62492 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

comment period is now open through 

November 13, 2023. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking published June 14, 2023, (88 

FR 38765) is extended. Comments and 

related material must be received by the 

Coast Guard on or before November 13, 

2023. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2013–1057 using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about this document call or 

email LCDR Laura Fitzpatrick, Office of 

Investigations and Casualty Analysis 

(CG–INV), Coast Guard; telephone 202– 

372–1032, email Laura.M.Fitzpatrick@

uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

The Coast Guard views public 

participation as essential to effective 

rulemaking, and will consider all 

comments and material received during 

the comment period. Your comment can 

help shape the outcome of this 

rulemaking. If you submit a comment, 

please include the docket number for 

this rulemaking, indicate the specific 

section of this document to which each 

comment applies, and provide a reason 

for each suggestion or recommendation. 

We encourage you to submit 

comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. If you cannot 

submit your material by using 

www.regulations.gov, call or email the 

person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this proposed rule 

for alternate instructions. We review all 

comments received, but we will only 

post comments that address the topic of 

the proposed rule. We may choose not 

to post off-topic, inappropriate, or 

duplicate comments that we receive. 

We accept anonymous comments. All 

comments we post to https://

www.regulations.gov will include any 

personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

submissions in response to this 

document, see the Department of 

Homeland Security’s eRulemaking 

System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 

March 11, 2020). 

Background and Discussion 

The Coast Guard issued a 

supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking (SNPRM) entitled ‘‘Marine 

Casualty Reporting on the Outer 

Continental Shelf,’’ on June 14, 2023 (88 

FR 38765). In it we propose changing 

the reporting criteria for changing the 

reporting criteria for certain casualties 

that occur on foreign floating outer 

continental shelf (OCS) facilities (FOFs), 

mobile offshore drilling units (MODUs), 

and vessels engaged in OCS activities. 

In addition, the SNPRM proposes to 

raise the property damage dollar 

threshold that triggers a casualty report 

from $25,000 to $75,000 for fixed 

facilities on the OCS because the 

original regulation setting the property 

damage threshold amount was issued in 

the 1980s and has not since been 

updated. This SNPRM would update 

Coast Guard regulations to keep up with 

technology, improve awareness of 

accident trends on the OCS, improve 

safety on the OCS, and reduce the 

regulatory burden on operators of fixed 

OCS platforms. 

We set a 90-day comment period for 

the SNRPM and received several 

requests to extend the comment period. 

The requesters cited need for additional 

time to provide constructive responses 

to the SNRPM and a lack of awareness 

about the SNPRM among members of 

the affected industry as reasons for the 

requested extension. 

In response to this request, we 

decided to extend the public comment 

period by 60 days. The comment period 

is now open through November 13, 

2023. 

Dated: September 8, 2023. 

W.R. Arguin, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant 

Commandant for Prevention Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2023–19811 Filed 9–11–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0254; FRL–11283–01– 

OCSPP] 

RIN 2070–ZA16 

Pesticide Tolerances; Implementing 

Registration Review Decisions for 

Certain Pesticides (FY23Q4) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to 

implement several tolerance actions 

under the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) that the Agency 

determined were necessary or 

appropriate during the registration 

review conducted under the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 

Act (FIFRA). During registration review, 

EPA reviews all aspects of a pesticide 

case, including existing tolerances, to 

ensure that the pesticide continues to 

meet the standard for registration under 

FIFRA. The tolerance actions and 

pesticide active ingredients addressed 

in this rulemaking are identified in Unit 

I.B. and discussed in detail in Unit III. 

of this document. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 13, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0254, 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

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

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. Do not submit electronically 

any information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Additional 

instructions on commenting or visiting 

the docket, along with more information 

about dockets generally, is available at 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Little, Pesticide Re-Evaluation 

Division (7508M), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (202) 566–2234; email address: 

little.robert@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Executive Summary 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

B. What action is the Agency taking? 

EPA is proposing several tolerance 

actions that the Agency previously 

determined were necessary or 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 62493 

appropriate during registration review 

for the following pesticide active 

ingredients: chlorsulfuron, 

primisulfuron-methyl, triasulfuron, 

halosulfuron-methyl, sulfosulfuron, 

iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium, 

trifloxysulfuron-sodium, and 

mesosulfuron-methyl. The proposed 

tolerance actions for each pesticide 

active ingredient are described in Unit 

III. and may include but are not limited 

to the following types of actions: 

• Revising tolerance expressions; 

• Modifying commodity definitions; 

• Updating crop groups; 

• Removing expired tolerances; 

• Revoking tolerances that are no 

longer needed; and 

• Harmonizing tolerances with Codex 

Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs). 

Although they may not have been 

identified in the registration review of a 

particular pesticide, this rule also 

includes proposals to reflect the 

Agency’s 2019 adoption of the 

Organization of Economic Cooperation 

and Development (OECD) Rounding 

Class Practice. Where applicable, these 

adjustments are proposed for specific 

pesticides as reflected in the proposed 

regulatory text section. 

C. What is EPA’s authority for taking 

this action? 

Pursuant to its authority under the 

Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a, EPA is 

proposing the tolerance actions in this 

rulemaking that the Agency previously 

determined were necessary or 

appropriate during the registration 

review conducted under the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 

Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. 

FFDCA section 408(b) authorizes EPA 

to establish a tolerance, if the Agency 

determines that a tolerance is safe; 

FFDCA section 408(c) authorizes EPA to 

establish an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance if the Agency 

determines that the exemption is safe. 

See 21 U.S.C. 346a(b) and (c). If EPA 

determines that a tolerance or 

exemption is not safe, EPA must modify 

or revoke that tolerance or exemption. 

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.’’ 21 U.S.C. 

346a(b)(2)(A)(ii), (c)(2)(A)(ii). This 

includes exposure through drinking 

water and in residential settings but 

does not include occupational exposure. 

FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) requires 

EPA to give special consideration to the 

exposure of infants and children to the 

pesticide chemical residue in 

establishing a tolerance 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[s.]’’ 21 

U.S.C. 346a(b)(2)(C). In addition, 

FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D) contains 

several factors EPA must consider when 

making determinations about 

establishing, modifying, or revoking 

tolerances. 21 U.S.C. 346a(b)(2)(D). 

FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B) requires that 

EPA, when making determinations 

about exemptions, to take into account, 

among other things, the considerations 

set forth in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) 

and (D). 21 U.S.C. 346a(c)(2)(B). 

FFDCA section 408(e), 21 U.S.C. 

346a(e), authorizes EPA to establish, 

modify, or revoke tolerances or 

exemptions from the requirement of a 

tolerance on its own initiative. Prior to 

issuing the final regulation, FFDCA 

section 408(e)(2) requires EPA to issue 

a notice of proposed rulemaking for a 

60-day public comment period, unless 

the 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. 

Furthermore, when establishing 

tolerances or exemptions from the 

requirement of a tolerance, FFDCA 

sections 408(b)(3) and (c)(3) require that 

there be a practical method for detecting 

and measuring pesticide chemical 

residue levels in or on food, unless in 

the case of exemptions, EPA determines 

that such method is not needed and 

states the reasons therefor in the 

rulemaking. 21 U.S.C. 346a(b) and (c). 

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). 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 

tolerance actions being proposed in this 

rulemaking. 

D. What can I do if I want the Agency 

to maintain a tolerance that the Agency 

proposes to revoke? 

This proposed rule provides a 60-day 

public comment period that allows any 

person to state an interest in retaining 

a tolerance proposed for revocation. If 

EPA receives such a comment within 

the 60-day period, EPA will not proceed 

to revoke the tolerance immediately. 

However, EPA will take steps to ensure 

the submission of any needed 

supporting data and will issue an order 

in the Federal Register under FFDCA 

section 408(f), if needed. The order 

would specify data needed and the 

timeframes for submission of the data 

and would require that within 90 days 

some person or persons notify EPA that 

they will submit the data. If the data are 

not submitted as required in the order, 

EPA will take appropriate action under 

FFDCA. 

After considering comments that are 

received in response to this proposed 

rule, EPA will issue a final rule. At the 

time of the final rule, you may file an 

objection or request a hearing on the 

action taken in the final rule. If you fail 

to file an objection to the final rule 

within the time period specified in the 

final rule, you will have waived the 

right to raise any issues resolved in the 

final rule. After the filing deadline 

specified in the final rule, issues 

resolved in the final rule cannot be 

raised again in any subsequent 

proceedings. 

E. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through https://

www.regulations.gov or email. If you 

wish to include CBI in your comment, 

please follow the applicable instructions 

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

commenting-epa-dockets#rules and 

clearly mark the part or all of the 

information that you claim to be CBI. In 

addition to one complete version of the 

comment that includes information 

claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment 

that does not contain the information 

claimed as CBI must be submitted for 

inclusion in the public docket. 

Information so marked will not be 

disclosed except in accordance with 

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When preparing and submitting your 

comments, see the commenting tips at 

https://www.regulations.gov/faq. 

3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to 

achieve environmental justice, the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of any group, including minority and/or 

low-income populations, in the 

development, implementation, and 

enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies. 

II. Background 

A. What is a tolerance? 

A ‘‘tolerance’’ represents the 

maximum level for residues of pesticide 

chemicals legally allowed in or on food, 

which includes raw agricultural 

commodities and processed foods and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
62494 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

feed for animals. Under the FFDCA, 

residues of a pesticide chemical that are 

not covered by a tolerance or exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance are 

considered unsafe. See 21 U.S.C. 

346a(a)(1). Foods containing unsafe 

residues are deemed adulterated and 

may not be distributed in interstate 

commerce. See 21 U.S.C. 331(a), 

342(a)(2)(B). Consequently, for a fooduse pesticide (i.e., a pesticide use that is 

likely to result in residues in or on food) 

to be sold and distributed, the pesticide 

must not only have appropriate 

tolerances or exemptions under the 

FFDCA, but also must be registered 

under FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. Fooduse pesticides not registered in the 

United States must have tolerances or 

exemptions in order for commodities 

treated with those pesticides to be 

imported into the United States. For 

additional information about tolerances, 

go to https://www.epa.gov/pesticidetolerances/about-pesticide-tolerances. 

B. Why does EPA consider international 

residue limits? 

When establishing a tolerance for 

residues of a pesticide, EPA must 

determine whether the Codex 

Alimentarius Commission (Codex) has 

established a Maximum Residue Limit 

(MRL) for that pesticide. See 21 U.S.C. 

346a(b)(4). As part of registration 

review, EPA determines whether 

international tolerances or MRLs exist 

for commodities and chemicals for 

which U.S. tolerances have been 

established. Where appropriate, EPA’s 

intention is to harmonize U.S. 

tolerances with those international 

MRLs to facilitate trade. EPA’s effort to 

harmonize with Codex MRLs is 

summarized in the tolerance 

reassessment section of the individual 

human health risk assessments that 

support the pesticide registration 

review. 

C. What is pesticide registration review? 

EPA periodically reviews existing 

registered pesticides to ensure they can 

continue to be used without 

unreasonable adverse effects on human 

health or the environment. The 

registration review program is intended 

to make sure that, as the ability to assess 

risk evolves and as policies and 

practices change, all registered 

pesticides continue to meet the FIFRA 

registration standard of no unreasonable 

adverse effects. As part of the 

registration review of a pesticide, EPA 

also evaluates whether existing 

tolerances are safe, whether any changes 

to existing tolerances are necessary or 

appropriate, and whether any new 

tolerances are necessary to cover 

residues from registered pesticides. 

Where appropriate, EPA has included a 

safety finding under the FFDCA for the 

proposed tolerance action for the 

pesticide, which is discussed in detail 

in the human health risk assessments 

conducted to support the registration 

review of each specific pesticide active 

ingredient or registration review case. In 

addition, these proposed tolerance 

changes are summarized in both the 

Proposed Interim Decision (PID), and in 

the Interim Decision (ID) for each 

pesticide active ingredient or 

registration review case. These 

documents can be found in the public 

docket that has been opened for each 

pesticide, which is available online at 

https://www.regulations.gov, using the 

docket ID number listed in Unit III. for 

each pesticide active ingredient 

included in this proposed action. 

Additional information about pesticide 

registration review is available at 

https://www.epa.gov/pesticidereevaluation. 

III. Proposed Tolerance Actions 

EPA is proposing to take the specific 

tolerance actions identified in this unit. 

A. 40 CFR 180.405; Chlorsulfuron; Case 

0631 (Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2012–0878) 

1. Proposed Changes to the Current 

Tolerances 

EPA is proposing to amend the 

current tolerances by: 

• Revising the tolerance expression 

for chlorsulfuron to describe more 

clearly the scope or coverage of the 

tolerances and the method for 

measuring compliance. Consistent with 

EPA policy, the revised tolerance 

expression would clarify that (1) as 

provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), 

the tolerances cover metabolites and 

degradates of chlorsulfuron not 

specifically mentioned; and (2) 

compliance with the specified tolerance 

levels is to be determined by measuring 

the specific compounds mentioned in 

the tolerance expression. The revisions 

to the tolerance expression would not 

substantively change the tolerances or, 

in any way, modify the permissible 

level of residues permitted by the 

tolerances. 

• Merging the established tolerances 

into a single paragraph for clarity. 

• Modifying tolerance values or 

tolerance levels for ‘‘Grass, forage’’; 

‘‘Grass, hay’’; ‘‘Oat, forage’’; and 

‘‘Wheat, forage’’ to reflect current OECD 

rounding practices. 

2. Safety Finding 

During registration review, EPA 

assessed the risks from exposure to 

chlorsulfuron, taking into consideration 

all reliable data on toxicity and 

exposure, including for infants and 

children. Based on the supporting risk 

assessments and registration review 

documents, which demonstrate that the 

aggregate exposure is below the 

Agency’s level of concern, EPA 

concludes there is a reasonable certainty 

that no harm will result to the general 

population, or specifically to infants 

and children, from aggregate exposure 

to chlorsulfuron residues. Thus, EPA 

has determined that the tolerances for 

residues of chlorsulfuron are safe. 

Adequate enforcement methodology as 

described in the supporting documents 

is available to enforce the tolerance 

expression. For further detail, see 

Chlorsulfuron. Draft Human Health Risk 

Assessment in Support of Registration 

Review, which can be found in the 

docket ID number listed in the heading 

of this unit. 

B. 40 CFR 180.452; Primisulfuronmethyl; Case 7220 (Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OPP–2011–0844) 

1. Proposed Changes to the Current 

Tolerances 

EPA is proposing to amend the 

current tolerances by: 

• Revising the tolerance expression 

for primisulfuron-methyl to describe 

more clearly the scope or coverage of 

the tolerances and the method for 

measuring compliance. Consistent with 

EPA policy, the revised tolerance 

expression would clarify that (1) as 

provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), 

the tolerance covers metabolites and 

degradates of primisulfuron-methyl not 

specifically mentioned; and (2) 

compliance with the specified tolerance 

levels is to be determined by measuring 

the specific compounds mentioned in 

the tolerance expression. The revisions 

to the tolerance expression would not 

substantively change the tolerances or, 

in any way, modify the permissible 

level of residues permitted by the 

tolerances. 

2. Safety finding 

EPA has determined that the 

proposed change to the tolerance 

expression would not impact EPA’s 

previous safety findings for the 

established tolerances for 

primisulfuron-methyl, because the 

change has no substantive effect on the 

tolerances or supporting risk 

assessments, but rather is merely 

intended to clarify the existing tolerance 

expression. For further detail, see 

Primisulfuron-Methyl. Human Health 

Draft Risk Assessment for Registration 

Review, which can be found in the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 62495 

docket ID number listed in the heading 

of this unit. 

C. 40 CFR 180.459; Triasulfuron; Case 

7221 (Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2012–0115) 

1. Proposed Changes to the Current 

Tolerances 

EPA is proposing to amend the 

current tolerances by: 

• Revising the tolerance expression 

for triasulfuron to describe more clearly 

the scope or coverage of the tolerances 

and the method for measuring 

compliance. Consistent with EPA 

policy, the revised tolerance expression 

would clarify that (1) as provided in 

FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the tolerance 

covers metabolites and degradates of 

triasulfuron not specifically mentioned; 

and (2) compliance with the specified 

tolerance levels is to be determined by 

measuring the specific compounds 

mentioned in the tolerance expression. 

The revisions to the tolerance 

expression would not substantively 

change the tolerances or, in any way, 

modify the permissible level of residues 

permitted by the tolerances. 

2. Safety Finding 

EPA has determined that the 

proposed change to the tolerance 

expression would not impact EPA’s 

previous safety findings for the 

established tolerances for triasulfuron, 

because the change has no substantive 

effect on the tolerances or supporting 

risk assessments, but rather is merely 

intended to clarify the existing tolerance 

expression. For further detail, see 

Triasulfuron. Draft Human Health Risk 

Assessment in Support of Registration 

Review, which can be found in the 

docket ID number listed in the heading 

of this unit. 

D. 40 CFR 180.479; Halosulfuronmethyl; Case 7233 (Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OPP–2011–0745) 

1. Proposed Changes to the Current 

Tolerances 

EPA is proposing to amend the 

current tolerances by: 

• Modifying the tolerance level for 

residues of halosulfuron-methyl in or on 

asparagus from 0.8 ppm to 1 ppm to 

harmonize with the Canadian MRL. 

There are no Codex MRLs for this 

pesticide chemical. 

• Converting the existing crop group 

tolerances for ‘‘vegetable, fruiting, group 

8’’ and ‘‘nut, tree, crop group 14’’ to the 

updated crop group tolerances for 

‘‘vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10’’ and 

‘‘nut, tree, crop group 14–12,’’ 

respectively. The tolerance levels would 

remain the same. 40 CFR 180.40(j) states 

that ‘‘[a]t appropriate times, EPA will 

amend tolerances for crop groups that 

have been superseded by revised crop 

groups to conform the pre-existing crop 

group to the revised crop group.’’ EPA 

has indicated in updates to its crop 

group rulemakings that registration 

review is one of those appropriate times. 

See, e.g., Tolerance Crop Grouping 

Program V (85 FR 70976) (November 6, 

2020). 

• Removing tolerances for residues of 

halosulfuron-methyl in or on certain 

commodities. Specifically, EPA is 

proposing to remove the tolerance for 

‘‘pea and bean, succulent shelled, 

subgroup 6’’ because it is an incorrect 

entry; no such crop subgroup exists. 

Instead, these commodities are covered 

under the established tolerance for ‘‘pea 

and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 

6B’’ at the same tolerance level. In 

addition, EPA proposes to remove 

tolerances for okra and pistachio as 

unnecessary, because they would be 

covered by the updated crop group 

tolerances for ‘‘vegetable, fruiting, group 

8–10’’ and ‘‘nut, tree, crop group 14– 

12,’’ respectively, at the same tolerance 

levels. 

2. Safety Finding 

During registration review, EPA 

assessed the risks from exposure to 

halosulfuron-methyl, taking into 

consideration all reliable data on 

toxicity and exposure, including for 

infants and children. Based on the 

supporting risk assessments and 

registration review documents, which 

demonstrate that the aggregate exposure 

is below the Agency’s level of concern, 

EPA concludes there is a reasonable 

certainty that no harm will result to the 

general population, or specifically to 

infants and children, from aggregate 

exposure to halosulfuron-methyl 

residues. Thus, EPA has determined 

that the tolerances for residues of 

halosulfuron-methyl are safe. Adequate 

enforcement methodology as described 

in the supporting documents is 

available to enforce the tolerance 

expression. For further detail, see 

Halosulfuron-Methyl. Draft Human 

Health Risk Assessment for Registration 

Review, which can be found in the 

docket ID number listed in the heading 

of this unit. 

E. 40 CFR 180.552; Sulfosulfuron; Case 

7247 (Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2011–0434) 

1. Proposed Changes to the Current 

Tolerances 

EPA is proposing to amend the 

current tolerances by: 

• Revising the tolerance expression 

for sulfosulfuron to describe more 

clearly the scope or coverage of the 

tolerances and the method for 

measuring compliance. Consistent with 

EPA policy, the revised tolerance 

expression would clarify that (1) as 

provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), 

the tolerance covers metabolites and 

degradates of sulfosulfuron not 

specifically mentioned; and (2) 

compliance with the specified tolerance 

levels is to be determined by measuring 

the specific compounds mentioned in 

the tolerance expression. The revisions 

to the tolerance expression do not 

substantively change the tolerances or, 

in any way, modify the permissible 

level of residues permitted by the 

tolerances. 

• Removing the tolerances for 

residues of sulfosulfuron in or on hog, 

meat (0.005 ppm); hog, fat (0.005 ppm); 

and hog, meat byproducts (0.05 ppm). 

EPA has determined that there is no 

reasonable expectation of finite residues 

of concern in swine. See 40 CFR 

180.6(a)(3). Moreover, a re-evaluation of 

tolerance enforcement methods 

determined that the limits of 

quantitation for these methods is 0.01 

ppm. 

2. Safety Finding 

During registration review, EPA 

assessed the risks from exposure to 

sulfosulfuron, taking into consideration 

all reliable data on toxicity and 

exposure, including for infants and 

children. Based on the supporting risk 

assessments and registration review 

documents, which demonstrate that the 

aggregate exposure is below the 

Agency’s level of concern, EPA 

concludes there is a reasonable certainty 

that no harm will result to the general 

population, or specifically to infants 

and children, from aggregate exposure 

to sulfosulfuron residues. Thus, EPA 

has determined that the tolerances for 

residues of sulfosulfuron are safe. 

Adequate enforcement methodology as 

described in the supporting documents 

is available to enforce the tolerance 

expression. For further detail, see 

Sulfosulfuron. Draft Human Health Risk 

Assessment in Support of Registration 

Review, which can be found in the 

docket ID number listed in the heading 

of this unit. 

F. 40 CFR 180.580; Iodosulfuron-methylsodium; Case 7253 (Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OPP–2012–0717) 

1. Proposed Changes to the Current 

Tolerances 

EPA is proposing to amend the 

current tolerances by: 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
62496 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

• Revising the tolerance expression 

for iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium to 

describe more clearly the scope or 

coverage of the tolerances and the 

method for measuring compliance. 

Consistent with EPA policy, the revised 

tolerance expression would clarify that 

(1) as provided in FFDCA section 

408(a)(3), the tolerance covers 

metabolites and degradates of 

iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium not 

specifically mentioned; and (2) that 

compliance with the specified tolerance 

levels is to be determined by measuring 

the specific compounds mentioned in 

the tolerance expression. The revisions 

to the tolerance expression do not 

substantively change the tolerances or, 

in any way, modify the permissible 

level of residues permitted by the 

tolerances. 

2. Safety Finding 

EPA has determined that the 

proposed change to the tolerance 

expression would not impact EPA’s 

previous safety findings for the 

established tolerances for iodosulfuronmethyl-sodium, because the change has 

no substantive effect on the tolerances 

or supporting risk assessments, but 

rather is merely intended to clarify the 

existing tolerance expression. For 

further detail, see Iodosulfuron-MethylSodium. Draft Human Health Risk 

Assessment in Support of Registration 

Review, which can be found in the 

docket ID number listed in the heading 

of this unit. 

G. 40 CFR 180.591; Trifloxysulfuron; 

Case 7028 (Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2013–0409) 

1. Proposed Changes to the Current 

Tolerances 

EPA is proposing to amend the 

current tolerances by: 

• Revising the tolerance expression 

for trifloxysulfuron, resulting from the 

application of its sodium salt, to 

describe more clearly the scope or 

coverage of the tolerances and the 

method for measuring compliance. 

Consistent with EPA policy, the revised 

tolerance expression would clarify that 

(1) as provided in FFDCA section 

408(a)(3), the tolerance covers 

metabolites and degradates of 

trifloxysulfuron not specifically 

mentioned; and (2) that compliance 

with the specified tolerance levels is to 

be determined by measuring the specific 

compounds mentioned in the tolerance 

expression. The revisions to the 

tolerance expression do not 

substantively change the tolerances or, 

in any way, modify the permissible 

level of residues permitted by the 

tolerances. 

• Revoking tolerances for residues of 

trifloxysulfuron in or on almond (0.02 

ppm) and almond hulls (0.01 ppm). 

Almonds are no longer included as a 

use site on any trifloxysulfuron-sodium 

product labels; therefore, the Agency is 

proposing to revoke the established 

tolerances. In addition, 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 these 

requirements in the final rule, EPA is 

proposing to amend the existing 

tolerances to include an expiration date 

that would be six months after the date 

of publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. 

2. Safety Finding 

During registration review, EPA 

assessed the risks from exposure to 

trifloxysulfuron-sodium, taking into 

consideration all reliable data on 

toxicity and exposure, including for 

infants and children. Based on the 

supporting risk assessments and 

registration review documents, which 

demonstrate that the aggregate exposure 

is below the Agency’s level of concern, 

EPA concludes there is a reasonable 

certainty that no harm will result to the 

general population, or specifically to 

infants and children, from aggregate 

exposure to trifloxysulfuron-sodium. 

Thus, EPA has determined that the 

tolerances for residues of 

trifloxysulfuron, resulting from the 

application of its sodium salt, are safe. 

Adequate enforcement methodology as 

described in the supporting documents 

is available to enforce the tolerance 

expression. For further detail, see 

Trifloxysulfuron-Sodium. Draft Human 

Health Risk Assessment in Support of 

Registration Review, which can be 

found in the docket ID number listed in 

the heading of this unit 

H. 40 CFR 180.597; MesosulfuronMethyl; Case 7277 (Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OPP–2012–0833) 

1. Proposed Changes to the Current 

Tolerances 

EPA is proposing to amend the 

current tolerances by: 

• Revising the tolerance expression 

for mesosulfuron-methyl to describe 

more clearly the scope or coverage of 

the tolerances and the method for 

measuring compliance. Consistent with 

EPA policy, the revised tolerance 

expression would clarify that (1) as 

provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), 

the tolerance covers metabolites and 

degradates of mesosulfuron-methyl not 

specifically mentioned; and (2) that 

compliance with the specified tolerance 

levels is to be determined by measuring 

the specific compounds mentioned in 

the tolerance expression. The revisions 

to the tolerance expression do not 

substantively change the tolerances or, 

in any way, modify the permissible 

level of residues permitted by the 

tolerances. 

2. Safety Finding 

EPA has determined that the 

proposed change to the tolerance 

expression would not impact EPA’s 

previous safety findings for the 

established tolerances for mesosulfuronmethyl, because the change has no 

substantive effect on the tolerances or 

supporting risk assessments, but rather 

is merely intended to clarify the existing 

tolerance expression. For further detail, 

see Mesosulfuron-Methyl. Human 

Health Draft Risk Assessment for 

Registration Review, which can be 

found in the docket ID number listed in 

heading of this unit. 

IV. Proposed Effective Date 

EPA is proposing that these tolerance 

actions would be effective on the date 

of publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. However, for actions 

in the final rule that lower or revoke 

existing tolerances, EPA is proposing an 

expiration date of six months after the 

date of publication of the final rule in 

the Federal Register, 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. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and 14094: 

Modernizing Regulatory Review 

This action is exempt from review 

under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735) (October 4, 1993), as amended by 

Executive Order 14094 (88 FR 21879) 

(April 11, 2023), because it proposes to 

establish or modify a pesticide tolerance 

or a tolerance exemption under FFDCA 

section 408. This exemption also 

applies to tolerance revocations for 

which extraordinary circumstances do 

not exist. As such, this exemption 

applies to the tolerance revocations in 

this proposed rule because the Agency 

knows of no extraordinary 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 62497 

circumstances that warrant 

reconsideration of this exemption for 

those proposed tolerance revocations. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because it 

does not contain any information 

collection activities. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. In 

making this determination, EPA 

concludes that the impact of concern for 

this rule is any significant adverse 

economic impact on small entities and 

that the Agency is certifying that this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because the 

rule has no net burden on small entities 

subject to the rule. This determination 

takes into account an EPA analysis for 

tolerance establishments and 

modifications that published in the 

Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 FR 

24950) (FRL–1809–5) and for tolerance 

revocations on December 17, 1997 (62 

FR 66020) (FRL–5753–1). 

Additionally, in a 2001 memorandum, 

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. See 

Memorandum from Denise Keehner, 

Division Director, Biological and 

Economic Analysis Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs, entitled ‘‘RFA/ 

SBREFA Certification for Import 

Tolerance Revocation’’ and dated May 

25, 2001, which is available in the 

docket. 

For the pesticides named in this 

proposed rule, EPA concludes that there 

is no reasonable expectation that 

residues of the pesticides for tolerances 

listed in this proposed rule for 

revocation will be found on the 

commodities discussed in this proposed 

rule, and the Agency knows of no 

extraordinary circumstances that exist 

as to the present proposed rule that 

would change EPA’s previous analyses. 

Any comments about the Agency’s 

determination for this rulemaking 

should be submitted to EPA along with 

comments on the proposed rule and will 

be addressed in the final rule. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The action imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255) (August 10, 

1999), because it will not 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. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249) (November 

9, 2000), because it will not have 

substantial direct effects on tribal 

governments, 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. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885) 

(April 23, 1997) directs federal agencies 

to include an evaluation of the health 

and safety effects of the planned 

regulation on children in federal health 

and safety standards and explain why 

the regulation is preferable to 

potentially effective and reasonably 

feasible alternatives. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it is not a significant regulatory 

action under section 3(f)(1) of Executive 

Order 12866 (See Unit V.A.), and 

because EPA does not believe the 

environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. 

However, EPA’s Policy on Children’s 

Health applies to this action. 

This rule proposes tolerance actions 

under the FFDCA, which requires EPA 

to give special consideration to 

exposure of infants and children to the 

pesticide chemical residue in 

establishing a tolerance 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 . . .’’ 

(FFDCA 408(b)(2)(C)). Consistent with 

FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the 

factors specified therein, EPA has 

reviewed the available scientific data 

and other relevant information in 

support of these proposed tolerance 

actions. The Agency’s consideration is 

documented in the pesticide specific 

registration review decision documents. 

See the pesticide specific discussions in 

Unit III. and access the chemical 

specific registration review documents 

in each chemical docket at https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355) (May 22, 

2001) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This action does not involve technical 

standards under the NTTAA section 

12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272. 

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) 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 (people of color and/or 

indigenous peoples) and low-income 

populations. As discussed in more 

detail in the pesticide specific risk 

assessments conducted as part of the 

registration review for each pesticide as 

identified in Unit III., EPA has 

considered the safety risks for the 

pesticides subject to this rulemaking 

and in the context of the tolerance 

actions set out in this rulemaking. EPA 

believes that the human health and 

environmental conditions that exist 

prior to this action do not result in 

disproportionate and adverse effects on 

people of color, low-income 

populations, and/or indigenous peoples. 

Furthermore, EPA believes that this 

action is not likely to result in new 

disproportionate and adverse effects on 

people of color, low-income populations 

and/or indigenous peoples. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
62498 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

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 31, 2023. 

Edward Messina, 

Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the 

preamble, 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. 

■ 2. Amend § 180.405 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 180.405 Chlorsulfuron; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. (1) Tolerances are 

established for residues of 

chlorsulfuron, including its metabolites 

and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in table 1 to this paragraph 

(a)(1). Compliance with the tolerance 

levels specified in table 1 is to be 

determined by measuring only 

chlorsulfuron (2-chloro-N-[[(4-methoxy6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2- 

yl)amino]carbonyl]benzenesulfonamide) 

in or on the commodity. 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1) 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Barley, grain ......................... 0.1 

Barley, straw ......................... 0.5 

Cattle, fat .............................. 0.3 

Cattle, meat .......................... 0.3 

Cattle, meat byproducts ....... 0.3 

Goat, fat ................................ 0.3 

Goat, meat ............................ 0.3 

Goat, meat byproducts ......... 0.3 

Grass, forage ........................ 11 

Grass, hay ............................ 19 

Hog, fat ................................. 0.3 

Hog, meat ............................. 0.3 

Hog, meat byproducts .......... 0.3 

Horse, fat .............................. 0.3 

Horse, meat .......................... 0.3 

Horse, meat byproducts ....... 0.3 

Milk ....................................... 0.1 

Oat, forage ............................ 20 

Oat, grain .............................. 0.1 

Oat, straw ............................. 0.5 

Sheep, fat ............................. 0.3 

Sheep, meat ......................... 0.3 

Sheep, meat byproducts ...... 0.3 

Wheat, forage ....................... 20 

Wheat, grain ......................... 0.1 

Wheat, straw ......................... 0.5 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 180.452 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory 

text, and 

■ b. Adding table heading ‘‘Table 1 to 

Paragraph (a)’’. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 180.452 Primisulfuron-methyl; tolerances 

for residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of 

primisulfuron-methyl, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in table 1 to this paragraph 

(a). Compliance with the tolerance 

levels specified in table 1 is to be 

determined by measuring only 

primisulfuron-methyl (methyl 2-[[[[[4,6- 

bis(difluoromethoxy)-2- 

pyrimidinyl)amino] 

carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoate) in or 

on the commodity. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 180.459 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory 

text; and 

■ b. Adding table heading ‘‘Table 1 to 

Paragraph (a)’’. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 180.459 Triasulfuron; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of triasulfuron, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

table 1 to this paragraph (a). Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

table 1 is to be determined by measuring 

only triasulfuron (2-(2-chloroethoxy)-N- 

[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2- 

yl)amino]carbonyl]benzenesulfonamide) 

in or on the commodity. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 180.479, paragraph (a) by: 

■ a. Adding table heading ‘‘Table 1 to 

Paragraph (a)’’ in paragraph (a)(1); 

■ b. In the Table in paragraph (a)(2): 

■ i. Adding table heading ‘‘Table 2 to 

Paragraph (a)’’; 

■ ii. Revising the entry ‘‘Asparagus’’; 

■ iii. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entry ‘‘Nut, tree, group 14–12’’; 

■ iv. Removing the entries ‘‘Okra’’; ‘‘Pea 

and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 

6’’, ‘‘Pistachio’’, and ‘‘Vegetable, 

fruiting, group 8’’; and 

■ v. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entry ‘‘Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10’’. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 180.479 Halosulfuron-methyl; tolerances 

for residues. 

(2) * * * 

TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (a) 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Asparagus ............................. 1 

* * * * * 

Nut, tree, group 14–12 ......... 0.05 

* * * * * 

Vegetable, fruiting, group 8– 

10 ...................................... 0.05 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend § 180.552 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory 

text; 

■ b. Adding the table heading ‘‘Table 1 

to Paragraph (a)’’ in paragraph (a)(1); 

and 

■ c. Removing in Table 1 the entries 

‘‘Hog, fat’’; ‘‘Hog, meat’’; and ‘‘Hog, meat 

byproducts’’. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 180.552 Sulfosulfuron; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of sulfosulfuron 

(N-[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2- 

pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]-2- 

(ethylsulfonyl)imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine-3- 

sulfonamide), including its metabolites 

and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only those sulfosulfuron 

residues convertible to 2- 

(ethylsulfonyl)-imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine, 

expressed as the stoichiometric 

equivalent of sulfosulfuron. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend § 180.580 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory 

text; and 

■ b. Adding table heading ‘‘Table 1 to 

Paragraph (a)’’ in paragraph (a)(1). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 180.580 Iodosulfuron-Methyl-sodium; 

tolerances for residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the herbicide 

iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium, including 

its metabolites and degradates, in or on 

the commodities listed in the table in 

this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only iodosulfuron-methylsodium (methyl 4-iodo-2-[[[[(4-methoxy6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2- yl)amino] 

carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl] benzoate, 

sodium salt), calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 62499 

iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium, in or on 

the commodity. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Amend § 180.591 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory 

text; 

■ b. Adding table heading ‘‘Table 1 to 

Paragraph (a)’’ in paragraph (a)(1); 

■ c. Revising in Table 1 the entries 

‘‘Almond’’ and ‘‘Almond, hulls’’; and 

■ d. Adding footnote 1 to Table 1. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 180.591 Trifloxysulfuron; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of 

trifloxysulfuron, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only trifloxysulfuron, N- 

[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2- 

pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]-3-(2,2,2- 

trifluoroethoxy)-2-pyridinesulfonamide. 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a) 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Almond 1 ................................ 0.02 

Almond, hulls1 ....................... 0.01 

* * * * * 

1These tolerances expire on [DATE 6 

MONTHS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN 

THE Federal Register]. 

* * * * * 

■ 9. Amend § 180.597 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory 

text; and 

■ b. Adding table heading ‘‘Table 1 to 

Paragraph (a)’’ in paragraph (a)(1). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 180.597 Mesosulfuron-methyl; 

tolerances for residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of 

mesosulfuron-methyl, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only mesosulfuron-methyl, 

methyl 2-[[[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2- 

pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]

amino]sulfonyl]-4-[[(methylsulfonyl)

amino]methyl]benzoate. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2023–19513 Filed 9–11–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0069; FRL–10579–07– 

OCSPP] 

Receipt of a Pesticide Petition Filed for 

Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or 

on Various Commodities (July 2023) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of filing of petition and 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: This document announces the 

Agency’s receipt of an initial filing of a 

pesticide petition requesting the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various commodities. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 12, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0069, 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

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

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. Do not submit electronically 

any information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Additional 

instructions on commenting and visiting 

the docket, along with more information 

about dockets generally, is available at 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Madison Le, Biopesticides and Pollution 

Prevention Division (BPPD) (7511M), 

main telephone number: (202) 566– 

1400, email address: BPPDFRNotices@

epa.gov. The mailing address for each 

contact person is Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 

Washington, DC 20460–0001. As part of 

the mailing address, include the contact 

person’s name, division, and mail code. 

The division to contact is listed at the 

end of each application summary. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When preparing and submitting your 

comments, see the commenting tips at 

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

commenting-epa-dockets. 

3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to 

achieve environmental justice, the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of any group, including minority and/or 

low-income populations, in the 

development, implementation, and 

enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies. To help 

address potential environmental justice 

issues, the Agency seeks information on 

any groups or segments of the 

population who, as a result of their 

location, cultural practices, or other 

factors, may have atypical or 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health impacts or environmental 

effects from exposure to the pesticides 

discussed in this document, compared 

to the general population. 

II. What action is the Agency taking? 

EPA is announcing receipt of a 

pesticide petition filed under section 

408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a, 

requesting the establishment or 

modification of regulations in 40 CFR 

part 180 for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various food 

commodities. The Agency is taking 

public comment on the request before 

responding to the petitioner. EPA is not 

proposing any particular action at this 

time. EPA has determined that the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1