Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 192 / Thursday, October 5, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 69039 

Voluntary Agreement, suspended the 

case schedule. See Notice of Identity of 

Petitioners and Case Scheduling Order 

(July 18, 2023). 

Section 115(d)(7)(D)(v) of the 

Copyright Act authorizes the Judges to 

approve and adopt a negotiated 

agreement that has been agreed to by the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective and the 

Digital Licensee Coordinator in lieu of a 

determination of the administrative 

assessment. An administrative 

assessment adopted under sec. 

115(d)(7)(D)(v) ‘‘shall apply to all digital 

music providers and significant 

nonblanket licensees engaged in 

covered activities during the period the 

administrative assessment is in effect.’’ 

Id. 

However, the Judges, in their 

discretion, may reject a proposed 

settlement for good cause shown. 17 

U.S.C. 115(d)(7)(D)(v) and 37 CFR 

355.6(d). Section 355.4(c)(4) of 37 CFR 

establishes a process for non-settling 

participants to comment on a proposed 

settlement and for the settling 

participants to respond. Because there 

were no non-settling participants in the 

instant proceeding, the proposed 

settlement was unopposed. Moreover, 

the participants explained to the Judges’ 

satisfaction how the Proposed 

Regulations comply with the provisions 

of the Copyright Act. See generally 

Voluntary Agreement. The Judges, 

finding no cause to reject the proposed 

settlement embodied in the Voluntary 

Agreement, hereby adopt it, and publish 

these final regulations implementing the 

settlement. 

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 390 

Copyright, Licensing and registration, 

Music, Phonorecords, Recordings, 

Royalties. 

Final Regulations 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Copyright Royalty Judges 

amend 37 CFR part 390 as follows: 

PART 390—AMOUNTS AND TERMS 

FOR ADMINISTRATIVE 

ASSESSMENTS TO FUND 

MECHANICAL LICENSING 

COLLECTIVE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 390 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 115, 801(b). 

§ 390.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend § 390.1 as follows: 

■ a. In the definition of ‘‘Annual 

Assessment’’ remove ‘‘2021’’ and add in 

its place ‘‘2023’’. 

■ b. Remove the definition of ‘‘Certified 

Minimum Fee Disclosure’’. 

■ 3. Amend § 390.2 by revising 

paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)(1) 

introductory text to read as follows: 

§ 390.2 Amount of assessments. 

(a) 2023 Annual Assessment. The 

Annual Assessment for the calendar 

year 2023 shall be in the amount of 

$32,900,000. 

(b) 2024 Annual Assessment. The 

Annual Assessment for the calendar 

year 2024 shall be in the amount of 

$39,050,000. 

(c) * * * (1) For the calendar year 

2025 and all subsequent years, the 

amount of the Annual Assessment will 

be automatically adjusted by increasing 

the amount of the Annual Assessment of 

the preceding calendar year by the 

lesser of: 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 390.3 by: 

■ a. In paragraph (b); 

■ i. Removing ‘‘2021’’ and adding in its 

place ‘‘2024’’; 

■ ii. Removing ‘‘2019’’ and adding in its 

place ‘‘2022’’; and 

■ iii. Removing ‘‘2020’’ and adding in 

its place ‘‘2023’’. 

■ b. Remove paragraph (c) and 

redesignate paragraphs (d) and (e) as 

paragraphs (c) and (d). 

■ c. Revise newly redesignated 

paragraph (c) introductory text. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 390.3 Annual minimum fees. 

* * * * * 

(c) Calculation by the MLC. The MLC 

will calculate each Licensee’s annual 

minimum fee based on usage reporting 

received from Licensees pursuant to 17 

U.S.C. 115(d)(4). The MLC shall send 

invoices for the appropriate annual 

minimum fee to each Licensee. 

Licensees shall pay the annual 

minimum fee invoices from the MLC by 

the later of: 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 390.4 as follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (b) remove the words 

‘‘, except that the calculation period for 

the Quarterly Allocation for the first and 

second quarters of 2021 shall be the 

same as for the annual minimum fee for 

the 2021 Annual Assessment, and shall 

be calculated based upon the 

information provided in the Certified 

Minimum Fee Disclosures, as required 

by this part.’’ 

■ b. Remove paragraph (c)(2)(i)(D) and 

redesignate paragraphs (c)(2)(i)(E) and 

(F) as (c)(2)(i)(D) and (E). 

■ c. Revise paragraph (h). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 390.4 Annual Assessment allocation and 

payment. 

* * * * * 

(h) 2023 Annual Assessment 

allocation and payment. The 2023 

Annual Assessment shall be paid in two 

separate processes: 

(1) The MLC will collect from 

Licensees the amount of $30,235,650 

pursuant to the standard procedures 

outlined in the other provisions of this 

part for collection of the 2023 Annual 

Assessment, including the collection of 

Annual Minimum Fees and Quarterly 

Allocations. 

(2) The MLC will collect from 

Allocated Licensees the amount of 

$2,664,350 through a separately 

invoiced, one-time collection, with no 

minimum fees applied. The amount 

shall be divided into two equal parts 

and allocated among Licensees using 

the formulas set forth in paragraphs 

(a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section. The 

calculation period shall be the first three 

months of 2023. The MLC may invoice 

for this collection at any time, with 

payment to be due no later than 45 days 

after receipt of the invoice from the 

MLC. 

Dated: September 25, 2023. 

David P. Shaw, 

Chief Copyright Royalty Judge. 

David R. Strickler, 

Copyright Royalty Judge. 

Steve Ruwe, 

Copyright Royalty Judge. 

Approved by: 

Carla D. Hayden, 

Librarian of Congress. 

[FR Doc. 2023–22179 Filed 10–4–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–72–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0269; FRL–10944–01– 

OCSPP] 

Ledprona Double-Stranded RNA; 

Exemption From the Requirement of a 

Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of Ledprona 

double-stranded (ds) RNA in or on 

potato when used as a foliar-applied 

insecticide for the selective control of 

Colorado potato beetle and in 

accordance with label directions and 

good agricultural practices. GreenLight 

Biosciences, Inc. submitted a petition to 

EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
69040 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 192 / Thursday, October 5, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance. This regulation eliminates the 

need to establish a maximum 

permissible level for residues of 

Ledprona dsRNA under FFDCA when 

used in accordance with this exemption. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

October 5, 2023. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before December 4, 2023, 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–2021–0269, is 

available online at https://

www.regulations.gov. Please review the 

visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Madison Le, Biopesticides and Pollution 

Prevention Division (7511M), Office of 

Pesticide Programs, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001; 

main telephone number: (703) 305– 

7090; email address: BPPDFRNotices@

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 40 CFR part 180 

through the Government Printing 

Office’s e-CFR site at https://

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

the OCSPP test guidelines referenced in 

this document electronically, please go 

to https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select 

‘‘Test Methods and Guidelines.’’ 

C. How can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

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

objection to any aspect of this regulation 

and may also request a hearing on those 

objections. You must file your objection 

or request a hearing on this regulation 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, you must 

identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2021–0269 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 December 4, 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– 

2021–0269, 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/contacts.html. 

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 and Statutory Findings 

In the Federal Register of June 28, 

2021 (86 FR 33922) (FRL–10025–08), 

EPA issued a document pursuant to 

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

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

pesticide tolerance petition (PP 1F8900) 

by GreenLight Biosciences, Inc., 200 

Boston Ave., Suite 1000, Medford, MA 

02155. The petition requested that 40 

CFR part 180 be amended by 

establishing an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of Ledprona dsRNA in or on all 

agricultural commodities and food 

products. That document referenced a 

summary of the petition prepared by the 

petitioner GreenLight Biosciences, Inc., 

which is available in the docket, https:// 

www.regulations.gov. There were no 

comments received in response to the 

notice of filing. 

Based upon review of the data 

supporting the petition and in 

accordance with its authority under 

FFDCA section 408(d)(4)(A)(i), EPA is 

establishing a tolerance exemption for 

residues of Ledprona dsRNA in or on 

potato only, rather than all agricultural 

commodities and food products as 

requested. The reasons for this change 

are explained in Unit III.C. 

In addition, EPA previously 

established a temporary tolerance 

exemption for residues of Ledprona 

dsRNA in or on potato (40 CFR 

180.1403; 88 FR 28427) in conjunction 

with Experimental Use Permit (EUP) 

No. 94614–EUP–1 issued to GreenLight 

BioSciences, Inc. in May 2023. The 

temporary tolerance exemption expires 

on April 30, 2025. Because this action 

establishes a permanent tolerance 

exemption for residues of Ledprona 

dsRNA in or on potato, EPA is removing 

the temporary tolerance exemption as 

no longer necessary. 

III. Final Rule 

A. EPA’s Safety Determination 

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

allows EPA to establish an exemption 

from the requirement for a tolerance (the 

legal limit for a pesticide chemical 

residue in or on a food) only if EPA 

determines that the exemption is ‘‘safe.’’ 

Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of 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 it does not 

include occupational exposure. 

Pursuant to FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 

in establishing or maintaining in effect 

an exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance, EPA must take into account 

the factors set forth in FFDCA section 

408(b)(2)(C) and (D). FFDCA section 

408(b)(2)(C) 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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 192 / Thursday, October 5, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 69041 

infants and children from aggregate 

exposure to the pesticide chemical 

residue. . . . ’’ Additionally, FFDCA 

section 408(b)(2)(D) requires that the 

Agency consider factors including 

‘‘available information concerning the 

cumulative effects of a particular 

pesticide’s residues’’ and ‘‘other 

substances that have a common 

mechanism of toxicity.’’ 

Consistent with FFDCA section 

408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the 

available scientific data and other 

relevant information in support of this 

action and considered its validity, 

completeness and reliability, and the 

relationship of this information to 

human risk. EPA has also considered 

available information concerning the 

variability of the sensitivities of major 

identifiable subgroups of consumers, 

including infants and children. A full 

explanation of the data upon which EPA 

relied and its risk assessment based on 

those data can be found within the 

document entitled ‘‘Final human health 

risk assessment, review of product 

characterization and manufacturing 

process for the new end-use product, 

CalanthaTM, containing 0.8% of the new 

active ingredient ‘‘Ledprona’’ dsRNA’’ 

(Human Health Risk Assessment). This 

document, as well as other relevant 

information, is available in the docket 

for this action at docket ID number 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0269. 

Ledprona (CAS# 2433753–68–3) 

consists of double-stranded ribonucleic 

acid (dsRNA) that induces mortality of 

the Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa 

decemlineata) via a gene silencing mode 

of action. When dsRNA is applied, it 

causes the inhibition (or silencing) of 

the gene product, messenger RNA 

(mRNA), preventing the translation of 

the mRNA to proteins. Ledprona dsRNA 

targets the Proteasome subunit beta 

type-5 (PSMB5) mRNA sequence in the 

Colorado potato beetle. PSMB5 mRNA 

encodes a protein that regulates proper 

folding of other proteins in the Colorado 

potato beetle. Once Ledprona is ingested 

by the Colorado potato beetle, over time 

the lack of PSMB5 mRNA leads to the 

reduction of the PSMB5 protein and 

ultimately causes mortality. 

Available data and scientific 

information have demonstrated that, 

with regard to humans, Ledprona 

presents no adverse effects of concern 

and exposure to the active ingredient 

will be insignificant. Dietary and 

drinking water exposure resulting from 

the proposed use is expected to be 

minimal due to the following factors: (1) 

the application rate is low (0.53 oz/acre/ 

calendar year); (2) residues of Ledprona 

dsRNA on food will be limited, as 

Ledprona dsRNA is a foliar insecticide 

and is expected to undergo rapid 

degradation due to microbes in the 

environment once applied; (3) mammals 

possess physiological barriers to dsRNA 

uptake (i.e., nucleases in saliva and the 

gastrointestinal tract, acidic conditions 

in the stomach, and presence of 

multiple membrane barriers); and (4) 

Ledprona dsRNA degrades rapidly in 

simulated gastric and intestinal fluids, 

including when combined with certain 

tank mix components (i.e., fungicides 

and insecticides commonly used on 

potatoes). This information allows EPA 

to rely on a well-established history of 

exposure to RNA molecules via food 

and supports the conclusion that dietary 

exposure from the use of the active 

ingredient will be negligible. 

With respect to dietary and drinking 

water hazards, submitted data 

demonstrate that Ledprona dsRNA is 

expected to pose minimal hazard. 

Ledprona dsRNA was found to have low 

toxicity via the oral route of exposure 

(EPA Toxicity Category IV). In addition, 

a bioinformatic analysis was conducted 

to evaluate the likelihood of off-target 

effects of the Ledprona dsRNA in 

humans in silico (i.e., by computer 

analysis of Ledprona RNA segments). 

This analysis identified two potential 

human transcripts as ‘‘off targets.’’ 

However, further analyses of these 

transcripts coupled with the specificity 

of Ledprona dsRNA to its target indicate 

that Ledprona is not expected to affect 

these genes in vivo, resulting in 

negligible hazard. 

Ledprona is not proposed for 

residential use and therefore a 

residential exposure assessment was not 

conducted. For non-occupational 

exposure, bystander exposure may 

occur post-application (i.e., contact with 

treated foliage or through spray drift of 

nearby treated areas). Due to the low 

application rate coupled with spray drift 

advisories and restrictions on product 

labels, exposure via contact with treated 

foliage and spray drift is considered to 

be negligible. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of 

FFDCA requires that, when considering 

whether to establish, modify, or revoke 

a tolerance, the Agency consider 

‘‘available information’’ concerning the 

cumulative effects of a particular 

pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other 

substances that have a common 

mechanism of toxicity.’’ No risk of 

cumulative toxicity/effects from 

Ledprona dsRNA has been identified as 

no toxicity has been shown for 

Ledprona dsRNA in the submitted 

studies. Therefore, EPA has not 

assumed that Ledprona dsRNA has a 

common mechanism of toxicity with 

other substances. Although FFDCA 

section 408(b)(2)(C) provides for an 

additional tenfold margin of safety for 

infants and children in the case of 

threshold effects, EPA has determined 

that there are no such effects due to the 

lack of toxicity of Ledprona dsRNA. As 

a result, an additional margin of safety 

for the protection of infants and 

children is unnecessary. 

Based upon the evaluation described 

above and in the Human Health Risk 

Assessment, EPA concludes that there is 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result to the U.S. population, including 

infants and children, from aggregate 

exposure to residues of Ledprona 

dsRNA. This includes all anticipated 

dietary exposures and all other 

exposures for which there is reliable 

information. The Agency has arrived at 

this conclusion based on the rapid 

degradation of the active ingredient in 

environmental and biological 

conditions, mammalian physiological 

barriers limiting the uptake of dsRNA, 

and the lack of effects observed in 

toxicity testing. 

B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

An analytical method is not required 

for enforcement purposes since the 

Agency is establishing an exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance 

without any numerical limitation. 

C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerance 

Exemption 

The petitioner requested that EPA 

establish a permanent tolerance 

exemption for residues of Ledprona 

dsRNA in or on all agricultural 

commodities and food products. EPA 

previously established a temporary 

tolerance exemption for residues of 

Ledprona dsRNA in or on potato in 

conjunction with EUP No. 94614–EUP– 

1. The exposure analysis and evaluation 

of additional data to establish this 

permanent tolerance exemption is based 

in part upon the specificity of Ledprona 

dsRNA to its target organism, the 

Colorado potato beetle, and the 

proposed use of Ledprona dsRNA on 

potatoes. No other use of Ledprona 

dsRNA on other agricultural 

commodities or food products has been 

proposed. As a result, EPA has not 

assessed whether use of Ledprona 

dsRNA on commodities other than 

potatoes would result in the same 

dietary exposures described in the 

current evaluation. Consequently, the 

permanent tolerance exemption for 

Ledprona dsRNA residues that EPA is 

granting in this action varies from what 

the petitioner sought and is limited to 

residues of Ledprona dsRNA in or on 

potato when used as a foliar-applied 

insecticide for the selective control of 

Colorado potato beetle and in 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
69042 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 192 / Thursday, October 5, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

accordance with label directions and 

good agricultural practices. 

D. Conclusion 

Based on the conclusions detailed in 

Unit III.A. and the Human Health Risk 

Assessment, EPA concludes that there is 

a reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result to the U.S. population, including 

infants and children, from aggregate 

exposure to residues of Ledprona 

dsRNA. Therefore, an exemption is 

established for residues of Ledprona 

dsRNA in or on potato when used as a 

foliar-applied insecticide for the 

selective control of Colorado potato 

beetle and in accordance with label 

directions and good agricultural 

practices. In addition, EPA is replacing 

the previously established temporary 

tolerance exemption for Ledprona 

dsRNA (40 CFR 180.1403) with this 

permanent tolerance exemption. 

IX. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executiveorders#influence. 

A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and 14094: 

Modernizing Regulatory Review 

This action is exempt from review by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under Executive Orders 12866, 

October 4, 1993 (58 FR 51735), as 

amended by Executive Order 14094 (88 

FR 21879, April 11, 2023), because it 

establishes or modifies a pesticide 

tolerance or a tolerance exemption 

under FFDCA section 408, and also 

applies to tolerance revocations for 

which extraordinary circumstances do 

not exist. 

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. 

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, August 10, 1999 (64 FR 

43255) 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, November 9, 2000 (65 FR 

67249), 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 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 

1997) because it is not a significant 

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

Executive Order 12866, 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 finalizes a tolerance action 

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 this final tolerance action. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, May 22, 2001 (66 FR 

28355), 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. EPA has considered the 

safety risks for the pesticide subject to 

this rulemaking and in the context of 

the tolerance action 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, lowincome 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. 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

This action is subject to the CRA, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA will submit 

a rule report to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. This action is not 

a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 192 / Thursday, October 5, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 69043 

Dated: September 29, 2023. 

Edward Messina, 

Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the 

preamble, 40 CFR chapter I is 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. Revise § 180.1403 to subpart D to 

read as follows: 

§ 180.1403 Ledprona double-stranded RNA 

(CAS# 2433753–68–3); exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance. 

An exemption from the requirement 

of a tolerance is established for residues 

of Ledprona dsRNA in or on potato 

when used as a foliar-applied 

insecticide for the selective control of 

Colorado potato beetle and in 

accordance with label directions and 

good agricultural practices. 

[FR Doc. 2023–22199 Filed 10–4–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Part 175 

[Docket No. USCG–2023–0243] 

RIN 1625–AC88 

DUKW Amphibious Passenger Vessels 

Correction 

In rule document 2023–19421, 

appearing on pages 62295–62301 in the 

issue of Monday, September 11, 2023, 

make the following correction: 

PART 175—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

[Corrected] 

■ On page 62300, in the third column, 

beginning in the second line from the 

bottom of the page and continuing into 

the first three lines, in the first column 

of page 62301, ‘‘Authority: 46 U.S.C. 

2103, 3205, 3306, 3703; Pub. L. 103– 

206, 107 Stat. 2439; 49 U.S.C. App. 

1804; DHS Delegation 00170.1, Revision 

No. 01.2, paragraph (II)(92)(a); § 175.900 

also issued under 44 U.S.C. 3507.’’ 

should read ‘‘Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2103, 

3205, 3306, 3703; Pub. L. 103–206, 107 

Stat. 2439; 49 U.S.C. 5103; DHS 

Delegation 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3, 

paragraph (II)(92)(a); § 175.900 also 

issued under 44 U.S.C. 3507.’’ 

[FR Doc. C1–2023–19421 Filed 10–4–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 0099–10–P 

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION 

SAFETY BOARD 

49 CFR Part 803 

[Docket No.: NTSB–2023–0006] 

RIN 3147–AA27 

Official Seal Description 

AGENCY: National Transportation Safety 

Board (NTSB). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The National Transportation 

Safety Board (NTSB) is amending its 

regulatory description of the agency’s 

seal. Since the seal’s inception, the 

agency has utilized various versions of 

the seal. For consistency, the agency is 

updating the regulation and codifying 

current agency practice. These updates 

will provide a revised graphical 

representation of the seal. Additionally, 

the NTSB is including non-substantive 

technical amendments throughout part 

803 due to recent internal organizational 

changes and a typographical error 

reflected in the agency’s mailing 

address. Since publishing the notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM), no 

comments have been received. 

DATES: The rule is effective November 6, 

2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William T. (Tom) McMurry, Jr., General 

Counsel, (202) 314–6080, rulemaking@

ntsb.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

In 1975, the NTSB adopted an official 

seal as authorized by the Independent 

Safety Board Act of 1974 (Act), and 

codified the seal in part 803 of its 

regulations titled ‘‘Official Seal.’’ 40 FR 

30232 (July 17, 1975). The adoption at 

that time marked the NTSB’s status as 

an independent Federal agency. 43 FR 

36454 (Aug. 17, 1978). The original seal 

design was that of a triskelion, which 

was later replaced by the American bald 

eagle as set forth in the NTSB’s final 

rule. 43 FR 36454. The NTSB explained 

that the eagle was ‘‘adopted in the 

interest of ready recognition of the 

Board’s status as an independent agency 

of the Federal Government charged with 

the investigation of transportation 

accidents.’’ Id. The agency continued, 

‘‘it is imperative that Board officials be 

readily recognized as agents of the U.S. 

Government . . . .’’ Id. 

Over thirty years later, the NTSB 

published its Plan for Retrospective 

Analysis of Existing Rules per two 

Executive orders that altogether advised 

agencies to conduct such an analysis. 77 

FR 37865, 37866 (June 25, 2012). After 

reviewing public comments, the NTSB 

subsequently announced its plan to 

update the agency’s regulations, which 

included part 803. 78 FR 1193 (Jan. 8, 

2013). However, in the final rule, the 

NTSB ultimately amended certain 

sections of part 803, but did not revise 

the description of the seal found in 

§ 803.1. See 81 FR 75729 (Nov. 1, 2016). 

Thus, the NTSB’s current seal has been 

in effect for more than 40 years. 

On July 6, 2023, the agency issued an 

NPRM announcing its intent to amend 

its regulatory description of the NTSB’s 

seal by updating the regulation and 

codifying current agency practice. 88 FR 

43070 (July 6, 2023). The NTSB received 

no comments to date and is issuing this 

final rule as a result. 

II. Changes to § 803.1 

Since the last revision of § 803.1 in 

August 1978, the NTSB has utilized 

various versions of the seal within the 

agency. For consistency, the NTSB is 

codifying what has evolved as standard 

agency practice. This change to update 

§ 803.1 focuses on additional options for 

background colors and will provide a 

revised graphical representation of the 

seal. 

While respecting the current NTSB 

seal, the agency is slightly modifying 

the design to make the seal digitally 

applicable. For example, the digital 

version of the current seal alters in 

appearance when applied to the NTSB 

uniform; specifically, the current font 

changes when the seal is affixed to 

clothing. Thus, the update to the design 

optimizes the seal, making it compatible 

with digital platforms. 

Over the years, various versions of the 

seal have been recognized within the 

agency, but have never been codified; 

that recognition is now reflected in this 

final rule. The agency clarifies that 

when the full color seal is used in print 

or digital media, the seal must be in a 

white circle. When the full color seal is 

embroidered on the official NTSB 

uniform, the seal’s background color 

must be that of the material of the 

uniform. 

Also, this final rule updates the 

regulatory description to reflect modern 

times. The NTSB will now use genderneutral language to refer to the eagle. 

Further, the agency will replace the 

Latin terms ‘‘dexter’’ and ‘‘sinister’’ with 

‘‘right’’ and ‘‘left’’, respectively. 

Additionally, the minor alteration of 

the NTSB’s eagle will be more 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1