42400 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 180.242 Thiabendazole; tolerances for 

residues. 

* * * * * 

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. 

Time-limited tolerances specified in the 

following table are established for 

residues of the thiabendazole, including 

its metabolites and degradates, in or on 

the specified agricultural commodities, 

resulting from use of the pesticide 

pursuant to FIFRA section 18 

emergency exemptions. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified 

below is to be determined by measuring 

only the sum of thiabendazole (2-(4- 

thiazolyl)benzimidazole) and its 

metabolite benzimidazole (free and 

conjugated), calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of 

thiabendazole. The tolerances expire on 

the date specified in the table. 

Commodity Parts per 

million Expiration date 

Pea, succulent shelled .................................................................................................................................... 0.02 December 31, 

2018. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–17681 Filed 7–16–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0585; FRL–9929–27] 

Distillates, (Fischer-Tropsch), Heavy, 

C18-C50, Branched, Cyclic and Linear; 

Exemption From the Requirement of a 

Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of distillates, 

(Fischer-Tropsch), heavy, C18-C50, 

branched, cyclic and linear when used 

as an inert ingredient (solvent, diluent 

and/or dust suppressant) in pesticide 

formulations applied to growing crops 

and raw agricultural commodities after 

harvest. On behalf of Pennzoil-Quaker 

State Company, Wagner Regulatory 

Associates, submitted a petition to EPA 

under the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting 

establishment of an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance. This 

regulation eliminates the need to 

establish a maximum permissible level 

for residues of distillates, (FischerTropsch), heavy, C18-C50, branched, 

cyclic and linear. 

DATES: This regulation is effective July 

17, 2015. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

September 15, 2015, 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–2012–0585, is 

available at 

http://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 (703) 305–5805. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susan Lewis, 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 40 CFR part 180 

through the Government Printing 

Office’s e-CFR site at http://

www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/

40tab_02.tpl. 

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–2012–0585 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 September 15, 2015. 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– 

2012–0585, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

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 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 42401 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

II. Petition for Exemption 

In the Federal Register of February 

27, 2013 (78 FR 13295) (FRL–9380–2), 

EPA issued a document pursuant to 

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

announcing the filing of a pesticide 

petition (PP 2E8049) by Wagner 

Regulatory Associates, P.O. Box 640, 

7217 Lancaster Pike, Suite A, 

Hockessin, DE 19707 on behalf of 

Pennzoil-Quaker State Company, 700 

Milam Street, Houston, TX 77002. The 

petition requested that 40 CFR 180.910 

be amended by establishing an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of distillates, 

(Fischer-Tropsch), heavy, C18-C50, 

branched, cyclic and linear (CAS Reg. 

No. 848301–69–9) when used as an inert 

ingredient as a solvent, diluent and/or 

dust suppressant in pesticide 

formulations applied to growing crops 

and raw agricultural commodities after 

harvest. That document referenced a 

summary of the petition prepared by 

Wagner Regulatory Associates on behalf 

of the Pennzoil-Quaker State Company, 

the petitioner, which is available in the 

docket, http://www.regulations.gov. 

There were no comments received in 

response to the notice of filing. 

III. Inert Ingredient Definition 

Inert ingredients are all ingredients 

that are not active ingredients as defined 

in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are 

not limited to, the following types of 

ingredients (except when they have a 

pesticidal efficacy of their own): 

Solvents such as alcohols and 

hydrocarbons; surfactants such as 

polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty 

acids; carriers such as clay and 

diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as 

carrageenan and modified cellulose; 

wetting, spreading, and dispersing 

agents; propellants in aerosol 

dispensers; microencapsulating agents; 

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

intended to imply nontoxicity; the 

ingredient may or may not be 

chemically active. Generally, EPA has 

exempted inert ingredients from the 

requirement of a tolerance based on the 

low toxicity of the individual inert 

ingredients. 

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and 

Determination of Safety 

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

allows EPA to establish an exemption 

from the requirement for a tolerance (the 

legal limit for a pesticide chemical 

residue in or on a food) only if EPA 

determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’ 

Section 408(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. . . .’’ 

EPA establishes exemptions from the 

requirement of a tolerance only in those 

cases where it can be clearly 

demonstrated that the risks from 

aggregate exposure to pesticide 

chemical residues under reasonably 

foreseeable circumstances will pose no 

appreciable risks to human health. In 

order to determine the risks from 

aggregate exposure to pesticide inert 

ingredients, the Agency considers the 

toxicity of the inert in conjunction with 

possible exposure to residues of the 

inert ingredient through food, drinking 

water, and through other exposures that 

occur as a result of pesticide use in 

residential settings. If EPA is able to 

determine that a finite tolerance is not 

necessary to ensure that there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

inert ingredient, an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance may be 

established. 

Consistent with FFDCA section 

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

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

reviewed the available scientific data 

and other relevant information in 

support of this action. EPA has 

sufficient data to assess the hazards of 

and to make a determination on 

aggregate exposure for distillates, 

(Fischer-Tropsch), heavy, C18-C50, 

branched, cyclic and linear including 

exposure resulting from the exemption 

established by this action. EPA’s 

assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with distillates, (FischerTropsch), heavy, C18-C50, branched, 

cyclic and linear follows. 

A. Toxicological Profile 

EPA has evaluated the available 

toxicity data and considered their 

validity, completeness, and reliability as 

well as the relationship of the results of 

the studies to human risk. EPA has also 

considered available information 

concerning the variability of the 

sensitivities of major identifiable 

subgroups of consumers, including 

infants and children. Specific 

information on the studies received and 

the nature of the adverse effects caused 

by distillates, (Fischer-Tropsch), heavy, 

C18-C50, branched, cyclic and linear 

(also known as GTL petroleum 

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

lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level 

(LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are 

discussed in this unit. 

The acute oral lethal dose (LD)50 is 

5,000 milligrams/kilograms (mg/kg) in 

rats. An acute dermal toxicity study was 

not conducted. There were no available 

dermal irritation data. It is not irritating 

to the rabbit eye. It is not a skin 

sensitizer in the guinea pig. 

In a 90-day oral toxicity study, GTL 

petroleum distillates administered by 

gavage resulted in a statistically 

significant increase in the incidence and 

severity of alveolar macrophage 

accumulations and increased 

vacuolation of alveolar macrophages in 

the lung in rats at the lowest observed 

adverse effect level (LOAEL) 200 mg/kg/ 

day. The No Observed Adverse Effect 

Level (NOAEL) was 50 mg/kg/day. 

In a 2-generation reproductive toxicity 

study via gavage in rats, GTL petroleum 

distillates caused maternal and offspring 

toxicity at 1,000 mg/kg/day. Toxicity 

was manifested as chronic interstitial/

alveolus inflammation in the lungs. The 

NOAEL for parental toxicity was 50 mg/ 

kg/day since animals in the mid dose 

(250 mg/kg/day) group were not 

analyzed. The reproduction NOAEL was 

1,000 mg/kg/day, the highest dose 

tested. 

Based upon subsequent studies 

conducted to evaluate the lung effects, 

the Agency determined that the effects 

observed in the 90-day oral toxicity 

study and 2-generation reproductive 

toxicity study were caused by gavage 

administration error and were not test 

material (dose) related. In a 28-day oral 

feeding study in rats at doses up to 

1,256 mg/kg/day, no adverse effects 

were observed. In a prenatal 

developmental toxicity study in the rat 

(by oral gavage) at doses up to 1,000 mg/ 

kg/day, no adverse toxicological effects 

were seen. The results of these two more 

recent studies alleviated the Agency’s 

concern for the lung effects seen in the 

90-day oral toxicity study and the 2- 

generation reproduction study. 

GTL petroleum distillates were 

evaluated for mutagenic potential using 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
42402 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

the Ames test, micronucleus assay, and 

gene mutation in mammalian cells. 

These studies were negative for the 

induction of mutations and aberrations. 

Therefore, GTL petroleum distillates are 

considered non-mutagenic. 

A neurotoxicity study was not 

conducted with GTL petroleum 

distillates. However, signs of 

neurotoxicity were not observed in 

acute toxicity tests at doses up to 5,000 

mg/kg body weight (bw)/day. Evidence 

of neurotoxicity was not observed in the 

90-day oral toxicity study in rats and in 

the 28-day oral feeding study in rats. 

An immunotoxicity study was not 

conducted with GTL petroleum 

distillates. However, alveolar 

macrophage accumulations and 

increased vacuolation of alveolar 

macrophages in the lung was observed 

in rats at >200 mg/kg/day in both the 

90-day oral and 2-generation 

reproduction toxicity studies. However, 

these effects were determined to be 

caused by gavage technique error rather 

than effects attributable to the test 

substance. 

There are no data specific to the 

absorption, metabolism, distribution 

and elimination of GTL petroleum 

distillates, however, the absorption of 

other mixtures of normal, branched and 

cyclic petroleum derived hydrocarbons 

is inversely related to carbon chain 

length and is independent of isomeric 

form, preparation process or type of 

product. Consequently, when 

administered orally, Fischer-Tropsch 

derived hydrocarbons in the range of 

C18-C50 are likely to be unabsorbed and 

excreted in the feces. 

Carcinogenicity studies with GTL 

petroleum distillates are not available 

for review. However, based on the lack 

of carcinogenicity of related linear, 

branched, and cyclic alkanes and the 

negligible absorption of GTL petroleum 

distillates, lack of systemic toxicity at 

the limit dose, lack of mutagenic 

concerns, GTL petroleum distillates are 

not expected to be carcinogenic. 

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/

Levels of Concern 

There were no adverse effects in 

repeat dose toxicity, reproductive, and 

developmental studies with GTL 

petroleum distillates at or above limit 

dose levels to either parental animals or 

their offspring. Thus, due to the low 

potential hazard and lack of hazard 

endpoint, the Agency has determined 

that a quantitative risk assessment using 

safety factors applied to a point of 

departure protective of an identified 

hazard endpoint is not appropriate for 

GTL petroleum distillates. 

C. Exposure Assessment 

1. Dietary exposure from food and 

feed uses and drinking water. In 

evaluating dietary exposure to GTL 

petroleum distillates, EPA considered 

exposure under the proposed exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance. 

Dietary exposure to GTL petroleum 

distillates can occur when eating food 

treated with pesticide formulation 

containing this inert ingredient. Since 

an endpoint for risk assessment was not 

identified, a quantitative dietary 

exposure assessment for GTL petroleum 

distillates was not conducted. 

2. From non-dietary exposure. The 

term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in 

this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure 

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

carpets, swimming pools, and hard 

surface disinfection on walls, floors, 

tables). 

GTL petroleum distillates may be 

used as an inert ingredient in 

agricultural pesticide products that 

could result in short- and intermediateterm residential exposure. Residential 

exposure can occur via dermal and 

inhalation routes of exposure to 

residential applicator. Dermal and 

inhalation exposure can occur from the 

use of consumer products and foods/

food additives containing GTL 

petroleum distillates. Since an endpoint 

for risk assessment was not identified, a 

quantitative residential exposure 

assessment for GTL petroleum 

distillates was not conducted. 

3. Cumulative effects from substances 

with a common mechanism of toxicity. 

Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA 

requires that, when considering whether 

to establish, modify, or revoke a 

tolerance, the Agency consider 

‘‘available information’’ concerning the 

cumulative effects of a particular 

pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other 

substances that have a common 

mechanism of toxicity.’’ 

EPA has not found distillates, 

(Fischer-Tropsch), heavy, C18-C50, 

branched, cyclic and linear to share a 

common mechanism of toxicity with 

any other substances, and the category 

does not appear to produce a toxic 

metabolite produced by other 

substances. For the purposes of this 

tolerance action, therefore, EPA has 

assumed that distillates, (FischerTropsch), heavy, C18-C50, branched, 

cyclic and linear do not have a common 

mechanism of toxicity with other 

substances. For information regarding 

EPA’s efforts to determine which 

chemicals have a common mechanism 

of toxicity and to evaluate the 

cumulative effects of such chemicals, 

see EPA’s Web site at http://

www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative. 

D. Safety Factor for Infants and 

Children 

1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of 

FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply 

an additional tenfold (10×) margin of 

safety for infants and children in the 

case of threshold effects to account for 

prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the 

completeness of the database on toxicity 

and exposure unless EPA determines 

based on reliable data that a different 

margin of safety will be safe for infants 

and children. This additional margin of 

safety is commonly referred to as the 

Food Quality Protection Act Safety 

Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this 

provision, EPA either retains the default 

value of 10×, or uses a different 

additional safety factor when reliable 

data available to EPA support the choice 

of a different factor. 

At this time, there is no concern for 

potential sensitivity to infants and 

children resulting from exposures to 

GTL petroleum distillates. There is no 

reported quantitative or qualitative 

evidence of increased susceptibility of 

rat fetuses to in utero exposure to GTL 

petroleum distillates in developmental 

toxicity studies in rats. No quantitative 

or qualitative evidence of increased 

susceptibility has been reported 

following the pre/postnatal exposure to 

rats in 2-generation reproduction 

toxicity studies in rats. Given the lack 

of adverse toxicological effects at limit 

dose levels, a safety factor analysis has 

not been used to assess the risk. For 

these reasons the additional tenfold 

safety factor is unnecessary. 

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of 

Safety 

In examining aggregate exposure, EPA 

takes into account the available and 

reliable information concerning 

exposures to pesticide residues in food 

and drinking water, and nonoccupational pesticide exposures. 

Dietary (food and drinking water) and 

non-dietary (residential) exposures of 

concern are not anticipated for GTL 

petroleum distillates because of its low 

toxicity based on animal studies 

showing toxicity at or above the limit 

dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day. Taking into 

consideration all available information 

on GTL petroleum distillates, EPA has 

determined that there is a reasonable 

certainty that no harm to any population 

subgroup, including infants and 

children, will result from aggregate 

exposure to GTL petroleum distillates 

under reasonably foreseeable 

circumstances. Therefore, the 

establishment of an exemption from 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 42403 

tolerance under 40 CFR 180.910 for 

residues of GTL petroleum distillates 

when used as an inert ingredient 

(solvent, diluent and/or dust 

suppressant) in pesticide formulations 

applied to growing crops and raw 

agricultural commodities after harvest is 

safe under FFDCA section 408. 

V. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

An analytical method is not required 

for enforcement purposes since the 

Agency is establishing an exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance 

without any numerical limitation. 

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 Codex Alimentarius is a joint 

United Nations Food and Agriculture 

Organization/World Health 

Organization food standards program, 

and it is recognized as an international 

food safety standards-setting 

organization in trade agreements to 

which the United States is a party. EPA 

may establish a tolerance that is 

different from a Codex MRL; however, 

FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that 

EPA explain the reasons for departing 

from the Codex level. 

The Codex has not established a MRL 

for distillates, (Fischer-Tropsch), heavy, 

C18-C50, branched, cyclic and linear. 

VI. Conclusions 

Therefore, an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance is established 

under 40 CFR 180. 910 for distillates, 

(Fischer-Tropsch), heavy, C18-C50, 

branched, cyclic and linear (CAS Reg. 

No. 848301–69–9) when used as an inert 

ingredient (solvent, diluent and/or dust 

suppressant) in pesticide formulations 

applied to growing crops or raw 

agricultural commodities after harvest. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action establishes a tolerance 

under FFDCA section 408(d) in 

response to a petition submitted to the 

Agency. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) has exempted these types 

of actions from review under Executive 

Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993). Because this action 

has been exempted from review under 

Executive Order 12866, this action is 

not subject to Executive Order 13211, 

entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive 

Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997). This action does not 

contain any information collections 

subject to OMB approval under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 

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

any special considerations under 

Executive Order 12898, entitled 

‘‘Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994). 

Since tolerances and exemptions that 

are established on the basis of a petition 

under FFDCA section 408(d), such as 

the tolerance in this final rule, do not 

require the issuance of a proposed rule, 

the requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.), do not apply. 

This action directly regulates growers, 

food processors, food handlers, and food 

retailers, not States or tribes, nor does 

this action alter the relationships or 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established by Congress 

in the preemption provisions of FFDCA 

section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency 

has determined that this action will not 

have a substantial direct effect on States 

or tribal governments, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States or tribal 

governments, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government or between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined 

that Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) and Executive Order 13175, 

entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply 

to this action. In addition, this action 

does not impose any enforceable duty or 

contain any unfunded mandate as 

described under Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 

1501 et seq.). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

VIII. Congressional Review Act 

Pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal 

Register. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: July 2, 2015. 

Susan Lewis, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. In § 180.910, add alphabetically the 

inert ingredient ‘‘Distillates, (FishcherTropsch), heavy, C18-C50, branched, 

cyclic and linear (CAS Reg. No. 848301– 

69–9)’’ to the table to read as follows: 

§ 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and 

post-harvest; exemptions from the 

requirement of a tolerance. 

* * * * * 

Inert ingredients Limits Uses 

*******

Distillates, (Fishcher-Tropsch), heavy, C18-C50, branched, cyclic 

and linear (CAS Reg. No. 848301–69–9).

.............. Solvent, diluent and/or dust suppressant. 

* * * * * * * 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
42404 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

[FR Doc. 2015–17630 Filed 7–16–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 64 

[Docket ID FEMA– 2015–0001; Internal 

Agency Docket No. FEMA–8387] 

Suspension of Community Eligibility 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule identifies 

communities where the sale of flood 

insurance has been authorized under 

the National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP) that are scheduled for 

suspension on the effective dates listed 

within this rule because of 

noncompliance with the floodplain 

management requirements of the 

program. If the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) receives 

documentation that the community has 

adopted the required floodplain 

management measures prior to the 

effective suspension date given in this 

rule, the suspension will not occur and 

a notice of this will be provided by 

publication in the Federal Register on a 

subsequent date. Also, information 

identifying the current participation 

status of a community can be obtained 

from FEMA’s Community Status Book 

(CSB). The CSB is available at http://

www.fema.gov/fema/csb.shtm. 

DATES: The effective date of each 

community’s scheduled suspension is 

the third date (‘‘Susp.’’) listed in the 

third column of the following tables. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you want to determine whether a 

particular community was suspended 

on the suspension date or for further 

information, contact Bret Gates, Federal 

Insurance and Mitigation 

Administration, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4133. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP 

enables property owners to purchase 

Federal flood insurance that is not 

otherwise generally available from 

private insurers. In return, communities 

agree to adopt and administer local 

floodplain management measures aimed 

at protecting lives and new construction 

from future flooding. Section 1315 of 

the National Flood Insurance Act of 

1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, 

prohibits the sale of NFIP flood 

insurance unless an appropriate public 

body adopts adequate floodplain 

management measures with effective 

enforcement measures. The 

communities listed in this document no 

longer meet that statutory requirement 

for compliance with program 

regulations, 44 CFR part 59. 

Accordingly, the communities will be 

suspended on the effective date in the 

third column. As of that date, flood 

insurance will no longer be available in 

the community. We recognize that some 

of these communities may adopt and 

submit the required documentation of 

legally enforceable floodplain 

management measures after this rule is 

published but prior to the actual 

suspension date. These communities 

will not be suspended and will continue 

to be eligible for the sale of NFIP flood 

insurance. A notice withdrawing the 

suspension of such communities will be 

published in the Federal Register. 

In addition, FEMA publishes a Flood 

Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that 

identifies the Special Flood Hazard 

Areas (SFHAs) in these communities. 

The date of the FIRM, if one has been 

published, is indicated in the fourth 

column of the table. No direct Federal 

financial assistance (except assistance 

pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford 

Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act not in connection with a 

flood) may be provided for construction 

or acquisition of buildings in identified 

SFHAs for communities not 

participating in the NFIP and identified 

for more than a year on FEMA’s initial 

FIRM for the community as having 

flood-prone areas (section 202(a) of the 

Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 

42 U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This 

prohibition against certain types of 

Federal assistance becomes effective for 

the communities listed on the date 

shown in the last column. The 

Administrator finds that notice and 

public comment procedures under 5 

U.S.C. 553(b), are impracticable and 

unnecessary because communities listed 

in this final rule have been adequately 

notified. 

Each community receives 6-month, 

90-day, and 30-day notification letters 

addressed to the Chief Executive Officer 

stating that the community will be 

suspended unless the required 

floodplain management measures are 

met prior to the effective suspension 

date. Since these notifications were 

made, this final rule may take effect 

within less than 30 days. 

National Environmental Policy Act. 

This rule is categorically excluded from 

the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, 

Environmental Considerations. No 

environmental impact assessment has 

been prepared. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The 

Administrator has determined that this 

rule is exempt from the requirements of 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act because 

the National Flood Insurance Act of 

1968, as amended, Section 1315, 42 

U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance 

coverage unless an appropriate public 

body adopts adequate floodplain 

management measures with effective 

enforcement measures. The 

communities listed no longer comply 

with the statutory requirements, and 

after the effective date, flood insurance 

will no longer be available in the 

communities unless remedial action 

takes place. 

Regulatory Classification. This final 

rule is not a significant regulatory action 

under the criteria of section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 

1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 

58 FR 51735. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. 

This rule involves no policies that have 

federalism implications under Executive 

Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule meets the applicable 

standards of Executive Order 12988. 

Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule 

does not involve any collection of 

information for purposes of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq. 

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64 

Flood insurance, Floodplains. 

Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 64—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 64 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; 

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 

1978 Comp.; p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 

3 CFR, 1979 Comp.; p. 376. 

§ 64.6 [Amended] 

■ 2. The tables published under the 

authority of § 64.6 are amended as 

follows: 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES