### 44729 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 148 / Friday, August 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules

since then, EPA developed new CTGs
entitled Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic and Letterpress Printing (Publication No. EPA 453/R– 06–002; September 2006); Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing (Publication No. EPA 453/R–06–003; September 2006); Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents (Publication No. EPA 453/R–06–001; September 2006). The CTG recommendations may not apply to a particular situation based upon the circumstances of a specific source. Regardless of whether a state chooses to implement the recommendations contained within the CTGs through state rules, or to issue state rules that adopt different approaches for RACT for VOCs, states must submit their RACT rules to EPA for review and approval as part of the SIP process.

III. Summary of SIP Revision

On November 15, 2013, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) submitted to EPA a SIP revision concerning the adoption of the EPA CTGs for offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing; flexible package printing; and industrial cleaning solvent operations in Allegheny County. These regulations are
contained in the ACHD Rules and Regulations, Article XXI, Air Pollution Control sections 2105.80, 2105.81, and 2105.82 in order to: (1) Establish applicability for offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing, flexible package printing, and industrial cleaning solvent operations at facilities; (2) establish exemptions; (3) establish record-keeping and work practice requirements; and (4) establish emission
limitations. More detailed information on these provisions as well as a detailed summary of EPA’s review and rationale for proposing to approve this SIP
revision can be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action
which is available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket number

EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0476.

IV. Proposed Action

EPA is proposing to approve the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania SIP revision submitted on November 15, 2013, which consists of amendments to the ACHD Rules and Regulations, Article XXI, Air Pollution Control, and meets the requirement to adopt RACT for sources located in Allegheny County covered by EPA’s CTG standards for the following categories: Offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing, flexible package printing, and industrial solvent cleaning operations. EPA is soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered before taking final action.

V. Statutory and Executive Order

Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

• does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq. );

• is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq. );

• does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);

• does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and

• does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this proposed rule, pertaining to ACHD’s adoption of CTG standards for offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing, flexible package printing, and industrial solvent cleaning operations does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Dated: July 14, 2014.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 2014–18226 Filed 7–31–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 180**

**[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0008; FRL–9911–67]**

**Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions**

**Filed for Residues of Pesticide**
**Chemicals in or on Various**
**Commodities**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice of filing of petitions and request for comment.

**SUMMARY :**  This document announces the Agency’s receipt of several initial filings of pesticide petitions requesting the
establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various commodities.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before September 2, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number and the pesticide petition number (PP) of interest as shown in the body of this document, 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 Confidential Business Information (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://


### 44730 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 148 / Friday, August 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules

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

.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Robert McNally, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD) (7511P), telephone number: (703) 305– 7090; email address: BPPDFRNotices@

epa.gov., Lois Rossi, Registration Division (RD) (7505P), telephone number: (703) 305–7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov. The mailing address for each contact person is: Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person’s name, division, and mail code. The
division to contact is listed at the end of each pesticide petition summary.

**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).

If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed at the end of the pesticide petition summary of interest.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD–ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD–ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments, remember

to:

i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.

iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/ or data that you used.

v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and suggest
alternatives.

vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What action is the agency taking?

EPA is announcing its receipt of several pesticide petitions filed under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a, requesting the establishment or modification of regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various food commodities. The Agency is taking public comment on the requests before responding to the petitioners. EPA is not proposing any particular action at this
time. EPA has determined that the pesticide petitions described in this
document contain the data or information prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the
submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting of the pesticide petitions. After considering the public comments, EPA intends to evaluate whether and what action may be warranted. Additional data may be
needed before EPA can make a final determination on these pesticide petitions.

Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the petitions that are the subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is included
in a docket EPA has created for each rulemaking. The docket for each of the petitions is available at http:// www.regulations.gov.

As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), EPA is publishing notice of the petition so that the public has an opportunity to comment on this request for the
establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in
or on food commodities. Further information on the petition may be obtained through the petition summary
referenced in this unit.

New Tolerance

1. PP 3F8166. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 0268). Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide, thiabendazole (2-(4- thiazolyl)benzimidazole) and its metabolite benzimidazole, in or on vegetable, root (except sugar beet), subgroup 1B at 0.02 ppm; radish, tops at 0.02 ppm; onion, bulb, subgroup 3– 07A at 0.02 ppm; brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5–A at 0.02 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit group 9 at 0.02 ppm; barley, grain at 0.05 ppm; barley, hay at 0.30 ppm; barley, straw at 0.30 ppm; wheat, grain at 0.05 ppm; wheat, straw at 0.30 ppm; wheat, hay at 0.30 ppm; wheat, forage 0.30 ppm; oats, grain at 0.05 ppm; oats, hay at 0.30 ppm; oats, straw at 0.30 ppm; oats, forage at 0.30 ppm; rye, grain at 0.05 ppm; rye, straw at 0.30 ppm; rye, forage at 0.30 ppm; triticale, grain at 0.05 ppm; triticale, hay at 0.30 ppm; triticale, straw at 0.30 ppm; triticale, forage at 0.30 ppm; alfalfa, forage at 0.02 ppm; alfalfa, hay at 0.02 ppm; and spinach at 0.02 ppm. The Pesticide Analytical Manual (PAM) Vol. II lists four spectrophotoflurometric methods (Methods I, A, B and C) for spectrophotoflurometric method


### 44731 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 148 / Friday, August 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules

(Method D) for determining residues ofthiabendazole and 5-hydroxythiabendazole in milk. This Notice of Filing (NOF) supersedes the NOF published June 5, 2013, Vol 78. Number 198. (RD)

2 . PP 4E8257. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0315). Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR–4), IR–4 Project Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180for residues of the fungicide, captan (Ntrichloromethylthio-4-cyclohexene-1,2- dicarboximide), in or on ginseng at 1.5 ppm. The analytical method, gas chromatography/electron capture detector (GC/ECD) is used to measure and evaluate residues of captan per se in or on plant commodities, and is listed as Method I, in PAM, Vol. II. (RD)

3. PP 4E8264. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0346). IR–4, IR–4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08450, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide, prohexadione calcium, in or on the raw agricultural commodities strawberry at 0.3 ppm and watercress at 2.0 ppm. Analytical methods using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC–MS) are used to measure and evaluate the chemical, prohexadione calcium, in strawberry and watercress, respectively. (RD)

4. PP 4F8240. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0303). Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the of the herbicide, mesotrione (2-[4- (methylsulfonyl)-2-notrobenzoyl]-1,3- cyclohexadione) in or on the raw agricultural commodities; citrus fruit,
crop group 10–10 at 0.01 ppm; pome fruit, crop group 11–10 at 0.01 ppm; stone fruit, crop group 12–12 at 0.01
ppm; tree nuts, crop group 14–12 at 0.01 ppm; and almond hulls at 0.015 ppm. The practical and specific analyticalmethod RAM 366/01, utilizing highperformance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with tandem mass-spectrometry (MS/MS) detection, is available for detecting and measuring the level of mesotrione in or on various crop
commodities. This method has been submitted to the Agency for inclusion in the Pesticide Analytical Manual Volume II (PAM II) as a confirmatory method. (RD)

5. PP4F8249. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0314). Dow Agro Sciences, LLC, 9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268–1054, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide, triclopyr, [(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyl)oxy] acetic acid in or on milk, fat at 0.7 ppm. An analytical method using electron capture gas chromatography is used to
measure and evaluate the chemical triclopyr. (RD)

6. PP 4F8254. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0340). Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the plant growth regulator, trinexapac-ethyl (4- (cyclopropyl-a-hydroxy-methylene)-3,5- dioxo-cyclohexanecarboxylic acid ethyl ester), expressed as its primary metabolite CGA–179500 (4- (cyclopropyl-a-hydroxy-methylene)-3,5- dioxo-cyclohexanecarboxylic acid), 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 2.5 ppm; rye, grain at 2.0 ppm; rye, hay at 0.8 ppm; and rye, straw at 0.4 ppm. Adequate enforcement methodology LC/ MS/MS methods (GRM020.01A) is
available to enforce the tolerance expression. (RD)

7. PP 4F8256. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0339). BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709–3528, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide, saflufenacil (2-chloro-5-[3,6-dihydro-3- methyl-2,6-dioxo-4-(trifluoromethyl)- 1(2H)-pyrimidinyl]-4-fluoro-N- [[methyl(1- methylethyl)amino]sulfonyl]benzamide) and its metabolites, in or on alfalfa, forage at 0.075 ppm and alfalfa, hay at 0.10 ppm. Adequate enforcement methodology LC/MS/MS methods D0603/02 (plants) and L0073/01 (livestock) are available to enforce the tolerance expression. (RD)

8. PP 4F8263. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0354). Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, 410 Swing Road, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide sedaxane (N-[2-[1,1 ′-bicyclopropyl]-2-ylphenyl]-3-(difluoromethyl)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole4-carboxamide), as a seed treatment for cotton, undelinted seed at 0.01 ppm; cotton, gin byproducts at 0.01 ppm; and beet, sugar at 0.01 ppm. Various crops were analyzed for sedaxane (parent only) using a procedure for analysis of sedaxane (SYN524464) that candistinguish between its trans- and cisisomers (SYN508210 and SYN508211). Plant matrices using method GRM023.01A, or modified method GRM023.01B are taken through an extraction procedure with final determination by HPLC with triple quadrupole MS detection LC–MS/MS. (RD)

Amended Tolerance

1. PP 4F8245. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0247) from BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709 requests to amend the tolerances
in 40 CFR 180.361 for the combined residues of the herbicide, pendimethalin(N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl2,6dinitrobenzenamine), and its 3, 5- dinitrobenzyl alcohol metabolite (CL 202347) in or on the raw agricultural commodities of alfalfa, forage at 80 ppm; and alfalfa, hay at 150 ppm. In plants the method is aqueous organic solvent extraction, column clean up, and quantitation by GC. The method has a limit of quantitation (LOQ) of 0.05 ppm for pendimethalin and the alcohol metabolite. (RD)

2. PP4F8249. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0314). Dow Agro Sciences, LLC, 9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268–1054, requests to amend the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.417 for residues of the herbicide, triclopyr, [(3,5,6- trichloro-2-pyridinyl)oxy] acetic acid in or on milk, at 0.03 ppm. An analytical method using electron capture gas chromatography is used to measure and evaluate the chemical triclopyr. (RD)

New Tolerance Exemption

1. PP 3E8222. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0358). IR–4, Rutgers University, 500 College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540, on behalf of CAI America LLC, 309 Fairwinds Drive, Cary, NC 27518, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the nematocide, insecticide, and fungicide, Propylene Glycol Alginate, in or on all raw agricultural food commodities. The petitioner believes no analytical method
is needed because there are no anticipated residues, and because there is already sufficient information withthe Agency to support an existing preand post-harvest exemption for propylene glycol alginate when it is used as an inert ingredient per 40 CFR 180.910. (BPPD)

2. PP 3F8195. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0353). D–I–1–4, Inc., a division of 1,4 Group, Inc., P.O. Box 860, Meridian, ID 83360, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the 1-octanol, applied post-harvest to stored potatoes and other sprouting root and tuber crops. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is expected that, when used as proposed
1-octanol would not result in residues that are of toxicological concern. (BPPD)


### 44732 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 148 / Friday, August 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules

3. PP 3F8219. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0155). SciReg, Inc., 12733 Director’s Loop, Woodbridge, VA 22192 (on behalf of Andermatt Biocontrol AG, Stahlermatten 6 CH–6146, Grossdietwil, Switzerland), requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of the microbial active ingredient, Autographa californica multiple nucleopolyhedrovirus (AcMNPV) strain FV #11, in or on all raw and processed agricultural commodities when used on crops in accordance with good agricultural practices. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is seeking to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. (BPPD)

4. PP 4F8233. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0352). DSM Food Specialties B.V., Alexander Fleminglaan 1, 2613 AX Delft, The Netherlands, requests to amend the established an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the fungicide, natamycin (6,ll,28-Trioxatricyclo[22.3.1.05,7]octacosa8,14,16,18,20-pentaene-25-carboxylic acid, 22-[(3-amino-3,6-dideoxy-B

∼Dmannopyranosyl)oxy]-l,3,26-trihydroxy12-methyl-10-oxo-, (1R,3S,5R,7R,8E,I2R,14E,16E,18E,20E, 22R,24S,25R,26S)- at 40 CFR 180.1315,
in or on mushrooms in enclosed mushroom production facilities to include post-harvest indoor use on pineapples. A worst-case estimate of the natamycin exposure in the diet were calculated using the following:

a. Maximum pineapple consumption; b. Use of the consumption data of the most highly exposed population group;
and

c. Use of the maximum residue found in the trials in any treated juice or meat sample, rather than the most probable
residue. On this basis, calculations for exposure to natamycin through consumption of treated pineapple yielded a Margin of Exposure (MOE) of approximately one million. (BPPD)

5. PP IN–10626. (EPA–HQ–OPP– 2013–0695). United Phosphorus, Inc., 630 Freedom Business Center, Suite 402, King of Prussia, PA 19406, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for 1,1’- iminodiproan-2-ol (diisopropanolamine; DIPA; CAS No. 110–97–4) under 40 CFR 180.910 when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations as a neutralizer or stabilizer in a pesticide formulation at no more than 10% by weight of the formulation. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for the establishment of a tolerance exemption for inert ingredients. (RD)

6. PP IN–10684. (EPA–HQ–OPP– 2014–0325). Huntsman Corporation, 8600 Gosling Road, The Woodlands, TX 77381, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of the ethanesulfonic acid, 2-hydroxy-(CAS #107–36–8), and the corresponding ammonium (CAS #57267–78–4), sodium (CAS #1562–00–1), potassium (CAS #1561–99–5), calcium (10550–47–7), magnesium (17345–56–1), zinc (CAS #129756–32–7), salts under 40 CFR
180.910 and 180.930 when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations on all raw agricultural commodities. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for the establishment of a tolerance exemption for inert ingredients. (RD)

7. PP IN–10689. (EPA–HQ–OPP– 2014–0393). Celanese Ltd, 222 W. Las Colinas Blvd., Suite 900N, Irving, TX 75039, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of the acetic acid ethenyl ester, polymer with ethane, ethenyltriethoxysilane and sodium ethenesulfonate (1:1) minimum number average molecular weight (in amu) 16,200 (CAS No. 913187–38–9) under
40 CFR 180.960 when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations as a binder and wetting agent for seed coating and adjuvant applications in pesticide formulations. The petitioner believes no analytical
method is needed because it is not required for the establishment of a tolerance exemption for inert ingredients. (RD)

8. PP IN–10693. (EPA–HQ–OPP– 2014–0326). Archer Daniels Midland Company, 4666 E. Faries Parkway, Decatur, IL 62526, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of the Sodium lactate, when either of the following isomers: sodium L-lactate (CAS #867– 56–1) and sodium D,L-lactate (CAS #72– 17–3) when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops, or to raw agricultural commodities post-harvest under 40 CFR 180.910. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for the establishment of a tolerance exemption for inert ingredients. (RD)

9. PP IN–10697. (EPA–HQ–OPP– 2014–0324). Specialty Fertilizer Products LLC, 11550 Ash Street, Suite 220, Leawood, KS 66211, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the butanedioic acid, 2-methylene-, polymer with 2,5-furandione, sodium and ammonium salts, hydrogen peroxide-initiated (CAS Reg. No. 556055–76–6 and 701908–99–8) under

40 CFR 180.960 when used as a pesticide inert ingredient as a suspension agent in pesticide formulations. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for the establishment of a tolerance exemption for inert ingredients. (RD)

10. PP IN–10700. (EPA–HQ–OPP– 2014–0332). BASF Corporation, 100 Campus Drive, Florham Park, NJ 07932, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the for 2-Propenoic acid, butyl ester, polymer with 1,6-diisocyanatohexane, N- (hydroxymethyl)-2-methyl-2- propenamide and 2-propenenitrile (CAS No. 1469998–09–1) under 40 CFR 180.960 when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations as a binder polymer in a pesticide

formulations without limitation. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for

the establishment of a tolerance exemption for inert ingredients. (RD)

11. PP 3F8193. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 0329). Technology Sciences Group, Inc., 1150 18th St. NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20036 (on behalf of Novozymes BioAg, Inc., 13100 W. Lisbon Rd., Suite 600, Brookfield, WI 53005), requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a

tolerance for residues of Isaria fumosoroseus strain FE 9901 in or on all food commodities when applied as an

insecticide or miticide and used in accordance with good agricultural practices. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is seeking to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance and it expects that, when used as directed, Isaria fumosoroseus strain FE 9901 will

not result in residues that are of toxicological concern. (BPPD)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives, Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: July 21, 2014.

Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 2014–18049 Filed 7–31–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**