[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 154 (Monday, August 11, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46866-46867]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18867]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0602]

Notice of Review and Update of the New York/New Jersey Area
Contingency Plan

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice; Request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard Captain of the Port, New York, as Chair of the
New York/New Jersey Area Committee, announces the review of the New
York/New Jersey Area Contingency Plan (NY/NJ ACP) and is seeking public
comment on the NY/NJ ACP. The NY/NJ ACP is a plan prepared by the New
York/New Jersey Area Committee to define roles, responsibilities,
resources and procedures necessary to respond to a myriad of spill
response evolutions. The New York/New Jersey Area Committee is composed
of experienced environmental/response representatives from federal,
state and local government agencies with definitive responsibilities
for the area's environmental integrity. Other interested stakeholders,
such as industry and environmental groups, also compose the NY/NJ Area
Committee. The NY/NJ Area Committee is responsible for developing the
NY/NJ ACP. This notice solicits comments and suggestions for updating
the NY/NJ ACP.

DATES: Comments and related material must either be submitted to our
online docket via http://www.regulations.gov on or before October 10,
2014 or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date.

ADDRESSES: The current NY/NJ ACP is the ``Port of NY/NJ ACP 2011
Revision'' and is available at http://homeport.uscg.mil/newyork in the
``Safety and Security'' block on the lower right of the page. Submit
comments using one of the listed methods, and see SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for more information on public comments.
     Online--http://www.regulations.gov following Web site
instructions.
     Fax--202-493-2251.

     Mail or hand deliver--Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Hours
for hand delivery are 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document
call or email LT Jeffrey J. Brooks, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For information about viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, toll free 1-800-647-5527.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We encourage you to submit comments (or
related material) on the NY/NJ ACP. We will consider all submissions
and may revise the NY/NJ ACP based on the NY/NJ Area Committee's
direction and your comments. Comments should be marked with docket
number USCG-2014-0602 and should provide a reason for each suggestion
or recommendation. You should provide personal contact information so
that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your comments;
but please note that all comments will be posted to the online docket
without change and that any personal information you include can be
searchable online (see the Federal Register Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets, 73 FR 3316, Jan. 17, 2008).
    Mailed or hand-delivered comments should be in an unbound 8\1/2\ x
11 inch format suitable for reproduction. The Docket Management
Facility will acknowledge receipt of mailed comments if you enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope with your submission.
    Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public comments, are in
our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by
following the Web site's instructions. You can also view the docket at
the Docket Management Facility (see the mailing address under
ADDRESSES) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.

Basis and Purpose

    This ACP is required by Title IV, Section 4202 of the Oil Pollution
Act of 1990, which amends Subsection (j) of Section 311 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321 (j)), as amended by the
Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et. seq.) to address the
development of a National Planning and Response System. This ACP is
also written in conjunction with the National Oil and Hazardous
Substance Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) (40 CFR 300) and the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601) as amended by the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986.
    Under the National Contingency Plan (NCP) (40 CFR 300), the Coast
Guard and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provide the leadership
of the National Response Team (NRT), the Regional Response Teams (RRT)
and local Area Committees to engage the National Response System to
verify threats (spill potential), risks (resources that might be harmed
in a spill), and establish the strategies necessary to prepare for and
respond to a pollution incident or event. Pursuant to Executive Order
12777 of October 22, 1991, the EPA is responsible for the inland zone
and the Coast Guard is responsible for the coastal zone. The Coast
Guard and EPA are responsible for organizing and overseeing the NY/NJ
Area Committee and the NY/NJ Area Committee is responsible for
developing the NY/NJ ACP. ACPs are periodically reviewed and revised.
The NY/NJ ACP is currently under review.
    The coastal zone addressed by the NY/NJ ACP is situated within the
boundaries of the RRT for Region 2 (RRT-II). At a meeting on April 9-
10, 2014, in Albany, New York, a meeting of the RRT-II discussed
response preparations for potential crude oil spills on the Hudson
River with members from the NY/NJ Area Committee, numerous federal and
state agencies, as well as attendees from private industry,
nongovernmental organizations, the media and private citizens. The
discussions that occurred at the RRT-II's April 9-10, 2014 meeting will
be used in updating the NY/NJ ACP, as well as the results and lessons
learned from the National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program
(PREP) exercises of the ACP. The most recent full-scale PREP exercise
was held on September 17, 2013 and was based upon a spill scenario in
western Long Island Sound that impacted both New York and Connecticut.

