Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 4559 

www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can 

view this document, as well as all other 

documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Portable Document Format 

(PDF). To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. You may also 

access documents of the Department 

published in the Federal Register by 

using the article search feature at 

www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, 

through the advanced search feature at 

this site, you can limit your search to 

documents published by the 

Department. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Numbers: 84.007 Federal Supplemental 

Educational Opportunity Grant Program; 

84.032 Federal Family Education Loan 

Program; 84.032 Federal PLUS Program; 

84.033 Federal Work Study Program; 84.038 

Federal Perkins Loan Program; 84.063 

Federal Pell Grant Program; and 84.268 

William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan 

Program.) 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1071, 1082, 

1087a, 1087aa, Part F–1, 1098aa. 

Miguel A. Cardona, 

Secretary of Education. 

[FR Doc. 2024–01227 Filed 1–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0065; FRL–11656–01– 

OCSPP] 

Baicalin in Pesticide Formulations; 

Tolerance Exemption 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of Baicalin 

anhydrous and Baicalin hydrate when 

used as inert ingredients (stabilizer) on 

growing crops pre-harvest, limited to a 

maximum concentration of 10% of the 

end-use formulation. Exponent, Inc. on 

behalf of UPL NA Inc. submitted a 

petition to EPA under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 

requesting establishment of an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance. This regulation eliminates the 

need to establish a maximum 

permissible level for residues of baicalin 

anhydrous and baicalin hydrate, when 

used in accordance with the terms of 

those exemptions. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

January 24, 2024. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before March 25, 2024 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–2023–0065, is 

available at https://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 and the OPP 

docket is (202) 566–1744. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Smith, Registration Division 

(7505T), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001; main telephone number: 

(202) 566–1030; 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 40 CFR part 180 

through the Office of the Federal 

Register’s e-CFR site at https://

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

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–2023–0065 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 March 

25, 2024. 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– 

2023–0065, 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/. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/. 

II. Petition for Exemption 

In the Federal Register of March 24, 

2023 (88 FR 17778) (FRL–10579–02), 

EPA issued a document pursuant to 

FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a, 

announcing the filing of a pesticide 

petition (PP IN–11658) by Exponent, 

Inc., 1150 Connecticut Ave., Suite 1100, 

Washington, DC 20036, on behalf of 

UPL NA Inc., 630 Freedom Business 

Center, Suite 402, King of Prussia, PA 

19406. The petition requested that 40 

CFR 180.920 be amended by 

establishing an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of baicalin anhydrous (CAS Reg. No. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
4560 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

21967–41–9) and baicalin hydrate (CAS 

Reg. No. 206752–33–2) when used as 

inert ingredients (stabilizer) in pesticide 

formulations applied to growing crops 

pre-harvest limited to a maximum 

concentration of 10% of the end-use 

formulation. That document referenced 

a summary of the petition prepared by 

Exponent, Inc. on behalf of UPL NA 

Inc., the petitioner, which is available in 

the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. 

There were no comments received in 

response to the notice of filing. For ease 

of reading, baicalin is used throughout 

this document and refers to both 

baicalin anhydrous and hydrate forms. 

III. Inert Ingredient Definition 

Inert ingredients are all ingredients 

that are not active ingredients as defined 

in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are 

not limited to, the following types of 

ingredients (except when they have a 

pesticidal efficacy of their own): 

Solvents such as alcohols and 

hydrocarbons; surfactants such as 

polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty 

acids; carriers such as clay and 

diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as 

carrageenan and modified cellulose; 

wetting, spreading, and dispersing 

agents; propellants in aerosol 

dispensers; microencapsulating agents; 

and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not 

intended to imply nontoxicity; the 

ingredient may or may not be 

chemically active. Generally, EPA has 

exempted inert ingredients from the 

requirement of a tolerance based on the 

low toxicity of the individual inert 

ingredients. 

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and 

Determination of Safety 

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 tolerance 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. When making a 

safety determination for an exemption 

for the requirement of a tolerance 

FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B) directs EPA 

to consider the considerations in section 

408(b)(2)(C) and (D). Section 

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

408(b)(2)(D) lists other factors for EPA 

consideration making safety 

determinations, e.g., the validity, 

completeness, and reliability of 

available data, nature of toxic effects, 

available information concerning the 

cumulative effects of the pesticide 

chemical and other substances with a 

common mechanism of toxicity, and 

available information concerning 

aggregate exposure levels to the 

pesticide chemical and other related 

substances, among others. 

EPA establishes exemptions from the 

requirement of a tolerance only in those 

cases where it can be clearly 

demonstrated that the risks from 

aggregate exposure to pesticide 

chemical residues under reasonably 

foreseeable circumstances will pose no 

harm to human health. In order to 

determine the risks from aggregate 

exposure to pesticide inert ingredients, 

the Agency considers the toxicity of the 

inert in conjunction with possible 

exposure to residues of the inert 

ingredient through food, drinking water, 

and through other exposures that occur 

as a result of pesticide use in residential 

settings. If EPA is able to determine that 

a finite tolerance is not necessary to 

ensure that there is a reasonable 

certainty that no harm will result from 

aggregate exposure to the inert 

ingredient, an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance may be 

established. 

Consistent with FFDCA section 

408(c)(2)(A), and the factors specified in 

FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has 

reviewed the available scientific data 

and other relevant information in 

support of this action. EPA has 

sufficient data to assess the hazards of 

and to make a determination on 

aggregate exposure for baicalin 

including exposure resulting from the 

exemption established by this action. 

EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with baicalin follows. 

A. Toxicological Profile 

EPA has evaluated the available 

toxicity data and considered their 

validity, completeness, and reliability as 

well as the relationship of the results of 

the studies 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. Specific 

information on the studies received and 

the nature of the adverse effects caused 

by baicalin as well as the no-observedadverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the 

lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level 

(LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are 

discussed in this unit. 

Baicalin exhibits low levels of acute 

toxicity via the oral route of exposure. 

Acute dermal toxicity is expected to be 

low based on low oral acute toxicity and 

the absence of clinical signs in a skin 

irritation study in rabbits. Acute 

inhalation toxicity is expected to be low 

based on its low vapor pressure. 

Baicalin is not a skin sensitizer. Special 

studies reported no acute adverse effects 

on respiratory function and the central 

nervous system (CNS) in rats up to 

5,000 mg/kg (equivalent to 3,000 mg/kg 

baicalin) or on cardiovascular function 

in dogs up to 1,000 mg/kg (equivalent to 

600 mg/kg baicalin). 

No effects were seen in subchronic 

oral toxicity studies in rats up to 2,000 

mg/kg/day (∼1,200 mg/kg/day baicalin), 

in mice up to 500 mg/kg/day (∼300 mg/ 

kg/day baicalin) and in dogs up to 1,000 

mg/kg/day (∼630 mg/kg/day baicalin). 

No increased offspring susceptibility 

was observed in the available studies as 

no offspring or maternal effects were 

observed. Concern for carcinogenicity is 

low based on a negative result in a 

mutagenicity study, lack of effects in 

subchronic studies, and the lack of 

relevant structural alerts for 

carcinogenicity. 

No evidence of neurotoxicity or 

immunotoxicity was observed in the 

available studies. Also, no neurotoxicity 

was observed in an acute toxicity study 

evaluating central nervous system 

effects in rats. 

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/ 

Levels of Concern 

Once a pesticide’s toxicological 

profile is determined, EPA identifies 

toxicological points of departure (POD) 

and levels of concern to use in 

evaluating the risk posed by human 

exposure to the pesticide. For hazards 

that have a threshold below which there 

is no appreciable risk, the toxicological 

POD is used as the basis for derivation 

of reference values for risk assessment. 

PODs are developed based on a careful 

analysis of the doses in each 

toxicological study to determine the 

dose at which no adverse effects are 

observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest 

dose at which adverse effects of concern 

are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/ 

safety factors are used in conjunction 

with the POD to calculate a safe 

exposure level—generally referred to as 

a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a 

reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin 

of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 4561 

risks, the Agency assumes that any 

amount of exposure will lead to some 

degree of risk. Thus, the Agency 

estimates risk in terms of the probability 

of an occurrence of the adverse effect 

expected in a lifetime. For more 

information on the general principles 

EPA uses in risk characterization and a 

complete description of the risk 

assessment process, see https://

www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/overview-riskassessment-pesticide-program. 

The hazard profile of baicalin is 

adequately defined. Overall, baicalin is 

of low acute, subchronic, and 

developmental toxicity. No systemic 

toxicity is observed up to 2,000 mg/kg/ 

day (∼1,200 mg/kg/day baicalin), in 

mice up to 500 mg/kg/day (∼300 mg/kg/ 

day baicalin) and in dogs up to 1,000 

mg/kg/day (∼630 mg/kg/day baicalin). 

Since signs of toxicity were not 

observed, no toxicological endpoints of 

concern or PODs were identified. 

Therefore, a qualitative risk assessment 

for baicalin can be performed. 

C. Exposure Assessment 

1. Dietary exposure from food and 

feed uses. In evaluating dietary 

exposure to baicalin, EPA considered 

exposure under the proposed exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance. 

EPA assessed dietary exposures from 

baicalin in food as follows: 

Dietary exposure (food and drinking 

water) to baicalin may occur following 

ingestion of foods with residues from 

their use in accordance with this 

exemption and use as an herbal 

supplement. However, a quantitative 

dietary exposure assessment was not 

conducted since a toxicological 

endpoint for risk assessment was not 

identified. 

2. From non-dietary exposure. The 

term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in 

this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure 

(e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), 

carpets, swimming pools, and hard 

surface disinfection on walls, floors, 

tables). 

Baicalin may be present in pesticide 

and non-pesticide products that may be 

used in and around the home and in 

cosmetic products. However, a 

quantitative residential exposure 

assessment was not conducted since a 

toxicological endpoint for risk 

assessment was not identified. 

3. 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.’’ 

Based on the lack of toxicity in the 

available database, EPA has not found 

baicalin to share a common mechanism 

of toxicity with any other substances, 

and baicalin does not appear to produce 

a toxic metabolite produced by other 

substances. For the purposes of this 

tolerance exemption, therefore, EPA has 

assumed that baicalin does not have a 

common mechanism of toxicity with 

other substances. 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 website at https:// 

www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-risk-pesticides. 

D. Additional Safety Factor for the 

Protection of Infants and Children 

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

provides that EPA shall apply an 

additional tenfold (10X) 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 

based on reliable data 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 (FQPA) 

Safety Factor (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 an assessment of baicalin, 

EPA has concluded that there are no 

toxicological endpoints of concern for 

the U.S. population, including infants 

and children. Because there are no 

threshold effects associated with 

baicalin, EPA conducted a qualitative 

assessment. As part of that assessment, 

the Agency did not use safety factors for 

assessing risk, and no additional safety 

factor is needed for assessing risk to 

infants and children. 

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of 

Safety 

Because no toxicological endpoints of 

concern were identified, EPA concludes 

that there is a reasonable certainty that 

no harm will result to the general 

population, or to infants and children 

from aggregate exposure to baicalin 

residues. 

V. Other Considerations 

Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

An analytical method is not required 

for enforcement purposes since the 

Agency is not establishing a numerical 

tolerance for residues of baicalin in or 

on any food commodities. EPA is 

establishing a limitation on the amount 

of baicalin that may be used in pesticide 

formulations applied pre-harvest. This 

limitation will be enforced through the 

pesticide registration process under the 

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 

Rodenticide Act (‘‘FIFRA’’), 7 U.S.C. 

136 et seq. EPA will not register any 

pesticide formulation for food use that 

exceeds 10% by weight of baicalin in 

the final pesticide formulation. 

VI. Conclusions 

Therefore, an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance is established 

for residues of baicalin anhydrous (CAS 

Reg. No. 21967–41–9) and baicalin 

hydrate (CAS Reg. No. 206752–33–2) 

when used as inert ingredients 

(stabilizer) in pesticide formulations on 

growing crops pre-harvest under 40 CFR 

180.920 limited to a maximum 

concentration of 10% of the end-use 

formulation. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action establishes exemptions 

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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
4562 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

under FFDCA section 408(d), such as 

the exemptions 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 

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). 

VIII. 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: January 18, 2024. 

Charles Smith, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the 

preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR 

chapter I 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. In § 180.920, amend table 1 to 

180.920 by revising its heading and 

adding in alphabetical order entries for 

‘‘Baicalin anhydrous’’ and ‘‘Baicalin 

hydrate’’ to read as follows: 

§ 180.920 Inert ingredients used preharvest; exemptions from the requirement 

of a tolerance. 

* * * * * 

TABLE 1 TO § 180.920 

Inert ingredients Limits Uses 

*******

Baicalin anhydrous (CAS Reg. No. 21967–41–9) .......................................... 10% by weight ................................... Stabilizer. 

Baicalin hydrate (CAS Reg. No. 206752–33–2) ............................................ 10% by weight ................................... Stabilizer. 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2024–01321 Filed 1–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION 

45 CFR Part 1611 

Income Level for Individuals Eligible 

for Assistance 

AGENCY: Legal Services Corporation. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Legal Services 

Corporation (LSC) is required by law to 

establish maximum income levels for 

individuals eligible for legal assistance. 

This document updates the specified 

income levels to reflect the annual 

amendments to the Federal Poverty 

Guidelines issued by the U. S. 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS). 

DATES: Effective January 24, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stefanie Davis, Deputy General Counsel 

and Ethics Officer, Legal Services 

Corporation, 3333 K St. NW, 

Washington, DC 20007; (202) 295–1563; 

sdavis@lsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

1007(a)(2) of the Legal Services 

Corporation Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 

2996f(a)(2), requires LSC to establish 

maximum income levels for individuals 

eligible for legal assistance. Section 

1611.3(c) of LSC’s regulations 

establishes a maximum income level 

equivalent to 125% of the Federal 

Poverty Guidelines (Guidelines), which 

HHS is responsible for updating and 

issuing. 45 CFR 1611.3(c). 

Each year, LSC updates appendix A to 

45 CFR part 1611 to provide client 

income eligibility standards based on 

the most recent Guidelines. The figures 

for 2024, set out below, are equivalent 

to 125% of the Guidelines published by 

HHS on January 12, 2024. 

In addition, LSC is publishing a chart 

listing income levels that are 200% of 

the Guidelines. This chart is for 

reference purposes only as an aid to 

recipients in assessing the financial 

eligibility of an applicant whose income 

is greater than 125% of the applicable 

Guidelines amount, but less than 200% 

of the applicable Guidelines amount 

(and who may be found to be financially 

eligible under duly adopted exceptions 

to the annual income ceiling in 

accordance with 45 CFR 1611.3, 1611.4, 

and 1611.5). 

Except where there are minor 

variances due to rounding, the amount 

by which the guideline increases for 

each additional member of the 

household is a consistent amount. 

List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 1611 

Grant programs—law, Legal services. 

For reasons set forth in the preamble, 

the Legal Services Corporation amends 

45 CFR part 1611 as follows: 

PART 1611—ELIGIBILITY 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1611 

continues to read as follows: 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1