65570 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 212 / Friday, November 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(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: October 17, 2013. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. In § 180.433, add alphabetically the 

following commodities to the table in 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 180.433 Fomesafen; tolerance for 

residues. 

(a) General. * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

*****

Bean, lima, succulent ............... 0.05 

*****

Cantaloupe ............................... 0.025 

*****

Cucumber ................................. 0.025 

Pea, succulent .......................... 0.025 

*****

Pumpkin .................................... 0.025 

*****

Soybean, vegetable, succulent 0.05 

Squash, summer ...................... 0.025 

Squash, winter .......................... 0.025 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

*****

Watermelon .............................. 0.025 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–25984 Filed 10–31–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 721 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2008–0918; FRL–9901–97] 

RIN 2070–AB27 

Modification of Significant New Uses 

of 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoroAGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA), EPA is finalizing an 

amendment to the significant new use 

rule (SNUR) for the chemical substance 

identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3- 

tetrafluoro-, which was the subject of 

premanufacture notice (PMN) P–07– 

601. This action amends the SNUR to 

allow the manufacture and processing 

for certain uses without requiring a 

significant new use notice (SNUN). EPA 

is finalizing this amendment based on 

review of newly submitted exposure 

and toxicity data. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

December 2, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2008–0918 is 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West 

Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC. 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 OPPT Docket is (202) 

566–0280. Please review the visitor 

instructions and additional information 

about the docket available at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical information contact: Jim 

Alwood, Chemical Control Division 

(7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (202) 564–8974; email address: 

alwood.jim@epa.gov. 

For general information contact: The 

TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 

South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 

14620; telephone number: (202) 554– 

1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you manufacture, process, 

or use the chemical substance identified 

as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN 

P–07–601). Potentially affected entities 

may include, but are not limited to: 

• Manufacturers or processors of the 

subject chemical substance (NAICS 

codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical 

manufacturers and petroleum refineries. 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. To determine whether 

you or your business may be affected by 

this action, you should carefully 

examine the applicability provisions in 

§ 721.5. If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the 

technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

This action may also affect certain 

entities through pre-existing import 

certification and export notification 

rules under TSCA. Chemical importers 

are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 

U.S.C. 2612) import certification 

requirements promulgated at 19 CFR 

12.118 through 12.127, and 19 CFR 

127.28. Chemical importers must certify 

that the shipment of the chemical 

substance complies with all applicable 

rules and orders under TSCA. Importers 

of chemicals subject to a SNUR must 

certify their compliance with the SNUR 

requirements. The EPA policy in 

support of import certification appears 

at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In 

addition, any persons who export or 

intend to export the chemical substance 

that is the subject of a proposed or final 

SNUR are subject to the export 

notification provisions of TSCA section 

12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) (see § 721.20), 

and must comply with the export 

notification requirements in 40 CFR part 

707, subpart D. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 212 / Friday, November 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 65571 

II. Background 

A. What action is the agency taking? 

EPA is finalizing an amendment to 

the SNUR for the chemical substance 

identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3- 

tetrafluoro-, (PMN P–07–601; CAS No. 

754–12–1; which is also identified by 

the trade name HFO–1234yf), codified 

at 40 CFR 721.10182. This final action 

removes the requirement to notify EPA 

at least 90 days prior to the manufacture 

or processing of the chemical substance 

for the consumer use to recharge the 

motor vehicle air conditioning systems 

in passenger cars and vehicles in which 

the original charging of motor vehicle 

air conditioning systems with the PMN 

substance was done by the motor 

vehicle. 

This rule was proposed in the Federal 

Register issue of May 31, 2013 (78 FR 

32617) (FRL–9387–7). EPA received 

three public comments supporting the 

proposed modification. One of the 

commenters also noted a potential 

ambiguity in the proposed regulatory 

text. Part of the proposed regulatory text 

would identify a significant new use as 

‘‘use in consumer products other than 

products used to recharge the motor 

vehicle air conditioning systems in 

passenger cars and vehicles in which 

the charging of motor vehicle air 

conditioning systems with the PMN 

substance was done by the motor 

vehicle original equipment 

manufacturer (OEM)’’. The commenter 

stated this could be construed to allow 

only one recharge of automotive air 

conditioning systems originally charged 

with HFO–1234yf. To clarify this 

ambiguity the commenter suggested 

revising the proposed text to ‘‘use in 

consumer products other than products 

used to recharge the motor vehicle air 

conditioning systems in passenger cars 

and vehicles in which the original 

charging of motor vehicle air 

conditioning systems with the PMN 

substance was done by the motor 

vehicle OEM’’ (the proposed revision is 

in italics). The commenter also 

suggested a similar change to the 

regulatory text for the significant new 

use designation for commercial use. 

EPA agrees with this clarification that 

the regulatory text is not intended to 

allow only one recharge of automotive 

air conditioning systems originally 

charged with HFO–1234yf. Therefore, 

the Agency is issuing a final amended 

SNUR, that: 

1. No longer requires notification 

prior to the manufacture or processing 

for the consumer use to recharge the 

motor vehicle air conditioning systems 

in passenger cars and vehicles in which 

the original charging of motor vehicle 

air conditioning systems with the PMN 

substance was done by the motor 

vehicle OEM. 

2. Clarifies the language in the 

regulatory text that manufacture and 

processing for use as a refrigerant in 

motor vehicle air conditioning systems 

in new passenger cars and vehicles as 

reported in the original PMN is not a 

significant new use. 

3. Clarifies the language in the 

regulatory text for commercial and 

consumer use that it is not intended to 

allow only one recharge of automotive 

air conditioning systems originally 

charged with HFO–1234yf. 

B. What is the agency’s authority for 

taking this action? 

Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 

2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine 

that a use of a chemical substance is a 

‘‘significant new use.’’ EPA must make 

this determination by rule after 

considering all relevant factors, 

including the four bulleted TSCA 

section 5(a)(2) factors, listed in Unit IV. 

of this document. Once EPA determines 

that a use of a chemical substance is a 

significant new use, TSCA section 

5(a)(1)(B) requires persons to submit a 

significant new use notice (SNUN) to 

EPA at least 90 days before they 

manufacture or process the chemical 

substance for that use. Persons who 

must report are described in § 721.5. 

III. Rationale for the Rule 

During review of PMN P–07–601, the 

chemical substance identified as 1- 

Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-, EPA 

determined that one or more of the 

criteria of concern established at 

§ 721.170 were met and regulation 

under section 5(a)(2) of TSCA was 

warranted. The basis for such criteria of 

concern is outlined in Unit II.A. of the 

proposed rule and in the Federal 

Register document of June 26, 1990 (55 

FR 26102). Based on these findings, a 

SNUR was promulgated pursuant to 

§ 721.170. 

After the review of new test data and 

information subsequent to issuance of 

the SNUR (see Unit II.A of the proposed 

rule), and consideration of the factors 

included in TSCA section 5(a)(2) (see 

Unit IV.), EPA determined that the 

concern criteria in § 721.170(b) are no 

longer met for the consumer use in the 

recharge of motor vehicle air 

conditioning systems originally charged 

with the PMN substance by the motor 

vehicle OEM. 

IV. Significant New Use Determination 

Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that 

EPA’s determination that a use of a 

chemical substance is a significant new 

use must be made after consideration of 

all relevant factors, including: 

• The projected volume of 

manufacturing and processing of a 

chemical substance. 

• The extent to which a use changes 

the type or form of exposure of human 

beings or the environment to a chemical 

substance. 

• The extent to which a use increases 

the magnitude and duration of exposure 

of human beings or the environment to 

a chemical substance. 

• The reasonably anticipated manner 

and methods of manufacturing, 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and disposal of a chemical substance. 

In addition to these factors 

enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2), the 

statute authorizes EPA to consider any 

other relevant factors. To determine that 

the consumer use in the recharge of 

motor vehicle air conditioning systems 

originally charged with the PMN 

substance by the motor vehicle OEM 

would not constitute a significant new 

use for the chemical substance 

identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3- 

tetrafluoro-, (PMN P–07–601), EPA 

considered relevant information about 

the toxicity of the chemical substance, 

likely human exposures and 

environmental releases associated with 

possible uses, taking into consideration 

the four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2) 

factors listed in this unit. 

V. Economic Analysis 

EPA evaluated the potential costs of 

establishing SNUN requirements for 

potential manufacturers and processors 

of the chemical substance during the 

development of the direct final rule. The 

Agency’s complete Economic Analysis 

is available in the docket under docket 

ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2008–0918. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866 

This action modifies a SNUR for a 

chemical substance that is the subject of 

a PMN. 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). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

According to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq., an Agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to a collection of information 

that requires OMB approval under PRA, 

unless it has been approved by OMB 

and displays a currently valid OMB 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
65572 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 212 / Friday, November 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in title 40 

of the CFR, after appearing in the 

Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR 

part 9, and included on the related 

collection instrument or form, if 

applicable. EPA has amended the table 

in 40 CFR part 9 to list the OMB 

approval number for the information 

collection requirements contained in 

this rule. This listing of the OMB 

control numbers and their subsequent 

codification in the CFR satisfies the 

display requirements of PRA and OMB’s 

implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 

1320. 

The information collection 

requirements related to this action have 

already been approved by OMB 

pursuant to PRA under OMB control 

number 2070–0012 (EPA ICR No. 574). 

This action does not impose any burden 

requiring additional OMB approval. If 

an entity were to submit a SNUN to the 

Agency, the annual burden is estimated 

to average between 30 and 170 hours 

per response. This burden estimate 

includes the time needed to review 

instructions, search existing data 

sources, gather and maintain the data 

needed, and complete, review, and 

submit the required SNUN. 

Send any comments about the 

accuracy of the burden estimate, and 

any suggested methods for minimizing 

respondent burden, including through 

the use of automated collection 

techniques, to the Director, Collection 

Strategies Division, Office of 

Environmental Information (2822T), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. Please remember to 

include the OMB control number in any 

correspondence, but do not submit any 

completed forms to this address. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

On February 18, 2012, EPA certified 

pursuant to section 605(b) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.), that promulgation of 

a SNUR does not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities where the 

following are true: 

1. A significant number of SNUNs 

would not be submitted by small 

entities in response to the SNUR. 

2. The SNUN submitted by any small 

entity would not cost significantly more 

than $8,300. 

A copy of that certification is 

available in the docket for this rule. 

This rule is within the scope of the 

February 18, 2012 certification. Based 

on the Economic Analysis discussed in 

Unit V. and EPA’s experience 

promulgating SNURs (discussed in the 

certification), EPA believes that the 

following are true: 

• A significant number of SNUNs 

would not be submitted by small 

entities in response to the SNUR. 

• Submission of the SNUN would not 

cost any small entity significantly more 

than $8,300. Therefore, the 

promulgation of the SNUR would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Based on EPA’s experience with 

proposing and finalizing SNURs, State, 

local, and Tribal governments have not 

been impacted by these rulemakings, 

and EPA does not have any reasons to 

believe that any State, local, or Tribal 

government will be impacted by this 

final rule. As such, EPA has determined 

that this final rule does not impose any 

enforceable duty, contain any unfunded 

mandate, or otherwise have any affect 

on small governments subject to the 

requirements of sections 202, 203, 204, 

or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 

104–4). 

E. Executive Order 13132 

This action will not have a substantial 

direct effect on States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999). 

F. Executive Order 13175 

This final rule does not have Tribal 

implications because it is not expected 

to have substantial direct effects on 

Indian Tribes. This final rule does not 

significantly nor uniquely affect the 

communities of Indian Tribal 

governments, nor does it involve or 

impose any requirements that affect 

Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the 

requirements of Executive Order 13175, 

entitled Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply 

to this final rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045, entitled Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because this is not an 

economically significant regulatory 

action as defined by Executive Order 

12866, and this action does not address 

environmental health or safety risks 

disproportionately affecting children. 

H. Executive Order 13211 

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), because this action is not 

expected to affect energy supply, 

distribution, or use and because this 

action is not a significant regulatory 

action under Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

In addition, since this action does not 

involve any technical standards, section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), does not 

apply to this action. 

J. Executive Order 12898 

This action does not entail special 

considerations of environmental justice 

related issues as delineated by 

Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994). 

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 721 

Environmental protection, Chemicals, 

Hazardous substances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: October 24, 2013. 

Maria J. Doa, 

Director, Chemical Control Division, Office 

of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. 

Therefore, 40 CFR part 721 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 721—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 721 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 

2625(c). 

■ 2. In § 721.10182, revise paragraphs 

(a)(1) and (a)(2)(i) to read as follows: 

§ 721.10182 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-. 

(a) * * * 

(1) The chemical substance identified 

as 1-propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 212 / Friday, November 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 65573 

P–07–601; CAS No. 754–12–1) is subject 

to reporting under this section for the 

significant new uses described in 

paragraph (a)(2) of this section. 

(2) * * * 

(i) Industrial, commercial, and 

consumer activities. A significant new 

use is use other than as a refrigerant in 

motor vehicle air conditioning systems 

in new passenger cars and vehicles (i.e., 

as defined in 40 CFR 82.32(c) and (d)); 

§ 721.80(m) (commercial use other than 

in passenger cars and vehicles in which 

the original charging of motor vehicle 

air conditioning systems with the PMN 

substance was done by the motor 

vehicle original equipment 

manufacturer (OEM)); § 721.80(o) (use 

in consumer products other than 

products used to recharge the motor 

vehicle air conditioning systems in 

passenger cars and vehicles in which 

the original charging of motor vehicle 

air conditioning systems with the PMN 

substance was done by the motor 

vehicle OEM). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–25981 Filed 10–31–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 20 

[Docket Nos. FWS–R9–MB–2012–0028 and 

FWS–R9–MB–2012–0038; FF09M21200– 

134–FXMB1231099BPP0] 

RIN 1018–AY61, 1018–AY66 

Migratory Bird Hunting; Application for 

Approval of Copper-Clad Iron Shot and 

Fluoropolymer Shot Coatings as 

Nontoxic for Waterfowl Hunting 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule; availability of 

environmental assessments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, approve copper-clad 

iron shot and fluoropolymer coatings for 

hunting waterfowl and coots. We 

published a proposed rule for approval 

of copper-clad iron shot and 

fluoropolymer coatings in the Federal 

Register on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 

59158). We considered comments on the 

proposed rule, and we believe that 

neither the shot nor the coatings will 

pose toxicity hazards to fish or wildlife 

or their habitats. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 2, 

2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

George Allen, at 703–358–1825. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 

(Act) (16 U.S.C. 703–712 and 16 U.S.C. 

742 a–j) implements migratory bird 

treaties between the United States and 

Great Britain for Canada (1916 and 1996 

as amended), Mexico (1936 and 1972 as 

amended), Japan (1972 and 1974 as 

amended), and Russia (then the Soviet 

Union 1978). These treaties protect most 

migratory bird species from take, except 

as permitted under the Act, which 

authorizes the Secretary of the Interior 

to regulate take of migratory birds in the 

United States. Under this authority, we 

control the hunting of migratory game 

birds through regulations in 50 CFR part 

20. We prohibit the use of shot types 

other than those listed in the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 

20.21(j) for hunting waterfowl and coots 

and any species that make up aggregate 

bag limits. 

Deposition of toxic shot and release of 

toxic shot components in waterfowl 

hunting locations are potentially 

harmful to many organisms. Research 

has shown that ingested spent lead shot 

causes significant mortality in migratory 

birds. Since the mid-1970s, we have 

sought to identify types of shot for 

waterfowl hunting that are not toxic to 

migratory birds or other wildlife when 

ingested. We continue to review shot 

types and shot coatings submitted for 

approval as nontoxic. 

We addressed lead poisoning in 

waterfowl in an environmental impact 

statement (EIS) in 1976, and again in a 

1986 supplemental EIS. The 1986 

document provided the scientific 

justification for a ban on the use of lead 

shot and the subsequent approval of 

steel shot for hunting waterfowl and 

coots that began that year, with a 

complete ban of lead for waterfowl and 

coot hunting in 1991. We have 

continued to consider other potential 

candidates for approval as nontoxic 

shot. We are obligated to review 

applications for approval of alternative 

shot types as nontoxic for hunting 

waterfowl and coots. 

Many hunters believe that some 

nontoxic shot types compare poorly to 

lead and may damage some shotgun 

barrels. A small and decreasing 

percentage of hunters have not 

complied with nontoxic shot 

regulations. Allowing use of additional 

nontoxic shot types may encourage 

greater hunter compliance and 

participation with nontoxic shot 

requirements and discourage the use of 

lead shot. The use of nontoxic shot for 

waterfowl hunting increased after the 

ban on lead shot, but we believe that 

compliance will continue to increase 

with the availability and approval of 

other nontoxic shot types. Increased use 

of nontoxic shot will enhance protection 

of migratory waterfowl and their 

habitats. 

Copper-Clad Iron Shot 

Copper-clad iron shot is a composite 

in which copper is thermo-mechanically 

bonded to centerless-ground steel rod, 

then mechanically worked to final wire 

and shot configurations. Copper-clad 

iron shot may be produced with a 

variety of different proportions of 

copper and iron, ranging from 16 to 

44.41% by weight copper, with a 

density of approximately 8.3 grams per 

cubic centimeter. Environ-Metal asserts 

that ‘‘there is little variability in 

composition to be expected’’ in 

production of the shot. Environ-Metal 

expects to produce about 50,000 pounds 

of copper-clad iron shot per year. 

Fluoropolymer Coatings 

Spectra Shot is cut wire shotgun shot 

(steel shot) with a proprietary shot 

coating. Four different colors of the 

coated shot will be marketed as Spectra 

ShotTM Blue, Spectra ShotTM Green, 

Spectra ShotTM Orange, and Spectra 

ShotTM Yellow. The thickness of the 

coating will be 3 to 10 microns, with a 

corresponding weight per shot as 

follows: Spectra ShotTM Blue—0.209 

milligram per shot; Spectra ShotTM

Green—0.732 milligram per shot; 

Spectra ShotTM Orange—0.942 

milligram per shot; and Spectra ShotTM

Yellow—1.779 milligrams per shot. 

Spectra Shot expects annual use of the 

coated shot in hunting migratory birds 

in the United States to be 98,000 

pounds. 

Polyamide-imide copolymer, 

polytetrafluoroethylene, amorphous 

fumed silica, and methylphenyl 

polysiloxane are common to all Spectra 

ShotTM colors and make up the bulk of 

the coating. The pigments vary between 

coatings, and comprise 13.8% to 20.5% 

by weight of the dry film. 

Effects of the Approval on Migratory 

Waterfowl 

Allowing use of additional nontoxic 

shot types may encourage greater hunter 

compliance and participation with 

nontoxic shot requirements and 

discourage the use of lead shot. 

Furnishing additional approved 

nontoxic shot types and nontoxic 

coatings likely will further reduce the 

use of lead shot. Thus, approving 

additional nontoxic shot types and 

coatings will likely have no effect on 

waterfowl and wetland habitats. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES