mohave (FEMA Docket     Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable Buster D.       Mohave County Development     Apr. 21, 2022........       480058
 No.: B-2209).                    Mohave County (21-09-    Johnson, Chairman, Mohave     Services Department, 3250
                                  1303P).                  County Board of               East Kino Avenue, Kingman,
                                                           Supervisors, P.O. Box 7000,   AZ 86402.
                                                           Kingman, AZ 86402.

Colorado:
    Arapahoe (FEMA Docket No.:   City of Aurora (21-08-   The Honorable Mike Coffman,   Public Works Department,      Apr. 29, 2022........       080002
     B-2214).                     0331P).                  Mayor, City of Aurora,        15151 East Alameda Parkway,
                                                           15151 East Alameda Parkway,   Aurora, CO 80012.
                                                           Aurora, CO 80012.
    Arapahoe (FEMA Docket No.:   Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable Nancy N.        Arapahoe County Public Works  Apr. 29, 2022........       080011
     B-2214).                     Arapahoe County (21-08-  Sharpe, Chair, Arapahoe       and Development Department,
                                  0331P).                  County Board of               6924 South Lima Street,
                                                           Commissioners, 5334 South     Centennial, CO 80112.
                                                           Prince Street, Littleton,
                                                           CO 80120.
Florida:
    Collier (FEMA Docket No.: B- City of Naples (21-04-   The Honorable Teresa          Building Department, 295      Apr. 28, 2022........       125130
     2209).                       4737P).                  Heitmann, Mayor, City of      Riverside Circle, Naples,
                                                           Naples, 735 8th Street        FL 34102.
                                                           South, Naples, FL 34102.
    Lee (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Sanibel (21-04-  The Honorable Holly D.        Community Services            Apr. 22, 2022........       120402
     2209).                       4886P).                  Smith, Mayor, City of         Department, 800 Dunlop
                                                           Sanibel, 800 Dunlop Road,     Road, Sanibel, FL 33957.
                                                           Sanibel, FL 33957.
    Leon (FEMA Docket No.:.....  City of Tallahassee      The Honorable John E.         Grow Management Department,   Apr. 22, 2022........       120144
    B-2209)....................  (20-04-5259P).            Dailey, Mayor, City of        435 North Macomb Street,
                                                           Tallahassee, 300 South        Tallahassee, FL 32301.
                                                           Adams Street, Tallahassee,
                                                           FL 32301.
    Leon (FEMA Docket No.:.....  Unincorporated areas of  Mr. Vincent S. Long, Leon     Leon County Emergency         Apr. 22, 2022........       120143
    B-2209)....................   Leon County (20-04-      County Administrator, 301     Management Department, 911
                                  5259P).                  South Monroe Street,          Easterwood Drive,
                                                           Tallahassee, FL 32301.        Tallahassee, FL 32311.
    Monroe (FEMA Docket No.:...  City of Marathon (21-04- The Honorable John Bartus,    Planning Department, 9805     Apr. 25, 2022........       120681
    B-2209)....................   5079P).                  Mayor, City of Marathon,      Overseas Highway, Marathon,
                                                           9805 Overseas Highway,        FL 33050.
                                                           Marathon, FL 33050.
    Monroe (FEMA Docket No.:...  Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable David Rice,     Monroe County Building        Apr. 21, 2022........       125129
    B-2209)....................   Monroe County (21-04-    Mayor, Monroe County Board    Department, 2798 Overseas
                                  5803P).                  of Commissioners, 1100        Highway, Suite 300,
                                                           Simonton Street, Key West,    Marathon, FL 33050.
                                                           FL 33040.
    Orange (FEMA Docket No.:...  City of Ocoee (21-04-    The Honorable Rusty Johnson,  City Hall, 150 North          Apr. 20, 2022........       120185
    B-2209)....................   4171P).                  Mayor, City of Ocoee, 150     Lakeshore Drive, Ocoee, FL
                                                           North Lakeshore Drive,        34761.
                                                           Ocoee, FL 34761.
    Polk (FEMA Docket No.:.....  Unincorporated areas of  Mr. Bill Beasley, Polk        Polk County Land Development  Apr. 21, 2022........       120261
    B-2209)....................   Polk County (21-04-      County Manager, 330 West      Division, 330 West Church
                                  1105P).                  Church Street, Bartow, FL     Street, Bartow, FL 33831.
                                                           33831.
    Sarasota (FEMA Docket No.:   City of Sarasota (21-04- The Honorable Erik Arroyo,    Development Services          Apr. 29, 2022........       125150
     B-2214).                     3619P).                  Mayor, City of Sarasota,      Department, 1565 1st
                                                           1565 1st Street, Room 101,    Street, Sarasota, FL 34236.
                                                           Sarasota, FL 34236.
    Sarasota (FEMA Docket No.:   Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable Alan Maio,      Sarasota County Planning and  Apr. 20, 2022........       125144
     B-2209).                     Sarasota County (21-04-  Chairman, Sarasota County     Development Services
                                  4033P).                  Board of Commissioners,       Department, 1001 Sarasota
                                                           1660 Ringling Boulevard,      Center Boulevard, Sarasota,
                                                           Sarasota, FL 34236.           FL 34240.
    Sarasota (FEMA Docket No.:   Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable Alan Maio,      Sarasota County Planning and  Apr. 27, 2022........       125144
     B-2209).                     Sarasota County (22-04-  Chairman, Sarasota County     Development Services
                                  1074P).                  Board of Commissioners,       Department, 1001 Sarasota
                                                           1660 Ringling Boulevard,      Center Boulevard, Sarasota,
                                                           Sarasota, FL 34236.           FL 34240.
Georgia:
    Bryan (FEMA Docket No.:....  Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable Carter          Bryan County Department of    Apr. 29, 2022........       130016
    B-2214)....................   Bryan County (21-04-     Infinger, Chairman, Bryan     Engineering and
                                  4473P).                  County Board of               Inspections, 51 North
                                                           Commissioners, 51 North       Courthouse Street,
                                                           Courthouse Street,            Pembroke, GA 31321.
                                                           Pembroke, GA 31321.
    Effingham (FEMA Docket No.:  Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable Wesley          Effingham County Development  Apr. 28, 2022........       130076
     B-2216).                     Effingham County         Corbitt, Chairman at Large,   Services Department, 804
                                 (20-04-5821P).            Effingham County Board of     South Laurel Street,
                                                           Commissioners, 804 South      Springfield, GA 31329.
                                                           Laurel Street, Springfield,
                                                           GA 31329.
Maine: York (FEMA Docket No.: B- Town of York (21-01-     The Honorable Todd A.         Building Department, 186      Apr. 28, 2022........       230159
 2216).                           1032P).                  Frederick, Chairman, Town     York Street, York, ME
                                                           of York Board of Selectmen,   03909.
                                                           186 York Street, York, ME
                                                           03909.
Maryland: Wicomico (FEMA Docket  Unincorporated areas of  Mr. John D. Psota, Acting     Wicomico County Department    Apr. 29, 2022........       240078
 No.: B-2209).                    Wicomico County (21-03-  Executive, Wicomico County,   of Planning and Zoning, 125
                                  1512P).                  P.O. Box 870, Salisbury, MD   North Division Street, Room
                                                           21803.                        201, Salisbury, MD 21801.
Montana:
    Missoula (FEMA Docket No.:   City of Missoula (21-08- The Honorable John Engen,     City Hall, 435 Ryman Street,  Apr. 27, 2022........       300049
     B-2214).                     0878P).                  Mayor, City of Missoula,      Missoula, MT 59802.
                                                           435 Ryman Street, Missoula,
                                                           MT 59802.
    Missoula (FEMA Docket No.:   Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable David           Missoula County Community     Apr. 27, 2022........       300048
     B-2214).                     Missoula County (21-08-  Strohmaier, Chairman,         and Planning Services
                                  0878P).                  Missoula County Board of      Department, 127 East Main
                                                           Commissioners, 199 West       Street, Missoula, MT 59802.
                                                           Pine Street, Missoula, MT
                                                           59802.
North Carolina:

    Mecklenburg (FEMA Docket     Town of Davidson (21-04- The Honorable Rusty Knox,     Planning Department, 216      Apr. 27, 2022........       370503
     No.: B-2216).                5219P).                  Mayor, Town of Davidson,      South Main Street,
                                                           P.O. Box 579, Davidson, NC    Davidson, NC 20836.
                                                           20836.
    Mecklenburg (FEMA Docket     Unincorporated areas of  Ms. Dena R Diorio,            Mecklenburg County Storm      Apr. 27, 2022........       370158
     No.: B-2216).                Mecklenburg County (21-  Mecklenburg County Manager,   Water Services Division,
                                  04-5219P).               600 East 4th Street,          2145 Suttle Avenue,
                                                           Charlotte, NC 28202.          Charlotte, NC 28202.
North Dakota: Morton (FEMA       City of Mandan (21-08-   The Honorable Tim Helbling,   Building Inspections          Apr. 25, 2022........       380072
 Docket No.: B-2209).             1142P).                  Mayor, City of Mandan, 205    Department, 205 2nd Avenue
                                                           2nd Avenue Northwest,         Northwest, Mandan, ND
                                                           Mandan, ND 58554.             58554.
Tennessee:
    Sumner (FEMA Docket No.: B-  City of Gallatin (21-04- The Honorable Paige Brown,    City Hall, 132 West Main      Apr. 22, 2022........       470185
     2214).                       1323P).                  Mayor, City of Gallatin,      Street, Gallatin, TN 37066.
                                                           132 West Main Street,
                                                           Gallatin, TN 37066.
    Sumner (FEMA Docket No.: B-  Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable Anthony Holt,   Sumner County Building        Apr. 22, 2022........       470349
     2214).                       Sumner County (21-04-    Mayor, Sumner County, 355     Department, 355 North
                                  1323P).                  North Belvedere Drive,        Belvedere Drive, Gallatin,
                                                           Gallatin, TN 37066.           TN 37066.
Texas:
    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.:..  City of Fort Worth (21-  The Honorable Mattie Parker,  Transportation and Public     Apr. 22, 2022........       480596
    B-2209)....................   06-1704P).               Mayor, City of Fort Worth,    Works Department,
                                                           200 Texas Street, Fort        Engineering Vault, 200
                                                           Worth, TX 76102.              Texas Street, Fort Worth,
                                                                                TX 76102.
    Williamson (FEMA Docket      City of Round Rock       The Honorable Craig Morgan,   Department of Utilities and   Apr. 25, 2022........       481048
     No.: B-2209).               (21-06-1842P).            Mayor, City of Round Rock,    Environmental Services,
                                                           221 East Main Street, Round   3400 Sunrise Road, Round
                                                           Rock, TX 78664.               Rock, TX 78665.
    Williamson (FEMA Docket      Unincorporated areas of  The Honorable Bill Gravell,   Williamson County             Apr. 25, 2022........       481079
     No.: B-2209).                Williamson County        Jr., Williamson County        Engineering Department,
                                 (21-06-1842P).            Judge, 710 South Main         3151 Southeast Inner Loop,
                                                           Street, Suite 101,            Georgetown, TX 78626.
                                                           Georgetown, TX 78626.
Virginia: Mathews (FEMA Docket   Unincorporated areas of  Mr. Sanford B. Wanner,        Mathews County Building       Apr. 29, 2022........       510096
 No.: B-2209).                    Mathews County (22-03-   Interim Administrator,        Department, 50 Brickbat
                                  0021P).                  Mathews County, P.O. Box      Road, Mathews, VA 23109.
                                                           839, Mathews, VA 23109.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-11680 Filed 5-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Please extend the ruling for the E-cigarette regulations. They have helped me a great deal. I used to have a hacking cough now I do not. I love my vaporisor and batteries. I have a Innokin MVP and 3 refillable tanks. The MVP lasts a long time. I really hope you do not impede the technology to be more effective at harm reduction. These regulations could possibly hurt small business owners. I also love flavors Such as Strawberry, Rainbow sherbert, Vanilla Cake, mango. and many more Flavors are an Important thing. because Cigarettes have such a strong flavor to them, finding a replacement for that is hard. The tobacco flavors do not work for me in this instance. I am 23 and smoked for 6 years. I beleive this has improved my health substantially. Thank.Thank you. please be lenient as possible.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 50 (Monday, March 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13528-13530]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05879]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RD15-2-000]

Proposed Agency Information Collection

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Energy.

ACTION: Notice and Request for Comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) invites
public comment in Docket No. RD15-2-000 on a proposed change to a
collection of information that the Commission is developing for
submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information,

including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

DATES: Comments regarding this proposed information collection must be
received on or before May 15, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
     Electronic Filing through http://www.ferc.gov. Documents
created electronically using word processing software should be filed
in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned
format.
     Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically
may mail or hand-deliver an original of their comments to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

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: The Commission will submit Reliability
Standard PRC-006-2 to OMB for review under FERC-725G (Mandatory
Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System: PRC Standards, OMB
Control No. 1902-0252).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In 2012, the Commission initially approved Reliability
Standard PRC-006-1. Automatic Underfrequency Load Shedding and Load
Shedding Plans Reliability Standards, Order No. 763, 139 FERC ]
61,098, order granting clarification, 140 FERC ] 61,164 (2012). The
Commission included Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 under FERC-725A
(OMB Control No. 1902-0244). The entire burden associated with
Reliability Standard PRC-006-2 (for new requirements as well as
those unchanged from PRC-006-1) will be added to FERC-725G. In the
future, the burden (an estimated 12,672 hours) associated with
Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 will be removed from FERC-725A, to
remove the temporary double counting of those hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-725G information
collection requirements with the stated changes to the current
reporting and record retention requirements.
    Abstract: The Commission requires the information collected by the
FERC-725G to implement the statutory provisions of section 215 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA).\2\ On August 8, 2005, Congress enacted into
law the Electricity Modernization Act of 2005, which is Title XII,
Subtitle A, of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005).\3\ EPAct
2005 added a new section 215 to the FPA, which required a Commission-
certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) to develop mandatory
and enforceable Reliability Standards, which are subject to Commission
review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be
enforced by the ERO subject to Commission oversight, or the Commission
can independently enforce Reliability Standards.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2012).
    \3\ Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-58, Title XII,
Subtitle A, 119 Stat. 594, 941 (codified at 16 U.S.C. 824o).
    \4\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 3, 2006, the Commission issued Order No. 672,
implementing section 215 of the FPA.\5\ Pursuant to Order No. 672, the
Commission certified one organization, North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), as the ERO.\6\ The Reliability
Standards developed by the ERO and approved by the Commission apply to
users, owners and operators of the Bulk-Power System as set forth in
each Reliability Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability
Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval, and
Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204, order on reh'g, Order No. 672-A, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,212 (2006).
    \6\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g and compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006),
order on compliance, 118 FERC ] 61,190, order on reh'g, 119 FERC ]
61,046 (2007), aff'd sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342
(D.C. Cir. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Order No. 763, the Commission approved Reliability Standard PRC-
006-1, but directed NERC to include explicit language in a subsequent
version of the Reliability Standard clarifying that applicable entities
are required to implement corrective actions identified by the planning
coordinator in accordance with a schedule established by the same
planning coordinator.
    NERC filed a petition on December 15, 2014 requesting approval of
proposed Reliability Standard PRC-006-2 addressing the Commission's
directive in Order No. 763. The NERC petition states that the
``[p]roposed Reliability Standard PRC-006-2, through proposed new
Requirement R15, and proposed enhanced language of the existing
Requirements R9 and R10, requires the Planning Coordinator to develop a
schedule for implementation of any necessary corrective actions, and
requires that the applicable entities will implement these corrective
actions according to the schedule established by the Planning
Coordinator.''
    Type of Respondents: Planning coordinators, UFLS entities (as they
are defined in the proposed Reliability Standard) and transmission
owners that own elements identified in the underfrequency load shedding
programs established by the planning coordinators.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \7\ Our estimate below regarding the
number of respondents is based on the NERC compliance registry as of
January 30, 2015. According to the NERC compliance registry, there are
80 planning coordinators. The individual burden estimates are based on
the time needed to gather data, run studies, and analyze study results
to design or update the underfrequency load shedding programs.
Additionally, documentation and the review of underfrequency load
shedding program results by supervisors and management is included in
the administrative estimations. These are consistent with estimates for
similar tasks in other Commission approved standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Commission defines burden 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. 5 CFR 1320.3 (2014) (explaining what is included in the
information collection burden).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimates for the additional burden and cost imposed by the order
in Docket No. RD15-2-000 follow.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The only changes to Requirements R9 and R10 and associated
measures and evidence retention in Reliability Standard PRC-006-2
(from PRC-006-1) were enhancements to the language which do not
impact the cost of implementation. The modifications provide
additional clarity and do not affect burden or cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                           FERC-725G, As Changed in RD15-2-000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Annual  number   Total number
                                    Number and type of    of  responses   of responses    Average burden  per   Total annual burden   Total annual cost
                                    respondent \9\  (1)  per respondent    (1) * (2) =     response  (hours)   (hours)  (3) * (4) =       \10\  ($)
                                                               (2)             (3)                (4)                   (5)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement R15 and Measure M15    80 planning                        1              80  52 hrs. (47 hrs. for  4,160 hrs. (3,760     $285,783 ($274,179
 and evidence retention (planning   coordinators.                                         reporting             hrs. for reporting    for reporting
 coordinator that conducts under                                                          requirements, and 5   requirements, and     requirements, and
 frequency load shedding design                                                           hrs. for record       400 hrs. for record   $11,604 for record
 assessment under Requirements                                                            retention             retention             retention
 R4, R5, or R12 and determines                                                            requirements).        requirements).        requirements).
 under frequency load shedding
 program does not meet the
 performance characteristics in
 Requirement R3, develops
 corrective action plans and
 schedule for implementation by
 UFLS entities within its area).
Total............................  80 planning           ..............  ..............  ....................  4,160...............  $285,783.
                                    coordinators.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    \9\ The number of respondents is based on the NERC compliance
registry as January 30, 2015.
    \10\ The estimates for cost per hour (salary plus benefits) are
based on the May 2013 figures of the Bureau of Labor and Statistics
(posted as of February 9, 2015 at http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     $72.92/hour [($84.96 + $60.87)/2], the average of the
salary plus benefits for a manager ($84.96/hour) and an electrical
engineer ($60.87/hour), is used for the hourly cost for the reporting
requirements associated with Requirement R15 and Measure M15.
     $29.01/hour, the salary plus benefits for a file clerk, is
used for the hourly cost for the evidence retention requirements
associated with Requirement R15 and Measure M15.

    Dated: March 9, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-05879 Filed 3-13-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


From: Kissell. Mary@ epamail. epa. gov [ mailto: Kissell. Mary@ epamail. epa. gov] Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 1: 08 PM To: Connell, Paula Subject: Re: Plywood & Composite Wood Products MACT The Plywood and Composite Wood Products MACT will be signed by the EPA Administrator by 27 Feb 2004. It will published in the Federal Register within a couple of months after the signature date.

The requirement for OSB presses is similar to what was proposed, although there are some changes.

The biggest rule change from the proposal is that we intend to create a lowrisk subcategory and delist it. Facilities that can demonstrate they are low risk could be part of the subcategory and not subject to the MACT requirements.

" Connell, Paula" < Paula. Connell@ st To: Mary Kissell/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA ate. mn. us> cc: Subject: Plywood & Composit Wood Products MACT 02/ 05/ 04 11: 19 AM I will be at a public information meeting in about a week for a draft Title V permit for an OSB facility in Minnesota.

We've talked about the upcoming MACT previously in the community. Can you tell me whether this MACT is still scheduled to be promulgated in March? If not, do you know when it will be promulgated? Will the final rule be similar to the proposed MACT, especially in regards to OSB press emissions?

I'd appreciate any info you can provide.

Thanks!

Paula J. Connell, P. E. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Rd St. Paul, MN 55155 ( 651) 282 2605 fax ( 651) 296 8717 paula. connell@ pca. state. mn. us


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 122 (Friday, June 26, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30487-30493]
[FR Doc No: E9-15139]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0239; FRL-8411-5]

Metolachlor, S-Metolachlor, Bifenazate, Buprofezin, and 2,4-D;
Proposed Tolerance Actions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to modify, establish and revoke certain
tolerances for the herbicides metolachlor and S-metolachlor and correct
the tolerance guava (from guave) on bifenazate and buprofezin and 2,4-D
on cranberry. The regulatory actions proposed in this document are in
follow-up to the Agency's reregistration program under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and tolerance
reassessment program under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), section 408(q).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 25, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0239, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2009-0239. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane Smith, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
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.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability provisions in Unit II.A. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is proposing to modify, revoke, and establish specific
tolerances for residues of the herbicides metolachlor, S-metolachlor,
bifenazate, buprofezin, and 2,4-D in or on commodities listed in the
regulatory text.
    EPA is proposing these tolerance actions to implement the tolerance
recommendations made during the reregistration and tolerance
reassessment processes (including follow-up on canceled or additional
uses of pesticides). As part of these processes, EPA is required to
determine whether each of the amended tolerances meets the safety
standard of FFDCA. The safety finding determination of ``reasonable
certainty of no harm'' is discussed in detail in each Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) and Report of the Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA) Tolerance Reassessment Progress and Risk Management Decision
(TRED) for the active ingredient. REDs and TREDs recommend the
implementation of certain tolerance actions, including modifications to
reflect current use patterns, meet safety findings, and change
commodity names and groupings in accordance with new EPA policy.
Printed copies of many REDs and TREDs may be obtained from EPA's
National Service Center for Environmental Publications (EPA/NSCEP),
P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati, OH 45242-2419; telephone number: 1-800-490-
9198; fax number: 1-513-489-8695; Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom and from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS),
5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161; telephone number: 1-800-
553-6847 or<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet at http://www.ntis.gov. Electronic
copies of REDs and TREDs are available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/status.htm and in the public
docket, at http://www.regulations.gov.
    The selection of an individual tolerance level is based on crop
field residue studies designed to produce the maximum residues under
the existing or proposed product label. Generally, the level selected
for a tolerance is a value slightly above the maximum residue found in
such studies, provided that the tolerance is safe. The evaluation of
whether a tolerance is safe is a separate inquiry. EPA recommends the
raising of a tolerance when data show that:
    1. Lawful use (sometimes through a label change) may result in a
higher residue level on the commodity.
    2. The tolerance remains safe, notwithstanding increased residue
level allowed under the tolerance.
In REDs, Chapter IV on ``Risk management, Reregistration, and Tolerance
reassessment'' typically describes the regulatory position, FQPA
assessment, cumulative safety determination, determination of safety
for U.S. general population, and safety for infants and children. In
particular, the human health risk assessment document which supports
the RED describes risk exposure estimates and whether the Agency has
concerns. In TREDs, the Agency discusses its evaluation of the dietary
risk associated with the active ingredient and whether it can determine
that there is a reasonable certainty (with appropriate mitigation) that
no harm to any population subgroup will result from aggregate exposure.
EPA also seeks to harmonize tolerances with international standards set
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, as described in Unit III.
    Explanations for proposed modifications in tolerances can be found
in the RED and TRED document and in more detail in the Residue
Chemistry Chapter document which supports the RED and TRED. Copies of
the Residue Chemistry Chapter documents are found in the Administrative
Record and EPA's

electronic copies are available through EPA's electronic public docket
and comment system, regulations.gov at http://www.regulations.gov. You
may search for docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0239, EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-
0223, EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0445, EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0674, EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0097,
and EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-1170, then click on that docket ID number to view
its contents.
    EPA has determined that the aggregate exposures and risks are not
of concern for the above-mentioned pesticide active ingredients based
upon the data identified in the RED or TRED which lists the submitted
studies that the Agency found acceptable.
    EPA has found that the tolerances that are proposed in this
document to be modified, are safe; i.e., that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residues, in accordance
with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C). (Note that changes to tolerance
nomenclature do not constitute modifications of tolerances). These
findings are discussed in detail in each RED or TRED. The references
are available for inspection as described in this document under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    In the Federal Register notices published August 8, 2007 (72 FR
44439) (FRL-8138-8) and May 21, 2008 (73 FR 29456) (FRL-8362-1), EPA
proposed to revoke, modify, and establish specific tolerances for
residues of the herbicides metolachlor and S-metolachlor as well as
tolerances for other pesticide chemicals. These proposals provided a
60-day comment period which invited public comment for consideration
and for support of tolerance retention under FFDCA standards. These
proposed actions were finalized on September 10, 2008 (73 FR 52607)
(FRL-8379-3) and September 17, 2008 (73 FR 53732) (FRL-8375-2). The
Agency received comments to the proposal published August 8, 2007 on S-
metolachlor in which we indicated we would respond in the future. This
action responds to those comments and addresses other tolerance actions
associated with metolachlor, S-metolachlor, bifenazate and buprofezin.
The proposal published May 21, 2008 provides related information on
metolachlor and S-metolachlor.
    1. Metolachlor/S-metolachlor. The Agency received comments from
Syngenta (EPA-HQ-2007-0445-0013) in response to the Federal Register
proposal published August 8, 2007 (73 FR 53732) as follows:
    (i) Revocation of tolerance in stone fruit-Use of S-Metolachlor
in stone fruit is an important tool for Canadian fruit producers and
therefore, it would be beneficial to maintain U.S. tolerances to
avoid any trade irritant issues for these crops being exported from
Canada to the U.S. Canada currently has a tolerance of 0.1 ppm for
S-metolachlor in apples, apricots, cherries, peaches/nectarines,
pears and plums.
    (ii) Increase in tolerance for Crop Group 6A from 0.3 ppm to 0.5
ppm-Canada currently has a tolerance of 0.3 ppm for S-metolachlor in
peas and snap beans. An increase in the U.S. tolerance could result
in a trade irritant for these crops exported from the U.S. to
Canada.
    (iii) Decrease in tolerance for Crop Group 6C from 0.3 ppm to
0.1 ppm-Canada currently has a tolerance of 0.3 ppm for S-
metolachlor in dry beans. A decrease in the U.S. tolerance could
result in a trade irritant for these crops exported from Canada to
the U.S.
    (iv) Increase in tolerance for egg and meat from 0.02 pm to 0.04
ppm-Canada currently has a tolerance of 0.02 ppm for S-metolachlor
in eggs, meat of cattle, goats, hogs, poultry and sheep. An increase
in the U.S. tolerance could result in a trade irritant for these
animal products exported from the U.S. to Canada.
    (v) Increase tolerance in animal liver from 0.05 ppm to 0.1 ppm-
Canada currently has a tolerance of 0.05 ppm for S-metolachlor in
liver of cattle and poultry. An increase in the U.S. tolerance could
result in a trade irritant for these animal products exported from
the U.S. to Canada.

    The Agency responded to Syngenta's first comment (i) on September
17, 2008 (73 FR 53732). In response to the remaining comments (ii)-(v),
the Agency has re-evaluated new and existing data for the legume crop
group 6, and existing data for cattle meat, fat and liver, poultry
meat, fat and egg for both metolachlor and S-metolachlor which, in
general, the Agency agrees with the comments. The maximum S-metolachlor
residue field trial data in/on legume vegetables support the
harmonization of the corresponding legume vegetable crop group 6
tolerances with the Canadian MRLs at 0.3 ppm for existing S-metolachor
tolerances and the establishment of a tolerance of 0.3 ppm in/on pea
and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B where maximum residues were
0.14 ppm. Extrapolating the residue data from the ruminant feeding
study to a 1x feeding level for cattle, goats, horses, and sheep the
maximum combined residues of concern for metolachlor and S-metolachlor
would be 0.01 ppm in meat and fat and 0.03 ppm in liver; and
considering the harmonization of tolerances with Canadian MRLs under
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Agency determined
that the tolerances should be decreased for cattle, goat, horse, and
sheep liver to 0.05 ppm and meat and fat to 0.02 ppm. Based on feeding
studies in hens dosed up to 3.9x the maximum theoretical dietary
burden, metolachlor and S-metolachlor residues of concern were not
detected (< 0.02 ppm the levels of quantitation (LOQ)) in eggs, liver,
fat, meat and meat byproducts and the importance of harmonizing MRLs
with Canada, the Agency determined the tolerances for eggs and poultry
meat and fat should be 0.02 ppm and poultry meat byproducts (which
includes liver) should be 0.05 ppm The Agency inadvertently published
the harmonized tolerances for residues of S-metolachlor in/on cattle
meat and liver, poultry meat and egg in the Federal Register published
September 17, 2008 (73 FR 53732) before proposing and receiving comment
which we are correcting with this action. Therefore, EPA proposes the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368(a)(2) for the combined S-metolachlor
residues of concern be established for pea and bean, succulent shelled,
subgroup 6B at 0.30 ppm; increased in/on pea and bean, dried shelled,
except soybean, subgroup 6C from 0.10 ppm to 0.30 ppm; decreased in/on
vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A from 0.50 ppm to 0.30
ppm; cattle, goat, horse, and sheep, liver from 0.10 to 0.05 ppm;
cattle, goat, horse, and sheep, meat and fat from 0.04 to 0.02 ppm; egg
and poultry, meat and fat from 0.04 to 0.02 ppm; and poultry, meat
byproducts from 0.04 to 0.05 ppm. Also, EPA proposes the tolerances in
40 CFR 180.368(a)(1) for the combined metolachlor residues of concern
be increased in/on pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean,
subgroup 6C from 0.10 ppm to 0.3 ppm; decreased in/on vegetable,
legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A from 0.50 ppm to 0.30 ppm; cattle,
goat, horse, and sheep, liver from 0.10 to 0.05 ppm; cattle, goat,
horse, and sheep, meat and fat from 0.04 to 0.02 ppm; egg and poultry,
meat and fat from 0.04 to 0.02 ppm; and poultry, meat byproducts from
0.04 to 0.05 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased tolerances
are safe; i.e. there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Additional rotational crop field trials conducted with S-
metolachlor on wheat and oats indicate that the maximum residues levels
were 0.40 ppm in/on oat forage, 0.50 ppm in/on oat hay, 0.09 ppm in/on
oat straw, <0.08 ppm in/on wheat and oat grain, 0.47 ppm in/on wheat
forage, 0.26 ppm in/on wheat hay, and 0.28 ppm in/on wheat straw.

Based on these residues levels and translating these data to the other
small grains, the Agency has determined that the tolerances should be
0.50 ppm for barley, oat, wheat and millet hay; 0.10 ppm for millet,
grain; and 0.50 ppm for millet, forage and straw. Based on residue data
conducted on soybean, corn, wheat and sorghum, the maximum residues
found on aspirated grain fractions were 0.63 ppm; therefore, the Agency
has determined that the tolerance for aspirated grain fractions (AGF)
should be 0.7 ppm. Rice straw is no longer considered a significant
animal feed item, therefore, tolerances are no longer required for rice
straw. Therefore, EPA proposes tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368(a)(2) be
established for the combined S-metolachlor residues of concern in/on
grain, aspirated fractions at 0.70 ppm; and in 40 CFR 180.368(d)(2) be
revoked on rice, straw at 0.50 ppm; decreased on barley, oat, and
wheat, hay from 1.0 ppm to 0.50 ppm; established on millet, grain at
0.10 ppm; millet, forage at 0.50 ppm; millet, hay at 0.50 ppm; and
millet, straw at 0.50 ppm.
    Additional rotational crop field trials conducted on wheat and oats
with metolachlor indicate that the maximum total residue levels were
0.35 ppm in/on forage, 0.45 ppm in/on hay, 0.42 ppm in/on straw, and
0.03 ppm in/on grain. Based on these residue levels and translating
these data to the other small grains, the Agency has determined that
the tolerances for metolachlor residues should be 0.80 ppm for barley,
millet, oat, and wheat hay; 0.10 ppm for barley, buckwheat, millet,
oat, rice, rye, and wheat grain; and 0.50 ppm for millet, oat, rye, and
wheat forage and 0.80 ppm for barley, millet, oat, rye, and wheat
straw. Rice straw is no longer considered a significant animal feed
item, therefore, tolerances are no longer required for rice straw.
Currently, since there are no active registrations with uses of
metolachlor on spinach, the tolerance on spinach at 0.50 ppm should be
revoked. Therefore, EPA proposes the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368(d)(1)
for the combined residues of concern for metolachlor be established on
barley, millet, oat, and wheat, hay at 0.80 ppm; increased on barley,
millet, oat, rye, and wheat straw from 0.50 ppm to 0.80 ppm; and
revoked on rice, straw at 0.50 ppm and in 40 CFR 180.368(a)(1) revoked
on spinach at 0.50 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased
tolerances are safe; i.e. there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    In this action, the Agency has proposed modifications to the
tolerances for the legume vegetable subgroups (6A, 6B, and 6C) such
that all of the subgroups (6A, 6B, and 6C) have the same tolerance of
0.30 ppm for both metolachlor and S-metolachlor consequently, these
tolerances should be consolidated as the vegetable, legume, group 6 at
0.30 ppm. Therefore, EPA proposes the tolerances be revised in 40 CFR
180.368(a)(1) and (a)(2) for the combined residues of concern for
metolachlor and S-metolachlor from vegetable, legume, edible-podded,
subgroup 6A; pea and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B; and pea and
bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C to vegetable, legume,
succulent or dried, group 6.
    2. Bifenazate. The Agency proposes the tolerance in 40 CFR
180.572(a) be corrected to read guava rather than guave.
    3. Buprofezin. The Agency proposes the tolerance in 40 CFR
180.511(a) be corrected to read guava rather than guave.
    4. 2,4-D. In the Federal Register of June 6, 2007 (72 FR 31221)
(FRL-8122[dash]7), the Agency incorrectly proposed a tolerance action
that included the commodity cranberry in berry, group 13 at 0.2 ppm in
40 CFR 180.142(a). That action removed the individual cranberry
tolerance at 0.5 ppm in 40 CFR 180.142(a). The proposal was finalized
September 12, 2007 (72 FR 52013) (FRL-8142-2). The berry crop group 13
is not inclusive of cranberries. Further, reestablishing the cranberry
tolerance at 0.5 ppm will harmonize with the Canadian maximum residue
level (MRL) under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
Therefore, the Agency proposes reestablishing the tolerance in 40 CFR
180.142(a) for residues of 2,4-D in/on cranberry at 0.5 ppm. The Agency
determined that the increased tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue.

B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    A ``tolerance'' represents the maximum level for residues of
pesticide chemicals legally allowed in or on raw agricultural
commodities and processed foods. Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a,
as amended by FQPA of 1996, Public Law 104-170, authorizes the
establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerance requirements,
modifications in tolerances, and revocation of tolerances for residues
of pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities and
processed foods. Without a tolerance or exemption, food containing
pesticide residues is considered to be unsafe and therefore
``adulterated'' under section 402(a) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 342(a). Such
food may not be distributed in interstate commerce (21 U.S.C. 331(a)).
For a food-use pesticide to be sold and distributed, the pesticide must
not only have appropriate tolerances under the FFDCA, but also must be
registered under FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.). Food-use pesticides not
registered in the United States must have tolerances in order for
commodities treated with those pesticides to be imported into the
United States.

C. When Do These Actions Become Effective?

    EPA is proposing that the actions herein become effective on the
date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.
    Any commodities listed in this proposal treated with the pesticides
subject to this proposal, and in the channels of trade following the
tolerance revocations, shall be subject to FFDCA section 408(1)(5), as
established by FQPA. Under this unit, any residues of these pesticides
in or on such food shall not render the food adulterated so long as it
is shown to the satisfaction of the Food and Drug Administration that:
    1. The residue is present as the result of an application or use of
the pesticide at a time and in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA,
and
    2. The residue does not exceed the level that was authorized at the
time of the application or use to be present on the food under a
tolerance or exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Evidence to
show that food was lawfully treated may include records that verify the
dates when the pesticide was applied to such food.

III. Are the Proposed Actions Consistent With International
Obligations?

    The tolerance actions in this proposal are not discriminatory and
are designed to ensure that both domestically produced and imported
foods meet the food safety standards established by FFDCA. The same
food safety standards apply to domestically produced and imported
foods.
    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 is a joint U.N. 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 in a notice published for public comment. EPA's effort to
harmonize with Codex MRLs is summarized in the tolerance reassessment
section of individual REDs and TREDs, and in the Residue Chemistry
document which supports the RED and TRED, as mentioned in Unit II.A.
Specific tolerance actions in this proposed rule and how they compare
to Codex MRLs (if any) are discussed in Unit II.A.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to establish tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(e), and also modify and revoke specific
tolerances established under FFDCA section 408. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions (e.g.,
establishment and modification of a tolerance and tolerance revocation
for which extraordinary circumstances do not exist) from review under
Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993). Because this proposed rule has been exempted
from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order
13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
This proposed rule does not contain any information collections subject
to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor does it require any special
considerations as required by Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review
or any other Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require Agency consideration of
voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law
104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency previously
assessed whether establishment of tolerances, exemptions from
tolerances, raising of tolerance levels, expansion of exemptions, or
revocations might significantly impact a substantial number of small
entities and concluded that, as a general matter, these actions do not
impose a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. These analyses for tolerance establishments and
modifications, and for tolerance revocations were published on May 4,
1981 (46 FR 24950) and on December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020) (FRL-5753-1),
respectively, and were provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration. Taking into account this analysis,
and available information concerning the pesticides listed in this
proposed rule, the Agency hereby certifies that this proposed rule will
not have a significant negative economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities. In a memorandum dated May 25, 2001, EPA determined
that eight conditions must all be satisfied in order for an import
tolerance or tolerance exemption revocation to adversely affect a
significant number of small entity importers, and that there is a
negligible joint probability of all eight conditions holding
simultaneously with respect to any particular revocation. (This Agency
document is available in the docket of this proposed rule).
Furthermore, for the pesticide named in this proposed rule, the Agency
knows of no extraordinary circumstances that exist as to the present
proposal that would change the EPA's previous analysis. Any comments
about the Agency's determination should be submitted to the EPA along
with comments on the proposal, and will be addressed prior to issuing a
final rule. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' This proposed rule directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States. This action
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has
determined that this proposed rule does not have any ``tribal
implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal implications'' is
defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have
``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.'' This proposed rule will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: June 19, 2009
Steven Bradbury,
Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as
follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

    2. Section 180.142 is amended by adding alphabectically the
following commodity to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.142  2,4-D; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
Cranberry..................................................          0.5
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    3. Section 180.368 is amended by revising the table in paragraph
(a)(1), (a)(2), (d)(1) and (d)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.368  Metolachlor; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. (1) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hulls..............................................         0.30
Animal feed, nongrass, group 18............................          1.0
Cattle, fat................................................         0.02
Cattle, kidney.............................................         0.20
Cattle, liver..............................................         0.05
Cattle, meat...............................................         0.02
Cattle, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver...........         0.04
Corn, field, forage........................................          6.0
Corn, field, grain.........................................         0.10
Corn, field, stover........................................          6.0
Corn, sweet, forage........................................          6.0
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed............         0.10
Corn, sweet, stover........................................          6.0
Cotton, gin byproducts.....................................          4.0
Cotton, undelinted seed....................................         0.10
Dill.......................................................         0.50
Egg........................................................         0.02
Goat, fat..................................................         0.02
Goat, kidney...............................................         0.20
Goat, liver................................................         0.05
Goat, meat.................................................         0.02
Goat, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver.............         0.04
Grass, forage..............................................           10
Grass, hay.................................................         0.20
Horse, fat.................................................         0.02
Horse, kidney..............................................         0.20
Horse, liver...............................................         0.05
Horse, meat................................................         0.02
Horse, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver............         0.04
Milk.......................................................         0.02
Nut, tree, group 14........................................         0.10
Okra.......................................................         0.50
Peanut.....................................................         0.20
Peanut, hay................................................           20
Peanut, meal...............................................         0.40
Potato.....................................................         0.20
Poultry, fat...............................................         0.02
Poultry, meat..............................................         0.02
Poultry, meat byproducts...................................         0.05
Safflower, seed............................................         0.10
Sheep, fat.................................................         0.02
Sheep, kidney..............................................         0.20
Sheep, liver...............................................         0.05
Sheep, meat................................................         0.02
Sheep, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver............         0.04
Sorghum, grain, forage.....................................          1.0
Sorghum, grain, grain......................................         0.30
Sorghum, grain, stover.....................................          4.0
Soybean, forage............................................          5.0
Soybean, hay...............................................          8.0
Soybean, seed..............................................         0.20
Tomato.....................................................         0.10
Vegetable, foliage of legume, subgroup 7A, except soybean..         15.0
Vegetable, legume, succulent or dried, group 6.............         0.30
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asparagus..................................................         0.10
Beet, sugar, molasses......................................          2.0
Beet, sugar, roots.........................................          0.5
Beet, sugar, tops..........................................         15.0
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A.......................         0.60
Cattle, fat................................................         0.02
Cattle, kidney.............................................         0.20
Cattle, liver..............................................         0.05
Cattle, meat...............................................         0.02
Cattle, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver...........         0.04
Corn, field, grain.........................................         0.10
Corn, field, forage........................................          6.0
Corn, field, stover........................................          6.0
Corn, pop, grain...........................................         0.10
Corn, pop, stover..........................................          6.0
Corn, sweet, forage........................................          6.0
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed............         0.10
Corn, sweet, stover........................................          6.0
Cotton, gin byproducts.....................................          4.0
Cotton, undelinted seed....................................         0.10
Egg........................................................         0.02
Garlic, bulb...............................................         0.10
Grain, aspirated fractions.................................         0.70
Goat, fat..................................................         0.02
Goat, kidney...............................................         0.20
Goat, liver................................................         0.05
Goat, meat.................................................         0.02
Goat, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver.............         0.04
Grass, forage..............................................         10.0
Grass, hay.................................................         0.20
Horse, fat.................................................         0.02
Horse, kidney..............................................         0.20
Horse, liver...............................................         0.05
Horse, meat................................................         0.02
Horse, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver............         0.04
Milk.......................................................         0.02
Onion, bulb................................................         0.10
Onion, green...............................................          2.0
Peanut.....................................................         0.20
Peanut, hay................................................         20.0
Peanut, meal...............................................         0.40
Poultry, fat...............................................         0.02
Poultry, meat..............................................         0.02
Poultry, meat byproducts...................................         0.05
Pumpkin....................................................         0.10
Safflower, seed............................................         0.10
Shallot, bulb..............................................         0.10
Sheep, fat.................................................         0.02
Sheep, kidney..............................................         0.20
Sheep, liver...............................................         0.05
Sheep, meat................................................         0.02
Sheep, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver............         0.04
Sorghum, grain, forage.....................................          1.0
Sorghum, grain, grain......................................          0.3
Sorghum, grain, stover.....................................          4.0
Soybean, forage............................................          5.0
Soybean, hay...............................................          8.0
Soybean, seed..............................................         0.20
Spinach....................................................         0.50
Squash, winter.............................................         0.10
Sunflower, seed............................................         0.50
Sunflower, meal............................................          1.0
Tomato, paste..............................................         0.30
Vegetable, foliage of legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A..         15.0
Vegetable, fruiting, except tabasco pepper, group 8........         0.10
Vegetable, leaf petioles, subgroup 4B......................         0.10
Vegetable, legume, succulent or dried, group 6.............         0.30
Vegetable, root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B............         0.30
Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C..................         0.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. (1) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Animal feed, nongrass, group 18............................          1.0
Barley, grain..............................................         0.10
Barley, hay................................................         0.80
Barley, straw..............................................         0.80
Buckwheat, grain...........................................         0.10
Millet, forage.............................................         0.50
Millet, grain..............................................         0.10
Millet, hay................................................         0.80
Millet, straw..............................................         0.80
Oat, forage................................................         0.50
Oat, grain.................................................         0.10
Oat, hay...................................................         0.80
Oat, straw.................................................         0.80
Rice, grain................................................         0.10
Rye, forage................................................         0.50
Rye, grain.................................................         0.10
Rye, straw.................................................         0.80
Wheat, forage..............................................         0.50
Wheat, grain...............................................         0.10
Wheat, hay.................................................         0.80
Wheat, straw...............................................         0.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Animal feed, nongrass, group 18............................          1.0
Barley, grain..............................................         0.10
Barley, hay................................................         0.50
Barley, straw..............................................         0.50
Buckwheat, grain...........................................         0.10
Millet, forage.............................................         0.50
Millet, grain..............................................         0.10
Millet, hay................................................         0.50
Millet, straw..............................................         0.50
Oat, forage................................................         0.50
Oat, grain.................................................         0.10
Oat, hay...................................................         0.50
Oat, straw.................................................         0.50
Rice, grain................................................         0.10
Rye, forage................................................         0.50
Rye, grain.................................................         0.10
Rye, straw.................................................         0.50
Wheat, forage..............................................         0.50
Wheat, grain...............................................         0.10
Wheat, hay.................................................         0.50
Wheat, straw...............................................         0.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    4. Section 180.511 is amended by removing the entry for ``Guave''
and adding the following commodity to the table in paragraph (a) to
read as follows:

Sec.  180.511  Buprofezin; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guava......................................................          0.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    5. Section 180.572 is amended by removing the entry for ``Guave''
and adding the following commodity to the table in paragraph (a) to
read as follows:

Sec.  180.572  Bifenazate; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guava......................................................          0.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-15139 Filed 6-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S