57084 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 185 / Wednesday, September 24, 2014 / Notices 

Texas 

Department of Agriculture 

Specific Exemption: EPA authorized 

the use of sulfoxaflor on sorghum to 

control sugarcane aphid; April 24, 2014 

to October 31, 2014. 

Virginia 

Department of Agriculture and 

Consumer Services 

Specific Exemptions: EPA authorized 

the use of dinotefuran on pome fruit and 

stone fruit to control the brown 

marmorated stinkbug; April 29, 2014 to 

October 15, 2014. 

Specific Exemption: EPA authorized 

the use of bifenthrin on apple, peach, 

and nectarine to control the brown 

marmorated stinkbug; June 20, 2014 to 

October 15, 2014. 

Washington State 

Department of Agriculture 

Specific Exemption: EPA authorized 

the use of lambda-cyhalothrin on 

asparagus to control European asparagus 

aphid; May 22, 2014 to September 30, 

2014. 

West Virginia 

Department of Agriculture 

Specific Exemption: EPA authorized 

the use of potassium salt of hop beta 

acids in beehives to control varroa mite; 

April 23, 2014 to December 31, 2014. 

Specific Exemption: EPA authorized 

the use of dinotefuran on pome fruit and 

stone fruit to control the brown 

marmorated stinkbug; April 29, 2014 to 

October 15, 2014. 

Specific Exemption: EPA authorized 

the use of bifenthrin on apple, peach, 

and nectarine to control the brown 

marmorated stinkbug; June 20, 2014 to 

October 15, 2014. 

Wyoming 

Department of Agriculture 

Specific Exemption: EPA authorized 

the use of diflubenzuron on alfalfa to 

control the Mormon cricket and 

grasshoppers; June 6, 2014 to October 

31, 2014. EPA authorized the use 

because projected levels of grasshoppers 

are very high for 2014 and the available 

alternatives are not expected to avert 

significant economic losses under 

outbreak conditions. Since this use has 

been requested for more than 5 years 

and an application for registration has 

not yet been received by EPA, a Notice 

of Receipt with opportunity for public 

comment published in the Federal 

Register, as required by 40 CFR 166.24, 

on April 30, 2014 (79 FR 24418) (FRL– 

9908–39) with public comment period 

closing on May 15, 2014. 

B. Federal Departments and Agencies 

Agriculture Department 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

Quarantine Exemption: EPA 

authorized a quarantine exemption to 

permit cotton growers to plant up to 

100% of cotton acreage to transgenic 

(Bt) cotton, in conjunction with sterile 

insect release, as a Pink Bollworm 

(PBW) eradication strategy, in the PBW 

eradication area in California; April 23, 

2014 to April 23, 2017. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. 

Dated: September 17, 2014. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2014–22746 Filed 9–23–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0628; FRL–9916–39] 

Registration Review Proposed Interim 

Decision; Notice of Availability 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

availability of EPA’s proposed interim 

registration review decisions for public 

comment. Registration review is EPA’s 

periodic review of pesticide 

registrations to ensure that each 

pesticide continues to satisfy the 

statutory standard for registration, that 

is, that the pesticide can perform its 

intended function without unreasonable 

adverse effects on human health or the 

environment. Through this program, 

EPA is ensuring that each pesticide’s 

registration is based on current 

scientific and other knowledge, 

including its effects on human health 

and the environment. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 24, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number for the specific pesticide of 

interest provided in the table in Unit 

II.A., 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://

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: 

For pesticide specific information, 

contact: The Chemical Review Manager 

for the pesticide of interest identified in 

the table in Unit II.A. 

For general information on the 

registration review program, contact: 

Richard Dumas, Pesticide Re-Evaluation 

Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (703) 308–8015; email address: 

dumas.richard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

This action is directed to the public 

in general, and may be of interest to a 

wide range of stakeholders including 

environmental, human health, farm 

worker, and agricultural advocates; the 

chemical industry; pesticide users; and 

members of the public interested in the 

sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. 

Since others also may be interested, the 

Agency has not attempted to describe all 

the specific entities that may be affected 

by this action. If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the 

Chemical Review Manager for the 

pesticide of interest identified in the 

table in Unit II.A. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

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 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 185 / Wednesday, September 24, 2014 / Notices 57085 

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. 

II. Background 

A. What action is the Agency taking? 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58, this notice 

announces the availability of EPA’s 

proposed interim registration review 

decisions for the pesticides shown in 

the table in this unit, and opens a 60- 

day public comment period on the 

proposed interim decisions. 

TABLE—REGISTRATION REVIEW PROPOSED INTERIM DECISIONS

Registration review case name and 

No. Pesticide docket ID No. Chemical review manager, telephone No., email address 

4–CPA (Case 2115) ........................ EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0544 ........... Miguel Zavala, (703) 347–0504, zavala.miguel@epa.gov. 

Allethrins (Case 0437) .................... EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0022 ........... Marianne Mannix, (703) 347–0275, mannix.marianne@epa.gov. 

Fluazinam (Case 7013) ................... EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0039 ........... Avivah Jakob, (703) 305–3328, jakob.avivah@epa.gov. 

Flumetsulam (Case 7229) ............... EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0625 ........... Katherine St. Clair, (703) 347–8778, stclair.katherine@epa.gov. 

Flutolanil (Case 7010) ..................... EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0148 ........... Garland Waleko, (703) 308–8049, waleko.garland@epa.gov. 

Hexaflumuron (Case 7413) ............. EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0568 ........... Ricardo Jones, (703) 347–0493, jones.ricardo@epa.gov. 

Iron Salts (Case 4058) .................... EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0626 ........... Katherine St. Clair, (703) 347–8778, stclair.katherine@epa.gov. 

Piperalin (Case 3114) ..................... EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0483 ........... Matthew Manupella, (703) 347–0411, manupella.matthew@epa.gov. 

Quinclorac (Case 7222) .................. EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–1135 ........... Margaret Hathaway, (703) 305–5076, hathaway.margaret@epa.gov. 

Triflumizole (Case 7003) ................. EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0115 ........... Steven Snyderman, (703) 347–0249 snyderman.steven@epa.gov. 

4–CPA (Proposed Interim Decision). 

The registration review docket for 4– 

CPA (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0544) is 

opening for public comment on a 

combined Work Plan, Summary 

Document, and Proposed Interim 

Registration Review Decision. 4–CPA is 

a plant growth regulator registered for 

use exclusively as a soaking agent for 

mung bean sprouts in greenhouse 

operations to prevent root formation. 

EPA conducted a qualitative assessment 

for both human health and 

environmental fate and ecological risks. 

No risks of concern were identified and 

the Agency has made a ‘‘no effect’’ 

determination for federally listed 

endangered and threatened (listed) 

species as well as a ‘‘no habitat 

modification’’ determination for all 

designated critical habitat. In this 

Proposed Interim Registration Review 

Decision, EPA is not making human 

health or environmental safety findings 

associated with the Endocrine Disrupter 

Screening Program (EDSP) for 4–CPA. 

Before completing this Registration 

Review, the Agency will make an EDSP 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA) section 408(p) determination. 

Allethrins (Proposed Interim 

Decision). The registration review 

docket for the allethrin stereoisomers 

(EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0022) opened in a 

notice published in the Federal Register 

of March 31, 2010 (75 FR 16117) (FRL– 

8814–4). The allethrin stereoisomers 

include bioallethrin, esbiol, esbiothrin, 

and pynamin forte. All allethrins 

registrations, with the exception of three 

products (71910–2, 71910–3, and 

71910–4) were cancelled effective 

December 2016. The only remaining 

registered uses of allethrins are 

impregnated mats for control of flying 

pests such as mosquitoes. There are no 

occupational, food or feed uses of 

allethrins. EPA conducted draft 

assessments for human health risks and 

ecological risks for the purposes of 

registration review. No risks of concern 

were identified in the human health risk 

assessment. The ecological risk 

assessment indicated that there was no 

reasonable expectation for the 

remaining registered uses of allethrins 

stereoisomers to cause direct or indirect 

adverse effects to threatened and 

endangered species. A ‘‘no effect’’ 

determination was made for all federally 

listed species as well as a ‘‘no habitat 

modification’’ determination made for 

all designated critical habitat. The 

allethrins stereoisomers have not been 

evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, 

the Agency’s final registration review 

decision is dependent upon the result of 

the evaluation of potential endocrine 

disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of 

this action, EPA is planning to issue an 

interim registration review decision for 

allethrins. 

Fluazinam (Proposed Interim 

Decision). The registration review 

docket for fluazinam (EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2009–0039) opened in a notice 

published in the Federal Register of 

September 23, 2009 (74 FR 48559) 

(FRL–8434–6). Fluazinam is a contact 

fungicide of the pyridinamine class 

registered for agricultural use on a 

variety of crops, including peanuts, 

potatoes, and beans. EPA conducted a 

human health risk assessment and did 

not identify any risks of concern. In 

addition, EPA conducted an 

environmental fate and effects risk 

assessment. Based on low-risk 

estimates, and the conservative nature 

of the risk assessment, the Agency has 

determined that fluazinam use does not 

pose unreasonable risks to the 

environment from currently registered 

uses of fluazinam. The Agency is not 

proposing mitigation changes at this 

time. The risk assessment for fluazinam 

did not come to a conclusion of ‘‘no 

effect’’ to listed species. Therefore, 

consultation with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service and the National 

Marine Fisheries Service (Services) on 

the potential risk of fluazinam to listed 

species will be necessary. Fluazinam 

has not been evaluated under the EDSP. 

Therefore, the Agency’s final 

registration review decision is 

dependent on the result of consultation 

under Endangered Species Act (ESA) 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
57086 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 185 / Wednesday, September 24, 2014 / Notices 

Section 7 with the Services, and the 

evaluation of potential endocrine 

disrupter risk. Pending the outcome of 

these actions, EPA is planning to issue 

an interim registration review decision 

for fluazinam. 

Flumetsulam (Proposed Interim 

Decision). The registration review 

docket for flumetsulam (EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2008–0625) opened in September 2008. 

Flumetsulam is a sulfonanilide 

herbicide in the triazolopyrimidine 

chemical class registered to control 

broadleaf weeds in field corn, soybeans, 

kidney beans, navy beans and pinto 

beans. There are no residential or public 

recreational uses of flumetsulam. EPA 

completed a draft human health risk 

assessment for all flumetsulam uses and 

did not identify any risks of concern. 

The ecological risk assessment indicated 

potential risks to non-target terrestrial 

and aquatic plants. The Agency is 

proposing mitigation to reduce spray 

drift to non-target plants. The ecological 

risk assessment did not come to a 

conclusion of ‘‘no effect’’ to all listed 

species. Therefore, a consultation with 

the Services on the potential risk of 

flumetsulam to listed species will be 

necessary. Flumetsulam has not been 

evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, 

the Agency’s final registration review 

decision is dependent upon the result of 

Section 7 Endangered Species 

consultation with the Services, and the 

evaluation of potential endocrine 

disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of 

these actions, EPA is planning to issue 

an interim registration review decision 

for flumetsulam. 

Flutolanil (Proposed Interim 

Decision). The registration review 

docket for flutolanil (EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2008–0148) opened in a notice 

published in the Federal Register of 

September 15, 2008 (73 FR 53244) 

(FRL–8381–3). Flutolanil is a systemic 

benzanilide fungicide first registered by 

EPA in 1993, used to control fungal 

diseases in both food crops (peanuts, 

potatoes, rice,) and non-food sites (turf, 

greenhouse, field-grown and potted 

ornamentals). Flutolanil has both 

protective and curative activity. EPA 

completed a qualitative draft human 

health risk assessment for all flutolanil 

uses and for proposed label 

amendments for Brassica (cole) leafy 

vegetables (crop group 5), turnip greens, 

rice, turf, and peanuts. No risks of 

concern were identified. The Agency 

also conducted an ecological risk 

assessment for existing and proposed 

uses listed above. For existing uses, 

risks of concern were identified for 

freshwater fish and estuarine/marine 

invertebrates in the water column and 

sediment, and for terrestrial dicots and 

aquatic non-vascular plants for some 

uses. The risk assessment for flutolanil 

did not come to a conclusion of ‘‘no 

effect’’ to listed species. Flutolanil has 

also not been evaluated under the EDSP. 

Therefore, the Agency’s final 

registration review decision is 

dependent upon the result of Section 7 

Endangered Species consultation with 

the Services and the evaluation of 

potential endocrine disruptor risk. 

Pending the outcome of these actions, 

EPA is planning to issue an interim 

registration review decision for 

flutolanil. 

Hexaflumuron (Proposed Interim 

Decision). The registration review 

docket for hexaflumuron (EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2009–0568) opened on September 

23, 2009 (74 FR 48559) (FRL–8343–6). 

Hexaflumuron is an insecticide/

termiticide applied in above- and 

below-ground termite bait systems, and 

is intended to be used near commercial, 

recreational or residential structures. 

EPA completed a qualitative human 

health risk assessment and no risks of 

concern were identified. The Agency 

also conducted an ecological risk 

assessment and determined that 

hexaflumuron does not pose 

unreasonable risk to the environment. 

The Agency has made an endangered 

species effects determination of ‘‘no 

effects’’ for aquatic organisms and a 

determination of ‘‘no habitat 

modification’’ to all designated critical 

habitats under ESA. Hexaflumuron has 

not been evaluated under EDSP. 

Therefore, the Agency’s final 

registration review decision is 

dependent on the result of the Section 

7 Endangered Species consultation with 

the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the 

potential endocrine disruptor risk. 

Pending the outcome of these actions, 

EPA is planning to issue an interim 

registration review decision for 

hexaflumuron. 

Iron Salts (Proposed Interim Decision) 

The registration review docket for iron 

salts (EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0626) 

opened in December 2008. There are 

two active chemicals in this case, ferric 

sulfate and ferrous sulfate monohydrate, 

which are collectively referred to as the 

iron salts. Iron salts are registered as 

herbicides to control moss on a variety 

of non-agricultural sites. Due to the 

ubiquitous nature of the iron salts, the 

lack of human health hazard and risk 

concern, EPA’s review of this case did 

not require a new human health risk 

assessment to support the existing uses. 

The ecological risk assessment came to 

a conclusion of ‘‘no effect’’ to all listed 

species. Therefore, a consultation with 

the Services on the potential risk of iron 

salts to listed species will not be 

necessary. Iron salts has not been 

evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, 

the Agency’s final registration review 

decision is dependent upon the result of 

the evaluation of potential endocrine 

disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of 

this action, EPA is planning to issue an 

interim registration review decision for 

iron salts. 

Piperalin (Proposed Interim Decision). 

The registration review docket for 

piperalin (EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0483) 

opened in September 2009. Piperalin is 

registered to treat powdery mildew 

fungal infections of ornamental plants, 

shrubs, vines, and trees grown in 

commercial greenhouses. There are no 

registered outdoor or residential uses. 

EPA completed a qualitative draft 

human health risk assessment for all 

piperalin uses. No risks of concern were 

identified. The Agency did not conduct 

a comprehensive ecological risk 

assessment since the use pattern does 

not likely result in outdoor exposures. 

However, the Agency completed a 

qualitative endangered species 

assessment for the greenhouse use. No 

risks of concern were identified and the 

Agency has made a ‘‘no effect’’ 

determination for federally listed 

species as well as a ‘‘no habitat 

modification’’ determination for all 

designated critical habitat. Piperalin has 

not been evaluated under the EDSP. 

Therefore, the Agency’s final 

registration review decision is 

dependent upon the result of the 

evaluation of potential endocrine 

disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of 

this action, EPA is planning to issue an 

interim registration review decision for 

piperalin. 

Quinclorac (Proposed Interim 

Decision). The registration review 

docket for quinclorac (EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2007–1135) opened in December 2007. 

Quinclorac is a systemic herbicide used 

to control broadleaf and grass weeds via 

ground spray or aerial application. 

Currently registered uses of quinclorac 

include turf grasses, sorghum, wheat, 

rangeland/pasture, rights-of way/

fencerow/hedgerow, grass grown for 

seed, fallow land, grass forage/fodder/

hay, rice, rhubarb, and low growing 

berry (except strawberry) subgroup 13– 

07H. EPA conducted a quantitative 

assessment for both human health and 

ecological risks. No risks of concern 

were identified in the human health risk 

assessment. The ecological risk 

assessment identified possible risks to 

both listed and non-listed non-target 

terrestrial plants. Therefore a ‘‘no effect’’ 

determination could not be made for all 

federally listed species and designated 

critical habitat. The proposed interim 

decision document outlines labeling 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 185 / Wednesday, September 24, 2014 / Notices 57087 

changes to reduce the risk from spray 

drift to non-target terrestrial plants. 

Quinclorac has not been evaluated 

under the EDSP. Therefore, the 

Agency’s final registration review 

decision is dependent upon the result of 

Section 7 Endangered Species 

consultation with the Services, and the 

result of the evaluation of potential 

endocrine disruptor risk. Pending the 

outcome of these actions, EPA is 

planning to issue an interim registration 

review decision for quinclorac. 

Triflumizole (Proposed Interim 

Decision). The registration review 

docket for triflumizole (EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2006–0115) opened in March 2007. 

Triflumizole is a broad spectrum, 

imidazole fungicide (group 3) that 

inhibits ergosterol biosynthesis in fungi, 

acting as a systemic fungicide. 

Triflumizole is registered for application 

to a number of food and non-food crops, 

including ornamentals in greenhouses/

shade houses, interior scapes, and 

Christmas trees/conifers on nurseries 

and plantations. It is also used as a preplant seed piece treatment on 

pineapples. EPA conducted a qualitative 

human health risk assessment and 

identified occupational handler and 

post-application exposure risks of 

concern for several use scenarios. EPA 

is proposing additional personal 

protective equipment of a chemicalresistant hat to address occupational 

handler risks of concern when applying 

triflumizole with open cab air blast 

equipment to apple, pear, and cherry. 

To address post-application risks of 

concern, EPA is proposing to increase 

re-entry intervals (REIs) for grapes (table 

and raisin) to 1-day and hops to 3 days. 

The ecological risk assessment 

identified potential risks to listed 

mammals, birds, herpatofauna, 

freshwater fish, and aquatic estuarinemarine invertebrates; however, the only 

non-listed taxa of concern was chronic 

risk to mammals. To mitigate potential 

chronic risk to non-listed mammals, the 

registrant agreed to label changes 

reducing the number of applications per 

year for certain crops and increasing the 

retreatment interval (RTI) to reflect 

typical usage. The risk assessment for 

triflumizole did not come to a 

conclusion of ‘‘no effect’’ to listed 

species. Therefore, consultation with 

the Services on the potential risk of 

triflumizole to listed species will be 

necessary. Triflumizole has not been 

evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, 

the Agency’s final registration review 

decision is dependent upon the result of 

Section 7 Endangered Species 

consultation with the Services and the 

evaluation of potential endocrine 

disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of 

these actions, EPA is planning to issue 

an interim registration review decision 

for triflumizole. 

The registration review docket for a 

pesticide includes earlier documents 

related to the registration review of the 

case. For example, the review typically 

opens with a summary document, 

containing a Preliminary Work Plan, for 

public comment. A final Work Plan is 

placed in the docket following public 

comment on the initial docket. The 

documents in the dockets describe 

EPA’s rationales for conducting 

additional risk assessments, as well as 

the Agency’s subsequent risk findings 

and consideration of possible risk 

mitigation measures. A proposed 

registration review decision will be 

supported by the rationales included in 

those documents. Following public 

comment on a proposed decision, the 

Agency will issue an interim 

registration review decision. 

The registration review program is 

being conducted under congressionally 

mandated time frames, and EPA 

recognizes the need both to make timely 

decisions and to involve the public. 

Section 3(g) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136a(g)) 

required EPA to establish by regulation 

procedures for reviewing pesticide 

registrations, originally with a goal of 

reviewing each pesticide’s registration 

every 15 years to ensure that a pesticide 

continues to meet the FIFRA standard 

for registration. The Agency’s final rule 

to implement this program was issued 

in August 2006 and became effective in 

October 2006, and appears at 40 CFR 

part 155, subpart C. The Pesticide 

Registration Improvement Act of 2003 

(PRIA) was amended and extended in 

September 2007. FIFRA, as amended by 

PRIA in 2007, requires EPA to complete 

registration review decisions by October 

1, 2022, for all pesticides registered as 

of October 1, 2007. 

The registration review final rule at 40 

CFR 155.58(a) provides for a minimum 

60-day public comment period on all 

proposed registration review decisions. 

This comment period is intended to 

provide an opportunity for public input 

and a mechanism for initiating any 

necessary amendments to the proposed 

decision. All comments should be 

submitted using the methods in 

ADDRESSES, and must be received by 

EPA on or before the closing date. These 

comments will become part of the 

docket for the pesticides included in the 

table in Unit II.A. Comments received 

after the close of the comment period 

will be marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not 

required to consider these late 

comments. 

The Agency will carefully consider all 

comments received by the closing date 

and will provide a ‘‘Response to 

Comments Memorandum’’ in the docket 

as appropriate. The final registration 

review decision will explain the effect 

that any comments had on the decision. 

Background on the registration review 

program is provided at: http://

www2.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation. 

Information regarding earlier documents 

related to the registration review of 

these pesticides can be found at: http:// 

www2.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation/

individual-pesticides-registrationreview. 

B. What is the Agency’s authority for 

taking this action? 

Section 3(g) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 

136a(g)) and 40 CFR part 155, subpart C, 

provide authority for this action. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. 

Dated: September 17, 2014. 

Patricia L. Parrott, 

Acting Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation 

Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2014–22739 Filed 9–23–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–1017; FRL–9916–69] 

Product Cancellation Order for Certain 

Pesticide Registrations 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA’s 

order for the cancellations, voluntarily 

requested by the registrants and 

accepted by the Agency, of the products 

listed in Table 1 of Unit II., pursuant to 

the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 

Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). This 

cancellation order follows an August 6, 

2014 Federal Register Notice of Receipt 

of Requests from the registrants listed in 

Table 2 of Unit II. to voluntarily cancel 

these product registrations. In the 

August 6, 2014 notice, EPA indicated 

that it would issue an order 

implementing the cancellations, unless 

the Agency received substantive 

comments within the 30 day comment 

period that would merit its further 

review of these requests, or unless the 

registrants withdrew their requests. The 

Agency did not receive any comments 

on the notice. Further, the registrants 

did not withdraw their requests. 

Accordingly, EPA hereby issues in this 

notice a cancellation order granting the 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES