[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60984-60985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27814]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-9971-91-OCSPP]
Production of Confidential Business Information in Pending
Litigation; Transfer of Information Claimed or Determined to
Potentially Contain Confidential Business Information to the United
States Department of Justice and Parties to Certain Litigation
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') is providing
notice, of disclosure of potential confidential business information in
litigation.
DATES: Access by U.S. Department of Justice (``DOJ'') and the parties
to litigation to material, including CBI, discussed in this Notice, is
ongoing and expected to continue during the litigation discussed in
this Notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael L. Goodis, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is being provided, pursuant to
40 CFR 2.209(d), to inform affected businesses that the EPA, via the
DOJ, has recently disclosed documents to the parties and the Court in
the matter of National Family Farm Coalition, et al. v. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and Scott Pruitt, Case No. 17-70196
(9th Cir.) (the ``Dicamba Litigation''), and in the consolidated
matters of National Family Farm Coalition, et al. v. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and Scott Pruitt, Case No. 17-70810 (9th Cir.) and
Natural Resources Defense Council v. Scott Pruitt and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Case No. 17-70817 (9th Cir.) (the
``Enlist Duo Litigation''), that have been submitted to EPA by
pesticide registrants or other data-submitters and that have been
claimed to be, or have been determined to potentially contain,
confidential business information (collectively ``CBI'').
In the ``Dicamba Litigation,'' Petitioners seek judicial review of
EPA's order granting a conditional pesticide registration under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (``FIFRA'') for the
new uses of the herbicide dicamba on genetically engineered cotton and
soybean. In the ``Enlist Duo Litigation,'' Petitioners seek judicial
review of EPA's order granting a conditional pesticide registration
under FIFRA of the herbicide ``Enlist Duo,'' containing the active
ingredients 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid choline salt (``2,4-D'') and
glyphosate dimethylammonium salt (``glyphosate'').
The documents are being produced as part of the Administrative
Records of the decisions at issue and include documents that
registrants or other data-submitters may have submitted to EPA
regarding the pesticides dicamba, 2,4-D, and/or glyphosate, and that
may be subject to various release restrictions under federal law. The
information includes documents submitted with pesticide registration
applications and may include CBI as well as scientific studies subject
to the disclosure restrictions of section 10(g) of FIFRA, 7 U.S.C.
136h(d).
All documents that may be subject to release restrictions under
federal law are designated as ``Confidential or Restricted
Information'' under Protective Orders that the Court entered on
November 8, 2017 in both cases (Dkt. 61-2 in the Dicamba Litigation;
Dkt. 55-2 in the Enlist Duo Litigation). The Protective Orders preclude
public disclosure of any such documents by the parties in this action
who have received the information from EPA, unless a party successfully
obtains a de-designation as Confidential or Restricted Information of
any portion of the Administrative Record via the procedure described in
paragraph 6 of the Protective Orders, and limits the use of such
documents to litigation
[[Page 60985]]
purposes only. Further, paragraph 6(h) of the Protective Orders states:
``At any time, the court may de-designate any portion of the
administrative record without advanced notice to the parties.'' If
filed with the Court, such documents would be filed under seal and
would not be available for public review, unless the information
contained in the document has been determined to not be subject to
section 10(g) of FIFRA and all CBI has been redacted. At the conclusion
of the litigation, the Protective Orders require that record material
EPA designates as ``Confidential or Restricted Information'' be
destroyed or returned to EPA.
Dated: December 7, 2017.
Michael L. Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2017-27814 Filed 12-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P