14646 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Notices 

47 Id. § 385.601. 

48ComEd Response at 11; ComEd Answer at 6. 

49 18 CFR 385.214; see FirstEnergy Corp., 185 

FERC ¶ 61,099 at P 21 & n.61 (stating that 

interventions are permitted in a contested audit 

proceeding in which the audited person elects to 

contest one or more audit findings or remedies in 

a trial-type hearing). 

50Enforcement staff is a participant in the trialtype hearing and settlement judge procedures. See 

18 CFR 385.102(b), (c) (2022). 

51 18 CFR 385.603. 

52 If the parties decide to request a specific judge, 

they must make their joint request to the Chief 

Judge by telephone at (202) 502–8500 within five 

days of this order. The Commission’s website 

contains a list of Commission judges available for 

settlement proceedings and a summary of their 

background and experience (https://www.ferc.gov/ 

available-settlement-judges). 

ComEd. The scope of the trial-type 

hearing is limited to these challenged 

findings and recommendations. 

Pursuant to Rule 601 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure,47 we also establish 

settlement judge procedures for this 

contested issue, as requested by 

ComEd.48

26. Any interested entity seeking to 

participate in this trial-type hearing 

shall file a motion to intervene pursuant 

to Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules 

of Practice and Procedure 49 no later 

than 15 days after the date of 

publication of this order in the Federal 

Register. 

27. While we are setting the allocation 

of overhead costs to CWIP for a trialtype evidentiary hearing,50 we 

encourage efforts to reach settlement 

before hearing procedures commence. 

To aid settlement efforts, we will hold 

the trial-type hearing in abeyance and 

direct that a settlement judge be 

appointed, pursuant to Rule 603 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure.51 If parties desire, they may, 

by mutual agreement, request a specific 

judge as the settlement judge in the 

proceeding. The Chief Judge, however, 

may not be able to designate the 

requested settlement judge based on 

workload requirements, which 

determine judges’ availability.52 The 

settlement judge shall report to the 

Chief Judge and the Commission within 

60 days of the date of the appointment 

of the settlement judge concerning the 

status of settlement discussions. Based 

on this report, the Chief Judge shall 

provide the parties with additional time 

to continue their settlement discussions 

or provide for commencement of a 

hearing by assignment of the case to a 

presiding judge. 

The Commission orders: 

(A) A paper hearing and related 

procedures are hereby established 

concerning two contested issues, the 

accounting treatment of AROs and MGP 

site remediation costs, as set forth in the 

body of this order. 

(B) A trial-type hearing and related 

procedures, and settlement procedures 

are hereby established concerning one 

contested issue, the allocation of 

overhead costs to CWIP, as set forth in 

the body of this order. 

(C) Pursuant to the authority 

contained in and subject to the 

jurisdiction conferred on the 

Commission by section 402(a) of the 

Department of Energy Organization Act 

and the Federal Power Act (FPA), 

particularly § 205, 206 and 301 thereof, 

and pursuant to the Commission’s Rules 

of Practice and Procedure and the 

regulations under the FPA (18 CFR 

chapter I), a public hearing shall be held 

concerning the allocation of overhead 

costs to CWIP, as discussed in the body 

of this order. However, the hearing will 

be held in abeyance to provide time for 

settlement judge procedures, as 

discussed in Ordering Paragraphs (D) 

and (E) below. 

(D) Pursuant to Rule 603 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 18 CFR 385.603, the Chief 

Judge is hereby directed to appoint a 

settlement judge in this proceeding 

within 45 days of the date of this order. 

Such settlement judge shall have all 

powers and duties enumerated in Rule 

603 and shall convene a settlement 

conference as soon as practicable after 

the Chief Judge designates the 

settlement judge. If parties decide to 

request a specific judge, they must make 

their request to the Chief Judge within 

five days of the date of this order. 

(E) Within 60 days of the appointment 

of the settlement judge, the settlement 

judge shall file a report with the 

Commission and the Chief Judge on the 

status of the settlement discussions. 

Based on this report, the Chief Judge 

shall provide participants with 

additional time to continue their 

settlement discussions, if appropriate, 

or assign this case to a presiding judge 

for a trial-type evidentiary hearing, if 

appropriate. If settlement discussions 

continue, the settlement judge shall file 

a report at least every 60 days thereafter, 

informing the Commission and the 

Chief Judge of participants’ progress 

toward settlement. 

(F) If settlement judge procedures fail 

and a trial-type evidentiary hearing is to 

be held, a presiding judge, to be 

designated by the Chief Judge, shall, 

within 45 days of the date of the 

presiding judge’s designation, convene a 

prehearing conference in these 

proceedings in a hearing room of the 

Commission, 888 First Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20426, or remotely (by 

telephone or electronically), as 

appropriate. Such a conference shall be 

held for the purpose of establishing a 

procedural schedule. The presiding 

judgeis authorized to establish 

procedural dates, and to rule on all 

motions (except motions to dismiss) as 

provided in the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure. 

By the Commission. Commissioner 

Danly is not participating. 

Issued: Issued December 8, 2023. 

Debbie-Anne A. Reese, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–04055 Filed 2–27–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2024–0041; FRL–11698–01– 

OCSPP] 

Pesticides; Proposed Removal of 

Polytetrafluoroethylene From List of 

Approved Inert Ingredients for 

Pesticide Products 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to remove 

polytetrafluoroethylene (CAS No. 9002– 

84–0) from the current list of inert 

ingredients approved for use in food use 

and nonfood use pesticide products 

because this inert ingredient has been 

identified as a per- and polyfluoroalkyl 

substance (PFAS) that is no longer used 

in any registered pesticide product. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 29, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2024–0041, 

online at https://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. 

Additional instructions on commenting 

or visiting the docket, along with more 

information about dockets generally, is 

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: 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Notices 14647 

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

You may be potentially affected by

this action if you engage in activities 

related to the registration of pesticide 

products, including but not limited to, 

the use of approved inert ingredients in 

registered pesticide products. 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: 

• Entities engaging in the formulation

and preparation of agricultural and 

household pest control chemicals or 

pesticide and other agricultural and 

household pest control chemicals or 

inert manufacturers and those who 

make proprietary inert ingredient 

formulations or pesticide and other 

agricultural chemical manufacturing 

generally (NAICS code 325320). 

If you have any questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult either person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

B. What is the Agency’s authority for

taking this action?

This action is issued under the 

authority of the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 

(FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136–136y. 

C. What action is the Agency taking?

EPA is considering removing from the

inert ingredient list the chemical 

polytetrafluoroethylene (CAS No. 9002– 

84–0), also known as Teflon®. All 

pesticide products that initially used 

polytetrafluoroethylene as an inert 

ingredient have been cancelled or 

reformulated to no longer contain 

polytetrafluoroethylene. EPA believes it 

is appropriate to remove 

polytetrafluoroethylene from the inert 

ingredient list to prevent the 

introduction of this PFAS into new 

pesticide formulations without 

additional EPA review. 

D. What should I consider as I prepare

my comments for EPA?

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI

information to EPA through email or 

https://www.regulations.gov. If you wish 

to include CBI in your comment, please 

follow the applicable instructions at 

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

commenting-epa-dockets#rules and 

clearly mark the information that you 

claim to be CBI. 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 preparing and submitting your 

comments, see the commenting tips at 

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

comments.html. 

II. Background

A. What are inert ingredients?

Most pesticide products contain

substances in addition to the active 

ingredient(s) that are referred to as inert 

ingredients or sometimes as ‘‘other 

ingredients.’’ An inert ingredient 

generally is any substance (or group of 

similar substances) other than an active 

ingredient that is intentionally included 

in a pesticide product. Examples of inert 

ingredients include emulsifiers, 

solvents, carriers, aerosol propellants, 

fragrances, and dyes. Additional 

information about inert ingredients, 

including requirements, guidance and 

the InertFinder tool, can be accessed at 

https://www.epa.gov/ 

pesticideregistration/inert-ingredientsregulation. 

B. What is the approved list of inert

ingredients?

EPA maintains a list of approved inert 

ingredients, available at https://

ordspub.epa.gov/ords/pesticides/ 

f?p=INERTFINDER:1::::1::. Inert 

ingredients that are on the approved list 

do not need further approval prior to 

inclusion in a pesticide formulation. 

However, applications for registration of 

individual formulations containing 

approved inert ingredients are subject to 

data requirements in 40 CFR part 158, 

regardless of whether the inert 

ingredient is on the approved list. If an 

application for registration of a pesticide 

product includes inert ingredients not 

on the approved list, the inert ingredient 

requires approval under section 3 of 

FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136a, and payment of 

a fee in accordance with section 33 of 

FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136w–8. 

III. EPA’s Proposed Action

A. Why is EPA considering this action?

PFAS are synthetic organic

compounds that do not occur naturally 

in the environment but have widespread 

use in commerce. The strong carbonfluorine bonds of PFAS make some of 

them resistant to degradation and thus 

highly persistent in the environment. 

Some PFAS have been detected in 

wildlife and in humans, indicating that 

at least some PFAS have the ability to 

bioaccumulate. Thus, exposure to PFAS 

is an urgent public health and 

environmental issue in the United 

States. As part of its strategic roadmap 

to address risks posed by PFAS (https:// 

www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/ 

2021-10/pfas-roadmap_final-508.pdf), 

EPA identified some specific actions to 

further the Agency’s directives to 

research, restrict, and remediate PFAS. 

As part of the ‘‘whole-of-agency’’ 

approach to reduce PFAS use and 

releases, EPA has reviewed the Agency’s 

list of chemical substances that have 

been approved for use as inert 

ingredients in pesticide products to 

determine whether any of these inert 

ingredients are PFAS. Based on that 

review, EPA is proposing to remove 

polytetrafluoroethylene (CAS No. 9002– 

84–0) from the current list of inert 

ingredients approved for use in food 

and nonfood pesticide products because 

it is a PFAS, and it is no longer used in 

currently registered pesticide products. 

This includes the revocation of the 

tolerance exemption for 

polytetrafluoroethylene under 40 CFR 

180.960. 

B. What effect would this action have?

Once an inert ingredient is removed

from the list, any proposed future use of 

the inert ingredient would need to be 

supported by data provided to and 

reviewed by the EPA as part of a new 

inert ingredient submission request. The 

type of data needed to evaluate a new 

inert ingredient may include, among 

others, studies to evaluate potential 

carcinogenicity, adverse reproductive 

effects, developmental toxicity, 

genotoxicity as well as environmental 

effects associated with any chemical 

substance that is persistent or 

bioaccumulative. Information regarding 

the inert ingredient approval process 

may be found at https://www.epa.gov/ 

pesticide-registration/guidancedocuments-inert-ingredients. 

EPA suggests that pesticide registrants 

review their records to ensure that the 

chemical substance, listed by chemical 

name and Chemical Abstracts Service 

Registry Number (CAS No.), in the 

docket for this action is no longer used 

as an inert ingredient in their registered 

pesticide products. While EPA has 

endeavored to carefully review its 

records, if a pesticide registrant is aware 

of a registered product containing 

polytetrafluoroethylene, that registrant 

should contact the Agency directly, 

using the contact listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Similarly, producers of proprietary 

mixtures currently approved for use as 

inert ingredients in pesticide products 

should also review their records to 

ensure that the chemical substance 

listed in the docket for this action is, in 

fact, not currently used in their 

proprietary mixtures. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
14648 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Notices 

After the close of the comment period, 

EPA will consider all comments 

received and determine an appropriate 

final action. 

Dated: February 22, 2024. 

Michal Freedhoff, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 2024–04059 Filed 2–27–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–11728–01–R9] 

Clean Air Act Operating Permit 

Program; Order on Petition for 

Objection to State Operating Permit for 

Agua Fria Generating Station 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of final order on petition. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Administrator signed an 

order dated January 30, 2024, granting 

in part and denying in part a petition 

dated June 1, 2023, from Sierra Club. 

The petition requested that the EPA 

object to a Clean Air Act (CAA) title V 

operating permit issued by the Maricopa 

County Air Quality Department 

(MCAQD) to the Salt River Project 

Agricultural Power District (SRP) Agua 

Fria Generating Station for its electricity 

generating station located in Glendale, 

Arizona. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Catherine Valladolid, EPA Region 9, 

(415) 947–4103, Valladolid.catherine@

epa.gov. The final order and petition are 

available electronically at: https://

www.epa.gov/title-v-operating-permits/ 

title-v-petition-database. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The EPA received a petition from 

Sierra Club dated June 1, 2023, 

requesting that the EPA object to the 

issuance of operating permit no. 

P0009346, issued by MCAQD to SRP 

Agua Fria Generating Station in 

Glendale, Arizona. On January 30, 2024, 

the EPA Administrator issued an order 

granting in part and denying in part the 

petition. The order itself explains the 

basis for the EPA’s decision. 

Sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the 

CAA provide that a petitioner may 

request judicial review of those portions 

of an order that deny issues in a 

petition. Any petition for review shall 

be filed in the United States Court of 

Appeals for the appropriate circuit no 

later than April 29, 2024. 

Dated: February 21, 2024. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2024–04113 Filed 2–27–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2023–0613; FRL–11608– 

02–OCSPP] 

Formaldehyde; Draft Risk Evaluation 

Peer Review by the Science Advisory 

Committee on Chemicals (SACC); 

Request for Comments on Experts 

Being Considered for Participation as 

Ad Hoc Peer Reviewers 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is announcing the 

availability of and soliciting public 

comments on the list of candidates 

under consideration for selection as ad 

hoc peer reviewers assisting the Science 

Advisory Committee on Chemicals 

(SACC) with their peer review of the 

Agency’s evaluation of the risks from 

formaldehyde being conducted to 

inform risk management decisions 

under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). The list of candidates provides 

the names and biographical sketches of 

all interested and available candidates 

identified from the responses to the call 

for nominations and other sources. 

Public comments on these candidates 

will be used to assist the Agency in 

selecting approximately 10–15 ad hoc 

peer reviewers to assist the SACC with 

the identified peer review. 

DATES: Submit your comments on or 

before March 14, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2023–0613, 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

at https://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. Additional 

instructions on commenting and visiting 

the docket, along with more information 

about dockets generally, is available at 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

Designated Federal Official (DFO) is 

Tamue Gibson, Mission Support 

Division (7602M), Office of Program 

Support, Office of Chemical Safety and 

Pollution Prevention, Environmental 

Protection Agency; telephone number: 

(202) 564–7642; email address: 

gibson.tamue@epa.gov; or call the SACC 

main office at (202) 564–8450. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. What action is the Agency taking? 

The Agency is seeking public 

comments on scientific and technical 

experts that EPA is considering for 

service as ad hoc peer reviewers 

assisting the SACC with the peer review 

of the Agency’s evaluation of the risks 

from formaldehyde being conducted to 

inform risk management decisions 

under TSCA. The Office of Pollution 

Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) 

collaborated with the Office of Pesticide 

Programs (OPP) to develop hazard 

assessments for human and ecological 

health. EPA expects to ask the SACC to 

consider and review these joint hazard 

assessments in addition to the OPPT 

exposure and risk characterizations. 

This SACC peer review is in addition to 

prior external peer reviews by the 

National Academies of Science, 

Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), 

the EPA’s Human Studies Review Board 

(HSRB) and SACC peer reviews of 

related scientific issues. The Agency is 

leveraging these peer reviews to support 

further development of the risk 

evaluation of formaldehyde. For 

additional information, please see the 

Agency’s request for nominations of ad 

hoc expert reviewers that appeared in 

the Federal Register of December 26, 

2023 (88 FR 88910 (FRL–11608–01– 

OCSPP)). 

B. What is the Agency’s authority for 

taking this action? 

EPA established the SACC in 2016 in 

accordance with TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 

2625(o), to provide independent advice 

and expert consultation with respect to 

the scientific and technical aspects of 

issues relating to the implementation of 

TSCA. The SACC operates in 

accordance with the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. 10, and 

supports activities under TSCA, 15 

U.S.C. 2601 et seq., the Pollution 

Prevention Act (PPA), 42 U.S.C. 13101 

et seq., and other applicable statutes. 

C. Does this action apply to me? 

This action is directed to the public 

in general and may be of particular 

interest to those involved in the 

manufacture, processing, distribution, 

and disposal of the subject chemical 

substance, and/or those interested in the 

assessment of risks involving chemical 

substances and mixtures regulated 

under TSCA. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1