Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 39345 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this rule 

will not result in such an expenditure, 

we do discuss the effects of this rule 

elsewhere in this preamble. 

F. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Directive 023–01, Rev. 1, associated 

implementing instructions, and 

Environmental Planning COMDTINST 

5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 

determined that this action is one of a 

category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule involves a safety 

zone that will prohibit entry within a 

1,900-foot radius of a designated 

coordinate in the vicinity of Naval Base 

Coronado in San Diego Bay. It is 

categorically excluded from further 

review under paragraph L60(a) of 

Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction 

Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 1. A 

Record of Environmental Consideration 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket. For instructions 

on locating the docket, see the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to call or email the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

coordinate protest activities so that your 

message can be received without 

jeopardizing the safety or security of 

people, places or vessels. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T11–101 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T11–101 Safety Zone; San Diego 

Bay; San Diego, CA. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

safety zone: All navigable waters of San 

Diego Bay, from surface to bottom, 

within a 1,900-foot radius around Pier 

14, Naval Amphibious Base, centered at 

position: 32°40′44.6′′ N 117°09′36.2′′ W. 

(b) Definitions. As used in this 

section, designated representative 

means a Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander, including a Coast Guard 

coxswain, petty officer, or other officer 

operating a Coast Guard vessel and a 

Federal, State, and local officer 

designated by or assisting the Captain of 

the Port San Diego (COTP) in the 

enforcement of the safety zone. 

(c) Regulations. (1) Swimming or 

diving is prohibited in the safety zone 

described in paragraph (a) of this 

section during the enforcement periods 

unless authorized by the COTP or the 

COTP’s designated representative. 

(2) To seek permission to enter, 

contact the COTP or the COTP’s 

representative by VHF Channel 16. 

Those in the safety zone must comply 

with all lawful orders or directions 

given to them by the COTP or the 

COTP’s designated representative. 

(d) Enforcement periods. This section 

will be enforced from 7:30 a.m. through 

3:30 p.m. daily on June 30, July 1, 5, 6, 

and 7, 2022. 

Dated: June 21, 2022. 

T.J. Barelli, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector San Diego. 

[FR Doc. 2022–14143 Filed 6–29–22; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0682; FRL–9932–01– 

OCSPP] 

Sodium Dioctyl Sulfosuccinate (CAS 

Reg. No. 577–11–7); Tolerance 

Exemption 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate (CAS Reg. No. 577–11–7) 

when used as an inert ingredient in 

antimicrobial pesticide formulations 

applied to food-contact surfaces in 

public eating places, dairy-processing 

equipment, and food-processing 

equipment and utensils under 40 CFR 

180.940(a). Spring Regulatory Sciences, 

on behalf of Evonik Corporation, 

submitted a petition to EPA under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA), requesting an exemption from 

the requirement of a tolerance. This 

regulation eliminates the need to 

establish a maximum permissible level 

for residues of sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate (CAS Reg. No. 577–11–7) 

when used in accordance with this 

exemption. 

DATES: This regulation is effective July 

1, 2022. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

August 30, 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–2021–0682, 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 and the OPP 

Docket is (202) 566–1744. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marietta Echeverria, Registration 

Division (7505T), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; main 

telephone number: (202) 566–1030; 

email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
39346 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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 Office of the Federal 

Register’s e-CFR site at https:// 

www.ecfr.gov/current/title40. 

C. Can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

U.S.C. 346a(g), 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–2021–0682 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 

August 30, 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– 

2021–0682, 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/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

II. Petition for Exemption 

In the Federal Register of October 21, 

2021 (86 FR 58239) (FRL–8792–04– 

OCSPP), EPA issued a document 

pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 

U.S.C. 346a, announcing the receipt of 

a pesticide petition (PP IN–11566) by 

Spring Regulatory Sciences (6620 

Cypresswood Dr, Suite 250, Spring, TX 

77379), on behalf of Evonik Corporation, 

(P.O. Box 34628, Richmond, VA 23234). 

The petition requested that 40 CFR 

180.940(a) be amended by establishing 

an exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate (CAS Reg. No. 577–11–7) 

for use as an inert ingredient in 

antimicrobial pesticide formulations. 

That document referenced a summary of 

the petition prepared by the petitioner, 

which is available in the docket, and 

solicited comments on the petitioner’s 

request at http://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(c)(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 shown that the 

risks from aggregate exposure to 

pesticide chemical residues under 

reasonably foreseeable circumstances 

will pose no harm 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 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(b)(2)(D), 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 and considered its 

validity, completeness and reliability 

and the relationship of this information 

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. EPA has 

sufficient data to assess the hazards of 

and to make a determination on 

aggregate exposure to sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate including exposure 

resulting from the exemption 

established by this action. EPA’s 

assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate follows. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 39347 

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. Sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate is also known as dioctyl 

sodium sulfosuccinate or DSS. Specific 

information on the studies received and 

the nature of the adverse effects caused 

by sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate, as 

well as the no-observed-adverse-effectlevel (NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the 

toxicity studies, are discussed in the 

November 5, 2012 document titled 

‘‘Dioctyl Sodium Sulfosuccinate: 

Preliminary Human Health Risk 

Assessment in Support of Registration 

Review,’’ which is available at https:// 

www.regulations.gov in docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–1006, and 

in the June 10th, 2022 document titled 

‘‘IN–11566; Petition to an amend 

Tolerance Exemption for Sodium 

dioctyl sulfosuccinate (CAS No. 577– 

11–7), adding it to the approved list of 

food use inert ingredients under 40 CFR 

180.940(a) in Pesticide Formulations.’’ 

which is available at https://

www.regulations.gov in the docket for 

this action. 

Sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate has 

low acute oral, dermal and inhalation 

toxicity. It is neither a skin sensitizer 

nor a skin or eye irritant. Toxicity to 

offspring occurred in the reproduction 

and developmental studies only at the 

limit dose and in the presence of 

parental toxicity. The subchronic 

toxicity, chronic toxicity, and 

mutagenicity studies did not 

demonstrate any significant toxicity of 

sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate. 

In a 90-day oral toxicity study in 

Sprague-Dawley rats with sodium 

dioctyl sulfosuccinate, no adverse 

effects were observed up to the highest 

dose tested and the NOAEL is 1000 mg/ 

kg/day. 

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/ 

Levels of Concern 

The toxicological points of departure/ 

levels of concern of sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate remain unchanged from 

the Toxicological Profile in Preliminary 

Human Health Risk Assessment in 

Support of Registration Review. 

D405928, November 5, 2012. No 

toxicological endpoints of concern were 

identified for sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate because there was no 

offspring susceptibility and the only 

effects observed occurred at the limit 

dose. 

C. Exposure Assessment 

Dietary and residential (nonoccupational and non-dietary) 

exposures are expected from the 

proposed and existing uses of sodium 

dioctyl sulfosuccinate. However, no 

quantitative dietary or residential 

exposure assessments were conducted 

because no toxicological endpoints of 

concern were identified. 

D. 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 determined that sodium 

dioctyl sulfosuccinate share a common 

mechanism of toxicity with any other 

substances, and sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate does not appear to 

produce a toxic metabolite produced by 

other substances. For the purposes of 

this action, therefore, EPA has assumed 

that sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate does 

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 website at https:// 

www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative. 

E. Safety Factor for Infants and Children 

Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA 

provides that EPA shall apply an 

additional tenfold 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 unless 

EPA concludes that a different margin of 

safety will be safe for infants and 

children. Based on an assessment of 

sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate, EPA has 

concluded that there are no 

toxicological endpoints of concern for 

the U.S. population, including infants 

and children, and a qualitative 

assessment is being conducted for 

sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate. The 

qualitative assessment does not use 

safety factors for assessing risk, and no 

additional safety factor is needed for 

assessing risk to infants and children. 

F. Determination of Safety 

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 sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate residues. More detailed 

information about the Agency’s analysis 

can be found at https://

www.regulations.gov in the November 5, 

2012 document titled ‘‘Dioctyl Sodium 

Sulfosuccinate: Preliminary Human 

Health Risk Assessment in Support of 

Registration Review’’ in docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–1006, and 

in the June 10th, 2022 document titled 

‘‘IN–11566; Petition to an amend 

Tolerance Exemption for Sodium 

dioctyl sulfosuccinate (CAS No. 577– 

11–7), adding it to the approved list of 

food use inert ingredients under 40 CFR 

180.940(a) in Pesticide Formulations.’’ 

in the docket for this action. 

V. Other Considerations 

Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

An analytical method is not required 

for enforcement purposes since the 

Agency is not establishing a numerical 

tolerance for residues of sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate in or on any food 

commodities. 

VI. Conclusion 

Therefore, an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance is established 

under 40 CFR 180.940(a) for sodium 

dioctyl sulfosuccinate when used as an 

inert ingredient in antimicrobial 

pesticide formulations applied to foodcontact surfaces in public eating places, 

dairy-processing equipment, and foodprocessing equipment and utensils. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action establishes a tolerance 

exemption 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). 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
39348 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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 exemption 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: June 22, 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 I 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 § 180.940, amend Table 1 to 

Paragraph (a) by adding, in alphabetical 

order, an entry for ‘‘Sodium dioctyl 

sulfosuccinate’’ to read as follows: 

§ 180.940 Tolerance exemptions for active 

and inert ingredients for use in 

antimicrobial formulations (Food-contact 

surface sanitizing solutions). 

* * * * * 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a) 

Pesticide chemical CAS Reg. No. Limits 

*******

Sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate ............................................................................................................................... 577–11–7 None. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2022–14067 Filed 6–30–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2021–0103; 

FXES111302WOLF0–FF02ENEH00] 

RIN 1018–BE52 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Revision to the 

Nonessential Experimental Population 

of the Mexican Wolf 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service or USFWS), 

revise the regulations for the 

nonessential experimental population of 

the Mexican wolf (Canis lupus baileyi) 

in the Mexican Wolf Experimental 

Population Area under section 10(j) of 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (ESA). The regulatory 

revisions in this rule include a revised 

population objective, a new genetic 

objective, and the temporary restriction 

of three take provisions. This rule also 

includes an essentiality determination 

under section 10(j) of the ESA. The 

experimental population, inclusive of 

these revisions, will contribute to the 

long-term conservation and recovery of 

the Mexican wolf by alleviating 

demographic and genetic threats in this 

population consistent with our 

rangewide recovery strategy and goals 

for the Mexican wolf. 

DATES: This rule is effective August 1, 

2022. 

ADDRESSES: This final rule, along with 

the October 29, 2021, proposed rule, 

public comments on the proposed rule, 

a final supplemental environmental 

impact statement, and record of 

decision, are available on the internet at 

https://www.regulations.gov in Docket 

No. FWS–R2–ES–2021–0103 or from the 

office listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brady McGee, Mexican Wolf Recovery 

Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, New Mexico Ecological 

Services Field Office, 2105 Osuna Rd. 

NE, Albuquerque, NM 87113; telephone 

505–761–4748. Individuals in the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES