2-Propenoic Acid, Polymer With Ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) Benzene, Sodium Salt; Tolerance Exemption, 52875-52879 [2011-21371]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 24, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
standard in FFDCA section 408(c)(2), a
tolerance exemption is appropriate.
VIII. Conclusions
EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to the U.S. population, including
infants and children, from aggregate
exposure to residues of Pseudomonas
fluorescens strain CL145A. Therefore,
an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance is established for residues of
Pseudomonas fluorescens strain
CL145A in or on all food commodities
when applied as a molluscicide.
IX. References
wreier-aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
1. Murray PR, Baron E, Jorgensen JH, Pfaller
MA, Yolken RH, editors. 2003. Manual of
Clinical Biology. 8th ed. Washington
(DC): ASM Press.
2. U.S. EPA. 2011. Pseudomonas fluorescens
strain CL145A Biopesticides Registration
Action Document dated July 2011
(available as ‘‘Supporting & Related
Material’’ within docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0568 at https://
www.regulations.gov).
3. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T, editors.
2005. ‘‘Pseudomonadales’’ in Bergey’s
Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. 2nd
ed. New York (NY): Springer.
4. Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development. 1997. Consensus
Document on Information Used in the
Assessment of Environmental
Applications Involving Pseudomonas.
Available from https://www.rebecanet.de/downloads/
OECD%20Consensus%20document%
20pseudomonas.pdf.
5. U.S. EPA. 2004. Primer for Municipal
Wastewater Treatment Systems. EPA
832–R–04–001.
6. U.S. EPA. 1996. Microbial Pesticide Test
Guidelines—Background for Residue
Analysis of Microbial Pest Control
Agents (OPPTS 885.2000). Available
from https://www.epa.gov/ocspp/pubs/
frs/publications/Test_Guidelines/
series885.htm.
X. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance
exemption under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition
submitted to EPA. 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 final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive
Order 12866, this final rule 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Aug 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This final rule 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 section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerance 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 final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes.
As a result, this action does not alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such,
EPA 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, EPA 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 final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
EPA consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
XI. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52875
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 this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule 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 29, 2011.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, 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. Section 180.1304 is added to
subpart D to read as follows:
■
§ 180.1304 Pseudomonas fluorescens
strain CL145A; exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance.
An exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance is established for residues
of Pseudomonas fluorescens strain
CL145A in or on all food commodities
when applied as a molluscicide.
[FR Doc. 2011–21249 Filed 8–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0430; FRL–8881–5]
2-Propenoic Acid, Polymer With
Ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
Benzene, Sodium Salt; Tolerance
Exemption
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of 2-Propenoic
acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and
(1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt
when used as an inert ingredient in a
pesticide chemical formulation under
40 CFR 180.960. BASF 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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM
24AUR1
52876
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 24, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of 2-Propenoic acid,
polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt on
food or feed commodities.
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 24, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before October 24, 2011, 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–2011–0430. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index
available at https://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
https://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:
Alganesh Debesai, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 308–8353; e-mail address:
debesai.alganesh@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
wreier-aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
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
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Aug 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
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 https://
ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. 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–2011–0430 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 October 24, 2011. 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 that does not
contain any 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 a copy of
your non-CBI objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0430, by one of
the following methods.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001.
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket
Facility’s normal hours of operation
(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is
(703) 305–5805.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register Wednesday,
July 6, 2011 (76 FR 39358) (FRL–8875–
6), EPA issued a notice pursuant to
section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a,
announcing the receipt of a pesticide
petition (PP 1E7862) filed by BASF
Corporation, 100 Campus Drive,
Florham Park, NJ 07932. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.960 be
amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt;
CAS Reg. No. 129811–24–1. That notice
included a summary of the petition
prepared by the petitioner and solicited
comments on the petitioner’s request.
The Agency did not receive any
comments.
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 exemption 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
use 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 an
exemption from the requirement of 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. * * *’’ and specifies
factors EPA is to consider in
establishing an exemption.
III. Risk Assessment and Statutory
Findings
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
E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM
24AUR1
wreier-aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 24, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
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(b)(2)(D), 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. In the
case of certain chemical substances that
are defined as polymers, the Agency has
established a set of criteria to identify
categories of polymers expected to
present minimal or no risk. The
definition of a polymer is given in 40
CFR 723.250(b) and the exclusion
criteria for identifying these low-risk
polymers are described in 40 CFR
723.250(d). 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt
conforms to the definition of a polymer
given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and meets
the following criteria that are used to
identify low-risk polymers.
1. The polymer is not a cationic
polymer nor is it reasonably anticipated
to become a cationic polymer in a
natural aquatic environment.
2. The polymer does contain as an
integral part of its composition the
atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, and
oxygen.
3. The polymer does not contain as an
integral part of its composition, except
as impurities, any element other than
those listed in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii).
4. The polymer is neither designed
nor can it be reasonably anticipated to
substantially degrade, decompose, or
depolymerize.
5. The polymer is manufactured or
imported from monomers and/or
reactants that are already included on
the TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory or manufactured under an
applicable TSCA section 5 exemption.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Aug 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
6. The polymer is not a water
absorbing polymer with a number
average molecular weight (MW) greater
than or equal to 10,000 daltons.
Additionally, the polymer also meets
as required the following exemption
criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).
7. The polymer’s number average MW
of is greater than 1,000 and less than
10,000 daltons. The polymer contains
less than 10% oligomeric material
below MW 500 and less than 25%
oligomeric material below MW 1,000,
and the polymer does not contain any
reactive functional groups.
Thus, 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
benzene, sodium salt meets the criteria
for a polymer to be considered low risk
under 40 CFR 723.250. Based on its
conformance to the criteria in this unit,
no mammalian toxicity is anticipated
from dietary, inhalation, or dermal
exposure to 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt.
IV. Aggregate Exposures
For the purposes of assessing
potential exposure under this
exemption, EPA considered that 2Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
benzene, sodium salt could be present
in all raw and processed agricultural
commodities and drinking water, and
that non-occupational non-dietary
exposure was possible. The number
average MW of 2-Propenoic acid,
polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt is
2,863 daltons. Generally, a polymer of
this size would be poorly absorbed
through the intact gastrointestinal tract
or through intact human skin. Since 2Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
benzene, sodium salt conform to the
criteria that identify a low-risk polymer,
there are no concerns for risks
associated with any potential exposure
scenarios that are reasonably
foreseeable. The Agency has determined
that a tolerance is not necessary to
protect the public health.
V. 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 2-Propenoic acid,
polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52877
methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and 2Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
benzene, sodium salt does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt
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 Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
VI. Additional Safety Factor for the
Protection of 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 data base unless
EPA concludes that a different margin of
safety will be safe for infants and
children. Due to the expected low
toxicity of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt,
EPA has not used a safety factor analysis
to assess the risk. For the same reasons
the additional tenfold safety factor is
unnecessary.
VII. Determination of Safety
Based on the conformance to the
criteria used to identify a low-risk
polymer, EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty of no harm to the
U.S. population, including infants and
children, from aggregate exposure to
residues of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt.
VIII. 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
E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM
24AUR1
52878
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 24, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N.
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 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
benzene, sodium salt.
IX. Conclusion
Accordingly, EPA finds that
exempting residues of 2-Propenoic acid,
polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt
from the requirement of a tolerance will
be safe.
X. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these rules
from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive
Order 12866, this final rule 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 final rule 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 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 of 1995 (NTTAA),
Public Law 104–113, section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, 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 final rule 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 section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. 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, or otherwise have any unique
impacts on local governments. 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 final rule.
In addition, this final rule does not
impose any enforceable duty or contain
any unfunded mandate as described
under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L.
104–4).
Although this action does not 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), EPA seeks to
achieve environmental justice, the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of any group, including minority and/or
low-income populations, in the
development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. As such, to the
extent that information is publicly
available or was submitted in comments
to EPA, the Agency considered whether
groups or segments of the population, as
a result of their location, cultural
practices, or other factors, may have
atypical or disproportionately high and
adverse human health impacts or
environmental effects from exposure to
the pesticide discussed in this
document, compared to the general
population.
XI. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. 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 this rule in the Federal
Register. This rule 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: August 15, 2011.
Lois Rossi,
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 § 180.960, the table is amended
by adding alphabetically the following
polymer to read as follows:
■
§ 180.960 Polymers; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
*
*
*
*
*
wreier-aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Polymer
CAS No.
*
*
*
*
*
*
2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt, minimum number average molecular weight (in amu), 2,800 ..............................................................................................................................................................
