[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 21, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29148-29149]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11794]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1989-0008; FRL-9911-20-Region 1]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Town Garage/Radio Beacon,
Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 1 is issuing
a Notice of Intent to Delete the Town Garage/Radio Beacon, Superfund
Site (Site) located in Londonderry, New Hampshire from the National
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments on this proposed
action. The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and the
State of New Hampshire, through the New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services (NHDES), have determined that all appropriate
response actions under CERCLA, other than five-year reviews, have been
completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions
under Superfund.

DATES: Comments must be received by June 20, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1989-0008, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions
for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>
     Mail: William Lovely, EPA Region 1--New England, 5 Post
Office Square, Suite 100, Mail Code OSRR07-4, Boston, MA 02109-3912 or
Rodney Elliott, EPA Region 1--New England, 5 Post Office Square, Suite
100, Mail Code ORA01-1, Boston, MA 02109-3912
     Hand delivery: William Lovely, EPA Region 1--New England,
5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Mail Code OSRR07-4, Boston, MA 02109-
3912 or Rodney Elliott, EPA Region 1--New England, 5 Post Office
Square, Suite 100, Mail Code ORA01-1, Boston, MA 02109-3912. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation (M-F, 9-5), and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1989-0008. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in the hard
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Records Center, 5 Post Office
Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Monday-Friday: 9:00
a.m.-5:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday-Closed, and
Leach Library, 276 Mammoth Road, Londonderry, NH 03055,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Monday-Thursday: 9:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m., Thursday: 10:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.,
Friday: 10:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m., Saturday: 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m., Sunday:
Closed.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Lovely, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1 New England, 5
Post Office Square, Mail code OSRR07-4, Boston, MA 02109-3912, (617)
918-1240, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the ``Rules and Regulations'' Section of
today's Federal Register, we are publishing a direct final Notice of
Deletion of the Town Garage/Radio Beacon Superfund Site from the
National Priorities List (NPL) without prior Notice of Intent to Delete
because we view this as a noncontroversial revision and anticipate no
adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this deletion in the
preamble to the direct final Notice of Deletion, and those reasons are
incorporated herein. If we receive no adverse comment(s) on this
deletion action, we will not take further action on this Notice of
Intent to Delete. If we receive adverse comment(s), we will withdraw
the direct final Notice of Deletion, and it will not take effect. We
will, as appropriate, address all public comments in a subsequent final
Notice of Deletion based on this Notice of Intent to Delete. We will
not institute a second comment period on this Notice of Intent to
Delete. Any parties

interested in commenting must do so at this time.
    For additional information, see the direct final Notice of Deletion
which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR
2923; 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

    Dated: April 24, 2014.
 H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2014-11794 Filed 5-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 71 (Friday, April 12, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14883-14886]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07273]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0546; FRL-9987-46]

Polyvinyl Acetate--Polyvinyl Alcohol Copolymer; 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 polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol
copolymer; when used as an inert ingredient in a pesticide chemical
formulation. Keller and Heckman LLP. on behalf of Synthomer USA LLC
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 polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol
copolymer on food or feed commodities.

DATES: This regulation is effective April 12, 2019. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 11, 2019 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-2018-0546, 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 Goodis, 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 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-2018-0546 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
June 11, 2019. 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-2018-0546, 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 October 18, 2018 (83 FR 52787) (FRL-
9984-21), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21
U.S.C. 346a, announcing the receipt of a pesticide petition (PP IN-
11189) filed by Keller and Heckman LLP. on behalf of Synthomer USA LLC,
200 Railroad Street, Roebuck, SC 29376. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.960 be amended by establishing an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl
alcohol copolymer; CAS Reg. No. 25213-24-5. 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). Polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol
copolymer 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 molecular weight (MW) greater than or equal to 10,000 daltons.
    Additionally, the polymer also meets as required the following
exemption criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).
    7. The polymer's minimum number average MW of 14,000 is greater
than or equal to 10,000 daltons. The polymer contains less than 2%
oligomeric material below MW 500 and less than 5% oligomeric material
below MW 1,000.
    Thus, polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol copolymer 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
polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol copolymer.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    For the purposes of assessing potential exposure under this
exemption, EPA considered that polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol
copolymer could be present in all raw and processed agricultural
commodities and drinking water, and that non-occupational non-dietary
exposure was possible. The minimum number average MW of polyvinyl
acetate--polyvinyl alcohol copolymer is 14,000 daltons. Generally, a
polymer of this size would be poorly absorbed through the intact
gastrointestinal tract or through intact human skin. Since polyvinyl
acetate--polyvinyl alcohol copolymer 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 polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol copolymer to
share a common mechanism of toxicity

with any other substances, and polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol
copolymer does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore,
EPA has assumed that polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol copolymer
does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA's website 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 polyvinyl acetate--
polyvinyl alcohol copolymer, 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 polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol
copolymer.

VIII. Other Considerations

A. Existing Exemptions From a Tolerance

    Not Available.

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 polyvinyl acetate--
polyvinyl alcohol copolymer.

IX. Conclusion

    Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting residues of polyvinyl
acetate--polyvinyl alcohol copolymer from the requirement of a
tolerance will be safe.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action 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 types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

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: April 8, 2019.
Michael 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.  180.960, add alphabetically the polymer ``Polyvinyl
acetate--polyvinyl alcohol copolymer, minimum number average molecular
weight (in amu), 14,000'' to the table to read as follows:

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

* * * * *

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

                              * * * * * * *
Polyvinyl acetate--polyvinyl alcohol copolymer, minimum       25213-24-5
 number average molecular weight (in amu), 14,000.......

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

[FR Doc. 2019-07273 Filed 4-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7442-7443]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02629]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3168-011; ER15-357-001; ER15-356-001; ER13-
618-006; ER12-2570-007.
    Applicants: ArcLight Energy Marketing, LLC, Chief Conemaugh Power,
LLC, Chief Keystone Power, LLC, Panther Creek Power Operating, LLC,
Westwood Generation, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of ArcLight
Energy Marketing, LLC, et. al.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5181.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1436-008; ER14-152-003; ER13-1793-005; ER12-
1260-007; ER10-3099-010; ER10-2329-005.
    Applicants: Eagle Point Power Generation LLC, Elgin Energy Center,
LLC, Hazle Spindle, LLC, RC Cape May Holdings, LLC, Stephentown
Spindle, LLC, Vineland Energy LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status and Asset Appendix Update
of the Rockland Sellers.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5197.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-591-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing per 35: Compliance Filing per 1/16/
15 Order to Correct Typographical Error to be effective 2/5/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5226.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-919-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii):
Original Service Agreement No. 4083; Queue Y3-058 to be effective 12/
31/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-920-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Service
Agreement No. 340--City of Azusa Firming Service and Energy Exchange to
be effective 4/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-921-000.
    Applicants: Covanta Delaware Valley, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii):
Revisions to Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 3/30/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5200.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-922-000.
    Applicants: Covanta Energy Marketing LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revised
Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 3/30/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5201.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-923-000.
    Applicants: Covanta Essex Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revised
Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 3/30/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5202.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-924-000.
    Applicants: Covanta Haverhill Associates, LP.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Notice
of Succession to be effective 3/30/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5203.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-925-000.
    Applicants: Covanta Maine, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revised
Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 3/30/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5204.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-926-000.
    Applicants: Covanta Niagara, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Notice
of Succession to be effective 3/30/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5205.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-927-000.
    Applicants: Covanta Plymouth Renewable Energy Limited Partnership.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Notice
of Succession to be effective 3/30/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5207.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following land
acquisition reports:

    Docket Numbers: LA14-4-000.
    Applicants: Blue Sky East, LLC, Palouse Wind, LLC, Canandaigua
Power Partners, LLC, Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC, Erie Wind,
LLC, Evergreen Wind Power, LLC, Evergreen Wind Power III, LLC, First
Wind Energy Marketing, LLC, Longfellow Wind, LLC, Milford Wind Corridor
Phase I, LLC, Milford Wind Corridor Phase II, LLC, Niagara Wind Power,
LLC, Stetson Wind II, LLC, Stetson Holdings, LLC, Vermont Wind, LLC.
    Description: Quarterly Land Acquisition Report of Blue Sky East,
LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: LA14-4-000.
    Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy LLC, Beech Ridge Energy II LLC,
Beech Ridge Energy Storage LLC, Bishop Hill Energy LLC, Bishop Hill
Energy III LLC, California Ridge Wind Energy LLC, Forward Energy LLC,
Grand Ridge Energy LLC, Grand Ridge Energy II LLC, Grand Ridge Energy
III LLC, Grand Ridge Energy IV LLC, Grand Ridge Energy V LLC, Grand
Ridge Energy Storage LLC, Gratiot County Wind LLC, Gratiot County Wind
II LLC, Grays Harbor Energy LLC, Hardee Power Partners Limited,
Invenergy Cannon Falls LLC, Invenergy Nelson LLC, Invenergy TN LLC,
Judith Gap Energy

LLC, Spindle Hill Energy LLC, Prairie Breeze Wind Energy LLC, Sheldon
Energy LLC, Vantage Wind Energy LLC, Stony Creek Energy LLC, Spring
Canyon Energy II LLC, Spring Canyon Energy III LLC, Spring Canyon
Energy LLC, Wolverine Creek Energy LLC, Willow Creek Energy LLC.
    Description: Quarterly Land Acquisition Report of Beech Ridge
Energy LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5141.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Docket Numbers: LA14-4-000.
    Applicants: CPV Maryland, LLC, CPV Shore, LLC, CPV Sentinel, LLC,
CPV Keenan II Renewable Energy Company, LLC.
    Description: Quarterly Land Acquisition Report of the CPV MBR
Companies.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5146.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA15-1-000.
    Applicants: Eagle Point Power Generation LLC.
    Description: Request for Waiver of the Requirements to File an
Open-Access Transmission Tariff, Establish an Open-Access Same Time
Information System and Comply With the Standards of Conduct of Eagle
Point Power Generation LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/29/15.
    Accession Number: 20150129-5222.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 29, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-02629 Filed 2-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 9, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 69)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 19154-19161]
[DOCID:fr09ap08-7]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0426; FRL-8356-9]

Buprofezin; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
buprofezin in or on berry, low growing , subgroup 13-07G; okra; olive;
olive, oil; pepper, nonbell; radicchio; vegetable, fruiting, group 8,
except nonbell pepper; and vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4,
except head lettuce and radicchio; and increases the existing tolerance
for residues of buprofezin in or on head lettuce. Interregional
Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). This regulation also
removes existing tolerances for residues of buprofezin in or on leaf
lettuce and tomato and modifies 40 CFR 180.511 by removing the third
column (Expiration/Revocation Date) from the table in paragraph (a),
since it is no longer applicable.

DATES: This regulation is effective April 9, 2008. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 9, 2008, 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: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0426. To access the
electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced
Search,'' then ``Docket Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where
indicated and select the ``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on
the regulations.gov website to view the docket index or access
available documents. All documents in the docket are listed in the
docket index available in regulations.gov. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (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 in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or,
if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in
Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr.,
Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those
engaged in the following activities:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111), e.g., agricultural
workers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
     Animal production (NAICS code 112), e.g., cattle ranchers
and farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311), e.g., agricultural
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers;
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532), e.g.,
agricultural workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse,
nursery, and floriculture workers; residential users.
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
provide 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?

    In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal
Register document through the electronic docket at http://
www.regulations.gov, you may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a
frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at
40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR
site at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 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-2007-0426 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 as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or
before June 9, 2008.
    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 that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit this copy, identified by docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0426, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Petition for Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of July 25, 2007 (72 FR 40877) (FRL-8137-
1), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
7E7207) by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College
Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested
that 40 CFR 180.511 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues
of the insecticide buprofezin, 2-[(1,1-dimethylethyl)imino]tetrahydro-
3(1-methylethyl)-5-phenyl-4H-1,3,5-thiadiazin-4-one, in or on
vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4 at 25 parts per million
(ppm); olive at 3.0 ppm; olive, oil at 9.0 ppm; and strawberry,
bearberry, bilberry, lowbush blueberry, cloudberry, cranberry,
lingonberry, muntries and partridge berry at 2.5 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Ninchino America,
Inc., the registrant, which is available to the public in the docket,
http://www.regulations.gov.
    In the Federal Register of October 24, 2007 (72 FR 60369) (FRL-
8150-8), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
7E7253) by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College
Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested
that 40 CFR 180.511 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues
of the insecticide buprofezin, 2-[(1,1-dimethylethyl)imino]tetrahydro-
3(1-methylethyl)-5-phenyl-4H-1,3,5-thiadiazin-4-one, in or on
vegetable, fruiting, group 8; and okra at 1.8 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Ninchino America,
Inc., the registrant, which is available to the public in the docket,
http://www.regulations.gov.
    Comments were received in response to the notices of filing. EPA's
response to these comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petitions, EPA has
revised the tolerance levels for several commodities (okra; olive;
olive, oil; vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4; and vegetable,
fruiting, group 8) and determined that separate tolerances are
appropriate for head lettuce and radicchio of the leafy vegetable,
except Brassica, group 4; and nonbell pepper of the fruiting vegetable
group 8. EPA has also determined that a tolerance on berry, low
growing, subgroup 13-07G is appropriate in lieu of the proposed
tolerances on individual berry commodities. 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....'' These provisions were added to FFDCA by the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
    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 the petitioned-for tolerance
for residues of buprofezin, 2-[(1,1-dimethylethyl)imino]tetrahydro-3(1-
methylethyl)-5-phenyl-4H-1,3,5-thiadiazin-4-one, on berry, low growing,
subgroup 13-07G at 2.5 ppm; lettuce, head at 6.0 ppm; okra at 4.0 ppm;
olive at 3.5 ppm; olive, oil at 4.8 ppm; pepper, nonbell at 4.0 ppm;
radicchio at 6.0 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8, except nonbell
pepper at 1.3 ppm; and vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4,
except head lettuce and radicchio at 35 ppm. EPA's assessment of
exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerance follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    Buprofezin has low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal and
inhalation routes of exposure. It is not an eye or skin irritant; nor
is it a dermal sensitizer. In subchronic toxicity studies, the primary
effects of concern in the rat were increased microscopic lesions in
male and female liver and thyroid, increased liver weights in males and
females, and increased thyroid weight in males. In chronic studies in
the rat, an increased incidence of follicular cell hyperplasia and
hypertrophy in the thyroid of males was reported. Increased relative
liver weights were reported in female dogs. Buprofezin was not
carcinogenic to male and female rats. In the mouse, increased absolute
liver weights in males and females, along with an increased incidence
of hepatocellular adenomas and hepatocellular adenomas plus carcinomas
in females were reported. Based on the increased incidence of liver
tumors in female mice only, no evidence of carcinogenicity in rats, and
no evidence of genotoxicity in submitted guideline studies using in
vitro and in vivo genotoxicity assays, EPA classified buprofezin as
having suggestive evidence but found the evidence to be sufficiently
weak that quantification of cancer risk was not deemed to be
appropriate.
    There is no evidence that buprofezin results in increased
susceptibility of in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study. Toxicity in the offspring was found at dose levels that were
also toxic to the parent(s), and the effects observed in the offspring
were not more severe, qualitatively, than the effects observed in the
parent(s).
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by buprofezin 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 the document Buprofezin - Human-Health Risk
Assessment for Application to Low-Growing Berries, Olives, Leafy
Vegetables (except Brassica), and Fruiting Vegetables. The referenced
document is available in the docket established by this action, which
is described under ADDRESSES, and is identified as document ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0426-0004 in that docket.

B. Toxicological Endpoints

    For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological level of concern (LOC) is derived
from the highest dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the
NOAEL) in the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in
risk assessment. However, if a NOAEL cannot be determined, the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL) is
sometimes used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs)
are used in conjunction with the LOC to take into account uncertainties
inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and
in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population
as well as other unknowns. Safety is assessed for acute and chronic
risks by comparing aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the acute
population adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic population adjusted dose
(cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all
applicable UFs. Short-, intermediate-, and long-term risks are
evaluated by comparing aggregate exposure to the LOC to ensure that the
margin of exposure (MOE) called for by the product of all applicable
UFs is not exceeded.
    For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of
exposure will lead to some degree of risk and estimates risk in terms
of the probability of occurrence of additional adverse cases.
Generally, cancer risks are considered non-threshold. For more
information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization
and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see http://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for buprofezin used for
human risk assessment can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in
document Buprofezin - Human-Health Risk Assessment for Application to
Low-Growing Berries, Olives, Leafy Vegetables (except Brassica), and
Fruiting Vegetables at page 11. The referenced document is available in
the docket established by this action, which is described under
ADDRESSES, and is identified as document ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-
0426-0004 in that docket.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to buprofezin, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing buprofezin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.511. EPA assessed dietary exposures from buprofezin in food as
follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified
in the toxicological studies for buprofezin for the population
subgroup, females 13-50 years old; no such effects were identified for
the general population or other population subgroups. In estimating
acute dietary exposure of females 13-50 years old, EPA used food
consumption information from the USDA 1994-1996 Nationwide Continuing
Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in
food, EPA assumed that residues are present at tolerance levels in all
commodities except meat and milk. Anticipated residues were calculated
for meat and milk commodities as follows: Tolerances for meat and milk
are established at the analytical method limit of quantitation (LOQ).
Since residues were only detected in the livestock feeding study when
feed contained 6.8-9.3x the maximum theoretical dietary burden (MTDB),
residues in these commodities were normalized to 1x the MTDB in the
acute dietary exposure assessment. For fruits and crops with an
extended interval from initial application to harvest (>50 day),
additional metabolites of toxicological concern (BF4 and its
conjugates, and BF12) that are not included in the tolerance expression
were included in the dietary exposure assessment, as appropriate, based
on the ratio of metabolite to parent found in plant metabolism studies.
No adjustment was made to account for the percent of crops treated with
buprofezin in the acute dietary exposure assessment. 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) was assumed for all commodities.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals
(CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA relied upon anticipated
residues and PCT information for some commodities. The

chronic analysis employed the same anticipated residue estimates for
meat and milk as those employed in the acute analysis. For apple, pear,
orange, and orange juice, average residues from the 2003, 2004 and/or
2005 USDA Pesticide Data Program (PDP) monitoring data were used for
estimation of total buprofezin and metabolite residues. For all other
plant commodities, tolerance-level or average field trial residues were
used. For fruits and crops with an extended interval from initial
application to harvest (>50 day), additional metabolites of
toxicological concern (BF4 and its conjugates, and BF12) that are not
included in the tolerance expression were included in the dietary
exposure assessment, as appropriate, based on the ratio of metabolite
to parent found in plant metabolism studies. The chronic analysis
incorporated screening-level PCT estimates for several registered crops
and projected percent crop treatment (PPCT) estimates for apple, peach,
apricot, nectarine, cherry, plum, celery, lettuce, spinach, strawberry
and tomato. Default processing factors were assumed for all commodities
except tomato paste and pur[egrave]e. The tomato paste and pur[egrave]e
processing factors were reduced to 1.2x based on the results of a
tomato processing study.
    iii. Cancer. EPA has classified buprofezin as having suggestive
evidence based on the occurrence of liver tumors in female mice. Since
the increased incidence of liver tumors occurred in female mice only
and there was no evidence of carcinogenicity in rats or evidence of
genotoxicity in submitted guideline studies using in vitro and in vivo
genotoxicity assays, EPA regards the carcinogenic potential of
buprofezin as very low and has determined that quantification of human
cancer risk is not appropriate. Therefore, a cancer exposure assessment
was not conducted.
    iv. Anticipated residue and 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 pursuant to FFDCA section
408(f)(1) require 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 this tolerance.
    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:
    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
such pesticide residue.
    b. The exposure estimate does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
    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.
    The Agency used PCT information as follows:
    PCT estimates for existing uses: Almond 1%; cantaloupe 5%; cotton
1%; citrus 1%; grape 1%; honeydew 1%; pear 10%; pistachio 1%; pumpkin
1%; squash 1%; and watermelon 1%.
    EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining
available federal, state, and private market survey data for that use,
averaging by year, averaging across all years, and rounding up to the
nearest multiple of five percent except for those situations in which
the average PCT is less than one. In those cases 1% is used as the
average. 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 Center for
Food and Agriculture Policy (NCFAP) for the most recent six years.
    EPA used PPCT estimates for the following commodities: Apple 5%;
peach 13%; apricot 40%; nectarine 60%; sweet cherry 44%; tart cherry
76%; plum 35%; celery 18%; head lettuce 67%; lettuce (other) 63%;
spinach 30%; strawberry 39%; tomato (fresh) 42%; and tomato
(processing) 25%.
    EPA estimates PPCT for a new pesticide use by assuming that the PCT
during the pesticide's initial five years of use on a specific use site
will not exceed the average PCT of the market leader (i.e., the one
pesticide with the greatest PCT) on that site over the three most
recent surveys. Comparisons are only made among the chemicals of the
same pesticide type (i.e., the leading insecticide on the use site is
selected for comparison with the new insecticide). The PCT values
included in the averages may be for the same pesticide or for different
pesticides, since the same or different pesticides may dominate for
each year selected. Typically, EPA uses USDA/NASS as the primary source
for PCT data. When a specific use site is not surveyed by USDA/NASS,
EPA uses other sources including proprietary data and calculates the
PPCT.
    This estimated PPCT, based on the average PCT of the market leader,
is appropriate for use in chronic dietary risk assessment. The method
of estimating a PPCT for a new use of a registered pesticide or a new
pesticide produces a high-end estimate that is unlikely, in most cases,
to be exceeded during the initial five years of actual use. The
predominant factors that bear on whether the estimated PPCT could be
exceeded are whether a new pesticide use or new pesticide is more
efficacious or controls a broader spectrum of pests than the dominant
pesticide; whether there are concerns that increasing pest pressure may
intensify the use of alternate pesticides; and/or whether the new
pesticide has a shorter pre-harvest or re-entry interval than
alternative insecticides. Based on all information currently available,
EPA concludes that it is unlikely that actual PCT for buprofezin will
exceed the PPCT during the next five years. A discussion of the factors
considered in making this determination can be found in the documents
Projected Percent Crop Treated for the Insecticide Buprofezin on Six
Crops: Grapes, Apricots, Nectarines, Sweet Cherries, Tart Cherries, and
Plums and Projected Percent Crop Treated (PPCT) for the Insecticide
Buprofezin on Five Crops: Celery, Lettuce, Spinach, Strawberries, and
Tomatoes; and in Attachment 2 to the document Buprofezin -
Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessments. The referenced
documents are available at www.regulations.gov in docket ID number EPA-
HQ-OPP-2007-0426.
    The Agency believes that the three conditions listed in this unit
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 information on the regional
consumption of food to which buprofezin may be applied in a particular
area.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks
sufficient monitoring data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for buprofezin in drinking water. Because
the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data, drinking water
concentration estimates are made by reliance on simulation or modeling
taking into account data on the environmental fate characteristics of
buprofezin. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://
www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model /Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) of
buprofezin for acute exposures are estimated to be 57.4 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.09 ppb for ground water. The EECs
for chronic exposures are estimated to be 12.5 ppb for surface water
and 0.09 ppb for ground water.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 57.4 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 12.5 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Buprofezin is not
registered for use on any sites that would result in residential
exposure.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    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 buprofezin and any other
substances and buprofezin does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance
action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that buprofezin has 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://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408 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. In
applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X
when reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or,
if reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional FQPA
safety factor value based on the use of traditional UFs and/or special
FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of in utero rat or
rabbit fetuses from exposure to buprofezin in prenatal developmental
toxicity studies; and there is no evidence of increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility of rat offspring in the 2-generation
reproduction study. There is evidence of thyroid toxicity following
subchronic and chronic exposures of rats and dogs to buprofezin;
however, data to determine whether young animals are more susceptible
to these effects are not available.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that the FQPA safety factor of
10X must be retained and applied to all subchronic and chronic
exposures whose endpoint is based on thyroid effects. For acute
exposures, EPA has determined that the FQPA safety factor may be
reduced to 1X. These decisions are based on the following findings:
    i. The toxicity database for buprofezin contains all of the
standard toxicity studies. However, there is uncertainty regarding
potential thyroid effects seen in some of these studies. Based on the
evidence of thyroid toxicity following subchronic and chronic exposures
of rats (histopathological lesions) and dogs (decreases in serum
thyroxine levels and increased thyroid weights), EPA requested a
buprofezin comparative thyroid assay study in rats (28-day; young
versus adults) to determine if the thyroid effects occur at a lower
dose in young versus adult animals. Since this study has not been
submitted, EPA concludes that the 10X FQPA safety factor to account for
database uncertainty should be retained and applied to all subchronic
and chronic exposures whose endpoint is based on thyroid effects. The
FQPA safety factor of 10X is not applicable to the acute endpoint,
since a single dose of buprofezin would not be expected to perturb
thyroid homeostasis in the adult or the young due to the buffering of
thyroid hormone concentrations by homeostatic mechanisms for compounds
with short half lives, like buprofezin.
    ii. There is no indication that buprofezin is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that buprofezin results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study. However, the developmental studies were not adequate to fully
assess the potential for susceptibility from subchronic and chronic
exposures. Consequently, there is concern for potential increased
sensitivity or susceptibility in offspring regarding thyroid effects.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were refined for some
commodities using reliable PCT/PPCT information and anticipated residue
values calculated from the available monitoring data and field trial
results. Dietary drinking water exposure is based on

conservative modeling estimates. Residential exposures are not
expected. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by buprofezin.
    Although there are no residual uncertainties identified in the
exposure databases, no neurotoxic concerns for buprofezin, and no
evidence of increased susceptibility of offspring in available studies,
there is sufficient uncertainty regarding thyroid effects, particularly
thyroid effects in the young, that EPA is retaining the 10X FQPA safety
factor for all subchronic and chronic exposures whose endpoint is based
on thyroid effects. EPA has also determined that the traditional 10X
uncertainty factor to account for interspecies variation may be reduced
to 3X for these exposures, since it has been established that rats are
more susceptible to thyroid effects than humans. These factors,
together with the traditional 10X uncertainty factor to account for
intraspecies variation, result in a total uncertainty factor of 300X
(10X, 3X and 10X) for subchronic and chronic exposures. The total
uncertainty factor for acute exposures is 100X (10X intraspecies
variation and 10X interspecies variation).

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    Safety is assessed for acute and chronic risks by comparing
aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the aPAD and cPAD. The aPAD and
cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all applicable UFs. For
linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the probability of additional
cancer cases given aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and long-
term risks are evaluated by comparing aggregate exposure to the LOC to
ensure that the MOE called for by the product of all applicable UFs is
not exceeded.
    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to buprofezin will occupy 7% of the aPAD for the population group
females 13-49 years old. No acute endpoint of concern was identified
for the remaining population groups.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to
buprofezin from food and water will utilize 91% of the cPAD for
children, 1 to 2 years old, the population group with the greatest
estimated exposure. There are no residential uses for buprofezin that
result in chronic residential exposure to buprofezin.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level). Buprofezin is not
registered for use on any sites that would result in residential
exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from
food and water, which does not exceed the Agency's level of concern.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Buprofezin is
not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential
exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from
food and water, which does not exceed the Agency's level of concern.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iii., EPA regards the carcinogenic potential of buprofezin as
very low and concludes that it poses no greater than a negligible
cancer risk to humans.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to buprofezin residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    The gas chromatography/nitrogen phosphorus detector methods used in
the field trial studies were adequately validated and similar to the
method validated by EPA's Analytical Chemistry Branch (ACB) and
forwarded to the Food and Drug Administration for publication in the
Pesticide Analytical Manual I. Since adequate method validation and
concurrent recoveries were attained in the field trial studies, EPA
concludes that the method validated by ACB is appropriate for
enforcement of the tolerances associated with these petitions. The
method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    There are no Canadian, Mexican, or Codex maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established for buprofezin in/on any of the commodities
associated with the current petitions, except tomato. There are Codex
and Mexican MRLs for residues of buprofezin per se on tomato of 1 ppm
and 0.5 ppm, respectively. Both MRLs are lower than the tolerance of
1.3 ppm being established for fruiting vegetables, a group which
includes tomato; however, since the field trial data considered in
determining the U.S. tolerance level indicate the potential for
residues in/on tomato to exceed the international MRLs, harmonization
is not possible at this time.

C. Response to Comments

    Comments were received from a private citizen in response to the
notices of filing of pesticide petitions PP7E7253 and PP7E7207. In
response to the notice of filing of PP7E7207, the commenter indicated
that she was unable to open ``the report on the proposal'' and
complained generally about the government website, http://
www.regulations.gov. If by ``the report on the proposal'' the commenter
is referring to the registrant's summary of the petition, EPA notes
that it is available in the docket in two common file formats,
MicroSoft Word and Portable Document Format (PDF,) and cannot explain
the commenter's inability to open it. In response to the notice of
filing of PP7E7253, the commenter objected to any residues on
vegetables and ``exemptions'' for ``this product'' on the basis of its
potential carcinogenicity. EPA considered the carcinogenic potential of
buprofezin in its risk assessment and determined that it did not pose a
cancer risk. Comments received contained no scientific data or other
substantive evidence to rebut this conclusion or the Agency's finding
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to buprofezin from the establishment of these
tolerances. The Agency has received these same or similar comments from
this commenter on numerous previous occasions. Refer to Federal
Register 70 FR 37686 (June 30, 2005), 70 FR 1354 (January 7, 2005), and
69 FR 63096 (October 29, 2004) for the Agency's previous responses to
these objections.

D. Changes to Proposed Tolerances

    Based upon review of the data supporting the petitions, EPA has
revised the tolerance levels for several commodities and determined
that separate tolerances are appropriate for certain members of the
leafy (except Brassica) and fruiting vegetable groups. EPA revised the
tolerances for okra from 1.8 ppm to 4.0 ppm; olive from 3.0 ppm to 3.5
ppm; olive, oil from 9.0 ppm to 4.8 ppm; vegetable, leafy, except
Brassica, group 4, except head lettuce and radicchio from 25 ppm to 35
ppm;

and vegetable, fruiting, group 8, except nonbell pepper from 1.8 ppm to
1.3 ppm. EPA revised these tolerance levels based on analyses of the
residue field trial data using the Agency's Tolerance Spreadsheet in
accordance with the Agency's Guidance for Setting Pesticide Tolerances
Based on Field Trial Data and the results of the olive processing
study. EPA also determined that separate tolerances should be
established for head lettuce and radicchio at 6.0 ppm and for nonbell
pepper at 4.0 ppm, since there is more than a 5-fold difference between
residues on these crops and other members of their respective crop
groups: vegetable, leafy (except Brassica) group 4; and vegetable,
fruiting group 8. A tolerance already exists for residues of buprofezin
on head lettuce at 5.0 ppm; it will be increased to 6.0 ppm.
    IR-4 petitioned for individual tolerances on strawberry, bearberry,
bilberry, lowbush blueberry, cloudberry, cranberry, lingonberry,
muntries and partridgeberry (PP 6E7163). In the Federal Register of
December 7, 2007 (72 FR 69150) (FRL-8340-6), EPA issued a final rule
that revised the crop grouping regulations. As part of this action, EPA
expanded and revised berries group 13. Changes to crop group 13
included adding new commodities, revising existing subgroups and
creating new subgroups (including a low growing berry subgroup
consisting of the commodities requested in PP 7E7207 and cultivars,
varieties, and/or hybrids of these). EPA indicated in the December 7,
2007 final rule as well as the earlier May 23, 2007 proposed rule (72
FR 28920) (FRL-8126-1) that, for existing petitions for which a Notice
of Filing had been published, the Agency would attempt to conform these
petitions to the rule. Therefore, consistent with this rule, EPA is
establishing a tolerance on low growing berry subgroup 13-07G. EPA
concludes it is reasonable to establish the tolerance on the newly
created subgroup, since the individual commodities for which tolerances
were requested are identical to those which comprise low growing berry
subgroup 13-07G.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of buprofezin,
2-[(1,1-dimethylethyl)imino]tetrahydro-3(1-methylethyl)-5-phenyl-4H-
1,3,5-thiadiazin-4-one, in or on berry, low growing , subgroup 13-07G
at 2.5 ppm; lettuce, head at 6.0 ppm; okra at 4.0 ppm; olive at 3.5
ppm; olive, oil at 4.8 ppm; pepper, nonbell at 4.0 ppm; radicchio at
6.0 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8, except nonbell pepper at 1.3
ppm; and vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4, except head
lettuce and radicchio at 35 ppm. Further, the existing tolerances in/on
``lettuce, leaf'' at 13.0 ppm and ``tomato'' at 0.50 ppm are deleted,
since residues of buprofezin on these commodities will be covered by
the higher tolerances being established on ``vegetable, leafy, except
Brassica, group 4, except head lettuce and radicchio '' and
``vegetable, fruiting, group 8, except non-bell pepper''.
    The table of buprofezin tolerances at 40 CFR 180.511(a) currently
includes a third column for expiration/revocation dates. Since none of
the existing tolerances is time-limited and EPA is not time-limiting
the new tolerances listed in this unit, there is no need for this
column. Therefore, the third column of the table is being deleted.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
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, 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) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, 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 section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. 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 6, 2000) do not apply to this rule. In addition, This
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) (Public Law 104-4).
    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).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report 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: March 26, 2008.
Daniel C. Kenny,
Acting Director, Registration Division, 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 180.511 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  180.511  Buprofezin; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of buprofezin,
2-[(1,1-dimethylethyl)imino]tetrahydro-3(1-methylethyl)-5-phenyl-4H-
1,3,5-thiadiazin-4-one, in or on the following food commodities:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Commodity                        Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acerola..............................................               0.30
Almond...............................................               0.05
Almond, hulls........................................                2.0
Apricot..............................................                9.0
Atemoya..............................................               0.30
Avocado..............................................               0.30
Banana...............................................               0.20
Bean, snap, succulent................................               0.02
Berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G..................                2.5
Birida...............................................               0.30
Canistel.............................................               0.90
Cattle, fat..........................................               0.05
Cattle, kidney.......................................               0.05
Cattle, liver........................................               0.05
Cattle, meat.........................................               0.05
Cattle, meat byproducts..............................               0.05
Cherimoya............................................               0.30
Citrus, dried pulp...................................                7.5
Citrus, oil..........................................                 80
Cotton, gin byproducts...............................               20.0
Cotton, undelinted seed..............................               0.35
Custard apple........................................               0.30
Feijoa...............................................               0.30
Fruit, citrus, group 10..............................                2.5
Fruit, pome, group 11................................                4.0
Fruit, stone, group 12, except apricot and peach.....                1.9
Goat, fat............................................               0.05
Goat, kidney.........................................               0.05
Goat, liver..........................................               0.05
Goat, meat...........................................               0.05
Goat, meat byproducts................................               0.05
Grape................................................                2.5
Guave................................................               0.30
Hog, fat.............................................               0.05
Hog, kidney..........................................               0.05
Hog, liver...........................................               0.05
Hog, meat............................................               0.05
Hog, meat byproducts.................................               0.05
Horse, fat...........................................               0.05
Horse, kidney........................................               0.05
Horse, liver.........................................               0.05
Horse, meat..........................................               0.05
Horse, meat byproducts...............................               0.05
Llama................................................               0.30
Jaboticaba...........................................               0.30
Lettuce, head........................................                6.0
Loganberry...........................................               0.30
Lychee...............................................               0.30
Mango................................................               0.90
Milk.................................................               0.01
Okra.................................................                4.0
Olive................................................                3.5
Olive, oil...........................................                4.8
Papaya...............................................               0.90
Passionfruit.........................................               0.30
Peach................................................                9.0
Pepper, nonbell......................................                4.0
Pistachio............................................               0.05
Pulasan..............................................               0.30
Radicchio............................................                6.0
Rambutan.............................................               0.30
Sapodilla............................................               0.90
Sapote, black........................................               0.90
Sapote, mamey........................................               0.90
Sheep, fat...........................................               0.05
Sheep, kidney........................................               0.05
Sheep, liver.........................................               0.05
Sheep, meat..........................................               0.05
Sheep, meat byproducts...............................               0.05
Soursop..............................................               0.30
Spanish lime.........................................               0.30
Star apple...........................................               0.90
Starfruit............................................               0.30
Sugar apple..........................................               0.30
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9.........................               0.50
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8, except nonbell pepper..                1.3
Vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4, except                    35
 head lettuce and radicchio..........................
Wax jambu............................................               0.30
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-7043 Filed 4-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 54 (Thursday, March 20, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 15590]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06119]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14589-000]

Green Energy Storage Corp.; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions to
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On February 24, 2014, Green Energy Storage Corp filed an
application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the
Sacaton Pumped Storage Project to be located off stream near Casa
Grande, Arizona. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued,
is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application
during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the
permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise
enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express
permission.
    The proposed 150-megawatt closed loop pumped storage project would
use the 1,200 feet of available head between a new upper reservoir and
an existing open pit mine. The project consists of the following: (1) A
new 28-foot-high upper dam with a total crest length of 6,000 feet,
impounding an upper reservoir with a maximum storage of 1,300 acre-feet
; (2) an existing open pit mine lower reservoir, with a maximum storage
of 1,500 acre-feet; (3) a penstock connecting the two reservoirs
consisting of a 200-foot-long, 12-foot-diameter steel pipe and a 1,250-
foot-long, 12-foot-diameter vertical shaft; (4) two 75-megawatt pump/
turbines; (5) a 2,200-foot-long, 14-foot-diameter draft tube, extending
from the turbines to the lower reservoir; (6) a new 137-kilovolt (kV)
transmission line extending about 2,500 feet from a new substation to
the existing 137-kV transmission line owned by Arizona Public Service;
and (7) appurtenant facilities. The estimated average generating
capacity of the project would be 400 gigawatt hours.
    Applicant Contact: Charles Gresham, Green Energy Storage Company,
14747 N 87th Ln, Peoria, AZ 85381, Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Jim Fargo; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14589-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at  http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14589) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 13, 2014.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-06119 Filed 3-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P