7388 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

This action is subject to the 

Congressional Review Act, and EPA will 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. This action 

is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 

U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by April 11, 2022. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Sulfur oxides. 

Dated: February 2, 2022. 

Debra Shore, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 

as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 52.1170, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding an entry for 

‘‘2010 SO2 Nonattainment New Source 

Review Certification’’ immediately after 

the entry for ‘‘2010 Sulfur Dioxide Clean 

Data Determination’’ and adding an 

entry under the subheading ‘‘Emissions 

Inventories’’ for ‘‘2010 SO2 Standard 

2014 base year’’ after the entry for ‘‘2010 

SO2 Standard 2012 base year’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1170 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MICHIGAN NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory SIP 

provision 

Applicable geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State 

submittal 

date 

EPA approval date Comments 

*******

2010 SO2 Nonattainment New 

Source Review Certification.

St. Clair County (part) ................... 6/30/2021 2/9/2022, [INSERT Federal Register CITATION].

* * * * * * * 

Emissions Inventories 

*******

2010 SO2 Standard 2014 base 

year.

St. Clair County (part) ................... 6/30/2021 2/9/2022, [INSERT Federal Register CITATION].

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2022–02676 Filed 2–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2020–0419 and EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2021–0020; FRL–9482–01–OCSPP] 

Fludioxonil; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes or 

amends tolerances for residues of 

fludioxonil in or on multiple crops that 

are referenced later in this document. 

The Interregional Project Number 4 (IR– 

4) and Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC 

requested these tolerances under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

February 9, 2022. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before April 11, 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 dockets for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

numbers EPA–HQ–OPP–2020–0419 and 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0020, are available 

online at https://www.regulations.gov or 

in-person 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. 

Due to the public health emergency, 

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, docket 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 7389 

access, visit https://www.epa.gov/ 

dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marietta Echeverria, Acting Director, 

Registration Division (7505P), Office of 

Pesticide Programs, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001; 

main telephone number: (703) 305– 

7090; 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 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 numbers EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2020–0419 and EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2021–0020 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 April 

11, 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 numbers EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2020–0419 and EPA–HQ–OPP–2021– 

0020, 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 

dockets generally, is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

II. Summary of Petitioned-For 

Tolerance 

In the Federal Register of June 28, 

2021 (86 FR 33922) (FRL–10025–08) 

and in the Federal Register of February 

25, 2021 (86 FR 11488) (FRL–10020–47), 

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 0E8847) by IR–4, 

North Carolina State University, 1730 

Varsity Drive, Venture IV, Suite 210, 

Raleigh, NC 27606. The February 25, 

2021, notice erroneously identified 

Syngenta as the petitioner. The petition 

requested that 40 CFR 180.516 be 

amended by establishing tolerances for 

residues of fludioxonil, [4-(2, 2-difluoro1,3-benzodioxol-4-yl)-1H-pyrrole-3- 

carbonitrile] in or on the raw 

agricultural commodities: Carrot, roots 

at 7 parts per million (ppm); Celtuce at 

15 ppm; Cottonseed subgroup 20C at 

0.05 ppm; Dragon fruit at 20 ppm; 

Durian at 20 ppm; Fennel, Florence, 

fresh leaves and stalk at 15 ppm; 

Jackfruit at 20 ppm; Leaf petiole 

vegetable subgroup 22B at 15 ppm; 

Leafy greens subgroup 4–16A at 30 

ppm; Mangosteen at 5 ppm; Persimmon, 

Japanese at 5 ppm; Sunflower subgroup 

20B at 0.01 ppm; Tropical and 

subtropical, small fruit, inedible peel, 

subgroup 24A at 20 ppm; Vegetable, 

legume, group 6, except bean, dry and 

bean, succulent at 0.01 ppm; Vegetable, 

root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B, 

except carrot and ginseng at 0.75 ppm; 

and Vegetable, tuberous and corm, 

subgroup 1C, except yam, true, tuber at 

6 ppm. The petition also requested to 

remove established tolerances for 

residues of fludioxonil, [4-(2, 2-difluoro1,3- benzodioxol-4-yl)-1H-pyrrole-3- 

carbonitrile] in or on the raw 

agricultural commodities: Carrots at 7.0 

ppm; Cotton, undelinted seed at 0.05 

ppm; Dragon fruit at 1.0 ppm; Leaf 

petioles subgroup 4B at 15 ppm; Leafy 

greens subgroup 4A at 30 ppm; Longan 

at 20 ppm; Lychee at 20 ppm; Melon 

subgroup 9A at 0.03 ppm; Safflower, 

seed at 0.01 ppm; Spanish lime at 20 

ppm; Sunflower, seed at 0.01 ppm; 

Vegetable, legume, group 6 at 0.01 ppm; 

Vegetable, root, except sugar beet, 

subgroup 1B at 0.75 ppm; and 

Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 

1C at 6.0 ppm. That document 

referenced a summary of the petition 

prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection, 

the registrant, which is available in 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2020– 

0419 at https://www.regulations.gov. 

There were no comments received in 

response to the notice of filing. 

Also, in the Federal Register of 

February 25, 2021 (86 FR 11488) (FRL– 

10020–47) 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 0F8858) by 

Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. 

Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419. The 

petition requested that 40 CFR 180.516 

be amended by establishing tolerances 

for residues of fludioxonil, [4-(2, 2- 

difluoro-1,3-benzodioxol-4-yl)-1Hpyrrole-3-carbonitrile] in or on the raw 

agricultural commodities tree nut crop 

group 14–12, except pistachios at 0.2 

ppm and almond hulls at 15 ppm. That 

document referenced a summary of the 

petition prepared by Syngenta Crop 

Protection, the registrant, which is 

available in docket ID number EPA– 

HQ–OPP–2021–0020 at https://

www.regulations.gov. There were no 

comments received in response to the 

notice of filing. 

Based upon review of the data 

supporting the petition, EPA is 

establishing one tolerance at a different 

level than petitioned for, has modified 

the nut tolerances, and has modified 

some of the commodity definitions. A 

discussion of these modifications can be 

found in unit IV.C. 

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and 

Determination of Safety 

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

EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal 

limit for a pesticide chemical residue in 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
7390 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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 fludioxonil 

including exposure resulting from the 

tolerance established by this action. 

EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with fludioxonil 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 

fludioxonil in which EPA concluded, 

based on the available information, that 

there is a reasonable certainty that no 

harm would result from aggregate 

exposure to fludioxonil 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. 

Toxicological profile. For a discussion 

of the Toxicological Profile of 

fludioxonil, see Unit III.A. of the 

November 6, 2018, final rulemaking (83 

FR 55491) (FRL–9982–75). 

Toxicological points of departure/ 

Levels of concern. For a summary of the 

Toxicological Points of Departure/ 

Levels of Concern for fludioxonil used 

for human risk assessment, please 

reference Unit III.B. of the August 14, 

2015, rulemaking (80 FR 48743) (FRL– 

9931–06). 

Exposure assessment. Much of the 

exposure assessment remains the same 

although updates have occurred to 

accommodate exposures from the 

petitioned-for tolerances. These updates 

are discussed in this section; for a 

description of the rest of the EPA 

approach to and assumptions for the 

exposure assessment, please reference 

Unit III.C. of the November 6, 2018, 

rulemaking. 

EPA’s dietary exposure assessments 

have been updated to include the 

additional exposure from the new uses 

of fludioxonil on the crops and the crop 

group conversions and expansions 

requested in these actions. The dietary 

exposure assessment used the same 

assumptions as the November 6, 2018, 

final rule, including tolerance level 

residues and 100 percent crop treated 

(PCT). 

Drinking water exposure. The new 

uses do not result in an increase in the 

estimated residue levels in drinking 

water, so the estimated drinking water 

concentrations used in 2018 final rule 

are the same as those used in this 

assessment. 

Non-occupational exposure. The 

assessment used the same assumptions 

as the November 6, 2018, final rule. The 

residential exposures used in the 

aggregate assessment are inhalation 

exposures from handlers applying 

paints with airless sprayers for adults 

and incidental oral exposures (hand-tomouth) from post-application exposure 

to outdoor treated turf for children 1 to 

<2 years old. 

Cumulative exposure. 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 fludioxonil and 

any other substances and fludioxonil 

does not appear to produce a toxic 

metabolite produced by other 

substances. For the purposes of this 

tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not 

assumed that fludioxonil 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.D. 

of the November 6, 2018, rulemaking for 

a discussion of the Agency’s rationale 

for that determination. 

Aggregate risks 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 

chronic population adjusted dose 

(cPAD). Short-, intermediate-, and 

chronic-term risks are evaluated by 

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. 

An acute dietary exposure assessment 

was not performed as there were no 

appropriate toxicological effects 

attributable to a single exposure (dose) 

observed in available oral toxicity 

studies, including maternal toxicity in 

the developmental toxicity studies. 

Fludioxonil is not expected to pose an 

acute risk. Chronic dietary risks are 

below the Agency’s level of concern of 

100% of the cPAD: They are 52% of the 

cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the 

group with the highest exposure. EPA 

has concluded the combined short-term 

food, water, and residential exposures 

result in margins of exposure above the 

level of concern of 100 for all scenarios 

assessed and are not of concern. 

Intermediate- and long-term aggregate 

risk assessments were not performed 

because there are no registered or 

proposed uses of fludioxonil that result 

in intermediate- or long-term residential 

exposures. A cancer dietary exposure 

and risk assessment was not conducted 

for fludioxonil as it is a Group D 

chemical—not classifiable as to human 

carcinogenicity. 

Therefore, based on the risk 

assessments and information described 

above, EPA concludes there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result to the general population, or to 

infants and children, from aggregate 

exposure to fludioxonil residues. More 

detailed information on this action can 

be found in the document titled 

‘‘Fludioxonil. Human Health Risk 

Assessment for Section 3 Registration 

for Crop Group Conversions/Expansions 

for Cottonseed subgroup 20C, Fennel, 

Florence, Fresh Leaves and Stalk; Leaf 

Petiole Vegetable Subgroup 22B; Leafy 

Greens Subgroup 4–16A; Sunflower 

Subgroup 20B, Tropical and 

Subtropical, Small Fruit, Inedible Peel, 

Subgroup 24A and to Establish an 

Individual Tolerance for Residues in/on 

Tree Nuts Crop Group 14–12, Dragon 

Fruit, Durian, Japanese Persimmon, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 7391 

Jackfruit, and Mangosteen.’’ (hereafter 

‘‘the Fludioxonil Human Health Risk 

Assessment’’) in docket ID numbers 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2020–0419 and EPA– 

HQ–OPP–2021–0020. 

IV. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

For a discussion of the available 

analytical enforcement method, see Unit 

IV.A. of the November 6, 2018, 

rulemaking. 

B. International Residue Limits 

In making its tolerance decisions, EPA 

seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with 

international standards whenever 

possible, consistent with U.S. food 

safety standards and agricultural 

practices. EPA considers the 

international maximum residue limits 

(MRLs) established by the Codex 

Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as 

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

The U.S. tolerances for cottonseed 

subgroup 20C; leaf petiole vegetable 

subgroup 22B; and persimmon, Japanese 

are harmonized with Codex MRLs. 

There are no Codex MRLs for many of 

the commodities included in this action, 

including almond; almond, hulls; 

celtuce; dragon fruit; durian; jackfruit; 

mangosteen; pecan; sugar apple; 

sunflower subgroup 20B; and tropical 

and subtropical, small fruit, inedible 

peel, subgroup 24A. 

Several U.S. tolerances are higher 

than the corresponding Codex MRLs. 

The following U.S. tolerances cannot be 

harmonized with Codex because U.S. 

growers could have violative residues 

despite legal use of fludioxonil: Carrot, 

roots at 7 ppm (Codex MRL is 1 ppm) 

and fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and 

stalk at 15 ppm (Codex MRL is 9 ppm). 

The U.S. tolerance for vegetable, 

legume group 6 at 0.01 ppm reflects 

seed treatment use. It is not appropriate 

to harmonize with the significantly 

higher Codex MRL of 0.6 ppm because 

the tolerance would not be effective for 

determining misuse. For a few other 

U.S. subgroup tolerances, EPA is not 

harmonizing with relevant Codex MRLs, 

which are established for individual 

commodities and vary widely among 

those commodities. The available 

representative commodity data support 

the crop subgroup and EPA’s general 

approach is to establish a crop group or 

subgroup tolerance when supported by 

available representative commodity 

data, rather than break up the group or 

subgroup for harmonization purposes. 

The U.S. tolerance for leafy greens 

subgroup 4–16A at 30 ppm is not 

harmonized with all relevant Codex 

MRLs for commodities in that group 

(e.g., head lettuce at 10 ppm and leaf 

lettuce at 40 ppm), although it is 

harmonized with the tolerance for 

spinach. The registrant requested that 

the leafy greens subgroup 4–16A 

tolerance be harmonized with the 

Canadian MRL of 30 ppm because 

Canada is a major trading partner with 

the U.S. for these crops. For vegetable, 

root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B, the 

U.S. tolerance is harmonized with the 

Canadian MRL at 0.75 ppm, rather than 

splitting the group and harmonizing 

individually with the Codex MRLs of 4 

ppm for ginseng, root and 0.3 ppm for 

radish, root. Finally, the U.S. tolerance 

for vegetable, tuberous and corm, 

subgroup 1C is harmonized with the 

Canadian MRL at 6 ppm, rather than 

splitting the group and harmonizing 

individually with the Codex MRLs of 5 

ppm for potato and 10 ppm for sweet 

potato. Finally, EPA is not harmonizing 

the U.S. tolerance for vegetable, 

cucurbit, group 9 with the Codex MRL 

of 0.5 ppm because the registrant 

requested that EPA harmonize this 

tolerance group with the Canadian MRL 

of 0.45 ppm instead because Canada is 

a major trading partner for these crops. 

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For 

Tolerances 

One petitioner requested an exception 

for carrot and ginseng from vegetable, 

root, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B; 

and yam, true, tuber from vegetable, 

tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C. EPA is 

not excepting carrot and yam from their 

respective subgroups because 

representative crops may not be 

excepted from a crop subgroup under 40 

CFR 180.40(h). Although an individual 

tolerance has been established for 

ginseng, EPA does not believe it is 

necessary to exclude ginseng from the 

vegetable, root, except sugar beet, 

subgroup 1B tolerance, as residues will 

be enforced according to the higher 

tolerance. EPA is adjusting the tolerance 

level for vegetable, tuberous and corm, 

subgroup 1C to be consistent with 

Agency rounding class practice. For tree 

nut crop group 14–12, maximum 

fludioxonil residues in representative 

crops were not within a factor of five of 

each other. Based on the residue data, 

the recommended tolerance for residues 

in/on almond is 0.2 ppm and the 

recommended tolerance for residues in/ 

on pecan is 0.01 ppm. In those 

circumstances, the Agency will 

normally establish individual crop 

tolerances, if supported by the available 

residue data. EPA has determined that 

the available data supports individual 

nut tolerance levels, based on 

translation from the representative 

commodities to the various nut 

commodities as specified in the 2010 

EPA analysis of IR–4’s petition to 

amend crop group. See U.S. EPA, 

Memorandum re: ‘‘Crop Grouping—Part 

IX: Analysis of the USDA IR–4 Petition 

to Amend the Crop Group Regulation 40 

CFR 180.41(c)(16) and Commodity 

Definitions (40 CFR 180.1(g)) Related to 

the Crop Group 14 Tree Nuts. Part I. 

Analysis.’’ at 134–136 (Sept. 30, 2010). 

Specifically, EPA is establishing 

tolerances of 0.2 ppm for the nut 

commodities that identified almond as 

the representative commodity and 

tolerances of 0.01 ppm for the nut 

commodities that identified pecan as 

the representative commodity. 

V. Conclusion 

Therefore, tolerances are established 

for residues of fludioxonil in or on 

African Tree Nut at 0.01 ppm; Almond 

at 0.2 ppm; Almond, hulls at 15 ppm; 

Beechnut at 0.2 ppm; Brazil nut at 0.01 

ppm; Brazilian pine at 0.2 ppm; Bunya 

at 0.2 ppm; Bur oak at 0.01 ppm; 

Butternut at 0.01 ppm; Cajou at 0.01 

ppm; Candlenut at 0.2 ppm; Carrot, 

roots at 7 ppm; Cashew at 0.01 ppm; 

Celtuce at 15 ppm; Chestnut at 0.2 ppm; 

Chinquapin at 0.2 ppm; Coconut at 0.01 

ppm; Coquito nut at 0.01 ppm; 

Cottonseed subgroup 20C at 0.05 ppm; 

Dika nut at 0.01 ppm; Durian at 20 ppm; 

Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk 

at 15 ppm; Ginkgo at 0.2 ppm; Guiana 

chestnut at 0.01 ppm; Hazelnut at 0.01 

ppm; Heartnut at 0.01 ppm; Hickory nut 

at 0.01 ppm; Jackfruit at 20 ppm; 

Japanese horse-chestnut at 0.01 ppm; 

Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B at 

15 ppm; Leafy greens subgroup 4–16A 

at 30 ppm; Macadamia nut at 0.01 ppm; 

Mangosteen at 5 ppm; Mongongo nut at 

0.01 ppm; Monkey puzzle at 0.2 ppm; 

Monkey-pot at 0.01 ppm; Okari nut at 

0.2 ppm; Pachira nut at 0.01 ppm; Peach 

palm nut at 0.2 ppm; Pecan at 0.01 ppm; 

Pequi at 0.2 ppm; Persimmon, Japanese 

at 5 ppm; Pili nut at 0.2 ppm; Pine nut 

at 0.2 ppm; Sapucaia nut at 0.01 ppm; 

Sunflower subgroup 20B at 0.01 ppm; 

Tropical almond at 0.2 ppm; Tropical 

and subtropical, small fruit, inedible 

peel, subgroup 24A at 20 ppm; Walnut, 

black at 0.01 ppm; Walnut, English at 

0.01 ppm; and Yellowhorn at 0.01 ppm. 

EPA is amending the tolerance for 

Dragon fruit from 1.0 ppm to 20 ppm, 

the tolerance for Pistachio from 0.10 

ppm to 0.1 ppm, and the tolerance for 

Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 

1C from 6.0 ppm to 6 ppm. The 

commodity definition for Vegetable, 

legume, group 6 is amended to 

Vegetable, legume, group 6, except bean 

while maintaining the tolerance at 0.01 

ppm. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
7392 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

Additionally, the following tolerances 

are removed as unnecessary due to the 

establishment of the above tolerances: 

Carrots at 7.0 ppm; Cotton, undelinted 

seed at 0.05 ppm; Leaf petioles 

subgroup 4B at 15 ppm; Leafy greens 

subgroup 4A at 30 ppm; Longan at 20 

ppm; Lychee at 20 ppm; Safflower, seed 

at 0.01 ppm; Spanish lime at 20 ppm; 

and Sunflower, seed at 0.01 ppm. In 

addition, EPA is removing the tolerance 

for the Melon subgroup, since it is 

unnecessary due to the tolerance for 

cucurbit vegetables, group 9 at 0.45 

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 to 

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 (CRA) 

Pursuant to the CRA (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: February 2, 2022. 

Marietta Echeverria, 

Acting Director, Registration Division, Office 

of Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the 

preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR 

chapter 1 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 § 180.516, amend the table in 

paragraph (a) (1) by: 

■ a. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entries ‘‘African Tree Nut’’; ‘‘Almond’’; 

‘‘Almond, hulls’’; ‘‘Beechnut’’; ‘‘Brazil 

nut’’; ‘‘Brazilian pine’’; ‘‘Bunya’’; ‘‘Bur 

oak’’; ‘‘Butternut’’; ‘‘Cajou’’; and 

‘‘Candlenut’’. 

■ b. Removing the entry for ‘‘Carrots’’. 

■ c. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entries ‘‘Carrot, roots’’; ‘‘Cashew’’; 

‘‘Celtuce’’; ‘‘Chestnut’’; ‘‘Chinquapin’’; 

‘‘Coconut’’; ‘‘Coquito nut’’; and 

‘‘Cottonseed subgroup 20C’’. 

■ d. Removing the entry for ‘‘Cotton, 

undelinted seed’’. 

■ e. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entry ‘‘Dika nut’’. 

■ f. Revising the entry for ‘‘‘‘Dragon 

fruit’’. 

■ g. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entries ‘‘Durian’’; ‘‘Fennel, Florence, 

fresh leaves and stalk’’; ‘‘Ginkgo’’; 

‘‘Guiana chestnut’’; ‘‘Hazelnut’’; 

‘‘Heartnut’’; ‘‘Hickory nut’’; ‘‘Jackfruit’’; 

and ‘‘Japanese horse-chestnut’’. 

■ h. Removing the entry for ‘‘Leaf 

petioles subgroup 4B’’. 

■ i. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entry ‘‘Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 

22B’’. 

■ j. Removing the entry for ‘‘Leafy 

greens subgroup 4A’’. 

■ k. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entry ‘‘Leafy greens subgroup 4–16A’’. 

■ l. Removing the entries for ‘‘Longan’’; 

and ‘‘Lychee’’. 

■ m. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entries ‘‘Macadamia nut’’; and 

‘‘Mangosteen’’. 

■ n. Removing the entry for ‘‘Melon 

subgroup 9A’’. 

■ o. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entries ‘‘Mongongo nut’’; ‘‘Monkey 

puzzle’’; ‘‘Monkey-pot’’; ‘‘Okari nut’’; 

‘‘Pachira nut’’; ‘‘Peach palm nut’’; 

‘‘Pecan’’; ‘‘Pequi’’; ‘‘Persimmon, 

Japanese’’; ‘‘Pili nut’’; and ‘‘Pine nut’’. 

■ p. Revising the entry for ‘‘Pistachio’’. 

■ q. Removing the entry for ‘‘Safflower, 

seed’’. 

■ r. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entry ‘‘Sapucaia nut’’. 

■ s. Removing the entries for ‘‘Spanish 

lime’’; and ‘‘Sunflower, seed’’. 

■ t. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entries ‘‘Sunflower subgroup 20B’’; 

‘‘Tropical almond’’; and ‘‘Tropical and 

subtropical, small fruit, inedible peel, 

subgroup 24A’’. 

■ u. Removing the entry for ‘‘Vegetable, 

legume, group 6’’. 

■ v. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entry ‘‘Vegetable, legume, group 6, 

except bean’’. 

■ w. Revising the entry for ‘‘Vegetable, 

tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C’’. 

■ x. Adding in alphabetical order the 

entries ‘‘Walnut, black’’; ‘‘Walnut, 

English’’; and ‘‘Yellowhorn’’. 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 180.516 Fludioxonil; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 7393 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1) 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

African Tree Nut .................................... 0.01 

Almond .................................................. 0.2 

Almond, hulls ......................................... 15 

* * * * * 

Beechnut ............................................... 0.2 

* * * * * 

Brazil nut ............................................... 0.01 

Brazilian pine ......................................... 0.2 

Bunya .................................................... 0.2 

Bur oak .................................................. 0.01 

* * * * * 

Butternut ................................................ 0.01 

Cajou ..................................................... 0.01 

Candlenut .............................................. 0.2 

* * * * * 

Carrot, roots .......................................... 7 

Cashew .................................................. 0.01 

Celtuce .................................................. 15 

* * * * * 

Chestnut ................................................ 0.2 

Chinquapin ............................................ 0.2 

* * * * * 

Coconut ................................................. 0.01 

Coquito nut ............................................ 0.01 

* * * * * 

Cottonseed subgroup 20C .................... 0.05 

* * * * * 

Dika nut ................................................. 0.01 

Dragon fruit ............................................ 20 

Durian .................................................... 20 

* * * * * 

Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and 

stalk .................................................... 15 

* * * * * 

Ginkgo ................................................... 0.2 

* * * * * 

Guiana chestnut .................................... 0.01 

Hazelnut ................................................ 0.01 

Heartnut ................................................. 0.01 

* * * * * 

Hickory nut ............................................ 0.01 

* * * * * 

Jackfruit ................................................. 20 

Japanese horse-chestnut ...................... 0.01 

* * * * * 

Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B ... 15 

Leafy greens subgroup 4–16A .............. 30 

Macadamia nut ...................................... 0.01 

* * * * * 

Mangosteen ........................................... 5 

Mongongo nut ....................................... 0.01 

Monkey puzzle ...................................... 0.2 

Monkey-pot ............................................ 0.01 

Okari nut ................................................ 0.2 

* * * * * 

Pachira nut ............................................ 0.01 

* * * * * 

Peach palm nut ..................................... 0.2 

* * * * * 

Pecan .................................................... 0.01 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1)— 

Continued 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Pequi ..................................................... 0.2 

Persimmon, Japanese ........................... 5 

Pili nut .................................................... 0.2 

Pine nut ................................................. 0.2 

* * * * * 

Pistachio ................................................ 0.1 

* * * * * 

Sapucaia nut ......................................... 0.01 

* * * * * 

Sunflower subgroup 20B ....................... 0.01 

* * * * * 

Tropical almond ..................................... 0.2 

Tropical and subtropical, small fruit, inedible peel, subgroup 24A ................. 20 

* * * * * 

Vegetable, legume, group 6, except 

bean ................................................... 0.01 

* * * * * 

Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C ............................................ 6 

Walnut, black ......................................... 0.01 

Walnut, English ..................................... 0.01 

* * * * * 

Yellowhorn ............................................. 0.01 

1There are no U.S. registrations as of July 28, 

2021. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2022–02560 Filed 2–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 501, 502, 511, 539, 552, 

and 570 

[GSAR Case 2016–G511 Docket No. 2021– 

0018; Sequence No. 1] 

RIN 3090–AJ84 

General Services Acquisition 

Regulation (GSAR); Contract 

Requirements for GSA Information 

Systems 

AGENCY: Office of Acquisition Policy, 

General Services Administration (GSA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: GSA is amending the General 

Services Administration Acquisition 

Regulation (GSAR) to streamline and 

update requirements for contracts that 

involve GSA information systems. The 

revision of GSA’s cybersecurity and 

other information technology 

requirements will lead to the 

elimination of a duplicative and 

outdated provision and clause from the 

GSAR. The final rule will replace the 

outdated text with existing policies of 

the GSA Office of the Chief Information 

Officer (OCIO) and provide centralized 

guidance to ensure consistent 

application across the organization. The 

updated GSA policy will align 

cybersecurity requirements based on the 

items being procured by ensuring 

contract requirements are coordinated 

with GSA’s Chief Information Security 

Officer and included in all applicable 

solicitations and contracts. 

DATES: Effective March 11, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Johnnie McDowell, Procurement 

Analyst, at 202–718–6112 or 

gsarpolicy@gsa.gov, for clarification of 

content. For information pertaining to 

status or publication schedules, contact 

the Regulatory Secretariat Division at 

202–501–4755 or gsaregsec@gsa.gov. 

Please cite GSAR Case 2016–G511. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

GSA published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register at 86 FR 50689 on 

September 10, 2021, to amend the 

General Services Administration 

Regulations (GSAR) to revise GSAR part 

511, Describing Agency Needs, part 539, 

Acquisition Information Technology, 

and other related parts; to maintain 

consistency with the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR); and to 

incorporate and consolidate existing 

cybersecurity and other information 

technology requirements previously 

implemented through various Office of 

the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) or 

agency policies. 

In general, the changes are necessary 

to bring long-standing GSA information 

system practices into the GSAR, 

consolidating policy into one area. 

Because of that consolidation, 

contractors may need less time and 

fewer resources to read and understand 

all the requirements relevant to their 

contract. 

II. Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 40 of the United States Code 

(U.S.C.) Section 121 authorizes GSA to 

issue regulations, including the GSAR, 

to control the relationship between GSA 

and contractors. 

III. Discussion and Analysis 

The proposed rule received one 

comment. The General Services 

Administration has reviewed the 

comment in the development of the 

final rule. The comment was 

determined to be irrelevant. Therefore, 

no changes were made between the 

proposed rule and this final rule as a 

result of the comment. GSA for clarity 

of internal procedures made editorial 

changes to GSAR 511.171 Requirements 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1