31598 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Notices 

TABLE 2—REGISTRANTS OF CANCELLED PRODUCTS—Continued 

EPA company No. Company name and address 

71995 .................................. Monsanto Company, 1300 I Street NW., Suite 450 East, Washington, DC 20005. 

73801 .................................. Tagos Chemicals India, LTD., Agent: Biologic, Inc., 115 Obtuse Hill Road, Brookfield, CT 06804. 

89118 .................................. Vive CorpProtection, Inc., Agent: OMC Ag Consulting, 828 Tanglewood Ln., East Lansing, MI 48823. 

CA–090010, HI–840004 ..... Bayer CropScience, LP, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. 

MA–090002, PA–080004 .... PeroxyChem, LLC, 2005 Market Street, Suite 3200, Philadelphia, PA 19103. 

This cancellation order follows a 

notice of receipt of voluntary 

cancellation requests received from the 

registrants that issued in the Federal 

Register of March 12, 2015 (80 FR 

12996) (FRL–9923–27). In the March 

2015 document, EPA indicated that it 

would issue an order implementing the 

cancellations, unless the Agency 

received substantive comments within 

the 30-day comment period that would 

merit its further review of these 

requests, or unless the registrants 

withdrew their requests. 

IV. Summary of Public Comments 

Received and Agency Response to 

Comments 

The comment period closed on April 

13, 2015. EPA received three comments. 

The comments agreed with the product 

cancellations. For this reason, the 

Agency does not believe that the 

comments submitted during the 

comment period merit further review or 

a denial of the requests for voluntary 

cancellation. 

Further, the registrants did not 

withdraw their requests. 

V. Cancellation Order 

Pursuant to FIFRA section 6(f) (7 

U.S.C. 136d(f)), EPA hereby approves 

the requested cancellations of the 

registrations identified in Table 1 of 

Unit III. Accordingly, the Agency hereby 

orders that the product registrations 

identified in Table 1 of Unit III. are 

canceled. The effective date of the 

cancellations that are the subject of this 

order is June 3, 2015. Any distribution, 

sale, or use of existing stocks of the 

products identified in Table 1 of Unit 

III. in a manner inconsistent with any of 

the provisions for disposition of existing 

stocks set forth in Unit VI. will be a 

violation of FIFRA. 

VI. Provisions for Disposition of 

Existing Stocks 

Existing stocks are those stocks of 

registered pesticide products which are 

currently in the United States and 

which were packaged, labeled, and 

released for shipment prior to the 

effective date of the cancellation action. 

The existing stocks provisions for the 

products subject to this order are as 

follows. 

A. For Products (069361–00030, 

073801–00003, and 089118–00001) 

The registrants have indicated to the 

Agency via written response that there 

are no existing stocks because no 

production has ever occurred. 

Therefore, no existing stocks date is 

necessary. Registrants are prohibited 

from selling or distributing the existing 

stocks of products listed in Table 1 of 

Unit III., except for export consistent 

with FIFRA section 17 (7 U.S.C. 136o) 

or for proper disposal. In addition, 

because no production has ever 

occurred, persons other than the 

registrants are prohibited from selling, 

distributing, or using the existing stocks. 

B. For the Product (010163–00174) 

The registrant has indicated to the 

Agency via written response that they 

will not sell or distribute any existing 

stocks after December 31, 2014, and as 

of that date will no longer have any 

current stock. Therefore, no existing 

stocks date for the registrant is 

necessary. The registrant is prohibited 

from selling or distributing existing 

stocks of the product listed in Table 1 

of Unit III., except for export consistent 

with FIFRA section 17 (7 U.S.C. 136o) 

or for proper disposal. Persons other 

than the registrant may sell, distribute, 

or use the existing stocks until such 

stocks are exhausted, provided that such 

sale, distribution, or use is consistent 

with the terms of the previously 

approved labeling on, or that 

accompanied, the canceled product. 

C. For Products (059639–00028, 

059639–00086, and 059639–00089) 

Since the notice in the Federal 

Register of March 12, 2015 (80 FR 

12996) (FRL–9923–27), EPA received 

clarification from the registrant which 

indicates that the manufacture and 

distribution for these products ended 

about 6 to 7 years ago. Therefore, no 

existing stocks date is necessary for the 

registrant. The registrant is prohibited 

from selling or distributing the existing 

stocks of products listed in Table 1 of 

Unit III., except for export consistent 

with FIFRA section 17 (7 U.S.C. 136o) 

or for proper disposal. In addition, 

because 6 to 7 years has passed, the 

Agency believes that existing stocks 

have been exhausted and no existing 

stocks date is necessary for persons 

other than the registrant. Persons other 

than the registrant are prohibited from 

selling, distributing, or using the 

existing stocks. 

D. For All Other Products Identified in 

Table 1 of Unit III 

The registrants may continue to sell 

and distribute existing stocks of 

products listed in Table 1 of Unit III. 

until June 2, 2016, which is 1 year after 

the publication of this Cancellation 

Order in the Federal Register. 

Thereafter, the registrants are prohibited 

from selling or distributing products 

listed in Table 1 of Unit III. except for 

export in accordance with FIFRA 

section 17 (7 U.S.C. 136o), or proper 

disposal. Persons other than the 

registrants may sell, distribute, or use 

existing stocks of products listed in 

Table 1 of Unit III. until existing stocks 

are exhausted, provided that such sale, 

distribution, or use is consistent with 

the terms of the previously approved 

labeling on, or that accompanied, the 

canceled products. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. 

Dated: May 14, 2015. 

Richard P. Keigwin, Jr., 

Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, 

Office of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2015–13513 Filed 6–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL—9928–70–OAR] 

Alternative Method for Calculating OffCycle Credits Under the Light-Duty 

Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions 

Program: Applications From Fiat 

Chrysler Automobiles, Ford Motor 

Company, and General Motors 

Corporation 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Notices 31599 

1See 40 CFR 86.1869–12(b). 

2See 40 CFR 86.1869–12(c). 

3See 40 CFR 86.1869–12(d). 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is requesting comment on 

applications from Fiat Chrysler 

Automobiles LLC (‘‘FCA’’), Ford Motor 

Company (Ford) and General Motors 

Corporation (GM) for off-cycle carbon 

dioxide (CO2) credits under EPA’s lightduty vehicle greenhouse gas emissions 

standards. ‘‘Off-cycle’’ emission 

reductions can be achieved by 

employing technologies that result in 

real-world benefits, but where that 

benefit is not adequately or entirely 

captured on the test procedures used by 

manufacturers to demonstrate 

compliance with emission standards. 

EPA’s light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas 

program acknowledges these benefits by 

giving automobile manufacturers several 

options for generating ‘‘off-cycle’’ 

carbon dioxide (CO2) credits. Under the 

regulations, a manufacturer may apply 

for CO2 credits for technologies that 

result in off-cycle benefits. In these 

cases, a manufacturer must provide EPA 

with a proposed methodology for 

determining the real-world off-cycle 

benefit. FCA and Ford have submitted 

applications that describe 

methodologies for determining off-cycle 

credits from high efficiency exterior 

lighting, solar reflective glass/glazing, 

solar reflective paint, and active seat 

ventilation. Ford’s application also 

proposes methodologies for determining 

the off-cycle benefits from active 

aerodynamic improvements (grill 

shutters), active transmission warm-up, 

active engine warm-up technologies, 

and engine idle stop-start. GM’s 

application proposes a methodology to 

determine the real-world benefits of an 

air conditioning compressor with 

variable crankcase suction valve 

technology. Pursuant to applicable 

regulations, EPA is making descriptions 

of the manufacturers’ off-cycle credit 

calculation methodologies available for 

public comment. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 6, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2015–0282, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the On-Line Instructions for Submitting 

Comments. 

• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–1741. 

• Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2015– 

0282, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Mailcode: 22821T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 

Public Reading Room, EPA West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. 

Attention Air and Radiation Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2015–0282. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Online Instructions for Submitting 

Comments: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. Attention Air and 

Radiation Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2015–0282. EPA’s policy is that 

all comments received will be included 

in the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

for which disclosure is restricted by 

statute. Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, 

EPA WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC. 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 Air 

and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Roberts French, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, Office of 

Transportation and Air Quality, 

Compliance Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 

Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 

48105. Telephone: (734) 214–4380. Fax: 

(734) 214–4869. Email address: 

french.roberts@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

EPA’s light-duty vehicle greenhouse 

gas (GHG) program provides three 

pathways by which a manufacturer may 

accrue off-cycle carbon dioxide (CO2) 

credits for those technologies that 

achieve CO2 reductions in the real 

world but where those reductions are 

not adequately or entirely captured on 

the test used to determine compliance 

with the CO2 standards, and which are 

not otherwise reflected in the standards’ 

stringency. The first pathway is a 

predetermined list of credit values for 

specific off-cycle technologies that may 

be used beginning in model year 2014.1

This pathway allows manufacturers to 

use conservative credit values 

established by EPA for a wide range of 

technologies, with minimal data 

submittal or testing requirements. In 

cases where additional laboratory 

testing can demonstrate emission 

benefits, a second pathway allows 

manufacturers to use a broader array of 

emission tests (known as ‘‘5-cycle’’ 

testing because the methodology uses 

five different testing procedures) to 

demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2

credits.2 The additional emission tests 

allow emission benefits to be 

demonstrated over some elements of 

real-world driving not captured by the 

GHG compliance tests, including high 

speeds, hard accelerations, and cold 

temperatures. These first two 

methodologies were completely defined 

through notice and comment 

rulemaking and therefore no additional 

process is necessary for manufacturers 

to use these methods. The third and last 

pathway allows manufacturers to seek 

EPA approval to use an alternative 

methodology for determining the offcycle CO2 credits.3 This option is only 

available if the benefit of the technology 

cannot be adequately demonstrated 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
31600 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Notices 

4See 40 CFR 86.1869–12(d)(2). 

using the 5-cycle methodology. 

Manufacturers may also use this option 

for model years prior to 2014 to 

demonstrate off-cycle CO2 reductions 

for technologies that are on the 

predetermined list, or to demonstrate 

reductions that exceed those available 

via use of the predetermined list. 

Under the regulations, a manufacturer 

seeking to demonstrate off-cycle credits 

with an alternative methodology (i.e., 

under the third pathway described 

above) must describe a methodology 

that meets the following criteria: 

• Use modeling, on-road testing, onroad data collection, or other approved 

analytical or engineering methods; 

• Be robust, verifiable, and capable of 

demonstrating the real-world emissions 

benefit with strong statistical 

significance; 

• Result in a demonstration of 

baseline and controlled emissions over 

a wide range of driving conditions and 

number of vehicles such that issues of 

data uncertainty are minimized; 

• Result in data on a model type basis 

unless the manufacturer demonstrates 

that another basis is appropriate and 

adequate. 

Further, the regulations specify the 

following requirements regarding an 

application for off-cycle CO2 credits: 

• A manufacturer requesting off-cycle 

credits must develop a methodology for 

demonstrating and determining the 

benefit of the off-cycle technology, and 

carry out any necessary testing and 

analysis required to support that 

methodology. 

• A manufacturer requesting off-cycle 

credits must conduct testing and/or 

prepare engineering analyses that 

demonstrate the in-use durability of the 

technology for the full useful life of the 

vehicle. 

• The application must contain a 

detailed description of the off-cycle 

technology and how it functions to 

reduce CO2 emissions under conditions 

not represented on the compliance tests. 

• The application must contain a list 

of the vehicle model(s) which will be 

equipped with the technology. 

• The application must contain a 

detailed description of the test vehicles 

selected and an engineering analysis 

that supports the selection of those 

vehicles for testing. 

• The application must contain all 

testing and/or simulation data required 

under the regulations, plus any other 

data the manufacturer has considered in 

the analysis. 

Finally, the alternative methodology 

must be approved by EPA prior to the 

manufacturer using it to generate 

credits. As part of the review process 

defined by regulation, the alternative 

methodology submitted to EPA for 

consideration must be made available 

for public comment.4 EPA will consider 

public comments as part of its final 

decision to approve or deny the request 

for off-cycle credits. 

II. Off-Cycle Credit Applications 

A. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles 

Using the alternative methodology 

approach discussed above, Fiat Chrysler 

Automobiles (FCA) is applying for 

credits for model years prior to 2014, 

and thus prior to when the list of default 

credits becomes available. FCA has 

applied for off-cycle credits using the 

alternative demonstration methodology 

pathway for the following technologies: 

High efficiency exterior lighting, solar 

reflective glass/glazing, solar reflective 

paint, and active seat ventilation. The 

application covers 2009–2013 model 

year vehicles. All of these technologies 

are described in the predetermined list 

of credits available in the 2014 and later 

model years. The methodologies 

described by FCA are generally 

consistent with those used by EPA to 

establish the predetermined list of 

credits in the regulations, and would 

result in the same credit values as 

described in the regulations. The 

magnitude of these credits is 

determined by specification or 

calculations in the regulations based on 

vehicle-specific measurements (e.g., the 

area of glass or the lighting locations 

using the specified technologies), but 

would be no higher than the following 

established regulatory caps: 

Technology 

Off-Cycle Credit— 

Cars 

(grams/mile) 

Off-Cycle Credit— 

Trucks 

(grams/mile) 

High efficiency lighting ................................................................................................................................. 1.0 1.0 

Solar reflective glass/glazing ....................................................................................................................... 2.9 3.9 

Solar reflective paint .................................................................................................................................... 0.4 0.5 

Active seat ventilation .................................................................................................................................. 1.0 1.3 

B. Ford Motor Company 

Using the alternative methodology 

approach discussed above, Ford Motor 

Company (Ford) is applying for credits 

for model years prior to 2014, and thus 

prior to when the list of default credits 

becomes available. Ford has applied for 

off-cycle credits using the alternative 

demonstration methodology pathway 

for the following technologies: High 

efficiency exterior lighting, solar 

reflective glass/glazing, solar reflective 

paint, active seat ventilation, active 

aerodynamics, active transmission 

warm-up, active engine warm-up, and 

engine idle start-stop. All of these 

technologies are described in the 

predetermined list of credits available in 

the 2014 and later model years. The 

application covers 2012 and 2013 model 

year vehicles. The methodologies 

described by Ford are generally 

equivalent to those used by EPA to 

establish the predetermined list of 

credits in the regulations, and would 

result in the same credit values as 

described in the regulations. The 

magnitude of these credits is 

determined by specification or 

calculations in the regulations based on 

vehicle-specific measurements (e.g., the 

area of glass or the lighting locations 

using the specified technologies), but 

would be no higher than the following 

established regulatory caps: 

Technology 

Off-cycle 

credit—cars 

(grams/mile) 

Off-cycle 

credit—trucks 

(grams/mile) 

High efficiency lighting ................................................................................................................................. 1.0 1.0 

Solar reflective glass/glazing ....................................................................................................................... 2.9 3.9 

Solar reflective paint .................................................................................................................................... 0.4 0.5 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Notices 31601 

Technology 

Off-cycle 

credit—cars 

(grams/mile) 

Off-cycle 

credit—trucks 

(grams/mile) 

Active seat ventilation .................................................................................................................................. 1.0 1.3 

Active aerodynamics .................................................................................................................................... Based on measured reduction in the 

coefficient of drag 

Active transmission warm-up ....................................................................................................................... 1.5 3.2 

Active engine warm-up ................................................................................................................................ 1.5 3.2 

Engine idle start-stop ................................................................................................................................... 2.5 4.4 

C. General Motors Corporation 

Using the alternative methodology 

approach discussed above, GM is 

applying for credits for model years 

2013 through 2015. These credits are for 

a component of the air conditioning 

system that results in air conditioning 

efficiency credits beyond those 

provided in the regulations. GM has 

applied for off-cycle credits for the 

Denso SAS air conditioner compressor 

with variable crankcase suction valve 

technology. GM is requesting an offcycle GHG credit of 1.1 grams CO2 per 

mile for this technology. EPA currently 

provides Mobile Air Conditioner (MAC) 

GHG credits for reduced reheat using an 

externally-controlled variable 

displacement compressor (EVDC), 

which provides significant efficiency 

improvements compared to the baseline 

fixed displacement compressors that 

were the norm at the time EPA created 

the GHG program. Under the 2012–2016 

light-duty GHG program, the credit for 

using an EVDC is 1.7 grams of CO2 per 

mile. GM has a new EVDC design from 

Denso that further improves the 

efficiency of the MAC compressor 

through the addition of a variable 

crankcase suction valve (variable CS 

valve). The Denso SAS compressor 

improves the internal valve system 

within the compressor to reduce the 

internal refrigerant flow necessary 

throughout the range of displacements 

that the compressor may use during its 

operating cycle. The variable CS valve 

can provide a larger mass flow under 

maximum capacity and compressor 

start-up conditions, when high flow is 

ideal, then reduce to smaller openings 

with reduced mass flow in mid or low 

capacity conditions. The refrigerant 

exiting the crankcase is optimized 

across the range of operating conditions, 

creating benefits for the energy 

consumption of the MAC system. 

The ‘‘5-cycle’’ methodology would 

not adequately measure the real world 

GHG reduction benefits of either the 

EVDC or the variable CS valve. Only one 

of the five tests is conducted with the 

air conditioner on and that test cycle 

represents worse case conditions (e.g., 

high temperature, solar load, and 

humidity) and would not represent the 

real world benefits of the technology. 

Therefore, GM has chosen to determine 

the appropriate off-cycle credits through 

use of an alternative methodology. 

GM worked with Denso to perform 

bench testing of EDVC with and without 

the variable CS valve and quantified the 

difference. Based on this analysis, GM 

determined an off-cycle credit of 1.1 

grams of CO2 per mile were appropriate. 

GM substantiated these results by also 

performing vehicle tests using the AC17 

test procedure. 

III. EPA Decision Process 

EPA has reviewed the applications for 

completeness and is now making the 

applications available for public review 

and comment as required by the 

regulations. The off-cycle credit 

applications submitted by FCA, Ford, 

and GM (with confidential business 

information redacted) have been placed 

in the public docket (see ADDRESSES

section above) and on EPA’s Web site at 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/ld-hwy/

greenhouse/ld-ghg.htm. EPA is 

providing a 30-day comment period on 

the applications for off-cycle credits 

described in this notice, as specified by 

the regulations. The manufacturers may 

submit a written rebuttal of comments 

for EPA’s consideration, or may revise 

an application in response to comments. 

After reviewing any public comments 

and any rebuttal of comments submitted 

by manufacturers, EPA will make a final 

decision regarding the credit requests. 

EPA will make its decision available to 

the public by placing a decision 

document (or multiple decision 

documents) in the docket and on EPA’s 

Web site at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/

regs/ld-hwy/greenhouse/ld-ghg.htm. 

While the broad methodologies used by 

these manufacturers could potentially 

be used for other vehicles and by other 

manufacturers, the vehicle specific data 

needed to demonstrate the off-cycle 

emissions reductions would likely be 

different. In such cases, a new 

application would be required, 

including an opportunity for public 

comment. 

Dated: May 27, 2015. 

Byron Bunker, 

Director, Compliance Division, Office of 

Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air 

and Radiation. 

[FR Doc. 2015–13503 Filed 6–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

[Docket No. FDA–2014–N–0168] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Announcement of Office of 

Management and Budget Approval; 

Disclosure Regarding Additional Risks 

in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription 

Drug Television Advertisements 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is announcing 

that a collection of information entitled, 

‘‘Disclosure Regarding Additional Risks 

in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug 

Television Advertisements’’ has been 

approved by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA 

PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food 

and Drug Administration, 8455 

Colesville Rd., COLE–14526, Silver 

Spring, MD 20993–0002, PRAStaff@

fda.hhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

January 15, 2015, the Agency submitted 

a proposed collection of information 

entitled, ‘‘Disclosure Regarding 

Additional Risks in Direct-to-Consumer 

Prescription Drug Television 

Advertisements’’ to OMB for review and 

clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An 

Agency may not conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to, a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES