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

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://


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 148 / Friday, August 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 44731 

(Method D) for determining residues of 

thiabendazole 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 180 

for 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 analytical 

method 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 can 

distinguish 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 with 

the 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) 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS