1798 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0832; FRL–9374–2] 

Receipt of a Pesticide Petition Filed for 

Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or 

on Various Commodities 

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 February 8, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0832, 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 

Confidential Business Information (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.htm. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gina 

Burnett, Biopesticides and Pollution 

Prevention Division (7511P), Office of 

Pesticide Programs, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; 

telephone number: (703) 605–0513; 

email address: burnett.gina@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. 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 submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the document by docket ID 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

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 

pesticide petition described in this 

document contains data or information 

prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); 

however, EPA has not fully evaluated 

the sufficiency of the submitted data at 

this time or whether the data supports 

granting of the pesticide petition. After 

considering the public comments, EPA 

intends to evaluate whether and what 

action may be warranted. Additional 

data may be needed before EPA can 

make a final determination on this 

pesticide petition. 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a 

summary of the petition that is the 

subject of this document, prepared by 

the petitioner, is included in a docket 

EPA has created for this rulemaking. 

The docket for this petition is available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov. As 

specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 

(21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3)), EPA is 

publishing notice of the petition so that 

the public has an opportunity to 

comment on this request for the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticides in 

or on food commodities. Further 

information on the petition may be 

obtained through the petition summary 

referenced in this unit. 

PP 2F8056. Fine Agrochemicals Ltd. 

c/o SciReg, Inc., 12733 Director’s Loop, 

Woodbridge, VA 22192, requests to 

amend an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.1299 for residues of the plant 

growth regulator prohydrojasmon (PDJ), 

propyl-3-oxo-2-pentylcycloVerDate Mar<15>2010 16:31 Jan 08, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM 09JAP1

srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules 1799 

pentylacetate, in or on red apples and 

grapes. The petitioner believes no 

analytical method is needed because 

this request is to establish a permanent 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance and, therefore, an analytical 

method is not required. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Agricultural commodities, Feed 

additives, Food additives, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: December 12, 2012. 

Sheryl K. Reilly, 

Acting Director, Biopesticides and Pollution 

Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide 

Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00272 Filed 1–8–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 20 

[PS Docket No. 11–153; PS Docket No. 10– 

255; FCC 12–149] 

Next Generation 911; Text-to-911; Next 

Generation 911 Applications 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications 

Commission proposes to amend its rules 

by requiring all wireless carriers and 

providers of ‘‘interconnected’’ text 

messaging applications to support the 

ability of consumers to send text 

messages to 911 in all areas throughout 

the nation where 911 Public Safety 

Answering Points (PSAPs) are also 

prepared to receive the texts. In 

addition, to inform consumers and 

prevent confusion, the Commission 

proposes to require all wireless carriers 

and interconnected text messaging 

providers to send automated ‘‘bounce 

back’’ error messages to consumers 

attempting to text 911 when the service 

is not available. 

DATES: Comment Date for Section III.A: 

January 29, 2013. 

Reply Comment Date for Section III.A: 

February 8, 2013. 

Comment Date for Other Sections: 

March 11, 2013. 

Reply Comment Date for Other 

Sections: April 9, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to 

Federal Communications Commission, 

445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 

20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Aaron Garza, Attorney Advisor, (202) 

418–1175. For additional information 

concerning the Paperwork Reduction 

Act information collection requirements 

contained in this document, contact 

Judith Boley-Herman, (202) 418–0214, 

or send an email to PRA@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Further 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in PS 

Docket No. 11–153, PS Docket No. 10– 

255, FCC 12–149, released on December 

13, 2012. The full text of this document 

is available for public inspection during 

regular business hours in the FCC 

Reference Center, Room CY–A257, 445 

12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554, 

or online at http://www.fcc.gov/ 

document/text-911-further-noticeproposed-rulemaking. 

I. Introduction 

1. Wireless consumers are 

increasingly using text messaging as a 

means of everyday communication on a 

variety of platforms. The legacy 911 

system, however, does not support text 

messaging as a means of reaching 

emergency responders, leading to 

potential consumer confusion and even 

to possible danger. As consumer use of 

carrier-based and third party-provided 

texting applications expands and 

evolves, the 911 system must also 

evolve to enable wireless consumers to 

reach 911 in those emergency situations 

where a voice call is not feasible or 

appropriate. 

2. In this Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, we propose rules that will 

enable Americans to send text messages 

to 911 (text-to-911) and that will 

educate and inform consumers 

regarding the future availability and 

appropriate use of text-to-911. 

Specifically, we propose to require all 

wireless carriers and providers of 

‘‘interconnected’’ text messaging 

applications to support the ability of 

consumers to send text messages to 911 

in all areas throughout the nation where 

911 Public Safety Answering Points 

(PSAPs) are also prepared to receive the 

texts. In addition, to inform consumers 

and prevent confusion, we propose to 

require all wireless carriers and 

interconnected text messaging providers 

to send automated ‘‘bounce back’’ error 

messages to consumers attempting to 

text 911 when the service is not 

available. 

3. Our proposals build on the recently 

filed voluntary commitment by the four 

largest wireless carriers—in an 

agreement with the National Emergency 

Number Association (NENA), and the 

Association of Public Safety 

Communications Officials (APCO) 

(Carrier-NENA–APCO Agreement)—to 

make text-to-911 available to their 

customers by May 15, 2014, and to 

provide automatic bounce back 

messages across their networks by June 

30, 2013. The baseline requirements we 

propose in this Further Notice are 

modeled on the Carrier-NENA–APCO 

Agreement, and we seek comment on 

whether all carriers, including regional, 

small and rural carriers, and all 

‘‘interconnected text’’ providers can 

achieve these milestones in the same or 

similar timeframes. To allow for the 

possibility of implementing our bounce 

back proposal by June 30, 2013, we are 

seeking comment on this portion of the 

Further Notice on an accelerated basis. 

Moreover, in light of the importance of 

these issues, we intend to resolve 

promptly the questions we raise in the 

remaining portion of the Further Notice 

in 2013. 

4. Our proposal to add text capability 

to the 911 system will vastly enhance 

the system’s accessibility for over 40 

million Americans with hearing or 

speech disabilities. It will also provide 

a vital and lifesaving alternative to the 

public in situations where 911 voice 

service is unavailable or placing a voice 

call could endanger the caller. Indeed, 

as recent history has shown, text 

messaging is often the most reliable 

means of communications during 

disasters where voice calls cannot be 

completed due to capacity constraints. 

Finally, implementing text-to-911 

represents a crucial next step in the 

ongoing transition of the legacy 911 

system to a Next Generation 911 

(NG911) system that will support not 

only text but will also enable consumers 

to send photos, videos, and data to 

PSAPs, enhancing the information 

available to first responders for 

assessing and responding to 

emergencies. 

5. Our proposed approach to text-to911 is also based on the presumption 

that consumers in emergency situations 

should be able to communicate using 

the text applications they are most 

familiar with from everyday use. 

Currently, the most commonly used 

texting technology is Short Message 

Service (SMS), which is available, 

familiar, and widely used by virtually 

all wireless consumers. In the CarrierNENA–APCO Agreement, the four major 

carriers have indicated that they intend 

to use SMS-based text for their initial 

text-to-911 deployments, and we expect 

other initial deployments to be similarly 

SMS-based. 

6. At the same time, we do not 

propose to limit our focus to SMS-based 

text. As a result of the rapid 

proliferation of smartphones and other 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with