57646 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about this correction, 

contact Kevin d’Eustachio, Office of 

Regulations and Administrative Law, 

telephone (202) 372–3854, e-mail 

kevin.m.deustachio@uscg.mil. For 

information about the original 

regulation, contact BOSN3 Joseph M. 

Edge, Coast Guard Sector North 

Carolina, telephone (252) 247–4525 

Joseph.M.Edge@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 

2011–22919 appearing on page 55561 in 

the Federal Register of Thursday, 

September 8, 2011, the following 

correction is made: 

§ 100.501 Special Local Regulations; 

Marine Events in the Fifth Coast Guard 

District. 

■ 1. On page 55563, in the third column, 

in the third amendatory instruction, 

remove the words ‘‘line No. 63’’ and 

replace with ‘‘line No. 59’’. 

Dated: September 12, 2011. 

Erin Ledford, 

Acting Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law (CG–0943), U.S. Coast 

Guard. 

[FR Doc. 2011–23743 Filed 9–15–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 132 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2010–0492; FRL–9466–3] 

RIN 2040–AF23 

Final Withdrawal of Certain Federal 

Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria 

Applicable to Wisconsin 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is withdrawing the 

federal aquatic life water quality criteria 

for chronic and acute copper and nickel, 

and chronic endrin and selenium 

applicable to certain waters of the Great 

Lakes System in Wisconsin. Wisconsin’s 

revised and EPA-approved criteria 

adequately protect all waters of the State 

designated for aquatic life use at a level 

consistent with the federal 

requirements. As a result of this 

withdrawal, Wisconsin will continue to 

implement its EPA-approved aquatic 

life criteria. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 17, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OW–2010–0492. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publically available, 

e.g., confidential business information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publically 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at the Office of Water (OW) Docket 

Center. This Docket Facility is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket telephone number 

is (202) 566–2426, and the Docket 

address is OW Docket, EPA West, Room 

3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20004. 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Francine Norling, U.S. EPA, Region 5, 

77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604 

(telephone: (312) 886–0271 or e-mail: 

norling.francine@epa.gov) or Sara 

Hilbrich, U.S. EPA Headquarters, Office 

of Science and Technology, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Mail Code 

4305T, Washington, DC 20460 

(telephone: (202) 564–0441 or e-mail: 

hilbrich.sara@epa.gov). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Potentially Affected Entities 

II. Background 

A. Applicable Federal Statutory and 

Regulatory Requirements 

B. Why is the EPA withdrawing certain 

federal aquatic life water quality criteria 

applicable to Wisconsin? 

C. Why is the EPA not withdrawing 

Wisconsin’s chronic endrin aquatic life 

use criterion for waters designated as 

Warm Water Sportfish and Warm Water 

Forage Fish use, and chronic selenium 

aquatic life use criterion for waters 

designated as limited Forage Fish use? 

D. What are the applicable federal aquatic 

life water quality criteria that the EPA is 

withdrawing? 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

F. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments) 

G. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks) 

H. Executive Order 13211 (Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use) 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations) 

K. Congressional Review Act 

I. Potentially Affected Entities 

This rule withdraws federal water 

quality standards, specifically aquatic 

life criteria for chronic and acute copper 

and nickel and chronic endrin and 

selenium for Wisconsin surface waters 

designated for certain aquatic life uses 

in the Great Lakes System (described in 

40 CFR part 132). As a result of this 

rule, Wisconsin will implement the 

following State-revised and EPAapproved aquatic life criteria: chronic 

and acute copper and nickel for all 

Wisconsin surface waters designated for 

aquatic life use; chronic endrin for 

Wisconsin surface waters designated for 

aquatic life use except waters 

designated as Warm Water Forage Fish 

and Warm Water Sportfish use; chronic 

selenium for Wisconsin surface waters 

designated for aquatic life use except 

waters designated as Limited Forage 

Fish use. Entities discharging copper, 

nickel, endrin or selenium to surface 

waters of Wisconsin could be affected 

by this rulemaking given that water 

quality standards are used to determine 

water quality based effluent limits in 

National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permits, 

and may affect Clean Water Act (CWA) 

Section 404 dredge and fill permits, and 

other federal licenses and permits 

requiring CWA 401 certification. Table 

1, below, provides examples of the types 

of NPDES-regulated entities that may 

ultimately be affected by the federal rule 

withdrawal. 

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF ENTITIES POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE FEDERAL RULE WITHDRAWAL

Category Examples of potentially affected entities 

Industry .................................................... Industries discharging to surface waters in Wisconsin designated by the State for aquatic life use. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 57647 

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF ENTITIES POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE FEDERAL RULE WITHDRAWAL—Continued 

Category Examples of potentially affected entities 

Municipalities ........................................... Publicly-owned treatment works discharging to surface waters in Wisconsin designated by the State 

for aquatic life use. 

If you have any questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the person 

identified in the preceding section 

entitled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

II. Background 

A. Applicable Federal Statutory and 

Regulatory Requirements 

In 1995, the EPA published the final 

Water Quality Guidance for the Great 

Lakes System (Guidance), required by 

CWA Section 118(c)(2) (33 U.S.C. 1268). 

Among other provisions, the Guidance 

identified minimum water quality 

standards to protect aquatic life as part 

of a comprehensive plan to restore the 

health of the Great Lakes System (40 

CFR 132.3). Under CWA Section 

118(c)(2), within two years of 

publishing the Guidance, Great Lakes 

States, including Wisconsin, were 

required to adopt provisions consistent 

with the Guidance into their water 

quality standards and NPDES permit 

programs. The regulation at 40 CFR 

132.5(f) provides that, after review of a 

State’s water quality standards 

submission, the EPA must either 

publish a notice of approval of the 

State’s submission in the Federal 

Register or notify the State that the EPA 

has determined that all or part of its 

submission is inconsistent with the 

CWA and/or the Guidance, and identify 

any changes needed to obtain EPA 

approval. If the EPA notified the State 

of inconsistencies, then the State had 90 

days to make the necessary changes. If 

the State failed to make the necessary 

changes, the EPA was required to 

publish a document in the Federal 

Register identifying the approved and 

disapproved elements of the submission 

and a final rule identifying the 

provisions of the Guidance that apply to 

the State. 

B. Why is the EPA withdrawing certain 

federal aquatic life water quality criteria 

applicable to Wisconsin? 

In 1997, Wisconsin adopted revised 

water quality standards to comply with 

the Guidance requirements at 40 CFR 

part 132. In October 2000, the EPA 

disapproved six of Wisconsin’s revised 

aquatic life criteria including chronic 

and acute copper and nickel, and 

chronic endrin and selenium. 

Subsequently the EPA published a final 

rule effective February 5, 2001, making 

the following aquatic life criteria, 

published at 40 CFR 132.6, effective for 

waters of the Great Lakes System in the 

State of Wisconsin: (1) Chronic and 

acute copper and nickel in Tables 1 and 

2 of 40 CFR 132.6(f); (2) chronic endrin 

in Table 2 of 40 CFR 132.6(f); and (3) 

chronic selenium in Table 2 of 40 CFR 

132.6(g). 

In January 2008, Wisconsin began 

rulemaking to revise its water quality 

standards to address the EPA’s 

disapproval of these aquatic life criteria. 

The Wisconsin Natural Resources Board 

adopted the State’s revised criteria on 

June 24, 2008 and the Wisconsin 

Attorney General certified these rules on 

December 22, 2008. On May 4, 2009, 

EPA Region 5 received a letter from the 

Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources requesting approval of final 

revisions to Chapter NR 105 (Surface 

Water Quality Criteria and Secondary 

Values for Toxic Substances) of the 

Wisconsin Administrative Code (WAC). 

Pursuant to CWA section 303(c)(3), 

the EPA is required to review and 

approve new and revised State water 

quality standards before such standards 

become effective for CWA purposes. 

The EPA found that Wisconsin’s revised 

criteria, with the exception of chronic 

selenium for waters designated by 

Wisconsin as Limited Forage Fish use, 

satisfy the federal requirements for 

submittal of new or revised water 

quality standards to the EPA and are 

consistent with the CWA and the 

Guidance requirements. Therefore, the 

EPA approved Wisconsin’s revised 

aquatic life criteria on July 1, 2009, with 

the exception of the chronic aquatic life 

criterion for selenium in waters 

designated by Wisconsin as Limited 

Forage Fish use. 

The EPA’s approval of Wisconsin’s 

aquatic life criteria makes the federal 

criteria no longer necessary for 

compliance with the CWA and the 

Guidance. Therefore, the EPA 

determined that the following federal 

aquatic life criteria for waters of the 

Great Lakes System in Wisconsin may 

be withdrawn: chronic and acute copper 

and nickel for all aquatic life uses; 

chronic endrin for all aquatic life uses 

with the exception of waters designated 

by Wisconsin as Warm Water Forage 

Fish and Warm Water Sportfish use; and 

chronic selenium for all aquatic life uses 

with the exception of waters designated 

by Wisconsin as Limited Forage Fish 

use. 

C. Why is the EPA not withdrawing 

Wisconsin’s chronic endrin aquatic life 

use criterion for waters designated as 

Warm Water Sportfish and Warm Water 

Forage Fish use, and chronic selenium 

aquatic life use criterion for waters 

designated as limited Forage Fish use? 

The EPA is not withdrawing the 

federal chronic endrin aquatic life use 

criterion for waters of the Great Lakes 

System in Wisconsin designated as 

Warm Water Sportfish and Warm Water 

Forage Fish use, due to a State 

transcription error. While the EPA 

approved Wisconsin’s revised chronic 

endrin aquatic life use criteria for all 

waters in the State of Wisconsin on July 

1, 2009, the chronic aquatic life use 

criterion for endrin for waters 

designated as Warm Water Forage Fish 

and Warm Water Sportfish use 

published in Wisconsin’s regulations at 

NR 105.06 (0.05 μg/L) is not identical to 

the criterion that Wisconsin submitted 

and that the EPA had approved (0.036 

μg/L). The EPA is not withdrawing the 

federal chronic endrin criterion for 

these aquatic life uses until after 

Wisconsin concludes rulemaking to 

correct the criterion in the State’s 

regulations. 

The EPA is not withdrawing the 

federal chronic selenium aquatic life use 

criterion for waters of the Great Lakes 

System in Wisconsin designated for 

Limited Forage Fish use because the 

EPA took no action on Wisconsin’s 

revised chronic selenium criterion for 

this aquatic life use in its July 1, 2009 

action approving the other aquatic life 

criteria. Therefore, the federal aquatic 

life use criterion for chronic selenium 

will continue to apply to waters within 

the Great Lakes System of Wisconsin, 

designated as Limited Forage Fish use. 

Wisconsin calculated the chronic 

selenium criterion based on water 

column toxicity studies, rather than 

through dietary exposure, which 

currently available data indicates is the 

appropriate methodology to use. 

Because Wisconsin does not have an 

EPA-approved chronic aquatic life 

selenium criterion for Limited Forage 

Fish Waters, the EPA is not 

withdrawing the federal chronic aquatic 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
57648 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

life selenium criterion for Wisconsin’s 

Limited Forage Fish waters in this rule. 

Wisconsin may revise their chronic 

selenium criterion and submit it to the 

EPA for review and approval at a future 

date. 

D. What are the applicable federal 

aquatic life water quality criteria that 

the EPA is withdrawing? 

The EPA is withdrawing certain 

federal aquatic life criteria for 

Wisconsin included in the Guidance at 

40 CFR 132.6. Specifically, the EPA is 

withdrawing the federal aquatic life use 

criteria for chronic and acute copper 

and nickel (40 CFR 132.6(f)) applicable 

to all waters of the Great Lakes System 

in Wisconsin designated for aquatic life 

uses. The EPA is also amending the 

federal chronic aquatic life criterion for 

endrin (40 CFR 132.6(f)) to apply 

exclusively to waters designated by 

Wisconsin as Warm Water Sportfish and 

Warm Water Forage Fish use, and 

amending the federal chronic aquatic 

life criterion for selenium (40 CFR 

132.6(g)) to apply exclusively to waters 

designated by Wisconsin as Limited 

Forage Fish use. As a result of this final 

rule withdrawal, Wisconsin will 

implement the EPA-approved aquatic 

life criteria under State law. 

Wisconsin has tiered aquatic life uses 

and the State’s EPA-approved aquatic 

life criteria revisions do not affect 

Wisconsin’s designated uses included in 

Chapter NR 105 of the WAC. Based on 

the designated uses defined in NR 

102.04(3) of the WAC, Wisconsin’s 

aquatic life designated uses of Cold 

Water, Warm Water Sportfish, and 

Warm Water Forage Fish are consistent 

with the requirements of CWA Section 

101(a)(2) for the protection and 

propagation of fish, shellfish, and 

wildlife. The Limited Forage Fish 

aquatic life use does not meet this 

requirement because these surface 

waters are capable of supporting only a 

‘‘limited community of forage fish and 

other aquatic life,’’ based on ‘‘limited 

capacity and naturally poor water 

quality or habitat’’ (WAC, Chapter 

102.04(3)(d)). The following section 

discusses and compares the calculations 

and criteria included in the EPA’s 

federal regulations and those included 

in Wisconsin’s revised criteria. 

1. Acute Copper Aquatic Life Criteria 

Applicable to Cold Water, Warm Water 

Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, 

Limited Forage Fish, and Limited 

Aquatic Life Designated Uses 

Wisconsin adopted and the EPA 

reviewed and approved an acute copper 

aquatic life criteria equation applicable 

to all surface waters in Wisconsin 

designated for aquatic life use. The 

equation used by Wisconsin to calculate 

the acute copper aquatic life criteria 

results in a slightly higher value than 

the EPA equation at a given hardness 

(see Table 2). 

TABLE 2—ACUTE COPPER CRITERIA EQUATION

[All aquatic life designated uses] 

EPA criteria maximum concentration 

(μg/L) 

Wisconsin acute toxicity criteria 

(μg/L) 

CMC = exp(0.9422*ln(hardness)) ¥ 1.700 ATC = exp(0.9436*ln(hardness)) ¥ 1.6036 

The difference between the EPA’s and 

Wisconsin’s intercept in the acute 

copper equation is due to the 

elimination of one of the most sensitive 

species from the criteria calculation 

(northern pikeminnow, genus 

Ptychocheilus) and inclusion of 

additional data for three species. 

Eliminating the Ptychocheilus data from 

the equation is scientifically defensible 

because Ptychocheilus is not native to 

Wisconsin and is not a surrogate for 

other Wisconsin taxa unrepresented in 

the data set. The northern pikeminnow 

is a type of minnow, and other minnows 

(fathead and bluntnose) found in 

Wisconsin are well-represented in the 

copper data set. Wisconsin’s slope of 

0.9436 is slightly different from the 

EPA’s 0.9422 slope due to Wisconsin’s 

inclusion of additional data on three 

species (Daphnia magna, rainbow trout, 

and bluegill) that were not included in 

the EPA’s 1985 slope calculation used 

in the Guidance. The EPA included 

these data in the 1995 criteria update, 

but did not recalculate the slope used in 

the 1985 EPA copper criteria document. 

Wisconsin’s method for deriving the 

acute copper criteria equation is an 

acceptable State-specific modification of 

the EPA’s criteria, consistent with 

Wisconsin’s methods for deriving 

criteria (WAC Chapter NR 105). The 

equation is scientifically sound and 

results in criteria that are protective of 

the use; therefore this equation is 

consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) 

and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR Parts 131 and 

132. 

2. Chronic Copper Aquatic Life Criteria 

Applicable to Cold Water, Warm Water 

Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, 

Limited Forage Fish, and Limited 

Aquatic Life Designated Uses 

Wisconsin adopted and the EPA 

reviewed and approved a chronic 

copper aquatic life criteria equation 

applicable to all surface waters in 

Wisconsin designated for aquatic life 

use. The equation used by Wisconsin for 

calculating chronic aquatic life criteria 

for copper produces a slightly higher 

value than the EPA equation at a given 

hardness (see Table 3). 

TABLE 3—CHRONIC COPPER CRITERIA EQUATION

[All aquatic life designated uses] 

EPA criterion continuous concentration 

(μg/L) 

Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria 

(μg/L) 

CCC = exp(0.8545*ln(hardness))¥1.702 CTC = exp(0.8557*ln(hardness))¥1.6036 

The difference between the EPA’s and 

Wisconsin’s chronic copper equation 

intercept is primarily due to the 

elimination of one of the most sensitive 

species from the federal criteria 

calculation (northern pikeminnow, 

genus Ptychocheilus), which is not 

native to Wisconsin. Wisconsin’s 

elimination of data for a non-native 

species that is not a surrogate for taxa 

that are unrepresented in the data set, is 

scientifically defensible. The northern 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 57649 

pikeminnow is a type of minnow, and 

other minnows (fathead and bluntnose) 

found in Wisconsin, are wellrepresented in the copper data set. 

Wisconsin’s slope of 0.8557 is slightly 

different from the EPA’s 0.8545 slope 

due to Wisconsin’s inclusion of 

additional data on three species 

(Daphnia magna, rainbow trout, and 

bluegill) that were not included in the 

EPA’s 1985 slope calculation used in 

the Guidance. The EPA included these 

data in the 1995 criteria update, but did 

not recalculate the slope used in the 

1985 copper criteria document. 

Wisconsin’s method for deriving the 

chronic copper criteria equation is an 

acceptable State-specific modification of 

the EPA’s criteria, consistent with 

Wisconsin’s methods for deriving 

criteria (WAC Chapter NR 105). The 

equation is scientifically sound and 

results in criteria that are protective of 

the use, therefore this equation is 

consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) 

and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 

132. 

3. Acute Nickel Aquatic Life Criteria 

Applicable to Cold Water, Warm Water 

Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, 

Limited Forage Fish, and Limited 

Aquatic Life Designated Uses 

Wisconsin adopted and the EPA 

reviewed and approved an acute nickel 

aquatic life criteria equation applicable 

to all surface waters in Wisconsin 

designated for aquatic life use. The 

equation used by Wisconsin to calculate 

acute aquatic life criteria for nickel is 

identical to the equation contained in 

the Great Lakes Water Quality 

Guidance, 40 CFR part 132 as well as 

the EPA’s CWA Section 304(a) criteria 

(see Table 4). The equation is 

scientifically sound and results in 

criteria that are protective of the use, 

therefore this equation is consistent 

with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) and 

303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 132. 

TABLE 4—ACUTE NICKEL CRITERIA EQUATION

[All aquatic life designated uses] 

EPA criteria maximum concentration 

(μg/L) 

Wisconsin acute toxicity criteria 

(μg/L) 

CMC = exp(0.846*ln(hardness)) + 2.255 ATC = exp(0.846*ln(hardness)) + 2.255 

4. Chronic Nickel Aquatic Life Criteria 

Applicable to Cold Water, Warm Water 

Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, 

Limited Forage Fish, and Limited 

Aquatic Life Designated Uses 

Wisconsin adopted and the EPA 

reviewed and approved, two criteria 

equations for chronic nickel for differing 

aquatic life uses (see Table 5). 

TABLE 5—CHRONIC NICKEL CRITERIA EQUATIONS

EPA criterion continuous concentration 

(μg/L) 

Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria (μg/L): Cold 

water, warm water sportfish, warm water 

forage fish, and limited forage fish 

Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria (μg/L): 

Limited aquatic life 

CCC = exp(0.846*ln(hardness)) + 0.0584 CTC = exp(0.846*ln(hardness)) + .0591 CTC = exp(0.846*ln(hardness)) + .4004 

The equation used by Wisconsin for 

calculating the chronic nickel criteria 

for Cold Water, Warm Water Sportfish, 

Warm Water Forage Fish, and Limited 

Forage Fish designated uses results in a 

value that is slightly higher than the 

resulting criterion from the EPA’s 

equation at a given hardness. This 

difference is due to Wisconsin’s use of 

a slightly different intercept and acutechronic ratio for the Cladoceran test 

data. The equation for the Limited 

Aquatic Life classification has a 

different value for the intercept because 

data for the fathead minnow, which are 

not expected to have a fish community 

in Limited Aquatic Life use waters, were 

not included in the calculation. 

For the Cold Water, Warm Water 

Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, and 

Limited Forage Fish water 

classifications, Wisconsin’s chronic 

nickel criteria equation is scientifically 

defensible and results in criteria 

protective of the use and therefore is 

consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) 

and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 

132. For Wisconsin’s equation for 

Limited Aquatic Life water 

classification, the elimination of data for 

a non-resident species is an appropriate 

State-specific modification of the EPA’s 

equation. Wisconsin’s equation is 

scientifically sound and results in 

criteria that are protective of the use, 

and is therefore consistent with CWA 

Sections 101(a)(2) and 303(c)(2), and 40 

CFR parts 131 and 132. 

5. Chronic Endrin Aquatic Life Criteria 

Applicable to Cold Water, Warm Water 

Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, 

Limited Forage Fish, and Limited 

Aquatic Life Designated Uses 

Wisconsin adopted and the EPA 

reviewed and approved a chronic 

endrin criterion for Cold Water, Warm 

Water Forage Fish, and Warm Water 

Sportfish classifications that is identical 

to the EPA’s criterion in the Guidance 

(40 CFR part 132). The criterion is 

scientifically sound and protective of 

the use, therefore this criterion is 

consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) 

and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 

132 (see Table 6). However, due to a 

transcription error, the chronic endrin 

aquatic life use criterion for waters 

designated as Warm Water Forage Fish 

and Warm Water Sportfish use 

published in Wisconsin’s regulations 

NR 105.06 (0.05 μg/L) is not identical to 

the criterion that Wisconsin submitted 

to the EPA and which the EPA approved 

(0.036 μg/L). Therefore, the EPA is not 

withdrawing the federal chronic endrin 

criterion for these uses until after 

Wisconsin concludes rulemaking to 

correct the criterion in the State’s 

regulations. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
57650 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

1Lemly, A Dennis. 2002. Selenium Assessment in 

Aquatic Ecosystems: A Guide for Hazard 

Evaluation. Springer Series on Environmental 

Management. Page 23. 

TABLE 6—CHRONIC ENDRIN AQUATIC LIFE CRITERIA

EPA criterion continuous concentration 

(μg/L) 

Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria (μg/L): Cold 

water, warm water forage fish, and warm 

water sportfish 

Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria (μg/L): 

Limited forage fish and limited aquatic life 

0.036 0.036 0.050 

Wisconsin’s criterion for Limited 

Forage Fish and Limited Aquatic Life 

waters is higher than the EPA’s criterion 

because three of the four most sensitive 

genera used to calculate the EPA’s 

criterion do not exist in these waters in 

Wisconsin, and were therefore excluded 

from the State’s calculation. These 

species are Perca (yellow perch), 

Lepomis (bluegill), and micropterus 

(largemouth bass). Instead, Wisconsin 

used data for the following genera for 

the endrin criterion calculation for 

Limited Forage Fish Waters: Pteronarcys 

(stonefly), which was also used by the 

EPA; Cyprinus (carp); Piemphales 

(fathead minnow); and Pteronarcella 

(stonefly). When the fathead minnow 

data set was removed from the Limited 

Aquatic Life calculation, the calculated 

criterion was lower than the calculated 

criterion for Limited Forage Fish waters. 

Under Wisconsin’s rules NR 

105.05(1)(a)(9), when this occurs, the 

Limited Aquatic Life criterion can be set 

equal to the Limited Forage Fish 

criterion if the species used to calculate 

the Limited Aquatic Life criterion are 

already included in the database used to 

calculate the Limited Forage Fish 

criterion. Therefore, Wisconsin 

established the Limited Aquatic Life 

criterion for endrin at a level that 

provides protection equal to the level 

for the Limited Forage Fish criterion. 

Wisconsin’s method for deriving the 

chronic endrin criterion for Limited 

Aquatic Life and Limited Forage Fish 

waters is an acceptable State-specific 

modification of the EPA’s criterion, 

consistent with Wisconsin’s methods for 

deriving criteria (Chapter NR 105 of the 

WAC). The criterion is scientifically 

sound and protective of the use, 

therefore this criterion is consistent 

with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) and 

303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 132. 

6. Chronic Selenium Aquatic Life 

Criteria Applicable to Cold Water, 

Warm Water Sportfish, Warm Water 

Forage Fish, Limited Forage Fish, and 

Limited Aquatic Life Designated Uses 

The EPA reviewed and approved 

Wisconsin’s revised chronic selenium 

criterion for Cold Water, Warm Water 

Sportfish, and Warm Water Forage Fish 

classifications, which are identical to 

the EPA’s chronic selenium criterion in 

40 CFR part 132 (see Table 7). The 

criterion is scientifically sound and 

protective of the uses, and is therefore 

consistent with CWA Section 101(a)(2) 

and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 

132. 

TABLE 7—CHRONIC SELENIUM AQUATIC LIFE CRITERIA

EPA Criterion continuous concentration 

(μg/L) 

Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria (μg/L): Cold 

water, warm water sportfish, warm water 

forage fish 

Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria (μg/L): 

Limited forage fish, limited aquatic life 

5.0 5.0 46.5 

Wisconsin did not adopt the EPA’s 

chronic aquatic life criterion for 

selenium, found in 40 CFR Part 132, for 

Limited Aquatic Life waters. 

Wisconsin’s basis for this decision is 

that Limited Aquatic Life waters only 

support an invertebrate community, and 

the EPA’s criterion was based on 

observed effects of selenium on 

sportfish (bluegills) in field studies 

(Belews Lake, North Carolina, and 

others). Instead, Wisconsin calculated a 

criterion for Limited Aquatic Life waters 

based on toxicity studies listed in the 

EPA’s 1987 selenium aquatic life criteria 

document (selenite, +4). Wisconsin’s 

value of 46.5 μg/L is slightly different 

than the EPA’s calculated criterion of 

44.72 μg/L, because Wisconsin removed 

the data for two saltwater species used 

in the EPA’s calculation. 

Wisconsin’s chronic aquatic life 

selenium criterion of 46.5 μg/L for 

Limited Aquatic Life waters is 

consistent with the protection provided 

for aquatic life in Limited Aquatic Life 

waters, for several reasons. First, two of 

the three freshwater studies used to 

calculate the criterion, in accord with 

the 1985 Guidelines, were conducted on 

invertebrates (Daphnia magna and 

Daphnia pulex). Wisconsin followed 

their State procedures for deriving 

aquatic life criteria, using these toxicity 

studies (Chapter NR 105 of the WAC). 

Second, current literature on selenium 

states: ‘‘The most important aspect of 

selenium residues in aquatic food 

chains is not direct toxicity to the 

organisms themselves, but rather the 

dietary source of selenium they provide 

to fish and wildlife species that feed on 

them’’.1 In the case of Limited Aquatic 

Life waters, there are no fish that feed 

on the invertebrates, and there is 

currently no information available to 

determine effects on wildlife from 

eating these organisms. No new studies 

have been conducted with invertebrates 

that would provide a scientific basis to 

refute the 1987 invertebrate toxicity 

studies reported in the EPA’s 1987 

selenium criteria document. 

For the above reasons, the EPA 

approved Wisconsin’s chronic selenium 

criterion for Limited Aquatic Life waters 

as an acceptable State-specific 

modification of the EPA’s criterion, 

consistent with Wisconsin’s methods for 

deriving criteria. The criterion is 

scientifically sound and protective of 

the use, therefore this criterion is 

consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) 

and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR Parts 131 and 

132. 

Wisconsin did not adopt the EPA’s 

chronic aquatic life selenium criterion 

of 5 μg/L, found in 40 CFR Part 132, for 

Limited Forage Fish waters. Wisconsin’s 

basis for not adopting the EPA’s 

criterion is that Limited Forage Fish 

waters only support forage fish and 

invertebrates, and the EPA’s criterion 

was based on observed effects of 

selenium on sportfish (bluegill) in field 

studies. Instead, Wisconsin calculated a 

chronic selenium criterion for Limited 

Forage Fish waters based on toxicity 

studies listed in the EPA’s 1987 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 57651 

selenium aquatic life criteria document 

(selenite, +4). The EPA did not use these 

laboratory toxicity studies as the final 

basis for the recommended national 

selenium criterion of 5 μg/L because 

these studies were based on water 

column-only exposure to selenium. 

Given the available data showing the 

importance of dietary exposure, the 

EPA’s criteria recommendations are 

based on field studies that account for 

bioaccumulation through the food chain 

as the main route of the exposure. The 

available data indicate that the primary 

route of exposure to all fish species is 

dietary. Consequently, a water column 

exposure-based criterion, such as the 

criterion adopted by Wisconsin for 

Limited Forage Fish waters, may not 

protect aquatic life in these waters. 

Therefore, the EPA did not act on 

Wisconsin’s revised chronic selenium 

criterion for Limited Forage Fish waters 

in its July 1, 2009 action approving the 

other aquatic life criteria. Because 

Wisconsin does not have an EPAapproved chronic aquatic life selenium 

criterion for Limited Forage Fish 

Waters, the EPA is not withdrawing the 

federal chronic aquatic life selenium 

criterion for these waters. Therefore, the 

federal criteria for chronic selenium will 

continue to apply to Wisconsin’s 

Limited Forage Fish waters. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) 

This action withdraws federal 

requirements applicable to Wisconsin 

and imposes no regulatory requirements 

or costs on any person or entity, does 

not interfere with the action or planned 

action of another agency, and does not 

have any budgetary impacts or raise 

novel legal or policy issues. Thus, it has 

been determined that this rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under the 

terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden because it 

is administratively withdrawing Federal 

requirements that are no longer needed 

in Wisconsin. It does not include any 

information collection, reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements. However, 

the OMB has previously approved the 

information collection requirements 

contained in the existing regulations 40 

CFR Part 131 under the provisions of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB 

control number 2040–0049. The OMB 

control numbers for the EPA’s 

regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this action on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 

CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

This rule imposes no regulatory 

requirements or costs on any small 

entity. Therefore, I certify that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on State, local, 

and tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under UMRA Section 202, the 

EPA generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost-benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may result 

in expenditures to State, local, and 

tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

to the private sector, of $100 million or 

more in any one year. Before 

promulgating an EPA rule for which a 

written statement is needed, UMRA 

Section 205 generally requires the EPA 

to identify and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives and 

adopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative 

that achieves the objectives of the rule. 

The provisions of UMRA Section 205 do 

not apply when they are inconsistent 

with applicable law. Moreover, UMRA 

Section 205 allows the EPA to adopt an 

alternative other than the least costly, 

most cost-effective or least burdensome 

alternative if the Administrator 

publishes with the final rule an 

explanation of why that alternative was 

not adopted. Before the EPA establishes 

any regulatory requirements that may 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments, including tribal 

governments, it must have developed 

under UMRA Section 203 a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments, enabling 

officials of affected small governments 

to have meaningful and timely input in 

the development of the EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. 

This rule contains no Federal 

mandates (under the regulatory 

provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for 

State, Tribal, or local governments or 

the private sector because it imposes no 

enforceable duty on any of these 

entities. Thus, this rule is not subject to 

the requirements of UMRA Sections 202 

and 205 for a written statement and 

small government agency plan. 

Similarly, the EPA has determined that 

this rule contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments and 

is therefore not subject to UMRA 

Section 203. 

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), requires the EPA to develop an 

accountable process to ensure 

‘‘meaningful and timely input by State 

and local officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on the 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.’’ 

This rule imposes no regulatory 

requirements or costs on any State or 

local governments; therefore, it does not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. 

F. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments) 

Subject to the Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) the 

EPA may not issue a regulation that has 

tribal implications, that imposes 

substantial direct compliance costs, and 

that is not required by statute, unless 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
57652 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

the Federal Government provides the 

funds necessary to pay the direct 

compliance costs incurred by tribal 

governments, or the EPA consults with 

tribal officials early in the process of 

developing the proposed regulation and 

develops a tribal summary impact 

statement. 

The EPA has concluded that this 

action may have tribal implications. 

However, it will neither impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal 

law. Wisconsin’s revised and EPAapproved aquatic life criteria are 

identical to, or only slightly less 

stringent than, the federal criteria being 

withdrawn in this rule. In 2009 the EPA 

determined that Wisconsin’s revised 

criteria, with the exception of the 

chronic aquatic life criterion for 

selenium in waters designated as 

Limited Forage Fish use, adequately 

protect all waters of the State designated 

for aquatic life use at a level consistent 

with the Guidance and CWA 

requirements. Therefore, tribal 

consultation on this rule is unnecessary. 

G. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks) 

Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: 

(1) is determined to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

the EPA has reason to believe may have 

a disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

the Agency must evaluate the 

environmental health or safety effects of 

the planned rule on children, and 

explain why the planned regulation is 

preferable to other potentially effective 

and reasonably feasible alternatives 

considered by the Agency. 

This rule is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 because it is not 

economically significant and the EPA 

has no reason to believe the 

environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. 

H. Executive Order 13211 (Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use) 

This rule is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is 

not a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– 

113, 12(d)(15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs 

the EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. Therefore, the EPA 

is not considering the use of any 

voluntary consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898—Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

The EPA has determined that this rule 

will not have disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or 

low-income populations for several 

reasons. First, this rule pertains to 

aquatic life use criteria only which, 

based on current science and the EPA’s 

CWA Section 304(a) recommended 

criteria, the EPA has previously 

determined are protective of the 

applicable aquatic life designated uses. 

Second, Wisconsin’s revised and EPAapproved aquatic life criteria apply to 

all waters in the State designated for 

certain aquatic life uses. For these 

reasons, the EPA believes that this 

action will not disproportionately affect 

any one group over another in the State 

of Wisconsin. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. The 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. A ‘‘major rule’’ cannot take 

effect until 60 days after it is published 

in the Federal Register, however this 

action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined 

by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will 

become effective 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register as 

provided under the Administrative 

Procedure Act. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 132 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Great Lakes, Indian lands, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Water 

pollution control. 

Dated: September 8, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 40 CFR part 132 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 132—WATER QUALITY 

GUIDANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES 

SYSTEM 

■ 1. The authority citation for 40 CFR 

part 132 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 132.6 paragraphs (f) and (g) are 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 132.6 Application of part 132 

requirements in Great Lakes States and 

Tribes. 

* * * * * 

(f) Effective December 6, 2000, the 

chronic aquatic life criterion for endrin 

in Table 2 of this part shall apply to the 

waters of the Great Lakes System in the 

State of Wisconsin designated by 

Wisconsin as Warm Water Sportfish and 

Warm Water Forage Fish aquatic life 

use. 

(g) Effective February 5, 2001, the 

chronic aquatic life criterion for 

selenium in Table 2 of this part shall 

apply to the waters of the Great Lakes 

System in the State of Wisconsin 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 57653 

designated by Wisconsin as Limited 

Forage Fish aquatic life use. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–23817 Filed 9–15–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 174 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0609; FRL–8889–2] 

Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab 

Protein in Corn; Temporary Exemption 

From the Requirement of a Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation extends the 

effective date for a temporary exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance for 

residues of Bacillus thuringiensis 

eCry3.1Ab protein in corn, in or on the 

food or feed commodities of corn; corn, 

field; corn, sweet; and corn, pop, when 

used as a plant-incorporated protectant 

in accordance with the terms of 

Experimental Use Permit (EUP) No. 

67979–EUP–8. Syngenta Seeds, Inc. 

submitted a petition to EPA under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA), requesting to extend the 

existing temporary tolerance exemption 

for Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab 

protein in corn that was set to expire on 

March 1, 2013. This regulation 

eliminates the need to establish a 

maximum permissible level for residues 

of Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab 

protein in corn under the FFDCA. The 

temporary tolerance exemption now 

expires on December 31, 2013. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

September 16, 2011. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before November 15, 2011, and 

must be filed in accordance with the 

instructions provided in 40 CFR part 

178 (see also Unit I.C. of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2009–0609. All documents in the 

docket are listed in the docket index 

available at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available in the electronic docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the Office of 

Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory 

Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket 

Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket Facility telephone 

number is (703) 305–5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mike Mendelsohn, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 308–8715; e-mail address: 

mendelsohn.mike@epa.gov. 

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. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

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. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of 40 CFR part 174 

through the Government Printing 

Office’s e-CFR site at http:// 

ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/ 

40tab_02.tpl. 

C. How can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file an 

objection to any aspect of this regulation 

and may also request a hearing on those 

objections. You must file your objection 

or request a hearing on this regulation 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, you must 

identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2009–0609 in the subject line on 

the first page of your submission. All 

objections and requests for a hearing 

must be in writing, and must be 

received by the Hearing Clerk on or 

before November 15, 2011. Addresses 

for mail and hand delivery of objections 

and hearing requests are provided in 40 

CFR 178.25(b). 

In addition to filing an objection or 

hearing request with the Hearing Clerk 

as described in 40 CFR part 178, please 

submit a copy of the filing that does not 

contain any CBI for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information not marked 

confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 

may be disclosed publicly by EPA 

without prior notice. Submit a copy of 

your non-CBI objection or hearing 

request, identified by docket ID number 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0609, by one of 

the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: OPP Regulatory Public Docket 

(7502P), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

II. Background and Statutory Findings 

In the Federal Register of June 8, 2011 

(76 FR 33183) (FRL–8874–8), EPA 

issued a notice pursuant to section 

408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 

346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a 

pesticide tolerance petition (PP 1G7868) 

by Syngenta Seeds, Inc., P.O. Box 

12257, Research Triangle Park, NC 

27709. The petition requested that 40 

CFR part 174 be amended by extending 

the effective date of an existing 

temporary exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab 

protein in corn. This notice referenced 

a summary of the petition prepared by 

the petitioner, Syngenta Seeds, Inc., 

which is available in the docket via 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES