3446 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

(19) Nova Chemicals Company 

Beaver—Incorporating by reference 

Permit No. 04–00033, issued April 2, 

2020, as redacted by PADEP, which 

supersedes prior RACT Permit No. 04– 

000333, issued April 16, 1999 and 

reissued January 24, 2001. See also 

§ 52.2063(c)(173)(i)(B)(4), for prior 

RACT approval. 

(20) Sasol Chemicals USA LLC— 

Incorporating by reference Permit No. 

61–00011, effective February 16, 2020, 

as redacted by Pennsylvania. All permit 

conditions in the prior RACT Permit No. 

61–011, effective April 18, 2005, remain 

as RACT requirements, except for the 

bypass limitation in Condition 12 

(applicable to Source 107, 314/340 

Distillation Columns), which is 

superseded by the new permit. See also 

§ 52.2020(d)(1), for prior RACT 

approval. 

(21) Silberline Manufacturing 

Company Lincoln Drive Plant– 

Incorporating by reference Permit No. 

54–00041, effective March 16, 2020, as 

redacted by Pennsylvania. All permit 

conditions in the prior RACT Permit No. 

54–0041, effective April 19, 1999, 

remain as RACT requirements. See also 

§ 52.2063(c)(143)(i)(B)(44), for prior 

RACT approval. 

(22) Superior Tube Company Lower 

Providence—Incorporating by reference 

Permit No. 46–00020, effective February 

5, 2020, as redacted by Pennsylvania, 

which supersedes the prior RACT I 

Permit No OP–46–0020, effective April 

17, 1998, except for the facility-wide 

NOX emissions limit found in Condition 

4 and Conditions 5, 10, 11, 13, 14, and 

15, which remain as RACT 

requirements. See also 

§ 52.2063(c)(136)(i)(B)(13), for prior 

RACT approval. 

(23) Victaulic Company Alburtis 

Facility—Incorporating by reference 

Permit No. 39–00069, effective October 

24, 2017, as redacted by Pennsylvania. 

(24) Victaulic Forks Facility— 

Incorporating by reference Permit No. 

48–00009, effective October 24, 2017, as 

redacted by Pennsylvania. 

[FR Doc. 2021–27231 Filed 1–21–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0352; FRL–9419–01– 

OCSPP] 

Nitrapyrin; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a 

tolerance for residues of nitrapyrin in or 

on cottonseed, crop subgroup 20C; 

cotton, gin byproducts; cotton, meal; 

rice, grain; and rice, straw. Corteva 

Agrosciences requested this tolerance 

under the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

January 24, 2022. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before March 25, 2022 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–2021–0352, 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 is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the OPP 

Docket is (202) 566–0294. 

Due to the public health concerns 

related to COVID–19, the EPA Docket 

Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is 

open to visitors by appointment only. 

For the latest status information on 

EPA/DC services and access, visit 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anita Pease, Antimicrobials Division 

(7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001; main telephone number: 

(703) 305–7090; email address: 

ADFRNotices@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of EPA’s tolerance 

regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through 

the Office of the Federal Register’s eCFR 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, 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–2021–0352 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, 2022. 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– 

2021–0352, 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/dockets/where-sendcomments-epa-dockets. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 3447 

dockets generally, is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

II. Summary of Petitioned-For 

Tolerance 

In the Federal Register of August 24, 

2021 86 FR 47275 (FRL–8792–02– 

OCSPP), EPA issued a document 

pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 

U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing 

of a pesticide petition (PP 0F8875) by 

Corteva Agrosciences, 9330 Zionsville 

Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268. The 

petition requested that 40 CFR 180.350 

be amended by establishing a tolerance 

for combined residues or residues of the 

nitrification inhibitor nitrapyrin and its 

metabolite, 6-chloropicolinic acid (6– 

CPA), in or on cottonseed crop subgroup 

20C; cotton, gin byproducts; cotton, 

meal; rice, grain; and rice, straw at 4.0, 

0.6, 6.0, 0.03 and 0.15 parts per million 

(ppm), respectively. That document 

referenced a summary of the petition 

prepared by Corteva Agrosciences, the 

registrant, which is included in the 

docket. There were no comments 

received in response to the notice of 

filing. 

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and 

Determination of Safety 

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

allows EPA to establish 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(b)(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. 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 . . . .’’ 

Consistent with FFDCA section 

408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in 

FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), 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 a tolerance for 

combined residues or residues of 

nitrapyrin and its metabolite, 6- 

chloropicolinic acid (6–CPA), in or on 

cottonseed crop subgroup 20C; cotton, 

gin byproducts; cotton, meal; rice, grain; 

and rice, straw at 4.0, 0.6, 6.0, 0.03 and 

0.15 parts per million (ppm), 

respectively. EPA’s assessment of 

exposures and risks associated with 

establishing the tolerance follows. 

In an effort to streamline its 

publications in the Federal Register, 

EPA is not reprinting sections that 

repeat what has been previously 

published for tolerance rulemaking of 

the same pesticide chemical. Where 

scientific information concerning a 

particular chemical remains unchanged, 

the content of those sections would not 

vary between tolerance rulemaking and 

republishing the same sections is 

unnecessary. EPA considers referral 

back to those sections as sufficient to 

provide an explanation of the 

information EPA considered in making 

its safety determination for the new 

rulemaking. 

EPA has previously published a 

number of tolerance rulemakings for 

nitrapyrin, in which EPA concluded, 

based on the available information, that 

there is a reasonable certainty that no 

harm would result from aggregate 

exposure to nitrapyrin and established 

tolerances for residues of that chemical. 

EPA is incorporating previously 

published sections from those 

rulemakings as described further in this 

rulemaking, as they remain unchanged. 

On August 27, 2019, EPA published in 

the Federal Register a final rule 

establishing tolerances for residues of 

nitrapyrin in or on sugar beet molasses, 

sugar beet roots, sugar beet tops, 

rapeseed seed, and the vegetable, 

tuberous and corm, crop subgroup 1C. 

See (85 FR 48651) (FRL–10009–42). 

That document contains a summary of 

the toxicological profile, assumptions 

for dietary exposure assessment, 

cumulative risk, and the safety factor for 

children, which have not changed. More 

detailed information on the subject 

action to establish a tolerance in or on 

cotton and rice can be found in the 

document titled, ‘‘Nitrapyrin. Human 

Health Risk Assessment for New Uses 

in/on Cotton and Rice,’’ dated December 

8, 2021 by going to https://

www.regulations.gov. The referenced 

document is available in the docket 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0352. 

Toxicological profile. For a discussion 

of the Toxicological Profile of 

nitrapyrin, see Unit III of the August 12, 

2020 rulemaking (85 FR 48651) (FRL– 

10009–42). There have been no changes 

to the toxicological endpoints since the 

last risk assessment. 

Toxicological points of departure/ 

Levels of concern. For a summary of the 

Toxicological Points of Departure/ 

Levels of Concern for nitrapyrin, see the 

document titled: ‘‘Nitrapyrin. Human 

Health Risk Assessment for New Uses 

in/on Cotton and Rice,’’ dated December 

8, 2021, in docket number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2021–0352. 

Exposure assessment. EPA’s dietary 

exposure assessments have been 

updated to include the additional 

exposure from the new uses of 

nitrapyrin on cotton and rice. The 

assessment used the same assumptions 

as the August 12, 2020 final rule 

concerning tolerance-level residues, 

default processing factors for all 

processed commodities, and 100 

percent crop treated. 

Drinking water exposure. EPA has 

revised the nitrapyrin drinking water 

assessment since the August 12, 2020 

final rule. Surface water and 

groundwater modeling were simulated 

using the Pesticide in Water Calculator 

(PWC version 2.0; Sep. 18, 2020) for use 

on cotton. The Pesticides in Flooded 

Applications Model (PFAM; version 2.0; 

Sep. 27, 2016) was also used in surface 

water modeling for use on rice. The 

highest estimated drinking water 

concentrations (EDWCs) are 124 mg/L for 

acute exposure and 111 mg/L for chronic 

exposure from ground water sources 

based on the Florida (FL) central ridge 

model scenarios. 

Non-occupational exposure. There are 

no currently registered or proposed 

residential uses for nitrapyrin; therefore, 

residential handler and post-application 

exposure and risks were not assessed. 

Cumulative exposures. Unlike other 

pesticides for which EPA has followed 

a cumulative risk approach based on a 

common mechanism of toxicity, EPA 

has not made a common mechanism of 

toxicity finding as to nitrapyrin and any 

other substances and nitrapyrin does 

not appear to produce a toxic metabolite 

produced by other substances. For the 

purposes of this action, therefore, EPA 

has not assumed that nitrapyrin has a 

common mechanism of toxicity with 

other substances. 

Safety factor for infants and children. 

EPA continues to conclude that there 

are reliable data to support the 

reduction of the Food Quality Protection 

Act (FQPA) safety factor. See Unit III of 

the August 12, 2020 final rule for a 

discussion of the Agency’s rationale for 

that determination. 

Aggregate risk and determination of 

safety. EPA determines whether acute 

and chronic dietary pesticide exposures 

are safe by comparing aggregate 

exposure estimates to the acute 

population adjusted dose (aPAD) and 

the chronic population adjusted dose 

(cPAD). Short-, intermediate-, and 

chronic term risks are evaluated by 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
3448 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

comparing the estimated aggregate food, 

water, and residential exposure to the 

appropriate points of departure to 

ensure that an adequate margin of 

exposure (MOE) exists. For linear cancer 

risks, EPA calculates the lifetime 

probability of acquiring cancer given the 

estimated aggregate exposure. 

The acute dietary (food and water) 

risk estimates are below EPA’s level of 

concern for all population subgroups 

(<100% of the acute population 

adjusted dose (aPAD)). The population 

subgroup with the highest acute risk 

estimate is all-infants (<1 year-old), at 

14% of the aPAD. The chronic dietary 

(food and water) risk estimates are 

below HED’s level of concern for all 

population subgroups (<100% of the 

chronic adjusted population dose 

(cPAD)). The population subgroup with 

the highest chronic risk estimate is 

children (1 to 2 years old) at 26% of the 

cPAD. 

Since there are no registered 

residential uses, the acute and chronic 

aggregate exposure and risk assessment 

are equivalent to the dietary (food and 

drinking water) exposure and risk 

estimates and are below EPA’s level of 

concern (<26% of the cPAD). Nitrapyrin 

is classified as ‘‘not likely to be 

carcinogenic to humans at doses that do 

not result in constitutive androstane 

receptor (CAR) activation as indicated 

by Cyp2b10 expression’’. Therefore, the 

chronic dietary endpoint and 

assessment are protective of all chronic 

risks, including potential carcinogenic 

effects. More detailed information can 

be found at https://www.regulations.gov 

in the document titled ‘‘Nitrapyrin. 

Human Health Risk Assessment for the 

Section 3 Registration Action for New 

Uses on in/on Cotton and Rice,’’ dated 

December 8, 2021 by going to https://

www.regulations.gov. The referenced 

document is available in the docket 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0352. 

IV. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

Adequate enforcement methodology 

(gas chromatography with electron 

capture detection) is available to enforce 

the tolerance expression. Seven 

analytical methods are available in 

Volume II of the Pesticide Analytical 

Manual (PAM II—Pesticide Reg. Sec. 

180.350) for tolerance enforcement for 

nitrapyrin and/or for metabolite 6–CPA. 

B. International Residue Limits 

Codex and Canada have not 

established maximum residue limits 

(MRLs) for residues of nitrapyrin. 

Therefore, there are no issues related to 

international harmonization. A 

summary of the MRLs can be found in 

Appendix D of the document titled 

‘‘Nitrapyrin. Human Health Risk 

Assessment for the Section 3 

Registration Action for New Uses on in/ 

on Cotton and Rice,’’ dated December 8, 

2021 by going to https://

www.regulations.gov. The referenced 

document is available in the docket 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0352. 

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For 

Tolerances 

Rice straw is no longer considered a 

significant livestock feed item and a 

tolerance is therefore unnecessary. 

Additionally, tolerance values for 

cottonseed crop subgroup 20C, cotton, 

gin byproducts and cotton meal are 

being established consistent with the 

Agency’s rounding class practice. 

V. Conclusion 

Therefore, tolerances are established 

for the residues of nitrapyrin in or on 

cottonseed crop subgroup 20C at 4 parts 

per million (ppm); cotton, gin 

byproducts at 0.6 ppm; cotton, meal at 

6 ppm; and rice, grain at 0.03 ppm. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action establishes tolerances 

under FFDCA section 408(d) in 

response to a petition submitted to the 

Agency. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) has exempted these types 

of actions from review under Executive 

Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993). Because this action 

has been exempted from review under 

Executive Order 12866, this action is 

not subject to Executive Order 13211, 

entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive 

Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997). This action does not 

contain any information collections 

subject to OMB approval under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 

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

any special considerations under 

Executive Order 12898, entitled 

‘‘Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994). 

Since tolerances and exemptions that 

are established on the basis of a petition 

under FFDCA section 408(d), such as 

the tolerances 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). 

VII. 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 19, 2022. 

Anita Pease, 

Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the 

preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR 

chapter I as follows: 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 3449 

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 § 180.350, amend the table in 

paragraph (a) by adding a table heading 

and, in alphabetical order, the entries 

‘‘Cottonseed subgroup 20C’’; ‘‘Cotton, 

gin byproduct’’; ‘‘Cotton, meal’’; and 

‘‘Rice, grain’’ to read as follows: 

§ 180.350 Nitrapyrin; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a) 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Cottonseed subgroup 20C ... 4 

Cotton, gin byproduct ........... 0.6 

Cotton, meal ......................... 6 

* * * * * 

Rice, grain ............................ 0.03 

* * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2022–01248 Filed 1–21–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Parts 114, 116, 118, 122, 175, 

177, 181, and 185 

[Docket No. USCG–2021–0306] 

RIN 1625–AC69 

Fire Safety of Small Passenger 

Vessels; Correction 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Interim rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is correcting 

an interim rule that appeared in the 

Federal Register on December 27, 2021. 

The interim rule announced changes to 

small passenger vessel fire safety 

regulations. The interim rule has an 

effective date of March 28, 2022. This 

correction fixes incorrect cross 

references in the regulatory text of that 

interim rule. 

DATES: This correction is effective on 

March 28, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this correction, 

please contact Lieutenant Carmine Faul, 

Coast Guard; telephone 202–475–1357, 

email carmine.a.faul@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Correction 

In FR Doc. 2021–27549, published at 

86 FR 73160 on December 27, 2021, the 

Coast Guard is correcting incorrect cross 

references in the regulatory text of 

§ 114.110(g)(1). On page 73171, 

published in the first column, the 

interim rule referenced incorrect 

paragraphs in the second amendatory 

instruction for § 114.110(g)(1). There, 

the interim rule incorrectly referenced 

the requirements in §§ 118.400(c) and 

118.500r. We are correcting the interim 

rule to instead cross reference 

§§ 118.400(d) and 118.500 in 

§ 114.110(g)(1). The interim rule added 

new § 118.400(d) which requires certain 

small passenger vessels to install an 

interconnected fire detection system. 

Referencing paragraph (c) of § 118.400 

was a typographical error. Additionally, 

§ 118.500r does not exist. The ‘‘r’’ is a 

typographical error. 

In FR Doc. 2021–27549, appearing on 

page 73171 in the Federal Register of 

Monday, December 27, 2021, the 

following correction is made: 

§ 114.110 [Corrected] 

■ 1. On page 73171, in the first column, 

in part 114, in amendment 2, in the 

regulatory text of § 114.110(g)(1), the 

text ‘‘118.400(c) and 118.500r’’ is 

corrected to read ‘‘118.400(d) and 

118.500’’. 

Dated: January 19, 2022. 

M.T. Cunningham, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01247 Filed 1–21–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1