[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 7, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9703-9712]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04533]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0257; FRL-9973-44]

Fluopicolide; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
fluopicolide in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. In addition, this regulation removes
several previously established tolerances that are superseded by this
final rule. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective March 7, 2018. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before May 7, 2018, 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-2016-0257, 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: Michael L. Goodis, Director,
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 protected].

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-2016-0257 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
May 7, 2018. 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-2016-0257, 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 Wednesday, June 22, 2016 (81 FR 40594)
(FRL-9947-32), 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 6E8464) by IR-4 Headquarters, Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.627 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide,
fluopicolide [2,6-dichloro-N-[[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-
pyridinyl]methyl]benzamide], including its metabolites and degradates,
in or on the commodities: Basil, dried leaves at 200 parts per million
(ppm); basil, fresh leaves at 30 ppm; bean, succulent at 0.9 ppm;
citrus, dried pulp at 0.048 ppm; citrus, oil at 1.94 ppm; hop, dried
cones at 15 ppm; fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 0.02 ppm; fruit, small,
vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 2.0 ppm; and
vegetable, fruiting, crop group 8-10 at 1.60 ppm. That document
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Valent, the
registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. Two similar anonymous public comments were
received in response to the notice of filing. The Agency's response to
the comments is included in Unit IV.C.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing certain tolerances that differ from what the petitioner
requested. The reasons for these changes are 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 fluopicolide including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
    Fluopicolide shares a metabolite, 2,6-dichlorobenzamide (BAM), with
another active ingredient, dichlobenil. Residues of BAM are assessed
independently of fluopicolide and dichlobenil because it has its own
toxicity database and endpoints of concern. The BAM assessment
considers residues resulting from both fluopicolide and dichlobenil
uses. EPA's safety finding for

fluopicolide considers the aggregate exposures to fluopicolide alone as
well as the aggregate exposure to BAM from both fluopicolide and
dichlobenil uses.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity database 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.
    Fluopicolide. Fluopicolide has low acute toxicity by the oral,
dermal, and inhalation routes. Following subchronic and chronic
exposures, increased liver weights and/or liver hypertrophy were
observed in rats and mice. Additional liver lesions were seen in mice,
including oval cell proliferation in a 90-day oral toxicity study and
altered cell foci in the carcinogenicity study. Treatment-related
effects in rats also included kidney and thyroid effects; however,
these effects were not seen consistently across studies in the
fluopicolide database. In the 28-day oral toxicity study in rats, there
were indications of nephrotoxicity including pale kidneys and
microscopic lesions (granulation, proteinaceous material, and
hydronephrosis). Kidney effects were not observed in any other studies,
except the reproduction toxicity study where slightly increased organ
weights and kidney lesions were observed in parental animals. Thyroid
toxicity was only observed in the combined chronic/carcinogenicity
study in rats and consisted of increased thyroid weights, gross
pathological observation of enlarged thyroids, and increased incidence
of cystic follicular hyperplasia in males (slight to moderate
severity).
    Evidence of increased quantitative susceptibility was seen in the
rat developmental toxicity study. Developmental effects (delayed
ossification and fetal growth) were only seen at a relatively high dose
(700 mg/kg/day) in the absence of maternal effects. There was no
evidence of susceptibility in the rabbit developmental toxicity and rat
reproduction toxicity studies. In the rabbit developmental toxicity
study, late abortions/premature deliveries were observed at 60 mg/kg/
day. Additional effects at this dose included late maternal deaths and
decreased crown rump length in fetuses. In the rat reproduction
toxicity study, offspring effects (decreased body weight) were seen in
the presence of parental effects (kidney effects).
    There is no evidence of neurotoxicity, immunotoxicity, or
mutagenicity in the fluopicolide toxicity database. Due to the absence
of treatment-related tumors in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, fluopicolide is classified as ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic
to Humans''.
    BAM. Acute toxicity studies on BAM demonstrated moderate acute
toxicity via the oral route of exposure. In subchronic and chronic
toxicity studies, the primary oral effects seen in the rat and dog were
body weight changes. Adverse liver effects, including hepatocellular
alterations and increased liver weights, were also observed. Toxicity
to the olfactory sensory neurons has been observed following
intraperitoneal exposure of mice to BAM, indicating potential
neurotoxicity; however, no effects on the olfactory system were
observed via the oral route. There is no evidence that BAM is either
mutagenic or clastogenic nor is there evidence of endocrine mediated
toxicity. A BAM combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in the
rat is available; however, in the absence of a carcinogenicity study
data for a second species, EPA has assumed that BAM's carcinogenic
potential is similar to that of dichlobenil, the parent compound having
the greatest carcinogenicity potential. Dichlobenil is classified as
``Group C, possible human carcinogen.'' Therefore, EPA has concluded
that quantification of cancer risk using a non-linear approach (i.e.,
RfD) will adequately account for all chronic toxicity, including
carcinogenicity, that could result from exposure to dichlobenil, and
therefore, to BAM.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by fluopicolide and BAM, as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document: Fluopicolide and 2,6-Dichlorobenzamide
(BAM). Human Health Risk Assessment to Support Registration for
Application of Fluopicolide on Basil, Succulent Bean, Hops, Small Vine
Climbing Subgroup 13-07F, and Citrus Fruit Group 10-10 and Crop Group
Conversion for Fruiting Vegetables 8-10, dated December 5, 2017 at
pages 19-25 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0257.

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://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for fluopicolide and BAM
used for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 and Table 2,
respectively, of this unit.

 Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Fluopicolide for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Point of departure
        Exposure/scenario            and uncertainty/     RfD, PAD, LOC for     Study and toxicological effects
                                      safety factors       risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (All populations)..      An endpoint attributable to a single dose was not identified from the
                                                                   available data.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations)  Maternal NOAEL = 20   cRfD = cPAD = 0.2    Developmental Toxicity Study in
                                    mg/kg/day.            mg/kg/day.           Rabbits.
                                   UFA = 10x...........                       LOAEL (maternal) = 60 mg/kg/day
                                   UFH = 10x...........                        based on death, abortions/
                                   FQPA SF = 1X........                        premature deliveries, and
                                                                               decreased food consumption.
                                                                              Co-critical: Chronic/Oncogenicity
                                                                               Study in Rats.
                                                                              NOAEL = 31.5 mg/kg/day.
                                                                              LOAEL = 109.4 mg/kg/day based on
                                                                               increased thyroid weight and
                                                                               increased incidence of thyroid
                                                                               lesions.
Incidental oral short- and         Maternal NOAEL = 20   LOC for MOE <100...  Developmental Toxicity Study in
 intermediate-term (1-30 days,      mg/kg/day.                                 Rabbits.
 and 1-6 months).                  UFA = 10x...........                       LOAEL (maternal) = 60 mg/kg/day
                                   UFH = 10x...........                        based on death, abortions/
                                   FQPA SF = 1X........                        premature deliveries, decreased
                                                                               food consumption and body-weight
                                                                               gain.
Dermal short- and intermediate-    Maternal NOAEL = 20   LOC for MOE <100...  Developmental Toxicity Study in
 term (1-30 days, and 1-6 months).  mg/kg/day.                                 Rabbits.
                                   UFA = 10x...........                       LOAEL (maternal) = 60 mg/kg/day
                                   UFH = 10x...........                        based on death, abortions/
                                   FQPA SF = 1X (when                          premature deliveries, decreased
                                    applicable).                               food consumption and body-weight
                                   DAF = 5%............                        gain.
                                                                              Co-critical: Chronic/Oncogenicity
                                                                               Study in Rats.
                                                                              NOAEL = 31.5 mg/kg/day.
                                                                              LOAEL = 109.4 mg/kg/day based on
                                                                               increased thyroid weight and
                                                                               increased incidence of thyroid
                                                                               lesions.
Inhalation short- and              Maternal NOAEL = 20   LOC for MOE <100...  Developmental Toxicity Study in
 intermediate-term (1-30 days,      mg/kg/day.                                 Rabbits.
 and 1-6 months).                  Inhalation assumed                         LOAEL (maternal) = 60 mg/kg/day
                                    equivalent to oral.                        based on death, abortions/
                                   UFA = 10x...........                        premature deliveries, decreased
                                   UFH = 10x...........                        food consumption.
                                   FQPA SF = 1X, when                         Co-critical: Chronic/Oncogenicity
                                    applicable.                                Study in Rats.
                                                                              NOAEL = 31.5 mg/kg/day.
                                                                              LOAEL = 109.4 mg/kg/day based on
                                                                               and increased thyroid weight and
                                                                               increased incidence of thyroid
                                                                               lesions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)     Classification: ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans'' based on the
                                     absence of treatment-related tumors in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
                                                                      studies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
  of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-
  level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
  UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
  members of the human population (intraspecies).

  Table 2--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for 2,6-Dichlorobenzamide (BAM) for Use in Human Health
                                                 Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Point of departure
        Exposure/scenario            and uncertainty/     RfD, PAD, LOC for     Study and toxicological effects
                                      safety factors       risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (All populations)..  LOAEL = 100 mg/kg/    aRfD = aPAD = 0.1    Dose-range finding assay for in
                                    day.                  mg/kg/day.           vivo mouse erythrocyte
                                   UFA = 10x...........                        micronucleus assay.
                                   UFH = 10x...........                       LOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day based on
                                   FQPA SF/UFL= 10x....                        lethargy after a single oral
                                                                               dose.
Chronic dietary (All populations)  NOAEL = 4.5 mg/kg/    cRfD = cPAD = 0.045  Chronic toxicity (dog).
                                    day.                  mg/kg/day.          LOAEL = 12.5 mg/kg/day based on
                                   UFA = 10x...........                        decreased body weight and body
                                   UFH = 10x...........                        weight gain.
                                   FQPA SF = 1X........
Incidental oral short- and         NOAEL = 14 mg/kg/day  LOC for MOE <100...  90-day oral (rat).
 intermediate-term (1-30 days,     UFA = 10x...........                       LOAEL = 49 mg/kg/day based on
 and 1-6 months).                  UFH = 10x...........                        decreased body weight gain (M)
                                   FQPA SF = 1X........                        and reduced skeletal muscle tone
                                                                               (day 4 only in males; days 91 and
                                                                               92 only in females).

Dermal short- and intermediate-    NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day  LOC for MOE <100...  5-day dermal using dichlobenil
 term (1-30 days and 1-6 months).  UFA = 10x...........                        (mouse; literature study).
                                   UFH = 10x...........                       LOAEL = 50 mg/kg/day based on
                                   FQPA SF = 1X (when                          olfactory epithelial damage.
                                    applicable).
Inhalation short- and              NOAEL = 12.1 mg/m\3\  LOC for MOE <100...  28-day inhalation using
 intermediate-term (1-30 days and  UFA = 3X............                        dichlobenil (rat).
 1-6 months).                      UFH = 10X...........                       LOAEL = 21 mg/m\3\ based on nasal
                                   FQPA SF = 1X (when                          degeneration.
                                    applicable).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer...........................     Classification: unclassified; parent herbicide dichlobenil classified as
                                        ``Group C, possible human carcinogen'' with RfD approach utilized for
                                                            quantification of human risk
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UF = uncertainty factor, UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies), UFH = potential variation in
  sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies), FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor, UFL = use of a
  LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL, NOAEL = no-observed adverse-effect level, LOAEL = lowest-observed adverse-effect
  level, RfD = reference dose (a = acute, c = chronic), PAD = population-adjusted dose, MOE = margin of
  exposure, LOC = level of concern, N/A = not applicable.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fluopicolide and its metabolite BAM, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing
fluopicolide tolerances in 40 CFR 180.627 and the exposures from BAM
from existing dichlobenil tolerances under 40 CFR 180.231. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from fluopicolide and its metabolite BAM in food as
follows:
    a. 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.
    i. Fluopicolide. A toxicity endpoint attributable to a single dose
has not been identified in the toxicological studies for fluopicolide;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
    ii. BAM. Such effects were identified for BAM. In estimating acute
dietary exposures to BAM, EPA used food consumption information from
the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA).
This dietary survey was conducted from 2003 to 2008. EPA conducted a
partially refined acute dietary exposure assessment. As to residue
levels in food, EPA assumed maximum BAM residue from either the
fluopicolide or dichlobenil field trial data. The acute assessment
assumed 100% crop treated for all commodities, except apples,
blueberries, cherries, peaches, pears, and raspberries. These values
reflect the dichlobenil percent crop treated estimates as fluopicolide
is not registered for application to these crops. Default processing
factors were used for commodities where empirical processing data were
not available
    b. Chronic exposure--i. Fluopicolide. In estimating chronic dietary
exposure, EPA used Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the
Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID, Version 3.16). The software
uses 2003-2008 food consumption data from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). The chronic analysis assumed
tolerance-level residues or maximum field trial residues, 100% crop
treated, default processing factors, and modeled drinking water
estimates.
    ii. BAM. In estimating chronic dietary exposures, EPA conducted a
partially refined chronic dietary exposure assessment using DEEM-FCID
(ver. 3.16) and USDA's NHANES/WWEIA (2003 through 2008). The chronic
dietary assessment assumed the maximum BAM residue from either the
fluopicolide or dichlobenil field trial data. The chronic assessment
assumed 100% crop treated for all commodities except apple. These
values reflect the dichlobenil percent crop treated estimates as
fluopicolide is not registered for application to these crops. Default
processing factors were used for commodities where empirical processing
data were not available.
    c. Cancer. Fluopicolide has been classified as ``not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans.'' Therefore, a cancer dietary exposure
assessment was not conducted for the parent fluopicolide. Additionally,
EPA has determined BAM's potential for carcinogenicity is similar to
that of dichlobenil, which is classified as ``group C, possible human
carcinogen.'' Quantification of cancer risk is based on the reference
dose (RfD) approach which requires comparison of the chronic exposure
to the RfD. Using this methodology will adequately account for all
chronic toxic effects, including carcinogenicity, likely to result from
exposure to BAM. Hence, a separate cancer exposure assessment to BAM
was not conducted.
    d. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in
food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after
the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect,
demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be

submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of these
tolerances.
    Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
     Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
     Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
     Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required
by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
    EPA did not use anticipated residue or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for fluopicolide. Tolerance level residues or
maximum field trial residues and 100 PCT were assumed for all food
commodities.
    EPA used anticipated residues and PCT information for the acute and
chronic dietary risk assessments for BAM. The BAM acute assessment
assumed 100 PCT for all commodities except apples (2.5%), blueberries
(2.5%), cherries (2.5%), peaches (2.5%), pears (5%) and raspberries
(20%). The BAM chronic assessment assumed 100 PCT for all commodities
except apples (1%). These values reflect the dichlobenil percent crop
treated estimates as fluopicolide is not registered for application to
these crops. Default processing factors were used for commodities where
empirical processing data were not available.
    In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National Pesticide Use
Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 6-7
years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis and a
maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The average PCT figure for
each existing use is derived by combining available public and private
market survey data for that use, averaging across all observations, and
rounding to the nearest 5%, except for those situations in which the
average PCT is less than 2.5%. The maximum PCT figure is the highest
observed maximum value reported within the most recent 6 years of
available public and private market survey data for the existing use
and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%, except for situations in
which the maximum PCT is less than 2.5%. In cases where the estimated
value is less than 2.5% but greater than 1%, the average and maximum
PCT used are 2.5%. If the estimated value is less than 1%, 1% is used
as the average PCT and 2.5% is used as the maximum PCT.
    The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates
are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are
reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that
the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an
underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption
information and consumption information for significant subpopulations
is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating
the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional
groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment
process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency
to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than
the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does
not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of
food to which BAM may be found in a particular area.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for fluopicolide in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of fluopicolide. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
    No monitoring data are available for fluopicolide or BAM. Drinking
water residues of fluopicolide (parent) estimates were generated using
maximum annual application rate of 0.375 lbs ai/acre, and the surface
water concentration calculator (SWCC version 1.106) for surface water,
and the pesticide root zone model for groundwater (PRZM-GW version
1.07). The estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
fluopicolide for non-cancer chronic exposures are 12.90 ppb for surface
water and 103 ppb for ground water.
    Estimates of BAM residues in drinking water were generated using
the Provisional Cranberry Model (PCM) and Pesticide Water Concentration
Calculator (PWC) for surface water, and the PRZM-GW model for
groundwater. BAM drinking water concentrations can result from the
application of dichlobenil and fluopicolide. The BAM estimates
resulting from application of dichlobenil are higher than those
resulting from application of fluopicolide. The acute and chronic
analyses assumed a BAM drinking water concentration of 239 ppb and 206
ppb, respectively, based on the PRZM-GW model from turf use (worst case
scenario).
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment for BAM, the water concentration value of 239 ppb was used
to assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 206 ppb and 103 ppb were
used to assess the contribution to drinking water for BAM and
fluopicolide, respectively.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
    Fluopicolide is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Residential turf grass and
recreational sites; however, all registered fluopicolide product labels
with residential use sites require that handlers wear specific clothing
and/or use personal protective equipment (PPE). Therefore, the Agency
has concluded that these products are not intended to be used by
homeowners and did not conduct residential handler assessments. There
is potential for post-application exposure for individuals entering
areas that have been previously treated with fluopicolide. EPA assessed
the following residential exposure scenarios for fluopicolide:
    Post-application exposure to children, youth, and adults from
treated lawns, turf, gardens, trees, and golf courses.
    In the case of BAM, the Agency considered the potential for
residential exposures to BAM from dichlobenil and fluopicolide uses. As
noted above, fluopicolide is registered for use on residential
turfgrass and recreational

sites, such as golf courses. These uses may also result in short-term
dermal post-application exposure to BAM to youth and adults from
treated gardens. Post-application exposures from treated turf is not
expected since BAM was not detected in turf transferable residue
studies with fluopicolide.
    As discussed above, residential handler assessments were not
performed for fluopicolide; therefore, a residential handler assessment
for BAM is also not required. Residential handler exposure to BAM
resulting from the application of dichlobenil is not expected. While
dichlobenil is currently registered for residential uses on ornamental
plants, they are approved for professional applicator use only. Post-
application exposure of adults and children to dichlobenil and BAM
exposure from the use of dichlobenil products on ornamental plants is
expected to be negligible and, therefore, was not assessed.
    Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
    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.''
    Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to fluopicolide and any other
substances. Fluopicolide shares a common metabolite, BAM, with
dichlobenil. EPA's assessment of BAM from pesticide use of fluopicolide
and dichlobenil has been updated for the current assessment and no
risks of concern were identified. For the purposes of this tolerance
action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that fluopicolide (parent) and
its metabolite BAM 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 website at: http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

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. For fluopicolide, there is
no evidence of increased susceptibility in the rabbit developmental or
rat reproduction toxicity studies. There was evidence of increased
quantitative susceptibility in the rat developmental toxicity study;
however, the developmental effects were only seen at a relatively high
dose (700 mg/kg/day), the effects are well-characterized with a clear
NOAEL, and the selected endpoints are protective of the observed
effects. For BAM, there was no evidence of increased susceptibility in
the rabbit developmental study.
    3. Conclusion for fluopicolide. 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 fluopicolide is complete.
    ii. There is no indication that fluopicolide 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 of increased susceptibility in the rabbit
developmental or rat reproduction toxicity studies. Although there is
evidence of increased quantitative susceptibility in the rat
developmental toxicity study, the developmental effects were only seen
at a relatively high dose, the effects are well characterized with a
clear NOAEL, and the selected endpoints are protective of the observed
effects. There are no residual uncertainties concerning prenatal and
postnatal toxicity for fluopicolide.
    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 water and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to fluopicolide in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure
of children. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by fluopicolide.
    4. Conclusion for BAM: EPA is retaining the FQPA SF of 10X for the
acute dietary exposure scenario for the general population to account
for the use of a LOAEL to extrapolate to a NOAEL. For all other
exposure scenarios, the FQPA SF has been reduced to 1X. That decision
is based on the following findings:
    i. Acute, subchronic, and chronic oral studies are available for
BAM and utilized for endpoint selection. For the dermal and inhalation
routes of exposures, the Agency is relying on dichlobenil toxicity
data, where olfactory toxicity was observed. Based on a comparison of
toxicity via the intraperitoneal route of exposure, higher doses of BAM
are needed to induce levels of olfactory toxicity that are similar to
those caused by dichlobenil; therefore, the endpoints based on
dichlobenil are considered protective of potential BAM toxicity.
    ii. Although there is potential neurotoxicity in the olfactory
system from BAM exposure, concern is low since the effects are well-
characterized and selected endpoints based on dichlobenil are
protective of these effects.
    iii. There is no evidence of increased susceptibility in the
developmental rabbit study.
    iv. The assessments of BAM are unlikely to underestimate exposure
and risks. Acute and chronic dietary assessments assumed maximum BAM
residues from field trial data as well as conservative (protective)
assumptions of BAM exposure in drinking water. Similar conservative
assumptions were used to assess post-application exposure of children
to BAM.

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 for
fluopicolide. Therefore, fluopicolide is not expected to pose an acute
risk.
    In the case of BAM, using the exposure assumptions discussed in
this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and
water to BAM will occupy 81% of the aPAD for children 1 to <2 years
old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
fluopicolide from food and water will utilize 15% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. In the case of BAM, chronic exposure to BAM from food and
water will utilize 26% of the cPAD for all infants (<1 year old), the
population group receiving the greatest exposure. Based on the
explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use patterns,
chronic residential exposure to residues of fluopicolide or BAM is not
expected.
    3. Short-term/intermediate-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).
    Fluopicolide is currently registered for uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure and may result in post-application
exposures of BAM. The Agency has determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with short-term
residential exposures to fluopicolide and BAM. There are no
intermediate-term exposures expected for fluopicolide or BAM; however,
the short-term aggregate assessment is considered protective of
intermediate-term since the same endpoints were selected to evaluate
short- and intermediate-term exposures.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined fluopicolide short-term
food, water, and residential exposures for children 1-2 years old and
children 6-11 years old result in aggregate MOEs of 490 and 670,
respectively. In addition, an aggregate assessment conducted for adults
resulted in an MOE of 500. Because EPA's level of concern for
fluopicolide is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
For BAM, dermal and inhalation exposures may not be combined with oral
exposures due to different toxicological effects used as the basis of
the selected endpoints. As a result, the aggregate risk estimates are
equivalent to the dietary risk estimates and are not of concern.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Due to the absence of
treatment-related tumors in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, fluopicolide is classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic
to humans''; therefore, a quantitative cancer assessment is not
required.
    EPA has assumed BAM's potential for carcinogenicity is similar to
that of dichlobenil, which is classified as ``group C, possible human
carcinogen.''
    Quantification of cancer risk is based on the RfD approach which
requires comparison of the chronic exposure to the RfD. Therefore, the
chronic risks discussed in Unit III.E.2. are considered protective of
both non-cancer and cancer effects.
    5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to fluopicolide residues, including its metabolite.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatography with tandem
mass spectroscopy (LC/MS/MS) enforcement method RM-43C-2) is available
to enforce the tolerance expression. Enforcement methodology (LC/MS/MS
Method, Methods 00782, 00782/M001, 00782/M002, and 00782/M003) is
available to adequately enforce the tolerance expression for BAM.
    The methods 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 protected].

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.
    Codex has not established MRLs for basil, hop, bean, or citrus. The
fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F
tolerance is harmonized with Codex grape MRL. Codex established a
tolerance for ``Fruiting vegetables other than cucurbits'' at 1.0 ppm.
Based on the field trial data and the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) calculator, using the labeled
application scenario may result in residues greater than 1.0 ppm in/on
fruiting vegetables. As a result, harmonization of the vegetable,
fruiting, crop group 8-10 tolerance with the Codex MRL could result in
food containing residues exceeding tolerances despite legal application
of the pesticide, which would not be appropriate.

C. Response to Comments on Notice of Filing

    Two anonymous public comments were received on the notice of filing
that center around opposing IR-4 and the uses of pesticides (toxic
chemicals), such as fluopicolide, on food commodities including grape,
citrus and basil, claiming these chemicals are harmful to human health.
    EPA's Response: Aside from assertions that chemicals are toxic and
linked to adverse human health effects, the commenters provided no
information supporting these assertions that EPA could use to evaluate
the safety of fluopicolide or BAM. The existing legal framework
provided by section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA) states that tolerances may be set when persons seeking such
tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the
safety standard imposed by that statute. When new or amended tolerances
are requested for residues of a pesticide in food or feed, the Agency
evaluates all available data and assesses the potential for risk from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide. As discussed in this rule, EPA
examined all relevant data for fluopicolide and BAM and has concluded
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from

aggregate human exposure to fluopicolide, including residues of its
metabolite BAM. The commenters have presented no information to support
reconsideration of that conclusion.

D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    The established tolerances differ from the petitioner's requests as
follows:
    i. EPA is establishing a tolerance for ``basil fresh leaves'' at 40
ppm, rather than 30 ppm, as a result of removing certain inadequate
residue data from the tolerance calculation.
    ii. The petitioner requested a tolerance for residues of
fluopicolide for the general category of ``bean, succulent'' at 0.9
ppm. This term is defined in EPA's regulations as including a variety
of beans in succulent form (see 40 CFR 180.1(g)). At this time, EPA is
establishing tolerances for only those beans included in the succulent
bean definition that are also supported by the submitted snap bean
field trial data. Those specific succulent beans are the following:
``bean, moth, succulent'', ``bean, yardlong, succulent'' (species of
the Vigna genus), ``bean, runner, succulent'', ``bean, snap,
succulent'', and ``bean, wax, succulent'' (species of the Phaseolus
genus). Tolerances for the other beans contained within the definition
of ``bean, succulent'' as contained in 180.1(g) are not being
established at this time due to lack of adequate residue data. In
addition, the Agency has adjusted the tolerance values for these beans
(from 0.9 to 0.90) to be consistent with its current guidance on
significant figures.
    iii. Because all reported residue data on crops supporting the
``fruit, citrus, crop group 10-10'' were below the 0.01 ppm limit of
quantitation, EPA is establishing a tolerance for this group at 0.01
ppm.
    iv. The petitioner's requested tolerances for ``citrus, dried
pulp'' at 0.048 ppm and ``citrus, oil'' at 1.94 ppm were based on the
petitioned-for tolerance level for citrus group 10-10 at 0.02 ppm.
Using the 0.01 ppm tolerance level for group 10-10 as indicated in the
previous paragraph and applying appropriate processing factors yields
tolerances of 0.03 for citrus, dried pulp and 1.0 for citrus, oil.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of the fungicide
fluopicolide [2,6-dichloro-N-[[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-
pyridinyl]methyl]benzamide], including its metabolites and degradates
(determined by measuring the parent only), in or on Basil, fresh leaves
at 40 ppm; Basil, dried leaves at 200 ppm; Bean, moth, succulent at
0.90 ppm; Bean, snap, succulent at 0.90 ppm; Bean, runner, succulent at
0.90 ppm; Bean, wax, succulent at 0.90 ppm; Bean, yardlong, succulent
at 0.90 ppm; Citrus, dried pulp at 0.03 ppm; Citrus, oil at 1.0 ppm;
Fruit, citrus, crop group 10-10 at 0.01 ppm; Fruit, small, vine
climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 2.0 ppm; Hop,
dried cones at 15 ppm; and Vegetable, fruiting, crop group 8-10 at 1.6
ppm. Also, the tolerances for ``Grape'' and ``Vegetable, fruiting,
group 8'' in the table in paragraph (a) and for ``Hop, dried, cones''
in the table in paragraph (b) are deleted as they are superseded by
this action. Finally, in an additional housekeeping measure, the
expired tolerances for ``Potato, processed potato waste'' at 1.0 ppm
and ``Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C'' at 0.3 ppm are
deleted since they have no effect anymore and have been replaced by
lower tolerances for those commodities as discussed in the Federal
Register of September 26, 2016 (81 FR 65924).

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); Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); or Executive Order 13771,
entitled ``Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82
FR 9339, February 3, 2017). 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 20, 2018.
Michael L. Goodis,
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.  180.627:
0
a. In the table to paragraph (a):
0
i. Add alphabetically the entries ``Basil, dried leaves''; ``Basil,
fresh leaves''; ``Bean, moth, succulent''; ``Bean, runner, succulent'';
``Bean, snap, succulent''; ``Bean, wax, succulent''; ``Bean, yardlong,
succulent''; ``Citrus, dried pulp''; ``Citrus, oil''; ``Fruit, citrus,
crop group 10-10''; and ``Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy
kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F'';
0
ii. Remove the entry for ``Grape'';
0
iii. Add alphabetically the entry ``Hop, dried cones'';
0
iv. Remove the entry for ``Potato, processed potato waste \1\ '';
0
v. Add alphabetically the entry ``Vegetable, fruiting, crop group 8-
10''; and
0
vi. Remove the entries for ``Vegetable, fruiting, group 8'' and
``Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C \1\ '' and footnote 1 of
the table.
0
b. Revise paragraph (b).
    The additions and revision read as follows:

Sec.  180.627  Fluopicolide; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basil, dried, leaves........................................         200
Basil, fresh leaves.........................................          40
Bean, moth, succulent.......................................        0.90
Bean, runner, succulent.....................................        0.90
Bean, snap, succulent.......................................        0.90
Bean, wax, succulent........................................        0.90
Bean, yardlong, succulent...................................        0.90
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Citrus, dried pulp..........................................        0.03
Citrus, oil.................................................         1.0
Fruit, citrus, crop group 10-10.............................        0.01
Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit,                 2.0
 subgroup 13-07F............................................

                                * * * * *
Hop, dried cones............................................          15

                                * * * * *
Vegetable, fruiting, crop group 8-10........................         1.6

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

    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-04533 Filed 3-6-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 151 (Tuesday, August 8, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53481-53482]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16938]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EF14-1-005]

Southwestern Power Administration; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on July 7, 2023, Southwestern Power Administration
submits tariff filing: 2013 IS NFTS Rate schedule Amendment P-13B to be
effective 7/15/2023.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to

serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the
Applicant.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail
similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in
docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 2, 2023.

    Dated: August 2, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-16938 Filed 8-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P