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
15:25 Aug 23, 2011
*
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
*
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM
*
24AUR1
*
129811–24–1
*
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 24, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
52879
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
issue of Wednesday, August 17, 2011,
make the following correction:
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
[FR Doc. 2011–21371 Filed 8–23–11; 8:45 am]
§ 65.4
[Amended]
1. On page 50917, in the untitled
table, the second through the sixth
entries should read:
■
44 CFR Part 65
[Docket ID FEMA–2011–0002]
Changes in Flood Elevation
Determinations
Correction
In rule document 2011–20963
appearing on pages 50915–50918 in the
*
Colorado:
Adams (FEMA
Docket No.:
B–1186).
Adams (FEMA
Docket No.:
B–1191).
Adams (FEMA
Docket No.:
B–1191).
*
City of Commerce
City (10–08–
0226P).
City of Thornton
(10–08–0748P).
Douglas (FEMA
Docket No. B–
1191).
Douglas (FEMA
Docket No.:
B–1195).
Unincorporated
areas of Adams
County (10–08–
0748P).
Unincorporated
areas of Douglas
County (11–08–
0030P).
Unincorporated
areas of Douglas
County (11–08–
0287P).
*
*
*
February 1, 2011; February 8,
2011; The Commerce City
Sentinel Express.
February 17, 2011; February
24, 2011; The NorthglennThornton Sentinel.
February 17, 2011; February
24, 2011; The NorthglennThornton Sentinel.
*
*
*
February 10, 2011; Feburary
17, 2011; The Douglas
County News-Press.
The Honorable Paul Natale, Mayor, City
of Commerce City, 7887 East 60th Avenue, Commerce City, CO 80022.
The Honorable Mack Goodman, Mayor
Pro Tem, City of Thornton, 9500 Civic
Center Drive, Thornton, CO 80229.
The Honorable W.R. ‘‘Skip’’ Fischer,
Chairman, Adams County Board of
Commissioners, 4430 South Adams
County Parkway, Brighton, CO 80601.
The Honorable Jill Repella, Chair, Douglas County Board of Commissioners,
100 3rd Street, Castle Rock, CO 80104.
June 17, 2011 ................
080049
March 10, 2011; March 17,
2011; The Douglas County
News-Press.
The Honorable Jill Repella, Chair, Doug- February 28, 2011 ..........
las County Board of Commissioners,
100 3rd Street, Castle Rock, CO 80104.
080049
*
*
*
*
June 8, 2011 ..................
080006
June 24, 2011 ................
080007
June 24, 2011 ................
080001
*
*
2. On the same page, in the same
table, the fourteenth entry should read:
■
*
Oklahoma: Tulsa
(FEMA Docket No.:
B–1113).
*
City of Broken
Arrow, (09–06–
3069P).
*
*
February 23, 2010; March 2,
2010; Tulsa Daily Commerce
and Legal News.
*
*
*
*
*
The Honorable Mike Lester, Mayor, City March 18, 2010 ..............
of Broken Arrow, 220 South 1st Street,
Broken Arrow, OK 74012.
*
*
*
*
400236
*
3. On the same page, in the same
table, the twentieth entry should read:
■
*
Texas: Bexar (FEMA
Docket No.: B–
1135).
*
City of San Antonio
(09–06–3107P).
*
*
April 23, 2010; April 30, 2010;
The San Antonio ExpressNews.
*
*
*
*
*
The Honorable Julian Castro, Mayor, City April 26, 2010 .................
of San Antonio, P.O. Box 839966, San
Antonio, TX 78283.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
480045
*
4. On page 50918, in the same table,
the first through the third entries should
read:
wreier-aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
■
*
Texas:
Collin (FEMA
Docket No.:
B–1116).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
City of Allen (09–06–
3028P).
15:25 Aug 23, 2011
November 6, 2009; November
13, 2009; The McKinney
Courier-Gazette.
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
The Honorable Stephen Terrell, Mayor,
City of Allen, 305 Century Parkway,
Allen, TX 75013.
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM
October 28, 2009 ...........
24AUR1
480131
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 24, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52875-52879]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21371]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0430; FRL-8881-5]
2-Propenoic Acid, Polymer With Ethenylbenzene and (1-
methylethenyl) Benzene, Sodium Salt; 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 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt when used as
an inert ingredient in a pesticide chemical formulation under 40 CFR
180.960. BASF 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
[[Page 52876]]
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-
methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt on food or feed commodities.
DATES: This regulation is effective August 24, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 24, 2011,
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-2011-0430. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at https://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 https://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: Alganesh Debesai, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8353; e-mail address:
debesai.alganesh@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 affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
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 https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. 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-2011-0430 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
October 24, 2011. 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 that does not contain any 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 a copy of
your non-CBI objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0430, by one of the following methods.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register Wednesday, July 6, 2011 (76 FR 39358) (FRL-
8875-6), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408 of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a, announcing the receipt of a pesticide petition (PP 1E7862)
filed by BASF Corporation, 100 Campus Drive, Florham Park, NJ 07932.
The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.960 be amended by establishing
an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-
Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
benzene, sodium salt; CAS Reg. No. 129811-24-1. That notice included a
summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner and solicited
comments on the petitioner's request. The Agency did not receive any
comments.
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 exemption 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 use 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 an exemption from the
requirement of 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. * * *'' and
specifies factors EPA is to consider in establishing an exemption.
III. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings
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
[[Page 52877]]
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(b)(2)(D), 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. In the case of certain chemical substances that
are defined as polymers, the Agency has established a set of criteria
to identify categories of polymers expected to present minimal or no
risk. The definition of a polymer is given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and the
exclusion criteria for identifying these low-risk polymers are
described in 40 CFR 723.250(d). 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt conforms to
the definition of a polymer given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and meets the
following criteria that are used to identify low-risk polymers.
1. The polymer is not a cationic polymer nor is it reasonably
anticipated to become a cationic polymer in a natural aquatic
environment.
2. The polymer does contain as an integral part of its composition
the atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
3. The polymer does not contain as an integral part of its
composition, except as impurities, any element other than those listed
in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii).
4. The polymer is neither designed nor can it be reasonably
anticipated to substantially degrade, decompose, or depolymerize.
5. The polymer is manufactured or imported from monomers and/or
reactants that are already included on the TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory or manufactured under an applicable TSCA section 5 exemption.
6. The polymer is not a water absorbing polymer with a number
average molecular weight (MW) greater than or equal to 10,000 daltons.
Additionally, the polymer also meets as required the following
exemption criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).
7. The polymer's number average MW of is greater than 1,000 and
less than 10,000 daltons. The polymer contains less than 10% oligomeric
material below MW 500 and less than 25% oligomeric material below MW
1,000, and the polymer does not contain any reactive functional groups.
Thus, 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-
methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt meets the criteria for a polymer to
be considered low risk under 40 CFR 723.250. Based on its conformance
to the criteria in this unit, no mammalian toxicity is anticipated from
dietary, inhalation, or dermal exposure to 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt.
IV. Aggregate Exposures
For the purposes of assessing potential exposure under this
exemption, EPA considered that 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt could be
present in all raw and processed agricultural commodities and drinking
water, and that non-occupational non-dietary exposure was possible. The
number average MW of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and
(1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt is 2,863 daltons. Generally, a
polymer of this size would be poorly absorbed through the intact
gastrointestinal tract or through intact human skin. Since 2-Propenoic
acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium
salt conform to the criteria that identify a low-risk polymer, there
are no concerns for risks associated with any potential exposure
scenarios that are reasonably foreseeable. The Agency has determined
that a tolerance is not necessary to protect the public health.
V. 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 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and
(1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For
the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
benzene, sodium salt 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 Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
VI. Additional Safety Factor for the Protection of 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 data base unless EPA concludes
that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children. Due to the expected low toxicity of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt, EPA has
not used a safety factor analysis to assess the risk. For the same
reasons the additional tenfold safety factor is unnecessary.
VII. Determination of Safety
Based on the conformance to the criteria used to identify a low-
risk polymer, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty of no
harm to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to residues of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt.
VIII. 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
[[Page 52878]]
(MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
U.N. 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 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt.
IX. Conclusion
Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting residues of 2-Propenoic acid,
polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt
from the requirement of a tolerance will be safe.
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these rules from review under
Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been exempted from
review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule 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 final rule 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 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 of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, 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 final rule 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 section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. 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, or otherwise have any unique
impacts on local governments. 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 final rule. In addition, this final rule does not impose
any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L.
104-4).
Although this action does not 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), EPA seeks to achieve
environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of
any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the
development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. As such, to the extent that information is
publicly available or was submitted in comments to EPA, the Agency
considered whether groups or segments of the population, as a result of
their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical
or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or
environmental effects from exposure to the pesticide discussed in this
document, compared to the general population.
XI. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. 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 this rule in the Federal
Register. This rule 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: August 15, 2011.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.960, the table is amended by adding alphabetically the
following polymer to read as follows:
Sec. [emsp14]180.960 Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Polymer CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1- 129811-24-1
methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt, minimum number
average molecular weight (in amu), 2,800...............
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52879]]
[FR Doc. 2011-21371 Filed 8-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P