23632 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

on May 23, 2009 through May 25, 2009. 

If the event concludes prior to the 

scheduled termination time, the Captain 

of the Port will cease enforcement of 

this safety zone and will announce that 

fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

(c) Definitions. The following 

definition applies to this section: 

Designated representative, means any 

commissioned, warrant, and petty 

officers of the Coast Guard on board 

Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, 

and local, state, and federal law 

enforcement vessels who have been 

authorized to act on the behalf of the 

Captain of the Port. 

(d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit 

through or anchoring within this safety 

zone is prohibited unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port of San Diego or 

his designated on-scene representative. 

(2) Mariners requesting permission to 

transit through the safety zone may 

request authorization to do so from the 

Sector San Diego Command Center. The 

Command Center may be contacted on 

VHF–FM Channel 16. 

(3) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the 

designated representative. 

(4) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast 

Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, 

flashing light, or other means, the 

operator of a vessel shall proceed as 

directed. 

(5) The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other federal, state, or local agencies. 

Dated: May 12, 2009. 

T.H. Farris, 

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

Port San Diego. 

[FR Doc. E9–11692 Filed 5–19–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2008–0786; FRL–8907–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Minnesota 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a request 

submitted by the Minnesota Pollution 

Control Agency (MPCA) on October 9, 

2008, to revise the Minnesota State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for 

particulate matter less than 10 microns 

(PM10). The approval revises the 

Minnesota SIP by updating information 

regarding the steel mini-mill facility 

located at 1678 Red Rock Road, St. Paul, 

Minnesota. The approval acknowledges 

the change of ownership and operation 

of the source from North Star Steel 

Company to Gerdau Ameristeel US Inc. 

The revision also amends the SIP by 

removing the Administrative Order 

issued to North Star Steel Company, and 

replacing the SIP conditions from the 

Administrative Order and placing those 

SIP requirements in a joint Title I/Title 

V document for Gerdau Ameristeel US, 

Inc. These revisions will not result in an 

increase in PM10 emissions because no 

emission limits were increased. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective July 20, 2009, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by June 19, 

2009. If adverse comments are received, 

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 

the direct final rule in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2008–0786, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, 

Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2008– 

0786. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Charles 

Hatten, Environmental Engineer, at 

(312) 886–6031 before visiting the 

Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Hatten, Environmental 

Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6031, 

hatten.charles@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. General Information 

II. What Revision did the State Request Be 

Incorporated into the SIP? 

III. What is EPA’s Analysis of the State 

Submission? 

IV. What Action is EPA Taking? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 23633 

I. General Information 

A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

This action applies only to the Gerdau 

Ameristeel US, Inc. (Gerdau) steel minimill facility located at 1678 Red Rock 

Road, St. Paul, Minnesota (Ramsey 

County). 

B. Has Public Notice been Provided? 

Minnesota published a public notice 

of the revisions to the SIP on July 25, 

2008. The comment period began on 

July 26, 2008, and ended on August 25, 

2008. In the public notice, Minnesota 

stated it would hold a public hearing if 

one were requested during the comment 

period. This follows the alternative 

public participation process EPA 

approved on June 5, 2006 (71 FR 32274). 

For limited types of SIP revisions that 

the public has shown little interest in, 

a public hearing is not automatically 

required. Because no one requested a 

public hearing, Minnesota did not hold 

a public hearing. 

C. What is the Background to this 

Action? 

Gerdau owns and operates a steel 

mini-mill formerly owned and operated 

by North Star Steel Company. The mill 

receives recycled automobile bodies, tin 

cans from refuse-derived fuel recycling 

operations, recycled white goods, and 

other grades of scrap steel. These 

materials are shredded in a hammer mill 

and the shredded steel is separated from 

the non-ferrous materials. The scrap 

steel is refined and converted into a 

large number of steel alloys in an 

electric arc furnace (EAF) and ladle 

refining station (LRS). The molten steel 

is cast into billets by a continuous 

casting machine. The billets are sold as 

such or reheated in a reheat furnace and 

hot-rolled into various structural shapes 

in a rolling mill. 

Gerdau is planning to make some 

physical changes at the steel mini-mill, 

generally, to update the facility. The 

changes at the facility will include: (1) 

Replacing the current additive silos 

with new lime additive silos, (2) 

replacing the current conveyor system 

with a new pneumatic system 

transferring the lime from the silos to 

the EAF, (3) the addition of lime 

injection ports on the EAF, and (4) 

removal of the fluff landfill and slag 

crushing operation (no longer in 

operation). 

The State provided a modeling 

analysis of the effect of the abovementioned changes at the facility on 

local PM10 concentrations. Below in 

section III, a more detailed discussion of 

the modeling analysis and its results can 

be found. 

II. What Revision did the State Request 

Be Incorporated into the SIP? 

The State has requested that EPA 

approve as a revision to the Minnesota 

SIP: (1) A change in the ownership of 

the source from North Star Steel 

Company to Gerdau Ameristeel US, Inc., 

(2) the replacement of the SIP 

conditions from the Administrative 

Order with the SIP conditions in the 

joint Title I/Title V document for 

Gerdau, and (3) the removal of the 

Administrative Order issued to North 

Star Steel Company. 

A. What Prior SIP Actions are Pertinent 

to this Action? 

The Gerdau mini-mill steel facility, 

previously owned and operated by 

North Star Steel Company, was found to 

be a culpable source in the Red Rock 

Road area’s nonattainment plan for the 

PM10 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS). However, the area 

currently meets the NAAQS for PM10, 

and was officially redesignated as 

attainment on September 24, 2002. 

The facility has been subject to an 

Administrative Order (Third Amended 

Findings and Order) as part of 

Minnesota’s SIP for attaining the PM10

NAAQS. The Administrative Order 

(Order) to control PM10 emissions was 

issued on April 22, 1993, and was 

approved into the SIP on February 15, 

1994 (59 FR 7218). MPCA subsequently 

amended the Order: Amendment One 

was approved on June 13, 1995 (60 FR 

31088) and Amendment Two on 

February 8, 1999 (64 FR 5936). 

B. What are Title I Conditions and Joint 

Title I/Title V Documents? 

SIP control measures were contained 

in permits issued to culpable sources in 

Minnesota until 1990 when EPA 

determined that limits in State-issued 

permits are not Federally enforceable 

because the permits expire. Minnesota 

then issued permanent Administrative 

Orders to culpable sources in 

nonattainment areas from 1991 to 

February of 1996. 

Minnesota’s consolidated permitting 

regulations, approved into its SIP on 

May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21447), include the 

term ‘‘Title I condition’’ which was 

written, in part, to satisfy EPA 

requirements that SIP control measures 

remain permanent. A ‘‘Title I condition’’ 

is defined as ‘‘any condition based on 

source-specific determination of 

ambient impacts imposed for the 

purposes of achieving or maintaining 

attainment with the national ambient air 

quality standard and which was part of 

the State implementation plan approved 

by EPA or submitted to the EPA 

pending approval under section 110 of 

the act. * * * ’’ The rule also states that 

‘‘Title I conditions and the permittee’s 

obligation to comply with them, shall 

not expire, regardless of the expiration 

of the other conditions of the permit.’’ 

Further, ‘‘any title I condition shall 

remain in effect without regard to 

permit expiration or reissuance, and 

shall be restated in the reissued permit.’’ 

Minnesota has initiated using joint 

Title I/Title V documents as the 

enforceable document for imposing 

emission limitations and compliance 

requirements in SIPs. The SIP 

requirements in joint Title I/Title V 

documents submitted by MPCA are 

cited as ‘‘Title I conditions,’’ therefore 

ensuring that SIP requirements remain 

permanent and enforceable. EPA 

reviewed the State’s procedure for using 

joint Title I/Title V documents to 

implement site-specific SIP 

requirements and found it to be 

acceptable under both Titles I and V of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA) (July 3, 1997 

letter from David Kee, EPA, to Michael 

J. Sandusky, MPCA). Further, a June 15, 

2006, letter from EPA to MPCA clarifies 

procedures to transfer requirements 

from Administrative Orders to joint 

Title I/Title V documents. 

III. What is EPA’s Analysis of the State 

Submission? 

In late 2004, the steel mini-mill 

facility formerly owned and operated by 

North Star Steel Company was 

purchased by Gerdau. Gerdau operates 

the facility in an area that currently 

meets the NAAQS for PM10. Pursuant to 

paragraph VI.D. of the Administrative 

Order previously issued to North Star 

Steel Company, Gerdau’s facility is 

subject to all of the same requirements 

of the Administrative Order for attaining 

the NAAQS for PM10. The requirements 

of the Order have been incorporated 

into a joint Title I/Title V document as 

non-expiring Title I conditions. 

In order to replace the Administrative 

Order, MPCA has placed all the 

conditions necessary for maintaining 

the NAAQS for PM10, including those 

from the Administrative Order, in Air 

Permit No. 12300055–004. The permit 

serves as a joint Title I/Title V 

document to be incorporated into 

Minnesota’s SIP, replacing the 

conditions from the Administrative 

Order. The SIP requirements in the joint 

Title I/Title V document submitted by 

MPCA are designated as ‘‘Title I 

Condition: SIP for PM10 NAAQS’’ 

making it clear that the term is part of 

the SIP’s source-specific requirements. 

The SIP revision does not include any 

increases in PM10 emission limits but, 

because some of the changes being made 

23634 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

to the facility may affect the release and 

dispersion of PM10 emissions, Gerdau 

performed an air quality analysis to 

address the facility’s impact on the PM10

NAAQS. The facility was modeled with 

the AERMOD air dispersion model 

using the urban option and five years of 

meteorological data from Minneapolis. 

Gerdau modeled only the impact of its 

own facility and added a background 

concentration provided by MPCA. The 

background concentrations were 28 

micrograms/cubic meter (μg/m3) for the 

annual PM10 averaging time and 70 

μg/m3 for the 24-hour averaging time. 

There is a PM10 monitor very close to 

the Gerdau facility, which is likely to 

capture PM10 emissions from Gerdau 

and its neighbors. From 2000 to 2006, 

that monitor recorded 24-hour values 

which averaged about 35 μg/m3, half the 

magnitude of the background value used 

in the modeling. The monitor did not 

record any exceedances of the PM10

standards during this period. 

The following table shows the 

maximum annual and high, sixth high 

24-hour PM10 levels from the modeling 

of Gerdau’s facility. 

TABLE—MAXIMUM MODELED PM10 CONCENTRATION, PRE- AND POST-MODIFICATION

Averaging time Current operating scenario Post-modification operating scenario 

Max PM10

concentration 

Gerdau 

Max PM10

concentration 

Gerdau + 

background 

Max PM10

concentration 

Gerdau 

Max PM10

concentration 

Gerdau + 

background 

Annual ...................................................................................... 13.75 41.75 12.44 40.44 

24-hour ..................................................................................... 63.70 133.70 62.24 132.24 

The modeling results show that 

Gerdau’s contribution to the ambient 

PM10 concentrations will decrease from 

the current operations to the postmodification scenario. A full modeled 

attainment demonstration was 

performed for Gerdau’s surrounding 

area in 1996. There have been only 

limited changes to the other nearby 

sources since then, and the existing SIP 

is expected to remain protective of the 

PM10 NAAQS. Since Gerdau’s 

modifications will decrease PM10

impacts in the area, Gerdau’s SIP 

revision will strengthen the existing 

PM10 SIP. 

IV. What Action is EPA Taking? 

EPA is approving a revision to 

Minnesota’s SIP changing the 

ownership of the steel mini-mill from 

North Star Steel Company to Gerdau 

Ameristeel US, Inc., and incorporating 

into the SIP those provisions in the joint 

Title I/Title V document No. 12300055– 

004 labeled as ‘‘Title I Condition: SIP for 

PM10 NAAQS.’’ EPA is also removing 

the Administrative Order issued to 

North Star Steel Company from the SIP. 

These revisions will not result in an 

increase in PM10 emissions because no 

emission limits were increased. 

We are publishing this action without 

prior proposal because we view this as 

a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

State plan if relevant adverse written 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective July 20, 2009 without further 

notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by June 19, 

2009. If we receive such comments, we 

will withdraw this action before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. The EPA 

will not institute a second comment 

period. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this action should do so 

at this time. If we do not receive any 

comments, this action will be effective 

July 20, 2009. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves State law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

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, this rule does not have 

Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 23635 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action 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. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by July 20, 2009. 

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, 

Lead, Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: May 5, 2009. 

Walter W. Kovalick Jr, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart Y—Minnesota 

■ 2. In § 52.1220 the table in paragraph 

(d) is amended by removing the entry 

for ‘‘North Star Steel Co.’’ and adding in 

alphabetical order an entry for ‘‘Gerdau 

Ameristeel US, Inc.’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.1220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MINNESOTA SOURCE-SPECIFIC PERMITS

Name of source Permit No. State effective 

date EPA approval date Comments 

*******

* * 

Gerdau Ameristeel US, Inc ................................................... 12300055–004 09/10/08 05/20/09, [Insert page 

number where the 

document begins].

Only conditions cited 

as ‘‘Title I condition: 

SIP for PM10

NAAQS.’’ 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–11638 Filed 5–19–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 174 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0101; FRL–8417–3] 

Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1A.105 

protein; Time Limited Exemption from 

the Requirement of a Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

18-month exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of the Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1A.105 

protein in or on the food and feed 

commodities cotton seed, cotton seed 

oil, cotton seed meal, cotton hay, cotton 

hulls, cotton forage and cotton gin 

byproducts when used as a plantincorporated protectant. Monsanto 

Company submitted a petition to EPA 

under the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting a 

time-limited exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance. This 

regulation eliminates the need to 

establish a maximum permissible level 

for residues of Bacillus thuringiensis 

Cry1A.105 protein in or on the food and 

feed commodities cotton seed, cotton 

seed oil, cotton seed meal, cotton hay, 

cotton hulls, cotton forage and cotton 

gin byproducts. This tolerance 

exemption expires and is revoked on 

November 22, 2010. 

DATES: This regulation is effective May 

20, 2009. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

July 20, 2009, 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: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2009–0101. All documents in the 

docket are listed in the docket index 

available at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available in the electronic docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. 

to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The Docket 

Facility telephone number is (703) 305– 

5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Denise Greenway, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

703–308–8263; e-mail address: 

greenway.denise@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. Potentially