Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 35 / Monday, February 23, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 9387 

(4) The restrictions described in 

paragraph (b) of this section are in effect 

24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 

(c) Enforcement. The regulations in 

this section shall be enforced by the 

Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard 

Station Mayport and/or such persons or 

agencies as he/she may designate. 

Dated: February 18, 2015. 

Edward E. Belk, Jr., 

Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division, 

Directorate of Civil Works. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03625 Filed 2–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 174 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0457; FRL–9922–53] 

Temporary Exemption From the 

Requirement of a Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a 

temporary exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of the VNT1 protein in potato when 

used as a plant-incorporated protectant 

in accordance with the terms of 

Experimental Use Permit (EUP) No. 

8917–EUP–2. J.R. Simplot Company 

submitted a petition to EPA under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA), requesting the temporary 

tolerance exemption. This regulation 

eliminates the need to establish a 

maximum permissible level for residues 

of VNT1 protein in potato. The 

temporary tolerance exemption expires 

on December 31, 2015. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

February 23, 2015. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before April 24, 2015, 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–2014–0457, 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), West William 

Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 

20460–0001. The Public Reading Room 

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

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room 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: 

Robert McNally, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), 

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 174 

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–2014–0457 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 April 24, 2015. 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– 

2014–0457, 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. Background and Statutory Findings 

In the Federal Register of October 24, 

2014 (79 FR 63594) (FRL–9916–03), 

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 4F8251) 

by J.R. Simplot Company, 5369 W. 

Irving St., Boise, ID 83706. In the 

Federal Register of December 17, 2014 

(79 FR 75107) (FRL–9918–90), EPA 

inadvertently reannounced the filing of 

this same petition. The petition 

requested that 40 CFR part 174 be 

amended by establishing a temporary 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of Potato Late 

Blight Resistance protein VTN1 in or on 

potato. Those documents referenced a 

summary of the petition prepared by the 

petitioner J.R. Simplot Company, which 

is available in the docket, http://

www.regulations.gov. Comments were 

received, and EPA’s response to these 

comments is discussed in Unit VII.B. 

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.’’ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
9388 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 35 / Monday, February 23, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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), which require 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. . . .’’ Additionally, 

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

that 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.’’ 

EPA performs a number of analyses to 

determine the risks from aggregate 

exposure to pesticide residues. First, 

EPA determines the toxicity of 

pesticides. Second, EPA examines 

exposure to the pesticide through food, 

drinking water, and through other 

exposures that occur as a result of 

pesticide use in residential settings. 

III. Toxicological Profile 

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. Product Characterization Overview 

The gene that confers Potato Late 

Blight Resistance (Rpi-vnt1) is found 

naturally in wild potato varieties. When 

Rpi-vnt1 is expressed in potato, the 

VNT1 protein it encodes confers broadspectrum resistance to Phytophthora 

infestans, late blight of potato. VNT1 

activates a signal transduction pathway 

that leads to localized plant cell death 

or the hypersensitive response. Death is 

restricted to a few plant cells and limits 

the growth and spread of Phytophthora 

infestans throughout the rest of the 

plant. 

Although people have not been 

exposed to the VNT1 protein in potatoes 

(because it is currently only found in 

wild potato varieties), humans have 

been exposed to the VNT1 protein in 

tomatoes. In addition to conferring 

resistance to late blight in potato, the 

VNT1 protein also confers resistance to 

late blight in tomatoes. Both potato and 

tomato, which both belong to the 

Solanum genus, are affected by late 

blight and have developed resistance 

through the same VNT1 protein. 

In addition, the VNT1 protein found 

in wild potatoes and tomatoes is similar 

to several other protein sequences in 

tomatoes. The protein in tomato species 

most closely related to the VNT1 protein 

(over 90% similarity) introduced into 

potato is called Tm-2 or Tm22, which is 

a protein bred into tomato for resistance 

to the tomato mosaic virus. 

B. Mammalian Toxicity and 

Allergenicity Assessment 

Since the VNT1 protein is not 

detectable by current methodologies and 

attempts to isolate or produce the VNT1 

protein were not successful, no toxicity 

testing was performed with either plant 

purified protein or protein produced in 

a surrogate organism. Rather, the 

Agency has reviewed a bioinformatics 

analysis of the allergenic and toxic 

potential of the VNT1 protein and on 

similar proteins to which humans are 

currently and regularly exposed through 

ingestion of edible plants. The Agency 

has identified known allergens found in 

potatoes and tomatoes, and the analysis 

shows that VNT1 protein does not have 

any similarity to any known allergens. 

The Agency has not identified any 

other potential toxicity with the VNT1 

protein. Although some proteins may 

have toxic properties, those proteins are 

not found in tomato or potato, and the 

VNT1 protein does not have any 

similarity to those proteins. 

Furthermore, consumers have been 

exposed previously to the VNT1 protein 

in tomatoes. Also, consumers have been 

exposed to the very similar Tm-2 

protein in tomato. Many tomato mosaic 

virus resistant tomato varieties are 

readily available and grown in the U.S. 

for fresh market tomato production and 

are widely consumed. Since no health 

or toxicity issues have been raised in 

tomato containing the Tm-2 protein, the 

Agency does not expect any toxicity to 

be associated with the VNT1 protein in 

potato. 

Therefore, EPA concludes that VNT1 

protein is not likely to pose any toxicity 

or cause any allergenicity based on the 

following: 

1. The VNT1 protein has been a 

component of the human diet from 

ingestion of tomatoes for a long time. 

2. The VNT1 protein is similar to 

other proteins to which people are 

regularly exposed in their diet without 

adverse effect. 

3. The VNT1 protein is not similar to 

any known allergens. 

IV. Aggregate Exposures 

In examining aggregate exposure, 

FFDCA section 408 directs EPA to 

consider available information 

concerning exposures from the pesticide 

residue in food and all other nonoccupational exposures, including 

drinking water from ground water or 

surface water and exposure through 

pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or 

buildings (residential and other indoor 

uses). 

The Agency has considered available 

information on the aggregate exposure 

levels of consumers (and major 

identifiable subgroups of consumers) to 

the pesticide chemical residue and to 

other related substances. These 

considerations include dietary exposure 

under the tolerance exemption and all 

other tolerances or exemptions in effect 

for the residues of plant-incorporated 

protectant, and exposure from nonoccupational sources. 

The Agency expects consumers to be 

exposed to the VNT1 protein through 

potatoes containing the plantincorporated protectant derived from 

the Rpi-vnt1 gene and to other potatoes 

and tomatoes containing the gene 

naturally. Since this protein will be 

directly incorporated into the potato in 

a plant-incorporated protectant, the 

Agency does not expect any exposure 

through drinking water or through 

inhalation or dermal routes of exposure. 

The Agency also does not expect any 

non-occupational (i.e., other residential) 

exposure to the VNT1 protein since 

there are no residential uses for this 

plant-incorporated protectant. 

V. Cumulative Effects From Substances 

With a Common Mechanism of Toxicity 

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.’’ 

EPA has concluded that the VNT1 

protein in potato does not have a toxic 

mode of action and thus does not share 

a common mechanism of toxicity with 

other substances; therefore, section 

408(b)(2)(D)(v)) does not apply. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 35 / Monday, February 23, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 9389 

VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. 

Population, Infants and Children 

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

that, in considering the establishment of 

a tolerance or tolerance exemption for a 

pesticide chemical residue, EPA shall 

assess the available information about 

consumption patterns among infants 

and children, special susceptibility of 

infants and children to pesticide 

chemical residues, and the cumulative 

effects on infants and children of the 

residues and other substances with a 

common mechanism of toxicity. In 

addition, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) 

provides that EPA shall apply an 

additional tenfold (10X) margin of 

exposure (safety) for infants and 

children in the case of threshold effects 

to account for prenatal and postnatal 

toxicity and the completeness of the 

database on toxicity and exposure 

unless EPA determines that a different 

margin of exposure (safety) will be safe 

for infants and children. This additional 

margin of exposure (safety) is commonly 

referred to as the Food Quality 

Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). 

In applying this provision, EPA either 

retains the default value of 10X or uses 

a different additional safety factor when 

reliable data available to EPA support 

the choice of a different factor. 

Based on the information discussed in 

Unit III., EPA concludes that there are 

no threshold effects of concern to 

infants, children, or adults from 

exposure to the VNT1 protein. As a 

result, EPA concludes that no additional 

margin of exposure (safety) is necessary 

to protect infants and children and that 

not adding any additional margin of 

exposure (safety) will be safe for infants 

and children. 

Therefore, based on the discussion in 

Unit III and the supporting 

documentation, 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 the residues of 

VNT1 protein in potato when it is used 

as a plant-incorporated protectant. Such 

exposure includes all anticipated 

dietary exposures and all other 

exposures for which there is reliable 

information. 

VII. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

The Agency has determined that an 

analytical method is not required for 

enforcement purposes since the Agency 

is establishing a temporary exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance 

without any numerical limitation in 

association with use under EUP No.: 

8917–EUP–2. 

B. Response to Comments 

EPA received two comments relevant 

to this petition. 

It is unclear whether one commenter, 

which urged ‘‘no deregulation’’, had a 

general comment related to the Agency’s 

tolerance action for the VNT1 protein. 

EPA’s action is establishing a regulation 

that would exempt residues of the VNT1 

protein in potato from the requirement 

of a tolerance; the Agency does not 

consider such action to be a 

‘‘deregulation’’. EPA continues to 

regulate this pesticidal active ingredient 

through the FFDCA and the Federal 

Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide 

Act (FIFRA). To the extent the 

commenter is arguing generally that that 

pesticides, including plant-incorporated 

protectants, should be banned on 

agricultural crop, the comment appears 

to be directed at the underlying statute 

and not EPA’s implementation of it. 

However, the existing legal framework 

provided by section 408 of the FFDCA 

states that tolerances or exemptions may 

be set when the Agency determines that 

the pesticide meets the safety standard 

imposed by that statute. 

Another commenter raised issues in 

regards to pollen drift, soil health, and 

mammalian health for plantincorporated protectants. In this FFDCA 

action, the Agency has reviewed the 

food safety issues for this product and 

has concluded the product is safe for 

human/animal consumption. The 

potatoes with the VNT1 protein are safe 

for human consumption at levels likely 

to be found in these sources. The other 

issues raised by the commenter, pollen 

drift and soil health, are not relevant to 

this food safety determination made 

under FFDCA. However, EPA has 

considered these issues as part of its 

review of the EUP regulated under 

FIFRA. 

VIII. Conclusion 

The Agency 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 VNT1 protein in 

potato. Therefore, a temporary 

exemption is established for residues 

the VNT1 protein in potato. The 

experimental use permit (EUP No. 

8917–EUP–2) expires on December 31, 

2015, so EPA is establishing an 

expiration for this temporary tolerance 

of the same date. 

IX. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action establishes an exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance 

under FFDCA section 408(d) in 

response to a petition submitted to the 

Agency. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) has exempted these types 

of actions from review under Executive 

Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993). Because this action 

has been exempted from review under 

Executive Order 12866, this action is 

not subject to Executive Order 13211, 

entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive 

Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997). This action does not 

contain any information collections 

subject to OMB approval under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require 

any special considerations under 

Executive Order 12898, entitled 

‘‘Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994). 

Since tolerances and exemptions that 

are established on the basis of a petition 

under FFDCA section 408(d), such as 

the exemption in this final rule, do not 

require the issuance of a proposed rule, 

the requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.), do not apply. 

This action directly regulates growers, 

food processors, food handlers, and food 

retailers, not States or tribes, nor does 

this action alter the relationships or 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established by Congress 

in the preemption provisions of FFDCA 

section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency 

has determined that this action will not 

have a substantial direct effect on States 

or tribal governments, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States or tribal 

governments, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government or between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined 

that Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) and Executive Order 13175, 

entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply 

to this action. In addition, this action 

does not impose any enforceable duty or 

contain any unfunded mandate as 

described under Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 

1501 et seq.). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
9390 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 35 / Monday, February 23, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

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

X. Congressional Review Act 

Pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule 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. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 174 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: February 4, 2015. 

Kimberly Nesci, 

Chief, Microbial Pesticides Branch, 

Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention 

Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 174—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 174 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Add § 174.534 to subpart W to read 

as follows: 

§ 174.534 VNT1 protein in potato; 

temporary exemption from the requirement 

of a tolerance. 

Residues of VNT1 protein in potato 

are exempt from the requirement of a 

tolerance when the Rpi-vnt1 gene that 

expresses the VNT1 protein is used as 

a plant-incorporated protectant in 

potato in accordance with the terms of 

Experimental Use Permit No. 8917– 

EUP–2. This temporary exemption from 

the requirement of a tolerance expires 

on December 31, 2015. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03570 Filed 2–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0589; FRL–9922–82] 

Fomesafen; Pesticide Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a 

tolerance for residues of fomesafen in or 

on watermelon. Interregional Research 

Project Number 4 (IR–4) requested this 

tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). A final rule 

establishing a tolerance for residues of 

fomesafen on watermelon, among other 

commodities, was previously published 

in the Federal Register on November 1, 

2013, however, watermelon was not 

ultimately included in the table in the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

under section 180.433 paragraph (a). 

This document corrects that error. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

February 23, 2015. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before April 24, 2015, 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–2012–0589, 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), West William 

Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 

20460–0001. The Public Reading Room 

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

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room 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: 

Susan Lewis, Registration Division 

(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; main 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–2012–0589 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 April 24, 2015. 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– 

2012–0589, 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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES