57026 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

have any impact on Federal 

enforcement authorities, EPA may at 

any time invoke its authority under the 

CAA, including, for example, sections 

113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the 

requirements or prohibitions of the state 

plan, independently of any state 

enforcement effort. In addition, citizen 

enforcement under section 304 of the 

CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or 

any, state audit privilege or immunity 

law. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land as defined 

in 18 U.S.C. 1151 or in any other area 

where EPA or an Indian tribe has 

demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule pertaining to Virginia’s 

1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard Second 

Maintenance Plan for the Hampton 

Roads Area does not have tribal 

implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. EPA defines 

environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further 

defines the term fair treatment to mean 

that ‘‘no group of people should bear a 

disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

VADEQ did not evaluate 

environmental justice considerations as 

part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and 

applicable implementing regulations 

neither prohibit nor require such an 

evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ 

analysis and did not consider EJ in this 

action. Consideration of EJ is not 

required as part of this action, and there 

is no information in the record 

inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 

12898 of achieving environmental 

justice for people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Adam Ortiz, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2023–18048 Filed 8–21–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0409; FRL–11232–01– 

OCSPP] 

RIN 2070–ZA16 

Phenol; Revoking Exemption From the 

Requirement of a Pesticide Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to revoke 

the tolerance exemption for residues of 

the antimicrobial pesticide ingredient 

phenol when used as an inert ingredient 

(solvent/cosolvent) in pesticide 

formulations applied to growing crops. 

This rulemaking is proposed on the 

Agency’s own initiative under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA) to implement a tolerance 

action the Agency determined was 

appropriate during the registration 

review conducted under the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 

Act (FIFRA) for phenol. EPA is 

proposing to revoke this tolerance 

exemption because it corresponds to a 

use no longer current or registered 

under FIFRA in the United States. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 23, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0409, is 

available at https://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William 

Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001. 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 and the OPP 

Docket is (202) 566–1744. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

at https://www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anita Pease, Antimicrobials Division 

(7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001; telephone number: 202– 

566–0736; email address: pease.anita@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2023 / Proposed Rules 57027 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111), 

e.g., agricultural workers; greenhouse, 

nursery, and floriculture workers; 

farmers. 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112), e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers, 

dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers. 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311), e.g., agricultural workers; farmers; 

greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture 

workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators. 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532), e.g., agricultural workers; 

commercial applicators; farmers; 

greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture 

workers; residential users. 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 

through the Office of the Federal 

Register’s e-CFR site at https://

www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40. 

C. How can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

U.S.C. 346a, 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–2023–0409, 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 

October 23, 2023. 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 (excluding 

any Confidential Business Information 

(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 the non-CBI copy of your 

objection or hearing request, identified 

by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2023–0409, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Do not submit electronically 

any information you consider to be 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 https://

www.epa.gov/dockets/where-sendcomments-epa-dockets. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

II. Background 

A. What action is the Agency taking? 

EPA is proposing to revoke the 

tolerance exemption in 40 CFR 180.920 

for residues of the antimicrobial 

pesticide ingredient phenol when used 

as an inert ingredient (solvent/ 

cosolvent) in pesticide formulations 

applied to growing crops, because this 

tolerance exemption corresponds to a 

use no longer current or registered 

under FIFRA in the United States. 

B. What is the Agency’s authority for 

taking this action? 

EPA is proposing this action pursuant 

to its authority under section 408 of the 

FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a. The Agency 

previously determined this action was 

appropriate during the registration 

review of phenol conducted under 

FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. 

Under FIFRA section 3(g), 7 U.S.C. 

136a(g), EPA is required to periodically 

review all registered pesticides and 

determine if those pesticides continue 

to meet the standard for registration 

under FIFRA. See also 40 CFR 

155.40(a). As part of registration review, 

EPA evaluates whether existing 

tolerances are safe, whether any changes 

to existing tolerances are necessary or 

appropriate, and whether any new 

tolerances are necessary. A ‘‘tolerance’’ 

represents the maximum level for 

residues of pesticide chemicals legally 

allowed in or on raw agricultural 

commodities and processed foods. 

Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, 

authorizes the establishment, 

modification, and revocation of 

tolerances or exemptions from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of pesticide chemicals in or on raw 

agricultural commodities and processed 

foods. Residues of pesticides in or on 

food that are not covered by a tolerance 

or exemption are deemed unsafe, 21 

U.S.C. 346a(a)(1). Any food containing 

unsafe residues is considered 

adulterated and may not be distributed 

in interstate commerce, 21 U.S.C. 

331(a), 342(a)(2)(B). For a food-use 

pesticide to be sold and distributed, the 

pesticide must not only have 

appropriate tolerances under the FFDCA 

but also must be registered under 

FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. Moreover, 

residues of food-use pesticides not 

registered in the United States must also 

be covered by a tolerance or exemption 

in order for commodities treated with 

those pesticides to be imported into the 

United States. 

Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA 

allows EPA to establish an exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance only 

if EPA determines that the tolerance is 

‘‘safe.’’ Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the 

FFDCA defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that 

‘‘there is a reasonable certainty that no 

harm will result from aggregate 

exposure to the pesticide chemical 

residue, including all anticipated 

dietary exposures and all other 

exposures for which there is reliable 

information.’’ This includes exposure 

through drinking water and in 

residential settings but does not include 

occupational exposure. Section 

408(c)(2)(B) of the FFDCA requires EPA, 

when making a safety determination 

concerning an exemption, to take into 

account, among other relevant 

considerations, the considerations listed 

in section 408(b)(2)(C) and (D). Section 

408(b)(2)(C) requires EPA to give special 

consideration to exposure of infants and 

children to the pesticide chemical 

residue and to ‘‘ensure that there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result to infants and children from 

aggregate exposure to the pesticide 

chemical residue. . . .’’ Section 

408(b)(2)(D) identifies various factors, 

including available information on 

aggregate and cumulative exposure, for 

EPA’s consideration in making a safety 

determination. 

Section 408(e) of the FFDCA, 21 

U.S.C. 346a(e), authorizes EPA to 

initiate a rulemaking to establish, 

modify, or revoke tolerances or 

exemptions from the requirement of a 

tolerance on its own initiative. Prior to 

issuing the final regulation, section 

408(e)(2) requires EPA to issue a notice 

of proposed rulemaking for a 60-day 

public comment period, unless the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
57028 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

Administrator for good cause finds that 

it would be in the public interest to 

have a shorter period and states the 

reasons in the rulemaking. 

Consistent with its obligations under 

FIFRA section 3(g) and FFDCA section 

408, EPA has reviewed the available 

scientific data and other relevant 

information and determined it is 

appropriate to take the action being 

proposed in this rulemaking. 

C. When does this action become 

effective? 

EPA is proposing that this action 

become effective six months after the 

date of publication of the final rule in 

the Federal Register. EPA is proposing 

this effective date for this action to 

allow a reasonable interval for 

producers in exporting members of the 

World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) 

Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) 

Measures Agreement to adapt to the 

requirements of the final rule. 

Any commodities treated with phenol 

in the channels of trade following the 

tolerance exemption revocation shall be 

subject to FFDCA section 408(l)(5), 21 

U.S.C. 346a(l)(5). Under this section, 

any residues of this pesticide in or on 

such food shall not render the food 

adulterated so long as it is shown to the 

satisfaction of the Food and Drug 

Administration that the residue is 

present as the result of an application or 

use of the pesticide at a time and in a 

manner that was lawful under FIFRA 

and the residue does not exceed the 

level that was authorized at the time of 

the application or use to be present on 

the food under a tolerance or 

exemption, unless EPA determines that 

consumption of legally treated food 

during the period of its likely 

availability in commerce will pose 

unreasonable dietary risk. Evidence to 

show that food was lawfully treated may 

include records that verify the dates 

when the pesticide was applied to such 

food. 

III. Proposed Rule 

EPA is proposing to revoke the 

tolerance exemption in 40 CFR 180.920 

for residues of phenol when used as an 

inert ingredient (solvent/cosolvent) in 

pesticide formulations applied to 

growing crops. In the August 2020 

Phenol and Salt Interim Registration 

Review Decision (available at https://

www.regulations.gov in docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0810), 

EPA determined that there are no 

current registrations for pesticide 

products containing phenol as an inert 

ingredient (solvent/cosolvent) for use on 

growing crops, and therefore the 

tolerance exemption for phenol under 

40 CFR 180.920 is not necessary and 

should be revoked. Moreover, there 

have been no registrations for use 

associated with this tolerance 

exemption for many years. The Agency 

therefore believes that existing stocks of 

pesticide products containing phenol 

for the use associated with this 

tolerance exemption have been 

exhausted and that treated commodities 

have cleared the channels of trade. 

IV. Conclusion 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke 

the exemption from the requirement of 

a tolerance for residues of phenol when 

used as an inert ingredient (solvent/ 

cosolvent) in pesticide products used on 

growing crops. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

In this proposed rule, EPA is 

proposing to revoke a specific tolerance 

exemption under its authority in FFDCA 

section 408(e). The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

exempted this type of action (e.g., 

tolerance exemption revocation for 

which extraordinary circumstances do 

not exist) from review under Executive 

Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993). Because this proposed 

rule has been exempted from review 

under Executive Order 12866, due to its 

lack of significance, this proposed rule 

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). This proposed 

rule does not contain any information 

collections subject to OMB approval 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) or impose 

any enforceable duty or contain any 

unfunded mandate as described under 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et 

seq.). Nor does it require any special 

considerations as required by Executive 

Order 12898, entitled ‘‘Federal Actions 

to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994); or OMB review or any other 

Agency action under Executive Order 

13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of Children 

from Environmental Health Risks and 

Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 

1997). This proposed rule does not 

involve any technical standards that 

would require Agency consideration of 

voluntary consensus standards pursuant 

to section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the 

Agency previously assessed whether 

revocations of tolerances might 

significantly impact a substantial 

number of small entities and concluded 

that, as a general matter, these actions 

do not impose a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This analysis was published in 

the Federal Register of December 17, 

1997 (62 FR 66020) (FRL–5753–1) and 

was provided to the Chief Counsel for 

Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration. Taking into account 

this analysis, and available information 

concerning the pesticide named in this 

proposed rule, the Agency hereby 

certifies that this proposed rule will not 

have a significant negative economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. In a memorandum dated May 

25, 2001, EPA determined that eight 

conditions must all be satisfied in order 

for an import tolerance or tolerance 

exemption revocation to adversely affect 

a significant number of small entity 

importers, and that there is a negligible 

joint probability of all eight conditions 

holding simultaneously with respect to 

any particular revocation. (This Agency 

document titled ‘‘RFA/SBREFA 

Certification for Import Tolerance 

Revocation’’ is available in the docket of 

this proposed rule.) Furthermore, for the 

pesticide named in this proposed rule, 

the Agency knows of no extraordinary 

circumstances that exist as to the 

present proposed rule that would 

change EPA’s previous analysis. Any 

comments about the Agency’s 

determination should be submitted to 

the EPA along with comments on the 

proposed rule and will be addressed 

prior to issuing a final rule. 

In addition, the Agency has 

determined that this proposed rule 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). Executive Order 13132, requires 

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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2023 / Proposed Rules 57029 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’ This proposed 

rule directly regulates growers, food 

processors, food handlers, and food 

retailers, not States. This proposed rule 

does not alter the relationships or 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established by Congress 

in the preemption provisions of FFDCA 

section 408(n)(4). For these same 

reasons, the Agency has determined that 

this proposed rule does not have any 

‘‘tribal implications’’ as described in 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000). Executive 

Order 13175, requires EPA to develop 

an accountable process to ensure 

‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal 

officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal 

implications’’ is defined in the 

Executive Order to include regulations 

that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on 

one or more Indian tribes, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and the Indian tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes.’’ This 

proposed rule will not have substantial 

direct effects on tribal governments, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175, does not 

apply to this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: August 14, 2023. 

Edward Messina, 

Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR 

chapter I be amended as follows: 

PART 180—TOLERANCES AND 

EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE 

CHEMICAL RESIDUES IN FOOD 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 180.920 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 180.920, amend table 1 by 

removing the inert ingredient ‘‘Phenol’’. 

[FR Doc. 2023–18050 Filed 8–21–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Parts 405, 410, 416, 419, 424, 

485, 488, 489 

Office of the Secretary 

45 CFR Part 180 

[CMS–1786–P] 

RIN 0938–AV09 

Medicare Program: Hospital Outpatient 

Prospective Payment and Ambulatory 

Surgical Center Payment Systems; 

Quality Reporting Programs; Payment 

for Intensive Outpatient Services in 

Rural Health Clinics, Federally 

Qualified Health Centers, and Opioid 

Treatment Programs; Hospital Price 

Transparency; Changes to Community 

Mental Health Centers Conditions of 

Participation, Proposed Changes to 

the Inpatient Prospective Payment 

System Medicare Code Editor; Rural 

Emergency Hospital Conditions of 

Participation Technical Correction 

Correction 

In proposed rule document 2023– 

14768 appearing on pages 49552–49921 

in the issue of Monday, July 31, 2023, 

make the following correction: 

On page 49762, Table 61 is corrected 

to read as set forth below: 

TABLE 61—CY 2024 PROPOSED SURGICAL PROCEDURES FOR THE ASC CPL 

CY 2024 CPT/HCPCS/CDT code CY 2024 long descriptor 

D4210 .............................................. Gingivectomy or gingivoplasty—four or more contiguous teeth or tooth bounded spaces per quadrant. 

D4211 .............................................. Gingivectomy or gingivoplasty—one to three contiguous teeth or tooth bounded spaces per quadrant. 

D4212 .............................................. Gingivectomy or gingivoplasty to allow access for restorative procedure, per tooth. 

D4260 .............................................. Osseous surgery (including elevation of a full thickness flap entry and closure)—four or more contiguous 

teeth or tooth bounded spaces per quadrant. 

D4263 .............................................. Bone replacement graft—retained natural tooth—first site in quadrant. 

D4270 .............................................. Pedicle soft tissue graft procedure. 

D4273 .............................................. Autogenous connective tissue graft procedure (including donor and recipient surgical sites) first tooth, implant, or edentulous tooth position in graft. 

D7111 .............................................. Extraction, coronal remnants—primary tooth. 

D7140 .............................................. Extraction—erupted tooth or exposed root (elevation and/or forcep removal). 

D7210 .............................................. Surgical removal of an erupted tooth requiring removal of bone and/or sectioning of tooth and including 

elevation of mucoperiosteal flap if indicated. 

D7220 .............................................. Removal of impacted tooth—soft tissue. 

D7230 .............................................. Removal of impacted tooth—partially bony. 

D7240 .............................................. Removal of impacted tooth—completely bony. 

D7241 .............................................. Removal of impacted tooth—completely bony, with unusual surgical complications. 

D7250 .............................................. Surgical removal of residual tooth roots (cutting procedure). 

D7270 .............................................. Tooth reimplantation and/or stabilization of accidentally evulsed or displaced tooth. 

D7310 .............................................. Alveoloplasty in conjunction with extractions—four or more teeth or tooth spaces, per quadrant. 

D7311 .............................................. Alveoloplasty in conjunction with extractions—one to three teeth or tooth spaces, per quadrant. 

D7472 .............................................. Removal of torus palatinus. 

D7473 .............................................. Removal of torus mandibularis. 

D7510 .............................................. Incision and drainage of abscess-intraoral soft tissue. 

D7511 .............................................. Incision and drainage of abscess—intraoral soft tissue—complicated (includes drainage of multiple fascial 

spaces). 

D7520 .............................................. Incision and drainage of abscess-extraoral soft tissue. 

D7550 .............................................. Partial ostectomy/sequestrectomy for removal of non-vital bone. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1