Request for Comments

    The Coast Guard is aware of reports of increased oil transport in
the coastal zone covered by the NY/NJ ACP. We are also aware of an
increased national trend to move oil via rail through the Coastal Zone.
The Coast Guard is, therefore, particularly interested in receiving
public comment regarding the transport of oil via rail through the
coastal zone covered by the NY/NJ ACP. Public input will be used to
assist the Coast Guard in determining response resource needs in
updating the NY/NJ ACP.
    The Coast Guard and EPA are working with representatives from the
State of New York and other federal agencies of the NY/NJ Area
Committee to schedule additional public engagement opportunities to
obtain public input on the NY/NJ ACP. We will announce the time and
place of any meetings by a later notice in the Federal Register. In
accordance with 40 CFR 1506.6(b)(1), the Coast Guard will inform those
persons who may be interested in participating in the NY/NJ Area
Committee's update of the NY/NJ ACP. Individual contact information for
updates on the NY/NJ ACP or an opportunity to participate in the NY/NJ
Area Committee process should be provided to the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph by October 10, 2014.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1321(j) and, 5
U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: July 17, 2014.
G.A. Loebl,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, New York.
[FR Doc. 2014-18867 Filed 8-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 138 (Friday, July 18, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41915-41918]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16836]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0023; FRL-9912-10]

Polyoxyalkylated Trimethylopropanes; Tolerance Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes with
20 to 80 moles of ethylene and/or propylene oxide, fatty acid esters
with C8 through C22 aliphatic alkanoic and/or
alkenoic fatty acids, branched or linear, the resulting polyoxyalkylene
trimethylopropane esters having a minimum molecular weight (MW) of
3,000 when used as an inert ingredient in a pesticide chemical
formulation. Spring Trading Co., on behalf of Croda, Inc., submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes on food or feed
commodities.

DATES: This regulation is effective July 18, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 16, 2014,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0023, 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: Lois Rossi, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 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. Can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0023 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
September 16, 2014. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0023, 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. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of February 21, 2014 (79 FR 9870) (FRL-
9904-98), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21
U.S.C. 346a, announcing the receipt of a pesticide petition (PP IN-
10658) filed by Spring Trading Co., 10805W. Timberwagon Circle, Spring,
TX 77380-4030, on behalf of Croda, Inc., 315 Cherry Lane, New Castle,
DE 19720. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.960 be amended by
establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes with 20 to 80 moles of
ethylene and/or propylene oxide, fatty acid esters with C8
through C22 aliphatic alkanoic and/or alkenoic fatty acids,
branched or linear, the resulting polyoxyalkylene trimethylopropane
esters having a minimum MW of 3,000. (CAS Reg. Nos., 25765-36-0; 29860-
47-7; 37339-03-0; 52624-57-4; 58090-24-7; 63964-38-5; 72939-62-9;
74521-14-5; 75300-70-8; 75300-90-2; 84271-03-4; 84271-04-5; 86850-92-2;
107120-02-5; 133331-01-8; 137587-60-1; 149797-40-0; 149797-41-1;
150695-97-9; 152130-24-0; 163349-94-8; 163349-95-9; 163349-96-0;
163349-97-1; 163349-98-2; 165467-70-9; 183619-46-7; 183619-50-3;
185260-01-9; 202606-04-0; 210420-84-1; 233660-70-3; 263011-96-7;
283602-94-8; 701980-40-7; 872038-58-9; 875709-44-7; 875709-45-8;
875709-46-9; 875709-47-0; 879898-63-2; 910038-01-6; 1190748-04-9;
1225384-02-0; 1428944-41-5; and 1446498-15-2). That document included a
summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner and solicited
comments on the petitioner's request. The Agency did not receive any
comments.
    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(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 use 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 an exemption from the
requirement of 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 . . .'' and
specifies factors EPA is to consider in establishing an exemption.

III. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings

    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be shown that the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably foreseeable
circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human health. In order
to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the inert in
conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert ingredient
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate
exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action and considered its validity, completeness and reliability
and the relationship of this information 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. In the case of certain chemical substances that
are defined as polymers, the Agency has established a set of criteria
to identify categories of polymers expected to present minimal or no
risk. The definition of a polymer is given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and the
exclusion criteria for identifying these low-risk polymers are
described in 40 CFR 723.250(d). Polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes
conforms to the definition of a polymer given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and
meets the following criteria that are used to identify low-risk
polymers.
    1. The polymer is not a cationic polymer nor is it reasonably
anticipated to become a cationic polymer in a natural aquatic
environment.
    2. The polymer does contain as an integral part of its composition
the atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
    3. The polymer does not contain as an integral part of its
composition, except as impurities, any element other than those listed
in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii).
    4. The polymer is neither designed nor can it be reasonably
anticipated to substantially degrade, decompose, or depolymerize.
    5. The polymer is manufactured or imported from monomers and/or
reactants that are already included on the TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory or manufactured under an applicable TSCA section 5 exemption.

    6. The polymer is not a water absorbing polymer with a number
average MW greater than or equal to 10,000 daltons.
    7. The polymer does not contain certain perfluoroalkyl moieties
consisting of a CF3- or longer chain length as specified in
40 CFR 723.250(d)(6).
    Additionally, the polymer also meets as required the following
exemption criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).
    8. The polymer's number average MW is greater than or equal to
1,000 and less than 10,000 daltons. The polymer contains less than 10%
oligomeric material below MW 500 and less than 25% oligomeric material
below MW 1,000.
    Thus, polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes meets the criteria for a
polymer to be considered low risk under 40 CFR 723.250. Based on its
conformance to the criteria in this unit, no mammalian toxicity is
anticipated from dietary, inhalation, or dermal exposure to
polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    For the purposes of assessing potential exposure under this
exemption, EPA considered that polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes
could be present in all raw and processed agricultural commodities and
drinking water, and that non-occupational, non-dietary exposure was
possible. The number average MW of polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes
is 3,000 daltons. Generally, a polymer of this size would be poorly
absorbed through the intact gastrointestinal tract or through intact
human skin. Since polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes conform to the
criteria that identify a low-risk polymer, there are no concerns for
risks associated with any potential exposure scenarios that are
reasonably foreseeable. The Agency has determined that a tolerance is
not necessary to protect the public health.

V. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of
Toxicity

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency
consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of
a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and
polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that polyoxyalkylated
trimethylopropanes do not have a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

VI. Additional Safety Factor for the Protection of Infants and Children

    Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold 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 data base unless EPA concludes
that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children. Due to the expected low toxicity of polyoxyalkylated
trimethylopropanes, EPA has not used a safety factor analysis to assess
the risk. For the same reasons the additional tenfold safety factor is
unnecessary.

VII. Determination of Safety

    Based on the conformance to the criteria used to identify a low-
risk polymer, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty of no
harm to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to residues of polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes.

VIII. Other Considerations

A. Existing Exemptions From a Tolerance

    None.

B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

C. International Residue Limits

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

IX. Conclusion

    Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting residues of polyoxyalkylated
trimethylopropanes from the requirement of a tolerance will be safe.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d)
in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these rules from review under
Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been exempted
from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not subject
to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it involve any
technical standards that would require Agency consideration of
voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this

action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal
governments, on the relationship between the national government and
the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or otherwise have any unique
impacts on local governments. Thus, the Agency has determined that
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition, this final rule
does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    Although this action does not 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), EPA seeks to achieve
environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of
any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the
development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. As such, to the extent that information is
publicly available or was submitted in comments to EPA, the Agency
considered whether groups or segments of the population, as a result of
their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical
or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or
environmental effects from exposure to the pesticide discussed in this
document, compared to the general population.

XI. 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: July 10, 2014.
Lois Rossi,
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.  180.960, the table is amended by alphabetically adding an
entry for ``Polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes * * *'' after the entry
for ``Polyoxyalkylated glycerol * * *'' to read as follows:

Sec.  [emsp14]180.960  Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Polymer                              CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Polyoxyalkylated trimethylopropanes      25765-36-0; 29860-47-7; 37339-
 with 20 to 80 moles of ethylene and/or   03-0; 52624-57-4; 58090-24-7;
 propylene oxide, fatty acid esters       63964-38-5; 72939-62-9; 74521-
 with C8 through C22 aliphatic alkanoic   14-5; 75300-70-8; 75300-90-2;
 and/or alkenoic fatty acids, branched    84271-03-4; 84271-04-5; 86850-
 or linear; minimum number average        92-2; 107120-02-5; 133331-01-
 molecular weight (in amu), 3,000.        8; 137587-60-1; 149797-40-0;
                                          149797-41-1; 150695-97-9;
                                          152130-24-0; 163349-94-8;
                                          163349-95-9; 163349-96-0;
                                          163349-97-1; 163349-98-2;
                                          165467-70-9; 183619-46-7;
                                          183619-50-3; 185260-01-9;
                                          202606-04-0; 210420-84-1;
                                          233660-70-3; 263011-96-7;
                                          283602-94-8; 701980-40-7;
                                          872038-58-9; 875709-44-7;
                                          875709-45-8; 875709-46-9;
                                          875709-47-0; 879898-63-2;
                                          910038-01-6; 1190748-04-9;
                                          1225384-02-0; 1428944-41-5;
                                          1446498-15-2.

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

[FR Doc. 2014-16836 Filed 7-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6406-6407]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02277]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0980; Airspace Docket No. 21-AGL-32]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Janesville, WI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the Class D and Class E airspace at
Janesville, WI. This action is the result of an airspace review caused
by the decommissioning of the Rockford very high frequency (VHF)
omnidirectional range (VOR) as part of the VOR Minimal Operational
Network (MON) Program. The names and geographic coordinates of the
airport are also being updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical
database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, May 19, 2022. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR
part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is also available for inspection at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of FAA Order JO 7400.11F at NARA, email:
[email protected] or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends the Class D airspace and Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface at Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport,
Janesville, WI, to support instrument flight rule operations at this
airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal

Register (86 FR 62755; November 12, 2021) for Docket No. FAA-2021-0980
to amend the Class D and Class E airspace at Janesville, WI. Interested
parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments
were received.
    Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraphs
5000 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace designations
listed in this document will be published subsequently in FAA Order JO
7400.11.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71:
    Amends the Class D airspace to within a 4.3-mile (increased from a
4.1-mile) radius of Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Janesville,
WI; adds an extension 1 mile each side of the 221[deg] bearing from the
airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius of the airport to 4.4 miles
southwest of the airport; adds an extension 1 mile each side of the
331[deg] bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius of
the airport to 4.4 miles northwest of the airport; updates the name
(previously Rock County Airport) and geographic coordinates of the
airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database; removes the
city associated with the airport from the airspace legal description to
comply with changes to FAA Order JO 7400.2N, Procedures for Handling
Airspace Matters; and updates the outdated term ``Airport/Facility
Directory'' to ``Chart Supplement'';
    And amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.8-mile (decreased from an 8.9-mile)
radius of Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport; adds an extension 2
miles each side of the 042[deg] bearing from the airport extending from
the 6.8-mile radius of the airport to 10.9 miles northeast of the
airport; removes the city associated with the airport from the airspace
legal description to comply with changes to FAA Order JO 7400.2N; and
removes the exclusionary language as it is not required.
    This action is due to an airspace review caused by the
decommissioning of the Rockford VOR, which provided navigation
information for the instrument procedures this airport, as part of the
VOR MON Program.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

AGL WI D Janesville, WI [Amended]

Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, WI
    (Lat. 42[deg]37'13'' N, long. 89[deg]02'30'' W)

    That airspace extending from the surface to and including 3,300
feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of the Southern Wisconsin Regional
Airport, and within 1 mile each side of the 221[deg] bearing from
the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius of the airport to 4.4
miles southwest of the airport, and within 1 mile each side of the
331[deg] bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius
of the airport to 4.4 miles northwest of the airport. This Class D
airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times
established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective dates
and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart
Supplement.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AGL WI E5 Janesville, WI [Amended]

Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, WI
    (Lat. 42[deg]37'13'' N, long. 89[deg]02'30'' W)
Beloit Airport, WI
    (Lat. 42[deg]29'52'' N, long. 88[deg]58'03'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within an 6.8-mile radius of the Southern Wisconsin Regional
Airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 042[deg] bearing from
the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport extending from the 6.8-mile
radius of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport to 10.9 miles
northeast of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, and within a
6.3-mile radius of the Beloit Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 31, 2022.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2022-02277 Filed 2-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 216 (Friday, November 7, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66368-66369]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26449]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9918-91-OGC]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent decree; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), notice is hereby given of a proposed
consent decree to address a lawsuit filed by Sierra Club in the United
States District Court for the District of Columbia: Sierra Club v.
McCarthy, Case No. 1:14-cv-00833-ESH (D.D.C.). On May 20, 2014,
Plaintiff filed a complaint which alleged that Gina McCarthy, in her
official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (``EPA''), failed to perform her nondiscretionary
duty to take action on a number of Texas state implementation plan
(``SIP'') submissions for the Dallas/Ft. Worth nonattainment area to
address the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS within one year of the date the
submissions were deemed complete by operation of law. These SIP
submissions include a demonstration of attainment, reasonably available
control technology (``RACT'') requirements for volatile organic
compounds (``VOCs'') and nitrogen oxides (``NOX''), and
provisions for reasonable further progress (``RFP'') toward attainment.
Plaintiff's complaint also alleged that the Administrator failed to
perform a nondiscretionary duty to determine whether the Dallas/Ft.
Worth area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the June 15, 2013
attainment date and to reclassify the area accordingly. The proposed
consent decree would establish deadlines for EPA to take these actions.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
by December 8, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2014-0815, online at www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred method);
by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kaytrue Ting, Air and Radiation Law
Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    The proposed consent decree would resolve a lawsuit filed by Sierra
Club seeking to compel the Administrator to take action under CAA
sections 110(k), 179(c)(1)-(2) and 181(b)(2)(A)-(B). Under the terms of
the proposed consent decree, EPA would agree to sign one or more
notices of final rulemaking to approve or disapprove, in whole or in
part, the Texas SIP submissions for the Dallas/Ft. Worth 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area identified in Attachment A of the consent
decree, including: NOX and VOC RACT provisions by July 31,
2015; an ozone attainment demonstration by August 31, 2015; and the
remaining SIP submissions identified by Plaintiff, including RFP
provisions, by December 15, 2014. The proposed consent decree also
provides that not later than fifteen days after the entry of the
consent decree, EPA would agree to sign a notice containing the
Administrator's proposed determination of whether Dallas/Ft. Worth
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.
The proposed consent decree further provides that not later than 180
days after publication of the proposed determination of whether Dallas/
Ft. Worth attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date, EPA would agree to sign a notice containing the Administrator's
final determination of whether Dallas/Ft. Worth attained by

the applicable attainment date. EPA would not be obligated to make a
final determination of whether Dallas/Ft. Worth attained the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS if the area is redesignated to attainment or if a
final rulemaking revoking the 1997 ozone NAAQS becomes effective. Under
the terms of the proposed consent decree, EPA will deliver notice of
the above actions to the Office of the Federal Register for review and
publication within 3 business days of issuance or signature. In
addition, the proposed consent decree indicates that EPA agrees that
Sierra Club is entitled to recover its costs of litigation pursuant to
42. U.S.C. 7604(d) for work incurred prior to the lodging of the
consent decree.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the
proposed consent decree from persons who are not named as parties or
intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of
Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree
if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that
such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent
with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of
Justice determines that consent to this consent decree should be
withdrawn, the terms of the consent decree will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree

A. How can I get a copy of the consent decree?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by EPA-HQ-
OGC-2014-0815) contains a copy of the proposed consent decree. The
official public docket is available for public viewing at the Office of
Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA
Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
www.regulations.gov. You may use www.regulations.gov to submit or view
public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the
official public docket, and access those documents in the public docket
that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in the
appropriate docket identification number then select ``search''.
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless
the comment contains copyrighted material, confidential business
information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute is not included in the official
public docket or in the electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that
copyrighted material, including copyrighted material contained in a
public comment, will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket
but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official
public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available
electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available
docket materials through the EPA Docket Center.

B. How and to whom do I submit comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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.
    Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA
electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The
electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail
(email) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an
email comment directly to the Docket without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: October 29, 2014.
Lorie J. Schmidt,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2014-26449 Filed 11-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 248)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 76700-76704]
[DOCID:fr28de05-14]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0467; FRL-7753-6]

Xanthomonas Campestris pv. Vesicatoria and Pseudomonas Syringae
pv. Tomato Specific Bacteriophages; Exemption from the Requirement of a
Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of the bacteriophages that specifically
target the bacterial pathogens Xanthomonas campestris pv. Vesicatoria
and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato present on tomatoes and peppers
when applied/used as bacteriocides on tomatoes and peppers. Omnylytics
submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996
(FQPA), requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance.
This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible
level for residues of Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and
Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages when applied/
used as bacteriocides on tomatoes and peppers.

DATES: This regulation is effective December 28, 2005. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 27, 2006.

ADDRESSES: To submit a written objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in Unit VIII. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0467. All documents in the
docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. (EDOCKET, EPA's

electronic public docket and comment system was replaced on November
25, 2005, by an enhanced federal-wide electronic docket management and
comment system located at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the on-

line instructions.) Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., 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 electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the
Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119,
Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This docket
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is (703) 305-
5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leonard Cole, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511C), 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

    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. 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. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document and Other
Related Information?

    In addition to using EDOCKET (http://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may

access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
 A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180

is available at E-CFR Beta Site Two at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of May 3, 2000 (FR 65 25717) (FRL-6553-2),
EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of the FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance
petition (PP OF6111) by OmniLytics, P.O. Box 4296, Logan, Utah 84323-
4296. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of the bacteriophages that specifically target the bacterial
pathogens Xanthomonas campestris pv. Vesicatoria and Pseudomonas
syringae pv. tomato on tomatoes and peppers. This notice included a
summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner OmniLytics. There
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the 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. Pursuant to section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
section 408(b)(2)(C), which require 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. . . . ''
Additionally, section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA requires that the
Agency consider ``available information concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues'' and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the
toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings.

III. Toxicological Profile

    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA, EPA has reviewed
the available scientific data and other

relevant information in support of this action and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability and the relationship of this
information 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.
    Phages are naturally occurring viruses that are found in soil,
water, and in association with animals, including humans, and plants.
The total number of phages worldwide is estimated to be in the range of
1,030 to 1,032. Phages are obligate intracellular parasites of
bacteria, which means they attack bacteria, and are not infectious to
humans or other animals. Phages are host-specific for bacteria, with
specific bacteriophages attacking only one bacterial species and most
frequently only one strain of a bacterial specieis. As such, phages do
not attack other beneficial soil bacteria. In addition, there is no
evidence for non-selective infection. Thus, non-target organisms, such
as fish and wildlife, are not affected. Humans and other animals
consume phages when they eat food they are commonly found in water,
ground beef, pork, sausage, chicken, raw skim milk, oysters, cheese,
fresh mushrooms, and lettuce. In addition, phages are common commensals
of the human gut and likely play an important role in regulating
various bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract. Moreover, phages have
been used therapeutically or non-therapeutically in humans for more
than 80 years with no ill effects. As cited in public literature,
phages have been used as therapeutic agents and are active against
bacteria of many human diseases such as anthrax, bronchitis, diarrhea,
scarlet fever, typhus, cholera, diphtheria, gonorrhea, paratyphus,
bubonic plague, and osteomyelitis. Moreover, hundreds of millions of
persons have received live bacteriophage vaccines. These phages have
been used in the human population to control polio, measles, mumps and
rubella. Recipients of these bacteriophages showed no evidence of
adverse reactions to phages. The specific mode of action of the active
component of the AgriPhage product is such that these bacteroicides are
effective only against the bacterial pathogens which they specifically
target, in this case, Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and
Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato bacteria when found on tomatoes and
peppers.
    In support of this tolerance exemption, data waivers were requested
and granted for the required mammalian toxicity studies, including
acute toxicity and other toxicological studies used to determine risks
to human health. The waiver requests, which were supported by publicly
available information submitted by OmniLytics, find their
jusitification in the information summarized in the paragraph above,
including, more generally, documented lack of toxicity associated with
bacteriophages, the fact that bacteriophages only attack specific
bacteria, and that they pose little to no risk to humans. Specifically,
waivers were granted based on public literature submitted by the
applicant for the following studies: Acute oral toxicity, acute dermal
toxicity, acute inhalation toxicity, primary eye irritation, and
primary dermal irritation.
    1. Hypersensitivity (OPPTS Harmonized Guideline 870.2600). The
potential for repeated contact of the product with human skin by
inhalation or dermal routes is a concern only to applicators of the
end-use products (i.e., occupational exposure); however, the risk to
applicators from exposure is mitigated as they are required to wear
protective chemical-resistant gloves, aprons, footwear and masks.
Accordingly, a hypersensitivity study is not required for registration
of this product (per 40 CFR 158.690(c)(2)(iii)). In addition, there are
no reports of dermal sensitization to low concentrations of Xanthomonas
campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific
bacteriophages in the published literature. The registrant also has
reported no hypersensitivity incidents to date (OPPTS Harmonized
Guideline 885.3400). Nonetheless, pursuant to FIFRA section 6(a)(2),
the registrant is required to report to the Agency any future incidents
of hypersensitivity associated with Xanthomonas campestris pv.
vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific
bacteriophages.
    2. Immune response (OPPTS Harmonized Guideline 870.7800). The
registrant requested a waiver for this study, and submitted supporting
published literature. EPA's review concluded that Xanthomonas
campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific
bacteriophages are common bacteriophages and are found in food consumed
by humans (Whitman et. al., 1971). With no known incidences of allergic
responses to these or similar phages, there is reasonable certainty
that Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae
pv. tomato specific bacteriophages will not induce adverse immune
responses in humans. This conclusion is further bolstered by the fact
that these bacteriophages are host specific. As a result, the agency
approved the waiver request for the Immune Response study.
    3. Acute injection toxicity/pathogenicity - Rat (OPPTS Harmonized
Guideline 885.3200). The Registrant submitted supporting public
literature for this study, and requested a waiver. A waiver was granted
based on the fact that Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and
Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages and similar
bacteriophages are common bacteriophages found in drinking water and
food ingested daily by humans and animals. According to published
literature no known adverse effects or deaths have occurred in any
species as a result of such dietary exposures. Bacteriophages are host
specific and attack only the target bacteria. It has been reported in
public literature that humans and other animals consume phages when
they eat food--they are commonly found in water, ground beef, pork,
sausage, chicken, raw skim milk, oysters, cheese, fresh mushrooms, and
lettuce. Further, phages have been used in the human population to
control polio, measles, mumps and rubella. Recipients of these
bacteriophages showed no evidence of adverse reactions to phages.
    Based on the published literature and data waivers submitted (and
granted) in accordance with the Tier I toxicology data requirements set
forth in 40 CFR 158.690(c), the Tier II and Tier III toxicology data
requirements also set forth therein were not triggered and, therefore,
not required in connection with this action.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    In examining aggregate exposure, section 408 of the FFDCA directs
EPA to consider available information concerning exposures from the
pesticide residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures,
including drinking water from ground water or surface water and
exposure through pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings
(residential and other indoor uses).

A. Dietary Exposure

    1. Food. All phages, including those at issue in this action, are
similar in nature in that they are host specific, attacking only
bacteria. Published literature submitted by the registrant, and other
publically available literature indicate that humans are exposed to
phages daily, and these phages are commonly found in humans having no
known adverse effects. Indeed, humans and

other animals routinely consume phages when they eat food such as raw
produce and cheese. For example, it is reported that 1,000
(103) to 5 x 105 phages can be isolated routinely
per gram (g) of high quality cheese. Pathogenic microorganisms are
often found in foods; therefore, it is not surprising that 1 study
found E. coli and coliphages in 11 of 12 foods purchased at retail
markets. In this study, 10 purchases of each of the 12 foods were made.
All 10 of the fresh ground beef purchases were contaminated with E.
coli, and all 10 contained coliphages. In addition to ground beef, E.
coli and coliphages were found in fresh chicken, fresh pork, fresh
oyster, fresh mushrooms, lettuce, chicken pot pie, biscuit dough, deli
loaf, deli roasted turkey, and package roasted chicken. Another example
of phages in food has been Propionibacterium freundenreichii phage
found in a concentration as high as 1.4 x 106/gm of swiss
cheese. Based on the above and the fact that bacteriophages are host
specific, these organisms are not known to pose any human health
effects. Throughout the literature cited by the registrant and other
publically available literature, there have been no known adverse
effects to humans ever reported. Accordingly, the Agency concludes that
when Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae
pv. tomato specific Bacteriophages are used according to the manner
intended (i.e., to control the bacterial pathogens Xanthomonas
campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato on
tomatoes and peppers), there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result to humans from all anticipated dietary exposures (through
food) to any residues resulting from such use.
    2. Drinking water exposure. The Xanthomonas campestris pv.
vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages
are not intended for use in drinking water, nor are the approved uses
likely to result in these bacteriophages reaching surface water or
ground water that might be used as drinking water. Furthermore, in the
unlikely event that Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and
Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages do reach water
consumed by humans, for the many reasons enumerated numerous times
above, the Agency concludes that when Xanthomonas campestris pv.
vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific Bacteriophages
are used according to the manner intended (i.e., to control the
bacterial pathogens Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and
Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato on tomatoes and peppers), there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to humans from all
anticipated dietary exposures (through water) to any residues resulting
from such use.

B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure

    Since Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas
syringae pv. tomato specific Bacteriophages are host specific and
inactivated within 24-48 hours after application, the potential for
non-occupational, non-dietary exposures (i.e., dermal and inhalation
exposures) to these phages by the general population, including infants
and children, is highly unlikely. Moreover, the general population,
including infants and children, are exposed to bacteriophages daily in
food and drinking water with no known adverse effects ever being
reported. Therefore, the Agency concludes that in the unlikely event
there is non-occupational, non-dietary exposure to these specific
phages, such exposures would pose no risks to the general population,
including infants and children.

V. Cumulative Effects

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the 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.'' These considerations
include the possible cumulative effects of such residues on infants and
children. Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas
syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages are host specific to the
Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv.
tomato bacteria that attack tomatoes and peppers only. Accordingly,
under the conditions in which Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria
and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages are
intended to be used, they will only attack the specific host bacteria
causing lysis of that bacteria, and they are only active 24-48 hours
after application. Given all of this and the fact that bacteriophages
generally are consumed daily in food and drinking water, with no known
adverse effects reported, any dietary and non-occupational exposures to
Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv.
tomato specific bacteriophages, when used according to label
directions, are expected to have no cumulative or incremental effects
to humans. In addition, due to the unique nature of bacteriophages, as
repeatedly noted in this action, the Agency is unaware of any other
substances that share a common mechanism of toxicity with the
Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv.
tomato specific bacteriophages.

VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, Infants and Children

    1. U.S. population. For all the reasons enumerated repeatedly
above, there is reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the
U.S. population, including infants and children, from aggregate
exposure to residues of Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and
Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages. This includes
all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which
there is reliable information.
    2. Infants and children. FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) provides that
EPA shall apply an additional tenfold margin of exposure (MOE) for
infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the data base
on toxicity and exposure, unless EPA determines that a different MOE
will be safe for infants and children. MOEs, which are often referred
to as uncertainty (safety) factors, are incorporated into EPA risk
assessments either directly, or through the use of a MOE analysis or by
using uncertainty factors in calculating a dose level that poses no
appreciable risk. As previously mentioned in the toxicological profile,
humans, including infants and children, have been exposed to phages
generally through food and water, where they are commonly found, and
through decades of therapeutic use, with no known or reported adverse
effects. Based on this and all the other reasons enumerated repeatedly
above, and based on all available information, the Agency concludes
that Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae
pv. tomato specific bacteriophages are non-toxic to mammals, including
infants and children. Because there are no threshold effects of concern
to infants, children, and adults when Xanthomonas campestris pv.
vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages
are used as labeled, the Agency concludes that the additional MOE is
not necessary to protect infants and children and that not adding any
additional MOE will be safe for infants and children.

VII. Other Considerations

A. Endocrine Disruptors

    Based on public literature cited by the company, Xanthomonas
campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific
bacteriophages are not known endocrine disruptors nor are other phages
related to Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas
syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages known endocrine disruptors.
Therefore, there is no impact via endocrine-related effects on the
Agency's safety finding set forth in this final rule for Xanthomonas
campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific
bacteriophages.

B. Analytical Method

    The Agency proposes to establish an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance without any numerical limitation for the many reasons
repeatedly stated above, including the active ingredient's host
specificity, the fact that the human population is exposed to
bacteriophages daily, through food, water, and other sources, with no
adverse effects, and the fact that bacteriophages have been used
therapeutically for more than 80 years with no adverse effects. For the
same reasons, the Agency concludes that an analytical method is not
required for enforcement purposes for Xanthomonas campestris pv.
vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato specific
Bacteriophages.

C. Codex Maximum Residue Level

    The are no known codex residue levels for this bacteriophage.

VIII. Conclusions

    The Agency concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to the U.S. population, including infants and
children, from aggregate exposure to residues of Xanthomonas campestris
pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas syringae pv.tomato specific
bacteriophages, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is reliable information, when used
according to label directions, as a microbial pesticide on peppers and
tomatoes.

IX. Objections and Hearing Requests

    Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any
person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may
also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural
regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for
hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. Although the procedures in those
regulations require some modification to reflect the amendments made to
the FFDCA by the FQPA, EPA will continue to use those procedures, with
appropriate adjustments, until the necessary modifications can be made.
The new section 408(g) of the FFDCA provides essentially the same
process for persons to ``object'' to a regulation for an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance issued by EPA under new section 408(d)
of the FFDCA, as was provided in the old sections 408 and 409 of the
FFDCA. However, the period for filing objections is now 60 days, rather
than 30 days.

A. What Do I Need to Do to File an Objection or Request a Hearing?

    You must file your objection or request a hearing on this
regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in this unit
and in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0467 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and
must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before February
27, 2006.
    1. Filing the request. Your objection must specify the specific
provisions in the regulation that you object to, and the grounds for
the objections (40 CFR 178.25). If a hearing is requested, the
objections must include a statement of the factual issues(s) on which a
hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions on such issues, and a
summary of any evidence relied upon by the objector (40 CFR 178.27).
Information submitted in connection with an objection or hearing
request may be claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that
information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except
in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the
information that does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion
in the public record. Information not marked confidential may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice.
    Mail your written request to: Office of the Hearing Clerk (1900L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. You may also deliver your request to the
Office of the Hearing Clerk in Suite 350, 1099 14th St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20005. The Office of the Hearing Clerk is open from 8
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Office of the Hearing Clerk is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Copies for the Docket. In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit IX.A., you
should also send a copy of your request to the PIRIB for its inclusion
in the official record that is described in ADDRESSES. Mail your
copies, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0467, to: Public
Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and
Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001. In person or by courier, bring a copy to the location of the
PIRIB described in ADDRESSES. You may also send an electronic copy of
your request via e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please use an ASCII
file format and avoid the use of special characters and any form of
encryption. Copies of electronic objections and hearing requests will
also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file format.
Do not include any CBI in your electronic copy. You may also submit an
electronic copy of your request at many Federal Depository Libraries.

B. When Will the Agency Grant a Request for a Hearing?

    A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator
determines that the material submitted shows the following: There is a
genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable
possibility that available evidence identified by the requestor would,
if established resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the
requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts to the
contrary; and resolution of the factual issues(s) in the manner sought
by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested (40
CFR 178.32).

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes an exemption from the tolerance
requirement under section 408(d) of the FFDCA 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 rule has been exempted from review under Executive
Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject
to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information

collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., 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 under 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 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). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a
petition under section 408(d) of the FFDCA, such as the exemption 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. 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 final 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 the FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency
has determined that this 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 6,
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 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 rule.

X. Reference

    Whitman, P.A. and R.T. Marshall. Isolation of psychrophilic
bacteriophages-host systems from refrigerated food products. Applied
Microbiology. Vol. 22, No 2, August 1971, pp. 220-223.

XI. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. 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 this final rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule 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: December 9, 2005.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

0
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. Section 180.1261 is added to subpart D to read as follows:

Sec.  180.1261  Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas
syringae pv. tomato specific Bacteriophages.

    An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established for
residues of Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Pseudomonas
syringae pv. tomato specific bacteriophages in or on tomatoes and
peppers.

[FR Doc. 05-24540 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S