80_FR_28940 80 FR 28843 - Trinexapac-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances

80 FR 28843 - Trinexapac-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 97 (May 20, 2015)

Page Range28843-28848
FR Document2015-11972

This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of trinexapac-ethyl in or on multiple commodities which are identified and discussed later in this document. Syngenta Crop protection LLC requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 97 (Wednesday, May 20, 2015)
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 97 (Wednesday, May 20, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28843-28848]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-11972]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0340; FRL-9926-62]


Trinexapac-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of 
trinexapac-ethyl in or on multiple commodities which are identified and 
discussed later in this document. Syngenta Crop protection LLC 
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective May 20, 2015. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 20, 2015, and 
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR 
part 178 (see also

[[Page 28844]]

Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket 
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0340, 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 (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP 
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and 
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lewis, Registration Division 
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone 
number: (703) 305-7090; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's 
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government 
Publishing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a 
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a 
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided 
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify 
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0340 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 
July 20, 2015. 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-2014-0340, by one of 
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit 
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket 
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand 
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the 
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along 
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of August 1, 2014 (79 FR 44731) (FRL-9911-
67), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 
4F8254) by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, 
NC 27419. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.662 be amended by 
establishing tolerances for residues of the plant growth regulator 
trinexapac-ethyl, (4-(cyclopropyl-a-hydroxy-methylene)-3,5-dioxo-
cyclohexanecarboxylic acid ethyl ester), and its primary metabolite 
CGA-179500 in or on rice, bran at 1.5 parts per million (ppm); rice, 
grain at 0.4 ppm; rice, straw at 0.07 ppm; rice, wild, grain at 0.4 
ppm; rye, bran at 2.5 ppm; rye, grain at 2.0 ppm; rye, hay at 0.8 ppm; 
and rye, straw at 0.4 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the 
petition prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection LLC, the registrant, 
which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There 
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has 
modified the proposed tolerances on rye commodities to rye, bran at 6.0 
ppm; rye, grain at 4.0 ppm; rye, hay at 1.5 ppm; and rye, straw at 0.9 
ppm. The reason for these changes are explained in Unit IV.C.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a 
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a 
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a 
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure 
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary 
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable 
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in 
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. 
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special 
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide 
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there 
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and 
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue . . 
. .''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors 
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available 
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this 
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a 
determination on aggregate exposure for trinexapac-ethyl including 
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action. 
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with trinexapac-
ethyl 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

[[Page 28845]]

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.
    Trinexapac-ethyl exhibits low acute toxicity as shown in the 
standard acute toxicity battery as well as in the acute neurotoxicity 
study in rats with no systemic or neurotoxic effects up to the limit 
dose. The dog appears to be the most sensitive species while no 
systemic adverse effects were seen in rats, rabbits, or mice up to the 
limit dose (1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)) following 
subchronic or chronic oral exposure. In the dogs; however, decreased 
body weight gain and food consumption, diffuse thymic atrophy, and 
changes in the epithelial cells of the renal tubules were seen in the 
90-day dog study at 516/582 mg/kg/day (males/females). Following 
chronic exposure, dose-related neuropathology of the brain 
characterized as focal bilateral vacuolation of the dorsal medial 
hippocampus and/or lateral midbrain was seen at >=365/357 mg/kg/day in 
male and female dogs, respectively. The lesions remained confined to 
the supporting cells in the central nervous system and did not progress 
to more advanced or more extensive damage of the nervous tissue. These 
lesions were not associated with other neuropathological findings or 
overt neurological signs, so their biological significance is unknown. 
Similar lesions were not observed in the rat or mouse following 
subchronic or chronic dietary exposure, and there was no other evidence 
in any other species tested to indicate a neurotoxicity potential. 
Furthermore, the brain lesions observed in the chronic dog study are 
not likely to develop from a short-term exposure and were not observed 
in either the rat or mouse short-term studies. In support of these 
findings, no evidence of neurotoxicity in the acute or subchronic rat 
neurotoxicity studies was found.
    In the rat and rabbit developmental toxicity studies, there is 
evidence of increased qualitative and quantitative susceptibility in 
the rat (increased incidence of asymmetrical sternebrae at the limit 
dose) and rabbit (decreased number of live fetuses/litter and increased 
post-implantation loss and early resorption at 360 mg/kg/day) in the 
absence of maternal toxicity. Qualitative sensitivity was observed in 
the 2-generation reproduction study but only in excess of the limit 
dose (1,212 mg/kg/day). The decreased pup survival when analyzed with 
sexes combined, resulted in statistical significance (5-7%); this 
finding was not significant when the data were analyzed separately. 
Further evaluation of the individual litters suggested that one or two 
litters were the cause of the reduced pup survival at the highest dose 
tested. Reproductive toxicity was not observed up to the limit dose. 
There was also no indication of immunotoxicity in mice up to the limit 
dose.
    Data from the combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in 
the rat did not demonstrate an increase in any tumor type that would be 
relevant to humans. The observation of squamous cell carcinomas in the 
non-glandular portion of the stomach of two males at 806 mg/kg/day does 
not provide reasonable evidence of a possible deleterious effect of 
trinexapac-ethyl on the pharynx and/or esophagus (non-glandular areas) 
of the human. This is because trinexapac-ethyl would not be in contact 
with human tissues for a significant period of time compared to the 
length of time it was in contact with the non-glandular portion of the 
rat stomach. Follicular adenocarcinomas of the thyroid were 
significantly increased in males (5%) at 806 mg/kg/day but this value 
was within the historical control range. In the mouse, there was no 
evidence of carcinogenicity. The mutagenicity database is complete, 
with no evidence of mutagenicity. The cancer classification for 
trinexapac-ethyl is ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.''
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the 
adverse effects caused by trinexapac-ethyl as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document ``Trinexapac-ethyl: Human Health Risk 
Assessment to Support New Uses on Rice and Rye'' on page 34 in docket 
ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0340.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA 
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of 
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the 
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no 
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for 
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed 
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to 
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) 
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified 
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with 
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a 
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe 
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes 
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the 
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of 
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the 
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete 
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for trinexapac-ethyl used 
for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III B. of the final rule 
published in the Federal Register of March 2, 2012 (77 FR 12742) (FRL-
9337-9).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary 
exposure to trinexapac-ethyl, EPA considered exposure under the 
petitioned-for tolerances (as revised in this regulation) as well as 
all existing trinexapac-ethyl tolerances in 40 CFR 180.662. EPA 
assessed dietary exposures from trinexapac-ethyl 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 
for trinexapac-ethyl. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used 
food consumption information from the United States Department of 
Agriculture (USDA) 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination 
Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in 
food, EPA assumed that residues are present in all commodities at the 
tolerance level and that 100% of all commodities with trinexapac-ethyl 
tolerances are treated. The acute dietary exposure was only estimated 
for females 13 to 49 years old based on an in utero effect (decrease in 
mean number of fetuses/litter and an increase in post-implantation 
loss) identified in the rabbit developmental study. An endpoint of 
concern was not identified for the general U.S. population; however, 
the acute dietary assessment will ensure protection of women that may 
become pregnant.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure 
assessment EPA used the food consumption data

[[Page 28846]]

from the USDA 2003-2008 (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, 
EPA assumed that residues are present in all commodities at the 
tolerance level and that 100% of all commodities with trinexapac-ethyl 
tolerances are treated.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has 
concluded that trinexapac-ethyl does not pose a cancer risk to humans. 
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing 
cancer risk is unnecessary.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information. 
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the 
dietary assessment for trinexapac-ethyl. Tolerance level residues and/
or 100 PCT were assumed for all food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening 
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk 
assessment for trinexapac-ethyl in drinking water. These simulation 
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of trinexapac-ethyl. Further information 
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure 
assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the Tier 1 Rice Model and Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground 
Water (PRZM GW), the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of 
trinexapac-ethyl for acute exposures are estimated to be 31.68 parts 
per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.116 ppb for ground water. The 
EDWCs of trinexapac-ethyl for chronic exposures for non-cancer 
assessments are estimated to be 31.68 ppb for surface water and 0.054 
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 31.68 ppb was used to 
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk 
assessment, the water concentration of value 31.68 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). Trinexapac-ethyl is 
currently registered for the following uses that could result in 
residential exposures: Residential lawns, athletic fields, parks, and 
golf courses. EPA assessed residential exposure using the following 
assumptions: That homeowner handlers wear shorts, short-sleeved shirts, 
socks, and shoes, and that they complete all tasks associated with the 
use of a pesticide product including mixing/loading, if needed, as well 
as the application. Residential handler exposure scenarios for both 
dermal and inhalation are considered to be short-term only, due to the 
infrequent use patterns associated with homeowner products.
    EPA uses the term ``post-application'' to describe exposure to 
individuals that occur as a result of being in an environment that has 
been previously treated with a pesticide. Trinexapac-ethyl can be used 
in many areas that can be frequented by the general population 
including residential areas (e.g., home lawns, recreational turf). As a 
result, individuals can be exposed by entering these areas if they have 
been previously treated. Therefore, short-and intermediate-term dermal 
post-application exposures and risks were also assessed for trinexapac-
ethyl. There is the potential for dermal and incidental oral exposure 
to children; however, since there is no toxicological endpoint of 
concern for that route, a quantitative assessment was not conducted. 
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic 
inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of 
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when 
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the 
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative 
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances 
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not found 
trinexapac-ethyl to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other 
substances, and trinexapac-ethyl does not appear to produce a toxic 
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this 
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that trinexapac-ethyl does 
not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For 
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a 
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of 
such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA 
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants 
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal 
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity 
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a 
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This 
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality 
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA 
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional 
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of 
a different factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Evidence of increased 
qualitative and/or quantitative susceptibility of the offspring was 
seen only at high doses in the developmental rat and rabbit studies, 
and in the rat reproduction study. Developmental toxicity in the rat 
was only observed at the limit dose (increased incidence of 
asymmetrical sternebrae at 1,000 mg/kg) in the absence of maternal 
toxicity. In the rabbit, no maternal toxicity was demonstrated at the 
highest dose tested (360 mg/kg/day), but there was a decrease in the 
mean number of fetuses/litter and an increase in post-implantation loss 
and early resorptions at this dose level.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the 
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the 
FQPA SF were reduced to 1x. That decision is based on the following 
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for trinexapac-ethyl is complete.
    ii. There is no indication that trinexapac-ethyl is a neurotoxic 
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study 
or additional Uncertainty Factor's to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. Although, there is evidence of susceptibility in the rat and 
rabbit developmental studies and qualitative susceptibility in the 2-
generation rat reproduction study, these effects only occurred at the 
highest doses tested for each study, and there were clearly identified 
NOAELs/LOAELs for the rabbit developmental study, the rat developmental 
study and for the reproduction study for each fetal/offspring effect. 
Therefore, there are no residual concerns with respect to developmental 
and reproductive effects.

[[Page 28847]]

    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure 
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based 
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative 
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used 
to assess exposure to trinexapac-ethyl in drinking water. EPA used 
similarly conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure 
of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These 
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by 
trinexapac-ethyl.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide 
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the 
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA 
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the 
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term 
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, 
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an 
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into 
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and 
drinking water. Therefore, acute aggregate risk is equivalent to the 
acute dietary risk as discussed in Unit III.C.1.i. All risk estimates 
are below EPA's level of concern. The acute dietary exposure estimate 
for females 13 to 49 years old will only utilize 2% of the aPAD, which 
is well below the Agency's level of concern (100% of the aPAD).
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this 
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to 
trinexapac-ethyl from food and water will utilize 6% of the cPAD for 
children 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest 
exposure.
    3. Short- and intermediate-term risk: Short- and immediate-term 
aggregate exposure take into account short-term and intermediate-term 
residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water 
(considered to be a background exposure level). Trinexapac-ethyl is 
currently registered for uses that could result in short- and 
intermediate-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined 
that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and 
water with short-term and intermediate-term residential exposures to 
trinexapac-ethyl. The short- and intermediate-term toxicological 
endpoints for trinexapac-ethyl are the same for each route of exposure. 
Therefore, for residential exposure scenarios, only short-term 
exposures were assessed, and are considered to be protective of 
intermediate-term exposure and risk.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water, 
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 4500 for children 
11-16 years old and 230 for adult females. Because EPA's level of 
concern for trinexapac-ethyl is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are 
not of concern.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of 
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity 
studies, chemical name is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA 
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result 
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate 
exposure to trinexapac-ethyl residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (Method GRM020.01A, which utilizes 
high performance liquid chromatography with triple-quadrupole mass 
spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is available to enforce the tolerance 
expression.
    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry 
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: 
[email protected].

B. International Residue Limits

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

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    EPA revised the petitioned-for tolerances on rye which were 
determined by extrapolating from residue data on barley. EPA concurs 
with translating from the existing cereal grains, however, from a 
residue perspective, rye is more similar to wheat than to barley. Since 
the tolerances for wheat commodities are higher than the tolerances for 
barley commodities, EPA has revised the tolerances for rye to be 
consistent with the wheat tolerances. The use of the higher wheat 
tolerances also represents a more conservative (protective) approach 
for assessing risk from total residues.

 V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of trinexapac-
ethyl, (4-(cyclopropyl-a-hydroxy-methylene)-3,5-dioxo-
cyclohexanecarboxylic acid ethyl ester), and the associated metabolite 
trinexapac, (4-(cyclopropylhydroxymethylene)-3,5-
dioxocyclohexanecarboxylic acid), calculated as the stoichiometric 
equivalent of trinexapac-ethyl, in or on rice, bran at 1.5 ppm; rice, 
grain at 0.4 ppm; rice, straw at 0.07 ppm; rice, wild, grain at 0.4 
ppm; rye, bran at 6.0 ppm; rye, grain at 4.0 ppm; rye, hay at 1.5 ppm; 
and rye, straw at 0.9 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in 
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from 
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been 
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not 
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any 
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any 
special considerations under

[[Page 28848]]

Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis 
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this 
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the 
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food 
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this 
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and 
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions 
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that 
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or 
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government 
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has 
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled 
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this 
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded 
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would 
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant 
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required 
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and 
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of 
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' 
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: May 8, 2015.
G. Jeffery Herndon,
Acting 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. Section 180.662, is amended by alphabetically adding the following 
commodities to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  180.662  Trinexapac-ethyl; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                * * * * *
Rice, bran.................................................          1.5
Rice, grain................................................          0.4
Rice, straw................................................         0.07
Rice, wild, grain..........................................          0.4
Rye, bran..................................................          6.0
Rye, grain.................................................          4.0
Rye, hay...................................................          1.5
Rye, straw.................................................          0.9
 
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-11972 Filed 5-19-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P



                                                                        Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 97 / Wednesday, May 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations                                                                          28843



                                                                 Pesticide chemical                              CAS Reg. No.                                                       Limits

                                                Heptyl alcohol ............................................           111–70–6     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                Hexanal .....................................................          66–25–1     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                Hexanoic acid ............................................            142–62–1     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                n-Hexanol ..................................................          111–27–3     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                (Z)-3-Hexenol ............................................            928–96–1     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                (Z)-3-Hexenol acetate ...............................                3681–71–8     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                Hexyl acetate ............................................            142–92–7     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.

                                                          *                               *                            *                       *                            *                          *                          *
                                                Lauric acid .................................................         143–07–7     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                Lauric aldehyde .........................................             112–54–9     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                Lauryl alcohol ............................................           112–53–8     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                d-Limonene ...............................................           5989–27–5     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.

                                                         *                           *                                 *                    *                    *                    *                  *
                                                Methyl-a-ionone ........................................              127–42–4     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.
                                                3-Methyl-2-butenyl acetate ........................                  1191–16–8     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.
                                                2-Methylundecanal ....................................                110–41–8     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.

                                                          *                              *                             *                    *                    *                    *                  *
                                                Myristaldehyde ..........................................             124–25–4     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.
                                                Myristic acid ..............................................          544–63–8     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.
                                                Neryl acetate .............................................           141–12–8     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.

                                                         *                                *                            *                    *                    *                    *                  *
                                                Nonanal .....................................................         124–19–6     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.
                                                Nonanoic acid ...........................................             112–05–0     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.
                                                Nonyl alcohol .............................................           143–08–8     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.

                                                         *                                 *                           *                    *                    *                    *                  *
                                                Octanal ......................................................        124–13–0     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.

                                                         *                                *                            *                    *                    *                    *                  *
                                                Octanoic acid ............................................            124–07–2     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.
                                                1-Octanol ...................................................         111–87–5     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.

                                                          *                              *                             *                    *                    *                    *                  *
                                                Palmitic acid ..............................................           57–10–3     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.

                                                         *                              *                              *                    *                    *                    *                  *
                                                Propionic acid ............................................            79–09–4     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.

                                                         *                               *                             *                    *                    *                    *                  *
                                                Stearic acid. ..............................................           57–11–4     When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.

                                                          *                               *                            *                       *                            *                          *                          *
                                                2-Tridecanal ..............................................          7774–82–5     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                3,5,5-Trimethylhexanal ..............................                5435–64–3     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                Undecanal .................................................           112–44–7     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                Undecyl alcohol .........................................             112–42–5     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                Valeraldehyde ...........................................             110–62–3     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.
                                                Valeric acid ................................................         109–52–4     When    ready   for   use,   the   end-use   concentration   is   not   to   exceed   100   ppm.

                                                             *                              *                           *                      *                           *                          *                           *



                                                *        *        *        *         *                                ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION                                    ethyl in or on multiple commodities
                                                [FR Doc. 2015–11959 Filed 5–19–15; 8:45 am]                           AGENCY                                                      which are identified and discussed later
                                                BILLING CODE 6560–50–P                                                                                                            in this document. Syngenta Crop
                                                                                                                      40 CFR Part 180                                             protection LLC requested these
                                                                                                                      [EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0340; FRL–9926–62]                         tolerances under the Federal Food,
                                                                                                                                                                                  Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                                                                                      Trinexapac-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances
                                                                                                                                                                                  DATES: This regulation is effective May
                                                                                                                      AGENCY:  Environmental Protection                           20, 2015. Objections and requests for
                                                                                                                      Agency (EPA).                                               hearings must be received on or before
                                                                                                                      ACTION: Final rule.                                         July 20, 2015, and must be filed in
                                                                                                                                                                                  accordance with the instructions
                                                                                                                      SUMMARY:  This regulation establishes                       provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also
                                                                                                                      tolerances for residues of trinexapac-


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014        17:09 May 19, 2015        Jkt 235001       PO 00000   Frm 00037   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700     E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM         20MYR1


                                                28844             Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 97 / Wednesday, May 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

                                                Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY                          and may also request a hearing on those               179500 in or on rice, bran at 1.5 parts
                                                INFORMATION).                                           objections. You must file your objection              per million (ppm); rice, grain at 0.4
                                                ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,                  or request a hearing on this regulation               ppm; rice, straw at 0.07 ppm; rice, wild,
                                                identified by docket identification (ID)                in accordance with the instructions                   grain at 0.4 ppm; rye, bran at 2.5 ppm;
                                                number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0340, is                         provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure                rye, grain at 2.0 ppm; rye, hay at 0.8
                                                available at http://www.regulations.gov                 proper receipt by EPA, you must                       ppm; and rye, straw at 0.4 ppm. That
                                                or at the Office of Pesticide Programs                  identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–                     document referenced a summary of the
                                                Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)                   OPP–2014–0340 in the subject line on                  petition prepared by Syngenta Crop
                                                in the Environmental Protection Agency                  the first page of your submission. All                Protection LLC, the registrant, which is
                                                Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William                    objections and requests for a hearing                 available in the docket, http://
                                                Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301                 must be in writing, and must be                       www.regulations.gov. There were no
                                                Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC                   received by the Hearing Clerk on or                   comments received in response to the
                                                20460–0001. The Public Reading Room                     before July 20, 2015. Addresses for mail              notice of filing.
                                                                                                        and hand delivery of objections and                     Based upon review of the data
                                                is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
                                                                                                        hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR               supporting the petition, EPA has
                                                Monday through Friday, excluding legal
                                                                                                        178.25(b).                                            modified the proposed tolerances on rye
                                                holidays. The telephone number for the                    In addition to filing an objection or               commodities to rye, bran at 6.0 ppm;
                                                Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,                  hearing request with the Hearing Clerk                rye, grain at 4.0 ppm; rye, hay at 1.5
                                                and the telephone number for the OPP                    as described in 40 CFR part 178, please               ppm; and rye, straw at 0.9 ppm. The
                                                Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review                 submit a copy of the filing (excluding                reason for these changes are explained
                                                the visitor instructions and additional                 any Confidential Business Information                 in Unit IV.C.
                                                information about the docket available                  (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
                                                at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.                                                                                III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
                                                                                                        Information not marked confidential
                                                FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                                                                              Determination of Safety
                                                                                                        pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
                                                Susan Lewis, Registration Division                      disclosed publicly by EPA without prior                  Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
                                                (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,                  notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your               allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
                                                Environmental Protection Agency, 1200                   objection or hearing request, identified              legal limit for a pesticide chemical
                                                Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,                      by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–                       residue in or on a food) only if EPA
                                                DC 20460–0001; main telephone                           2014–0340, by one of the following                    determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
                                                number: (703) 305–7090; email address:                  methods:                                              Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
                                                RDFRNotices@epa.gov.                                      • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://               defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
                                                SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                              www.regulations.gov. Follow the online                reasonable certainty that no harm will
                                                                                                        instructions for submitting comments.                 result from aggregate exposure to the
                                                I. General Information                                                                                        pesticide chemical residue, including
                                                                                                        Do not submit electronically any
                                                A. Does this action apply to me?                        information you consider to be CBI or                 all anticipated dietary exposures and all
                                                   You may be potentially affected by                   other information whose disclosure is                 other exposures for which there is
                                                this action if you are an agricultural                  restricted by statute.                                reliable information.’’ This includes
                                                producer, food manufacturer, or                           • Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental                   exposure through drinking water and in
                                                pesticide manufacturer. The following                   Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/                 residential settings, but does not include
                                                list of North American Industrial                       DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.                 occupational exposure. Section
                                                Classification System (NAICS) codes is                  NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.                       408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
                                                not intended to be exhaustive, but rather                 • Hand Delivery: To make special                    give special consideration to exposure
                                                provides a guide to help readers                        arrangements for hand delivery or                     of infants and children to the pesticide
                                                determine whether this document                         delivery of boxed information, please                 chemical residue in establishing a
                                                applies to them. Potentially affected                   follow the instructions at http://                    tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
                                                entities may include:                                   www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.                    reasonable certainty that no harm will
                                                   • Crop production (NAICS code 111).                    Additional instructions on                          result to infants and children from
                                                   • Animal production (NAICS code                      commenting or visiting the docket,                    aggregate exposure to the pesticide
                                                112).                                                   along with more information about                     chemical residue . . . .’’
                                                   • Food manufacturing (NAICS code                     dockets generally, is available at                       Consistent with FFDCA section
                                                311).                                                   http://www.epa.gov/dockets.                           408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
                                                   • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS                     II. Summary of Petitioned-For
                                                                                                                                                              FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has
                                                code 32532).                                                                                                  reviewed the available scientific data
                                                                                                        Tolerance
                                                                                                                                                              and other relevant information in
                                                B. How can I get electronic access to                      In the Federal Register of August 1,               support of this action. EPA has
                                                other related information?                              2014 (79 FR 44731) (FRL–9911–67),                     sufficient data to assess the hazards of
                                                  You may access a frequently updated                   EPA issued a document pursuant to                     and to make a determination on
                                                electronic version of EPA’s tolerance                   FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.                    aggregate exposure for trinexapac-ethyl
                                                regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through                  346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a                including exposure resulting from the
                                                the Government Publishing Office’s e-                   pesticide petition (PP 4F8254) by                     tolerances established by this action.
                                                CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/                Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O.                   EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
                                                text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/                       Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419. The                  associated with trinexapac-ethyl
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                Title40/40tab_02.tpl.                                   petition requested that 40 CFR 180.662                follows.
                                                                                                        be amended by establishing tolerances
                                                C. How can I file an objection or hearing               for residues of the plant growth                      A. Toxicological Profile
                                                request?                                                regulator trinexapac-ethyl, (4-                         EPA has evaluated the available
                                                  Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21                        (cyclopropyl-a-hydroxy-methylene)-3,5-                toxicity data and considered its validity,
                                                U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an                     dioxo-cyclohexanecarboxylic acid ethyl                completeness, and reliability as well as
                                                objection to any aspect of this regulation              ester), and its primary metabolite CGA–               the relationship of the results of the


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:45 May 19, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00038   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM   20MYR1


                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 97 / Wednesday, May 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations                                          28845

                                                studies to human risk. EPA has also                     when the data were analyzed separately.               safety factors are used in conjunction
                                                considered available information                        Further evaluation of the individual                  with the POD to calculate a safe
                                                concerning the variability of the                       litters suggested that one or two litters             exposure level—generally referred to as
                                                sensitivities of major identifiable                     were the cause of the reduced pup                     a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
                                                subgroups of consumers, including                       survival at the highest dose tested.                  reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
                                                infants and children.                                   Reproductive toxicity was not observed                of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
                                                  Trinexapac-ethyl exhibits low acute                   up to the limit dose. There was also no               risks, the Agency assumes that any
                                                toxicity as shown in the standard acute                 indication of immunotoxicity in mice                  amount of exposure will lead to some
                                                toxicity battery as well as in the acute                up to the limit dose.                                 degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
                                                neurotoxicity study in rats with no                        Data from the combined chronic                     estimates risk in terms of the probability
                                                systemic or neurotoxic effects up to the                toxicity/carcinogenicity study in the rat             of an occurrence of the adverse effect
                                                limit dose. The dog appears to be the                   did not demonstrate an increase in any                expected in a lifetime. For more
                                                most sensitive species while no                         tumor type that would be relevant to                  information on the general principles
                                                systemic adverse effects were seen in                   humans. The observation of squamous                   EPA uses in risk characterization and a
                                                rats, rabbits, or mice up to the limit dose             cell carcinomas in the non-glandular                  complete description of the risk
                                                (1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/                   portion of the stomach of two males at                assessment process, see http://
                                                day)) following subchronic or chronic                   806 mg/kg/day does not provide                        www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
                                                oral exposure. In the dogs; however,                    reasonable evidence of a possible                     riskassess.htm.
                                                decreased body weight gain and food                     deleterious effect of trinexapac-ethyl on                A summary of the toxicological
                                                consumption, diffuse thymic atrophy,                    the pharynx and/or esophagus (non-                    endpoints for trinexapac-ethyl used for
                                                and changes in the epithelial cells of the              glandular areas) of the human. This is                human risk assessment is discussed in
                                                renal tubules were seen in the 90-day                   because trinexapac-ethyl would not be                 Unit III B. of the final rule published in
                                                dog study at 516/582 mg/kg/day (males/                  in contact with human tissues for a                   the Federal Register of March 2, 2012
                                                females). Following chronic exposure,                   significant period of time compared to                (77 FR 12742) (FRL–9337–9).
                                                dose-related neuropathology of the brain                the length of time it was in contact with
                                                                                                                                                              C. Exposure Assessment
                                                characterized as focal bilateral                        the non-glandular portion of the rat
                                                vacuolation of the dorsal medial                        stomach. Follicular adenocarcinomas of                   1. Dietary exposure from food and
                                                hippocampus and/or lateral midbrain                     the thyroid were significantly increased              feed uses. In evaluating dietary
                                                was seen at ≥365/357 mg/kg/day in male                  in males (5%) at 806 mg/kg/day but this               exposure to trinexapac-ethyl, EPA
                                                and female dogs, respectively. The                      value was within the historical control               considered exposure under the
                                                lesions remained confined to the                        range. In the mouse, there was no                     petitioned-for tolerances (as revised in
                                                supporting cells in the central nervous                 evidence of carcinogenicity. The                      this regulation) as well as all existing
                                                system and did not progress to more                     mutagenicity database is complete, with               trinexapac-ethyl tolerances in 40 CFR
                                                advanced or more extensive damage of                    no evidence of mutagenicity. The cancer               180.662. EPA assessed dietary
                                                the nervous tissue. These lesions were                  classification for trinexapac-ethyl is                exposures from trinexapac-ethyl in food
                                                not associated with other                               ‘‘Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to                    as follows:
                                                neuropathological findings or overt                     Humans.’’                                                i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
                                                neurological signs, so their biological                    Specific information on the studies                dietary exposure and risk assessments
                                                significance is unknown. Similar lesions                received and the nature of the adverse                are performed for a food-use pesticide,
                                                were not observed in the rat or mouse                   effects caused by trinexapac-ethyl as                 if a toxicological study has indicated the
                                                following subchronic or chronic dietary                 well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-               possibility of an effect of concern
                                                exposure, and there was no other                        level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-                occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
                                                evidence in any other species tested to                 adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the                 exposure. Such effects were identified
                                                indicate a neurotoxicity potential.                     toxicity studies can be found at http://              for trinexapac-ethyl. In estimating acute
                                                Furthermore, the brain lesions observed                 www.regulations.gov in document                       dietary exposure, EPA used food
                                                in the chronic dog study are not likely                 ‘‘Trinexapac-ethyl: Human Health Risk                 consumption information from the
                                                to develop from a short-term exposure                   Assessment to Support New Uses on                     United States Department of Agriculture
                                                and were not observed in either the rat                 Rice and Rye’’ on page 34 in docket ID                (USDA) 2003–2008 National Health and
                                                or mouse short-term studies. In support                 number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0340.                          Nutrition Examination Survey, What We
                                                of these findings, no evidence of                                                                             Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As
                                                                                                        B. Toxicological Points of Departure/                 to residue levels in food, EPA assumed
                                                neurotoxicity in the acute or subchronic                Levels of Concern
                                                rat neurotoxicity studies was found.                                                                          that residues are present in all
                                                  In the rat and rabbit developmental                      Once a pesticide’s toxicological                   commodities at the tolerance level and
                                                toxicity studies, there is evidence of                  profile is determined, EPA identifies                 that 100% of all commodities with
                                                increased qualitative and quantitative                  toxicological points of departure (POD)               trinexapac-ethyl tolerances are treated.
                                                susceptibility in the rat (increased                    and levels of concern to use in                       The acute dietary exposure was only
                                                incidence of asymmetrical sternebrae at                 evaluating the risk posed by human                    estimated for females 13 to 49 years old
                                                the limit dose) and rabbit (decreased                   exposure to the pesticide. For hazards                based on an in utero effect (decrease in
                                                number of live fetuses/litter and                       that have a threshold below which there               mean number of fetuses/litter and an
                                                increased post-implantation loss and                    is no appreciable risk, the toxicological             increase in post-implantation loss)
                                                early resorption at 360 mg/kg/day) in                   POD is used as the basis for derivation               identified in the rabbit developmental
                                                the absence of maternal toxicity.                       of reference values for risk assessment.              study. An endpoint of concern was not
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                Qualitative sensitivity was observed in                 PODs are developed based on a careful                 identified for the general U.S.
                                                the 2-generation reproduction study but                 analysis of the doses in each                         population; however, the acute dietary
                                                only in excess of the limit dose (1,212                 toxicological study to determine the                  assessment will ensure protection of
                                                mg/kg/day). The decreased pup survival                  dose at which no adverse effects are                  women that may become pregnant.
                                                when analyzed with sexes combined,                      observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest                      ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
                                                resulted in statistical significance (5–                dose at which adverse effects of concern              the chronic dietary exposure assessment
                                                7%); this finding was not significant                   are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/              EPA used the food consumption data


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:09 May 19, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00039   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM   20MYR1


                                                28846             Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 97 / Wednesday, May 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

                                                from the USDA 2003–2008 (NHANES/                        wear shorts, short-sleeved shirts, socks,             D. Safety Factor for Infants and
                                                WWEIA). As to residue levels in food,                   and shoes, and that they complete all                 Children
                                                EPA assumed that residues are present                   tasks associated with the use of a
                                                in all commodities at the tolerance level                                                                        1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
                                                                                                        pesticide product including mixing/                   FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
                                                and that 100% of all commodities with                   loading, if needed, as well as the
                                                trinexapac-ethyl tolerances are treated.                                                                      an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
                                                                                                        application. Residential handler                      safety for infants and children in the
                                                   iii. Cancer. Based on the data                       exposure scenarios for both dermal and
                                                summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has                                                                            case of threshold effects to account for
                                                                                                        inhalation are considered to be short-                prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
                                                concluded that trinexapac-ethyl does
                                                                                                        term only, due to the infrequent use                  completeness of the database on toxicity
                                                not pose a cancer risk to humans.
                                                                                                        patterns associated with homeowner                    and exposure unless EPA determines
                                                Therefore, a dietary exposure
                                                assessment for the purpose of assessing                 products.                                             based on reliable data that a different
                                                cancer risk is unnecessary.                                EPA uses the term ‘‘post-application’’             margin of safety will be safe for infants
                                                   iv. Anticipated residue and percent                  to describe exposure to individuals that              and children. This additional margin of
                                                crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did                 occur as a result of being in an                      safety is commonly referred to as the
                                                not use anticipated residue and/or PCT                  environment that has been previously                  Food Quality Protection Act Safety
                                                information in the dietary assessment                   treated with a pesticide. Trinexapac-                 Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this
                                                for trinexapac-ethyl. Tolerance level                   ethyl can be used in many areas that can              provision, EPA either retains the default
                                                residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed                    be frequented by the general population               value of 10X, or uses a different
                                                for all food commodities.                               including residential areas (e.g., home               additional safety factor when reliable
                                                   2. Dietary exposure from drinking                                                                          data available to EPA support the choice
                                                                                                        lawns, recreational turf). As a result,
                                                water. The Agency used screening level                                                                        of a different factor.
                                                                                                        individuals can be exposed by entering
                                                water exposure models in the dietary                                                                             2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
                                                exposure analysis and risk assessment                   these areas if they have been previously
                                                                                                                                                              Evidence of increased qualitative and/or
                                                for trinexapac-ethyl in drinking water.                 treated. Therefore, short-and
                                                                                                                                                              quantitative susceptibility of the
                                                These simulation models take into                       intermediate-term dermal post-
                                                                                                                                                              offspring was seen only at high doses in
                                                account data on the physical, chemical,                 application exposures and risks were
                                                                                                                                                              the developmental rat and rabbit
                                                and fate/transport characteristics of                   also assessed for trinexapac-ethyl. There             studies, and in the rat reproduction
                                                trinexapac-ethyl. Further information                   is the potential for dermal and                       study. Developmental toxicity in the rat
                                                regarding EPA drinking water models                     incidental oral exposure to children;                 was only observed at the limit dose
                                                used in pesticide exposure assessment                   however, since there is no toxicological              (increased incidence of asymmetrical
                                                can be found at http://www.epa.gov/                     endpoint of concern for that route, a                 sternebrae at 1,000 mg/kg) in the
                                                oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.                        quantitative assessment was not                       absence of maternal toxicity. In the
                                                   Based on the Tier 1 Rice Model and                   conducted. Further information                        rabbit, no maternal toxicity was
                                                Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground                        regarding EPA standard assumptions                    demonstrated at the highest dose tested
                                                Water (PRZM GW), the estimated                          and generic inputs for residential                    (360 mg/kg/day), but there was a
                                                drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)                   exposures may be found at http://                     decrease in the mean number of fetuses/
                                                of trinexapac-ethyl for acute exposures                 www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/                  litter and an increase in post-
                                                are estimated to be 31.68 parts per                     trac6a05.pdf.                                         implantation loss and early resorptions
                                                billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.116                                                                     at this dose level.
                                                ppb for ground water. The EDWCs of                         4. Cumulative effects from substances
                                                                                                        with a common mechanism of toxicity.                     3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
                                                trinexapac-ethyl for chronic exposures
                                                                                                        Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA                      that reliable data show the safety of
                                                for non-cancer assessments are
                                                                                                        requires that, when considering whether               infants and children would be
                                                estimated to be 31.68 ppb for surface
                                                                                                        to establish, modify, or revoke a                     adequately protected if the FQPA SF
                                                water and 0.054 ppb for ground water.
                                                                                                        tolerance, the Agency consider                        were reduced to 1x. That decision is
                                                   Modeled estimates of drinking water
                                                                                                                                                              based on the following findings:
                                                concentrations were directly entered                    ‘‘available information’’ concerning the
                                                into the dietary exposure model. For                    cumulative effects of a particular                       i. The toxicity database for trinexapac-
                                                acute dietary risk assessment, the water                pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other                      ethyl is complete.
                                                concentration value of 31.68 ppb was                    substances that have a common                            ii. There is no indication that
                                                used to assess the contribution to                      mechanism of toxicity.’’ EPA has not                  trinexapac-ethyl is a neurotoxic
                                                drinking water. For chronic dietary risk                found trinexapac-ethyl to share a                     chemical and there is no need for a
                                                assessment, the water concentration of                  common mechanism of toxicity with                     developmental neurotoxicity study or
                                                value 31.68 ppb was used to assess the                                                                        additional Uncertainty Factor’s to
                                                                                                        any other substances, and trinexapac-
                                                contribution to drinking water.                                                                               account for neurotoxicity.
                                                                                                        ethyl does not appear to produce a toxic
                                                   3. From non-dietary exposure. The                                                                             iii. Although, there is evidence of
                                                                                                        metabolite produced by other
                                                term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in                                                                      susceptibility in the rat and rabbit
                                                                                                        substances. For the purposes of this
                                                this document to refer to non-                                                                                developmental studies and qualitative
                                                                                                        tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
                                                occupational, non-dietary exposure                                                                            susceptibility in the 2-generation rat
                                                (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,                assumed that trinexapac-ethyl does not                reproduction study, these effects only
                                                indoor pest control, termiticides, and                  have a common mechanism of toxicity                   occurred at the highest doses tested for
                                                flea and tick control on pets).                         with other substances. For information                each study, and there were clearly
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                Trinexapac-ethyl is currently registered                regarding EPA’s efforts to determine                  identified NOAELs/LOAELs for the
                                                for the following uses that could result                which chemicals have a common                         rabbit developmental study, the rat
                                                in residential exposures: Residential                   mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate                 developmental study and for the
                                                lawns, athletic fields, parks, and golf                 the cumulative effects of such                        reproduction study for each fetal/
                                                courses. EPA assessed residential                       chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at                      offspring effect. Therefore, there are no
                                                exposure using the following                            http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/                        residual concerns with respect to
                                                assumptions: That homeowner handlers                    cumulative.                                           developmental and reproductive effects.


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:09 May 19, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00040   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM   20MYR1


                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 97 / Wednesday, May 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations                                          28847

                                                   iv. There are no residual uncertainties              toxicological endpoints for trinexapac-               different from a Codex MRL; however,
                                                identified in the exposure databases.                   ethyl are the same for each route of                  FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
                                                The dietary food exposure assessments                   exposure. Therefore, for residential                  EPA explain the reasons for departing
                                                were performed based on 100 PCT and                     exposure scenarios, only short-term                   from the Codex level. The Codex has not
                                                tolerance-level residues. EPA made                      exposures were assessed, and are                      established a MRL for trinexapac-ethyl.
                                                conservative (protective) assumptions in                considered to be protective of                        C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
                                                the ground and surface water modeling                   intermediate-term exposure and risk.                  Tolerances
                                                used to assess exposure to trinexapac-                    Using the exposure assumptions
                                                ethyl in drinking water. EPA used                       described in this unit for short-term                    EPA revised the petitioned-for
                                                similarly conservative assumptions to                   exposures, EPA has concluded the                      tolerances on rye which were
                                                assess postapplication exposure of                      combined short-term food, water, and                  determined by extrapolating from
                                                children as well as incidental oral                     residential exposures result in aggregate             residue data on barley. EPA concurs
                                                exposure of toddlers. These assessments                 MOEs of 4500 for children 11–16 years                 with translating from the existing cereal
                                                will not underestimate the exposure and                 old and 230 for adult females. Because                grains, however, from a residue
                                                risks posed by trinexapac-ethyl.                        EPA’s level of concern for trinexapac-                perspective, rye is more similar to wheat
                                                                                                        ethyl is a MOE of 100 or below, these                 than to barley. Since the tolerances for
                                                E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of                                                                       wheat commodities are higher than the
                                                Safety                                                  MOEs are not of concern.
                                                                                                          4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.                   tolerances for barley commodities, EPA
                                                   EPA determines whether acute and                     population. Based on the lack of                      has revised the tolerances for rye to be
                                                chronic dietary pesticide exposures are                 evidence of carcinogenicity in two                    consistent with the wheat tolerances.
                                                safe by comparing aggregate exposure                    adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,              The use of the higher wheat tolerances
                                                estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and                   chemical name is not expected to pose                 also represents a more conservative
                                                chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer                   a cancer risk to humans.                              (protective) approach for assessing risk
                                                risks, EPA calculates the lifetime                        5. Determination of safety. Based on                from total residues.
                                                probability of acquiring cancer given the               these risk assessments, EPA concludes                 V. Conclusion
                                                estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,                   that there is a reasonable certainty that
                                                intermediate-, and chronic-term risks                                                                            Therefore, tolerances are established
                                                                                                        no harm will result to the general
                                                are evaluated by comparing the                                                                                for residues of trinexapac-ethyl, (4-
                                                                                                        population, or to infants and children
                                                estimated aggregate food, water, and                                                                          (cyclopropyl-a-hydroxy-methylene)-3,5-
                                                                                                        from aggregate exposure to trinexapac-
                                                residential exposure to the appropriate                                                                       dioxo-cyclohexanecarboxylic acid ethyl
                                                                                                        ethyl residues.
                                                PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE                                                                           ester), and the associated metabolite
                                                exists.                                                 IV. Other Considerations                              trinexapac, (4-
                                                   1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk                                                                     (cyclopropylhydroxymethylene)-3,5-
                                                                                                        A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
                                                assessment takes into account acute                                                                           dioxocyclohexanecarboxylic acid),
                                                exposure estimates from dietary                            Adequate enforcement methodology                   calculated as the stoichiometric
                                                consumption of food and drinking                        (Method GRM020.01A, which utilizes                    equivalent of trinexapac-ethyl, in or on
                                                water. Therefore, acute aggregate risk is               high performance liquid                               rice, bran at 1.5 ppm; rice, grain at 0.4
                                                equivalent to the acute dietary risk as                 chromatography with triple-quadrupole                 ppm; rice, straw at 0.07 ppm; rice, wild,
                                                discussed in Unit III.C.1.i. All risk                   mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) is                       grain at 0.4 ppm; rye, bran at 6.0 ppm;
                                                estimates are below EPA’s level of                      available to enforce the tolerance                    rye, grain at 4.0 ppm; rye, hay at 1.5
                                                concern. The acute dietary exposure                     expression.                                           ppm; and rye, straw at 0.9 ppm.
                                                estimate for females 13 to 49 years old                    The method may be requested from:
                                                                                                        Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,                   VI. Statutory and Executive Order
                                                will only utilize 2% of the aPAD, which
                                                                                                        Environmental Science Center, 701                     Reviews
                                                is well below the Agency’s level of
                                                concern (100% of the aPAD).                             Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;                    This action establishes tolerances
                                                   2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure                  telephone number: (410) 305–2905;                     under FFDCA section 408(d) in
                                                assumptions described in this unit for                  email address: residuemethods@                        response to a petition submitted to the
                                                chronic exposure, EPA has concluded                     epa.gov.                                              Agency. The Office of Management and
                                                that chronic exposure to trinexapac-                                                                          Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
                                                                                                        B. International Residue Limits                       of actions from review under Executive
                                                ethyl from food and water will utilize
                                                6% of the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years                  In making its tolerance decisions, EPA              Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
                                                old, the population group receiving the                 seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with               Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
                                                greatest exposure.                                      international standards whenever                      October 4, 1993). Because this action
                                                   3. Short- and intermediate-term risk:                possible, consistent with U.S. food                   has been exempted from review under
                                                Short- and immediate-term aggregate                     safety standards and agricultural                     Executive Order 12866, this action is
                                                exposure take into account short-term                   practices. EPA considers the                          not subject to Executive Order 13211,
                                                and intermediate-term residential                       international maximum residue limits                  entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
                                                exposure plus chronic exposure to food                  (MRLs) established by the Codex                       Regulations That Significantly Affect
                                                and water (considered to be a                           Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as                   Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
                                                background exposure level).                             required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).                  FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
                                                Trinexapac-ethyl is currently registered                The Codex Alimentarius is a joint                     Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
                                                for uses that could result in short- and                United Nations Food and Agriculture                   Children from Environmental Health
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                intermediate-term residential exposure,                 Organization/World Health                             Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
                                                and the Agency has determined that it                   Organization food standards program,                  April 23, 1997). This action does not
                                                is appropriate to aggregate chronic                     and it is recognized as an international              contain any information collections
                                                exposure through food and water with                    food safety standards-setting                         subject to OMB approval under the
                                                short-term and intermediate-term                        organization in trade agreements to                   Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
                                                residential exposures to trinexapac-                    which the United States is a party. EPA               U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
                                                ethyl. The short- and intermediate-term                 may establish a tolerance that is                     any special considerations under


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:09 May 19, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00041   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM   20MYR1


                                                28848             Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 97 / Wednesday, May 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

                                                Executive Order 12898, entitled                         and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping                        file an application for the facilities
                                                ‘‘Federal Actions to Address                            requirements.                                                 specified in its rulemaking petition and
                                                Environmental Justice in Minority                          Dated: May 8, 2015.                                        construct the station. TDS also reiterates
                                                Populations and Low-Income                              G. Jeffery Herndon,
                                                                                                                                                                      that the grant of the petition would
                                                Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,                                                                               serve the public interest because its
                                                                                                        Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
                                                1994).                                                                                                                operation on channel 18 would
                                                                                                        of Pesticide Programs.
                                                   Since tolerances and exemptions that                                                                               eliminate potential interference to and
                                                are established on the basis of a petition                Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is                              from wireless operations in the Lower
                                                under FFDCA section 408(d), such as                     amended as follows:                                           700 MHZ A Block located adjacent to
                                                the tolerance in this final rule, do not                                                                              channel 51 in Portland, Oregon market,
                                                                                                        PART 180—[AMENDED]                                            permitting the wireless licensee to
                                                require the issuance of a proposed rule,
                                                the requirements of the Regulatory                                                                                    expand service to additional consumers
                                                                                                        ■ 1. The authority citation for part 180
                                                Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et                                                                                sooner than would otherwise be
                                                                                                        continues to read as follows:
                                                seq.), do not apply.                                                                                                  possible.
                                                                                                            Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
                                                   This action directly regulates growers,                                                                            DATES: This rule is effective May 20,
                                                food processors, food handlers, and food                ■ 2. Section 180.662, is amended by                           2015.
                                                retailers, not States or tribes, nor does               alphabetically adding the following                           FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                this action alter the relationships or                  commodities to the table in paragraph                         Joyce Bernstein, Joyce.Bernstein@
                                                distribution of power and                               (a) to read as follows:                                       fcc.gov, Media Bureau, (202) 418–1647.
                                                responsibilities established by Congress                                                                              SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
                                                in the preemption provisions of FFDCA                   § 180.662 Trinexapac-ethyl; tolerances for
                                                                                                        residues.                                                     synopsis of the Commission’s Report
                                                section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency                                                                                and Order, MB Docket No. 15–88,
                                                has determined that this action will not                    (a) * * *
                                                                                                                                                                      adopted May 14, 2015, and released
                                                have a substantial direct effect on States                                                                            May 14, 2015. The full text of this
                                                or tribal governments, on the                                                                            Parts per
                                                                                                                       Commodity                                      document is available for public
                                                                                                                                                          million
                                                relationship between the national                                                                                     inspection and copying during normal
                                                government and the States or tribal                                                                                   business hours in the FCC’s Reference
                                                governments, or on the distribution of                     *          *              *               *         *      Information Center at Portals II, CY–
                                                power and responsibilities among the                    Rice, bran .................................            1.5   A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington,
                                                various levels of government or between                 Rice, grain ................................            0.4   DC 20554. This document will also be
                                                the Federal Government and Indian                       Rice, straw ................................           0.07
                                                                                                        Rice, wild, grain ........................              0.4
                                                                                                                                                                      available via ECFS (http://
                                                tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined                                                                               fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/). To request
                                                that Executive Order 13132, entitled                    Rye, bran ..................................            6.0
                                                                                                        Rye, grain .................................            4.0   materials in accessible formats for
                                                ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,                                                                               people with disabilities (braille, large
                                                                                                        Rye, hay ...................................            1.5
                                                1999) and Executive Order 13175,                        Rye, straw .................................            0.9   print, electronic files, audio format),
                                                entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination                                                                              send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call
                                                with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR                       *           *            *            *          *      the Consumer & Governmental Affairs
                                                67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply                                                                                 Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202–
                                                to this action. In addition, this action                *          *     *        *        *                          418–0432 (tty).
                                                does not impose any enforceable duty or                 [FR Doc. 2015–11972 Filed 5–19–15; 8:45 am]                      This document does not contain
                                                contain any unfunded mandate as                         BILLING CODE 6560–50–P                                        information collection requirements
                                                described under Title II of the Unfunded                                                                              subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
                                                Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.                                                                                  of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition,
                                                1501 et seq.).                                          FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS                                        therefore, it does not contain any
                                                   This action does not involve any                     COMMISSION                                                    information collection burden ‘‘for
                                                technical standards that would require                                                                                small business concerns with fewer than
                                                Agency consideration of voluntary                       47 CFR Part 73                                                25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small
                                                consensus standards pursuant to section                                                                               Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
                                                12(d) of the National Technology                        [MB Docket No. 15–88; RM–11747; DA                            Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
                                                                                                        15–584]
                                                Transfer and Advancement Act                                                                                          3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory
                                                (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).                           Television Broadcasting Services;                             Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to
                                                                                                        Bend, Oregon                                                  this proceeding.
                                                VII. Congressional Review Act                                                                                            The Commission will send a copy of
                                                  Pursuant to the Congressional Review                  AGENCY:  Federal Communications                               this Report and Order in a report to be
                                                Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will                    Commission.                                                   sent to Congress and the Government
                                                submit a report containing this rule and                ACTION: Final rule.                                           Accountability Office pursuant to the
                                                other required information to the U.S.                                                                                Congressional review Act, see 5 U.S.C.
                                                Senate, the U.S. House of                               SUMMARY:   The Commission has before it                       801(a)(1)(A).
                                                Representatives, and the Comptroller                    a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued
                                                                                                                                                                      List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
                                                General of the United States prior to                   in response to a petition for rulemaking
                                                publication of the rule in the Federal                  filed by TDS Broadcasting LLC (‘‘TDS’’),                        Television.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                Register. This action is not a ‘‘major                  the licensee of KOHD, channel 51,                             Federal Communications Commission.
                                                rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).                   Bend, Oregon, requesting the                                  Barbara A. Kreisman,
                                                                                                        substitution of channel 18 for channel                        Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau.
                                                List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180                     51 at Bend. TDS filed comments
                                                 Environmental protection,                              reaffirming its interest in the proposed                      Final Rule
                                                Administrative practice and procedure,                  channel substitution and stated that if                         For the reasons discussed in the
                                                Agricultural commodities, Pesticides                    the proposal is granted, it will promptly                     preamble, the Federal Communications


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:09 May 19, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000       Frm 00042   Fmt 4700     Sfmt 4700     E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM   20MYR1



Document Created: 2018-02-21 10:29:51
Document Modified: 2018-02-21 10:29:51
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionRules and Regulations
ActionFinal rule.
DatesThis regulation is effective May 20, 2015. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before July 20, 2015, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ContactSusan Lewis, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
FR Citation80 FR 28843 
CFR AssociatedEnvironmental Protection; Administrative Practice and Procedure; Agricultural Commodities; Pesticides and Pests and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements

2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR