75254 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

• does 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 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 state, 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 Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by February 10, 

2014. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposed 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 in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: November 25, 2013. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

40 CFR part 52 is 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. 

Subpart GG—New Mexico 

■ 2. Section 52.1620(c) is amended by 

revising the entry for Part 74 under the 

first table titled ‘‘EPA Approved New 

Mexico Regulations’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.1620 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA APPROVED NEW MEXICO REGULATIONS

State Citation Title/Subject 

State 

approval/ 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Comments 

New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20—Environment Protection Chapter 2—Air Quality 

*******

Part 74 ............................ Permits—Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration.

1/8/2013 12/11/2013 ....................

[Insert FR page number 

where document begins].

Revisions to 20.2.74.303(A) NMAC submitted 5/

23/2011, effective 6/3/2011, are NOT part of 

SIP. 

20.2.74.303 NMAC submitted 12/1/2010, effective 1/1/2011, remains SIP approved (6/20/

2011, 76 FR 43149). 

Revisions to 20.2.74.7(AZ)(2)(a) NMAC submitted 1/8/2013, effective 2/6/2013, are NOT 

part of SIP. 

20.2.74.7(AZ)(2)(a) NMAC submitted 5/23/2011, 

effective 6/3/2011, remains SIP approved. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–29448 Filed 12–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0832; FRL–9398–1] 

Prohydrojasmon; 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 the biochemical 

pesticide prohydrojasmon (PDJ) when 

used as a plant growth regulator in or on 

apple and grape pre-harvest, in 

accordance with label directions and 

good agricultural practices. This 

regulation eliminates the need to 

establish a maximum permissible level 

for residues of PDJ. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

December 11, 2013. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 75255 

on or before February 10, 2014, 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–2012–0832, 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: 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. 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 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 section 408(g) of the Federal 

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 

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–2012–0832 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 February 10, 2014. 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– 

2012–0832, 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 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 January 9, 

2013, (78 FR 1798) (FRL–9374–2), EPA 

issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA 

section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), 

announcing the filing of a pesticide 

tolerance petition (PP 2F8056) by Fine 

Agrochemicals Ltd. (the petitioner), on 

behalf of SciReg, Inc., 12733 Director’s 

Loop, Woodbridge, VA 22192. The 

petition requested that 40 CFR 180.1299 

be amended by establishing an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of PDJ, propyl-3- 

oxo-2-pentylcyclo-pentylacetate, in or 

on red apples and grapes. The notice 

referenced a summary of the petition 

prepared by the petitioner, which is 

available in the docket, http://

www.regulations.gov. No substantive 

comments were received in response to 

the notice of filing. 

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

allows EPA to establish an exemption 

from the requirement of 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 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 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
75256 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

available information concerning the 

variability of the sensitivities of major 

identifiable subgroups of consumers, 

including infants and children. 

A. Overview of PDJ 

PDJ is a synthetically made plant 

growth regulator that is structurally 

similar and functionally identical to 

jasmonic acid (JA), a naturally occurring 

plant regulator present in all vascular 

plants. The jasmonates, of which JA is 

a member, is a group of plant hormones 

involved in multiple stages of plant 

development and defense, including the 

ability to stimulate fruit ripening. The 

highest levels of naturally occurring JA 

are found in actively growing plant 

tissues such as leaves, flowers, and 

developing fruit, thus JA has always 

been a natural component of diets 

containing plant materials. To date, 

there have been no reported toxic effects 

associated with the consumption of JA 

in fruits and vegetables. See the 

document entitled, ‘‘Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) 

Considerations for Prohydrojasmon 

(PDJ), propyl-3-oxo-2-pentylcyclopentylacetate’’ (July 16, 2013), available 

in the docket for this action. 

B. Biochemical Pesticide Toxicology 

Data Requirements 

All applicable mammalian toxicology 

data requirements supporting the 

petition to exempt residues of PDJ from 

the requirement of a tolerance in or on 

apple and grape pre-harvest have been 

fulfilled. No toxic endpoints were 

established and no significant 

toxicological effects were observed in 

any of the acute toxicity studies. In 

addition, studies submitted indicate that 

PDJ is not genotoxic, has no subchronic 

toxic effects, and is not a developmental 

toxicant. There are no known effects on 

endocrine systems via oral, dermal, or 

inhalation routes of exposure. For a full 

discussion of the data upon which EPA 

relied, and its human health risk 

assessment based on that data, please 

refer to the document entitled, ‘‘Federal 

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) 

Considerations for Prohydrojasmon 

(PDJ), propyl-3-oxo-2-pentylcyclopentylacetate’’ (July 16, 2013). This 

document, as well as other relevant 

information, is available in the docket 

for this action as described under 

ADDRESSES. 

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). 

A. Dietary Exposure 

The proposed use patterns may result 

in dietary exposure to PDJ; however, 

exposure to residues on treated fruit or 

foliage is not expected to exist above 

background levels of naturally occurring 

JA (see document entitled, ‘‘Federal 

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) 

Considerations for Prohydrojasmon 

(PDJ), propyl-3-oxo-2-pentylcyclopentylacetate’’ (July 16, 2013)). No 

significant exposure via drinking water 

is expected; PDJ is applied at low rates, 

rapidly degrades, and is not directly 

applied to water. Should exposure 

occur, however, minimal to no risk is 

expected for the general population, 

including infants and children, due to 

the low toxicity of PDJ as demonstrated 

in the data submitted and evaluated by 

the Agency, as fully explained in the 

document entitled, ‘‘Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) 

Considerations for Prohydrojasmon 

(PDJ), propyl-3-oxo-2-pentylcyclopentylacetate’’ (July 16, 2013). 

B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure 

Non-occupational exposure is not 

expected because PDJ is not approved 

for residential uses. The active 

ingredient is applied directly to 

commodities and degrades rapidly. 

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 or exemption, 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 determined PDJ to have a 

non-toxic mode of action, and the 

compound does not appear to produce 

any toxic metabolites. For the purposes 

of this tolerance action, therefore, the 

EPA has assumed that PDJ does not 

have a common mechanism of toxicity 

with other substances. Following from 

this, the EPA concludes that there are 

no cumulative effects associated with 

PDJ that need to be considered. For 

information regarding EPA’s efforts to 

determine which chemicals have a 

common mechanism of toxicity and to 

evaluate the cumulative effects of such 

chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at http:// 

www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative. 

VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. 

Population, Infants and Children 

Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA 

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 ten-fold (10×) 

margin of 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 safety will be safe for infants 

and children. This additional margin of 

safety is commonly referred to as the 

Food Quality Protection Act Safety 

Factor. In applying this provision, EPA 

either retains the default value of 10×, 

or uses a different additional or no 

safety factor when reliable data are 

available to support a different 

additional or no safety factor. 

As part of its qualitative assessment, 

EPA evaluated the available toxicity and 

exposure data on PDJ and considered its 

validity, completeness, and reliability, 

as well as the relationship of this 

information to human risk. EPA 

considers the toxicity database to be 

complete and has identified no residual 

uncertainty with regard to prenatal and 

postnatal toxicity or exposure. No 

hazard was identified based on the 

available studies, as fully explained in 

the document entitled, ‘‘Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) 

Considerations for Prohydrojasmon 

(PDJ), propyl-3-oxo-2-pentylcyclopentylacetate’’ (July 16, 2013). Based 

upon its evaluation, EPA concludes that 

there are no threshold effects of concern 

to infants, children, or adults when PDJ 

is applied as a plant growth regulator to 

stimulate fruit ripening, and used in 

accordance with label directions and 

good agricultural practices. As a result, 

EPA concludes that no additional 

margin of exposure (safety) is necessary. 

VII. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

An analytical method is not required 

for enforcement purposes for the same 

reasons that EPA did not apply an extra 

10× margin of safety, discussed in Unit 

VI., and because EPA is establishing an 

exemption from the requirement of a 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 75257 

tolerance without any numerical 

limitation. 

B. International Residue Limits 

In making its tolerance decisions, EPA 

seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with 

international standards whenever 

possible, consistent with U.S. food 

safety standards and agricultural 

practices. EPA considers the 

international maximum residue limits 

(MRLs) established by the Codex 

Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as 

required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). 

The Codex Alimentarius is a joint 

United Nations Food and Agriculture 

Organization/World Health 

Organization food standards program, 

and it is recognized as an international 

food safety standards-setting 

organization in trade agreements to 

which the United States is a party. EPA 

may establish a tolerance that is 

different from a Codex MRL; however, 

FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that 

EPA explain the reasons for departing 

from the Codex level. 

The Codex has not established a MRL 

for PDJ. 

VIII. Conclusion 

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 PDJ. EPA is 

therefore establishing an exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance for 

residues of PDJ when used as a plant 

growth regulator in or on apple and 

grape pre-harvest, in accordance with 

label directions and good agricultural 

practices. 

IX. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This final rule establishes 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 final rule 

has been exempted from review under 

Executive Order 12866, this final rule 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 final rule 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 tolerance 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 final rule 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 final rule. 

In addition, this final rule does not 

impose any enforceable duty or contain 

any unfunded mandate as described 

under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 

1501 et seq.). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(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 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: October 25, 2013. 

Steven Bradbury, 

Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Revise § 180.1299 to read as 

follows: 

§ 180.1299 Prohydrojasmon; exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance. 

An exemption from the requirement 

of a tolerance is established for residues 

of the biochemical pesticide 

prohydrojasmon (PDJ), propyl-3-oxo-2- 

pentylcyclo-pentylacetate, when used as 

a plant growth regulator in or on apple 

and grape pre-harvest, in accordance 

with label directions and good 

agricultural practices. 

[FR Doc. 2013–29561 Filed 12–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0295; FRL–9902–17] 

Flutriafol; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for residues of flutriafol in or 

on coffee, bean, green and coffee, 

instant. Cheminova A/S, c/o Cheminova 

Inc. requested these tolerances under 

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 

Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

December 11, 2013. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before February 10, 2014, 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–2013–0295, is 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES