Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 57273 

1Fine particulates directly emitted by sources 

and not formed in a secondary manner through 

chemical reactions or other processes in the 

atmosphere. 

2NOX and SO2 are precursors for fine particulates 

through chemical reactions and other related 

processes in the atmosphere. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–22620 Filed 9–17–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0337 and EPA–R05– 

OAR–2012–0462; FRL–9900–79–Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Redesignation of the SteubenvilleWeirton Area to Attainment of the 1997 

Annual Standard and the 2006 24-Hour 

Standard for Fine Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is redesignating under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA) the Ohio 

portion of the Steubenville-Weirton area 

(Jefferson County, OH and Brooke and 

Hancock Counties, WV) to attainment 

for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS or standard) for fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5). On April 16, 

and May 31, 2012, the Ohio 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(OEPA) submitted a request for EPA to 

redesignate the Steubenville-Weirton 

Ohio nonattainment area. EPA 

determined that the SteubenvilleWeirton area has attained the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard, and proposed to approve 

Ohio’s request to redesignate the area on 

July 11, 2013. EPA’s final rulemaking 

involves several related actions. EPA is 

approving, as a revision to the Ohio 

state implementation plan (SIP), the 

state’s plan for maintaining the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

in the area through 2025. EPA is making 

a finding of insignificance for Ohio’s 

motor vehicle emissions of nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) and direct PM2.5 for the 

Steubenville-Weirton area for 

transportation conformity purposes. 

Therefore, as Ohio requested, EPA is 

redesignating the Ohio portion of the 

Steubenville-Weirton area to attainment 

for the 1997 PM2.5 annual and 2006 24- 

hour standards. 

DATES: This rule will be effective 

September 18, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification EPA–R05–OAR–2012– 

0337 and EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0462. 

All documents in these dockets are 

listed on the www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is 

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

Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. We recommend that 

you telephone Carolyn Persoon at (312) 

353–8290 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carolyn Persoon, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8290, 

persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What is the background for the actions? 

II. What actions is EPA taking? 

III. What is EPA’s response to comments? 

IV. Why is EPA taking these actions? 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for the 

actions? 

On April 16, and May 31, 2012, OEPA 

submitted a request for EPA to 

redesignate the Steubenville-Weirton 

nonattainment area to attainment for the 

1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, and for EPA approval of the 

state’s SIP revision containing an 

emissions inventory and a maintenance 

plan for the area. On July 11, 2013, (78 

FR 41752), EPA proposed redesignation 

and proposed approval of Ohio’s plan 

for maintaining the 1997 annual and 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Finally, for 

transportation conformity purposes EPA 

is approving Ohio’s determination that 

on-road emissions of PM2.5 and NOX are 

insignificant contributors to PM2.5

concentrations in the area. Additional 

background for today’s action is set 

forth in EPA’s July 11, 2013, proposed 

rulemaking. 

II. What actions is EPA taking? 

EPA has determined that the entire 

Steubenville-Weirton area is attaining 

the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard (78 FR 41752) and that the 

Ohio portion of the area has met the 

requirements for redesignation under 

section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Thus, 

EPA is changing the legal designation of 

the Ohio portion of the SteubenvilleWeirton area from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. This action does 

not address the West Virginia portion of 

the Steubenville-Weirton area. EPA is 

also taking several additional actions 

related to Ohio’s PM2.5 redesignation 

requests, as discussed below. 

EPA is approving Ohio’s 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 maintenance plans for the 

Steubenville-Weirton area as revisions 

to the Ohio SIP (such approval being 

one of the CAA criteria for redesignation 

to attainment status). The maintenance 

plans are designed to keep the 

Steubenville-Weirton area in attainment 

of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025. 

EPA is also approving the 2005 and 

2008 emission inventories for primary 

PM2.5,1 NOX, and sulfur dioxide (SO2),2

documented in Ohio’s PM2.5

redesignation request submittals. These 

emissions inventories satisfy the 

requirement in section 172(c)(3) of the 

CAA for a comprehensive, current 

emission inventory. 

Finally, EPA is approving Ohio’s 

determination for transportation 

conformity purposes that on-road 

emissions of PM2.5 and NOX are 

insignificant contributors to PM2.5

concentrations in the area. 

Further discussion of the basis for 

these actions was provided in the 

proposal on July 11, 2013 (78 FR 41752). 

III. What is EPA’s response to 

comments? 

EPA received no comments on its 

proposed rulemaking. 

IV. Why is EPA taking these actions? 

EPA has determined that the 

Steubenville-Weirton area has 

continued to attain the 1997 annual and 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has 

also determined that all other criteria 

have been met for the redesignation of 

the Ohio portion of the SteubenvilleWeirton area from nonattainment to 

attainment of the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and for approval 

of Ohio’s maintenance plan for the area. 

See CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E) and 

175A. The detailed rationale for EPA’s 

findings and actions is set forth in the 

proposed rulemaking of July 11, 2013, 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
57274 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

(78 FR 41752), and in this final 

rulemaking. 

V. Final Action 

EPA has previously made the 

determination that the SteubenvilleWeirton area has attained the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard 

(76 FR 56641; 77 FR 28264, 

respectively). EPA is determining that 

the area continues to attain the 

standards and that the Ohio portion of 

the area meets the requirements for 

redesignation to attainment of the 

standards under sections 107(d)(3)(E) 

and 175A of the CAA. Thus, EPA is 

changing the legal designation of the 

Ohio portion of the SteubenvilleWeirton area from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also 

approving Ohio’s 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 maintenance plans for the 

Steubenville-Weirton area as a revision 

to the SIP because the plan meets the 

requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA. EPA is approving the 2005 and 

2008 emissions inventories for primary 

PM2.5, NOX, and SO2, documented in 

Ohio’s April 16, and May 31, 2012, 

submittals as satisfying the requirement 

in section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for a 

comprehensive, current emission 

inventory. 

Finally, EPA is approving Ohio’s 

determination for transportation 

conformity purposes that on-road 

emissions of PM2.5 and NOX are 

insignificant contributors to PM2.5

concentrations in the area. 

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), 

EPA finds there is good cause for this 

action to become effective immediately 

upon publication. This is because a 

delayed effective date is unnecessary 

due to the nature of a redesignation to 

attainment, which relieves the area from 

certain CAA requirements that would 

otherwise apply to it. The immediate 

effective date for this action is 

authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(1), which provides that 

rulemaking actions may become 

effective less than 30 days after 

publication if the rule—grants or 

recognizes an exemption or relieves a 

restriction, and section 553(d)(3), which 

allows an effective date less than 30 

days after publication—as otherwise 

provided by the agency for good cause 

found and published with the rule. The 

purpose of the 30-day waiting period 

prescribed in section 553(d) is to give 

affected parties a reasonable time to 

adjust their behavior and prepare before 

the final rule takes effect. Today’s rule, 

however, does not create any new 

regulatory requirements such that 

affected parties would need time to 

prepare before the rule takes effect. 

Rather, today’s rule relieves the Ohio of 

various requirements for the Ohio 

portion of the Steubenville-Weirton 

area. For these reasons, EPA finds good 

cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for this 

action to become effective on the date of 

publication of this action. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of the 

maintenance plan under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

required by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

impose any new requirements, but 

rather results in the application of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act 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 these 

reasons, these actions: 

• Are not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• are 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.); 

• do 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); 

• do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• are not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• are not significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• are 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, 

• do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this final rule does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the Commonwealth, and EPA 

notes that it will not impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

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. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action 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. 

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

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by November 18, 2013. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 57275 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: August 27, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 are amended 

as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 2. Section 52.1880 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (p)(5), (q)(5), (s), and 

(t) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1880 Control strategy: Particulate 

matter. 

* * * * * 

(p) * * * 

(5) The Ohio portion of the 

Steubenville-Weirton nonattainment 

area (Jefferson County). The 

maintenance plan establishes a 

determination of insignificance for both 

NOX and primary PM2.5 for conformity 

purposes. 

(q) * * * 

(5) Ohio’s 2005 and 2008 NOX, 

directly emitted PM2.5, SO2, VOC, and 

ammonia emissions inventory satisfies 

the emission inventory requirements of 

section 172(c)(3) for the SteubenvilleWeirton area. 

* * * * * 

(s) Approval—The 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 maintenance plans for the 

following areas have been approved: 

(1) The Ohio portion of the 

Steubenville-Weirton nonattainment 

area (Jefferson County). The 

maintenance plan establishes a 

determination of insignificance for both 

NOX and primary PM2.5 for conformity 

purposes. 

(t) Approval—The 2006 24-hour PM2.5

comprehensive emissions inventories 

for the following areas have been 

approved: 

(1) Ohio’s 2005 and 2008 NOX, 

directly emitted PM2.5, SO2, VOC, and 

ammonia emissions inventory satisfies 

the emission inventory requirements of 

section 172(c)(3) for the SteubenvilleWeirton area. 

PART 81–-DESIGNATION OF AREAS 

FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING 

PURPOSES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 4. Section 81.336 is amended by 

revising the entry for SteubenvilleWeirton, OH-WV in the tables entitled 

‘‘Ohio—PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS)’’ and 

‘‘Ohio—PM2.5 (24-Hour NAAQS)’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 81.336 Ohio. 

* * * * * 

OHIO—PM2.5

[Annual NAAQS] 

Designated area 

Designation a

Date 1 Type 

*******

Steubenville-Weirton, OH–WV: 

Jefferson County ............................................................................................................................... 9/18/2013 Attainment. 

* * * * * * * 

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. 

* * * * * 

OHIO—PM2.5

[24-Hour NAAQS] 

Designated area 

Designation for the 1997 NAAQSa Designation for the 2006 

NAAQSa

Date 1 Type Date 2 Type 

*******

Steubenville-Weirton, OH–WV: 

Jefferson County .................................................................... ........................ Unclassifiable/Attainment ... 9/18/2013 Attainment. 

* * * * * * * 

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. 

2This date is 30 days after November 13, 2009, unless otherwise noted. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
57276 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–22623 Filed 9–17–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0911; FRL–9398–9] 

Quinoxyfen; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for residues of quinoxyfen in 

or on multiple commodities which are 

identified and discussed later in this 

document. This regulation also deletes 

the established tolerances in or on 

grape; pepper, bell; pepper, nonbell; and 

strawberry as they will be superseded 

by crop group/subgroup tolerances 

established by this tolerance rule. The 

Interregional Research Project Number 4 

(IR–4) Project Headquarters requested 

these tolerances under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

September 18, 2013. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before November 18, 2013, 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: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0911, is 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West 

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 is (202) 566–1744, and 

the telephone number for the OPP 

Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois 

Rossi, Registration Division (7505P), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 305–7090; email address: 

RDFRNotices@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. 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. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of EPA’s tolerance 

regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through 

the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR 

site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/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, 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–2012–0911 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 18, 2013. 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– 

2012–0911, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be CBI or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on commenting 

or visiting the docket, along with more 

information about dockets generally, is 

available at 

http://www.epa.gov/dockets. 

II. Summary of Petitioned-for Tolerance 

In the Federal Register of Wednesday, 

January 16, 2013 (78 FR 3377) (FRL– 

9375–4), EPA issued a document 

pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 

U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing 

of a pesticide petition (PP 2E8117) by 

IR–4 Project Headquarters, 500 College 

Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 

08540. The petition requested that 40 

CFR 180.588 be amended by 

establishing tolerances for residues of 

the fungicide quinoxyfen, 5,7-dichloro4-(4-fluorophenoxy)quinoline, in or on 

berry, low growing, subgroup 13–07G at 

0.90 parts per million (ppm); fruiting, 

small, vine climbing, except fuzzy 

kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F at 0.60 ppm 

and vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10 at 

1.7 ppm. In addition, the petition 

requested removal of established 

tolerances in or on grape at 0.60 ppm; 

strawberry at 0.90 ppm; pepper, bell at 

0.35 ppm; and pepper, nonbell at 1.7 

ppm, as these will be superseded upon 

approval of the proposed tolerances. 

That document referenced a summary of 

the petition prepared by Dow 

AgroSciences LLC, the registrant, which 

is available in the docket, http://

www.regulations.gov. There were no 

comments received in response to the 

notice of filing. 

EPA has revised proposed tolerance 

levels for several commodities and 

revised the quinoxyfen tolerance 

expression for all established 

commodities. The reasons for these 

changes are explained in Unit IV.C. 

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and 

Determination of Safety 

Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA 

allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the 

legal limit for a pesticide chemical 

residue in or on a food) only if EPA 

determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’ 

Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA 

defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES