96-16588. Folpet; Revocation of Pesticide Tolerances  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 37218-37222]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-16588]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    40 CFR Part 180
    
    [OPP-300363B; FRL-5382-1]
    RIN 2070-AC18
    
    
    Folpet; Revocation of Pesticide Tolerances
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    ACTION: Final Rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This rule revokes tolerances for folpet residues in or on the 
    following commodities: celery, cherries, leeks, onions (green), 
    shallots, blackberries, blueberries, boysenberries, crabapples, 
    currants, dewberries, gooseberries, huckleberries, loganberries, 
    raspberries, citrus fruits, garlic, pumpkins, summer squash, and winter 
    squash. This revocation is necessary because the registrant has 
    voluntarily canceled use of this fungicide on these commodities.
    EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule becomes effective September 16, 1996.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests, identified by the 
    docket, [OPP-300363B], may be submitted to: Hearing Clerk (1900), 
    Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW., Washington, 
    DC 20460. Fees accompanying objections and hearing requests shall be 
    labeled ``Tolerance Petition Fees'' and forwarded to: EPA Headquarters 
    Accounting Operations Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box 360277M, 
    Pittsburgh, PA 15251. A copy of any objections and hearing requests 
    filed with the Hearing Clerk should be identified by the docket number 
    and submitted to: Public Response and Program Resources Branch, Field 
    Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, 
    Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. 
    In person, bring copy of objections and hearing requests to: Rm. 1132, 
    CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202.
        A copy of objections and hearing requests filed with the Hearing 
    Clerk may also be submitted electronically by sending electronic mail 
    (e-mail) to: opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov. Copies of objections and 
    hearing requests must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of 
    special characters and any form of encryption. Copies of objections and 
    hearing requests will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1 
    file format or ASCII file format. All copies of objections and hearing 
    requests in electronic form must be identified by the docket number 
    [OPP-300363B]. No ``Confidential Business Information'' (CBI) should be 
    submitted through e-mail. Electronic copies of objections and hearing 
    requests on this rule may be filed online at many Federal Depository 
    Libraries. Additional information on electronic submissions can be 
    found below in this document.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail, Jeff Morris, Review Manager, 
    Special Review Branch (7508W), Office of Pesticide Programs, 
    Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. 
    Office location and telephone number: 3rd floor, Crystal Station, 2800 
    Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202, (703) 308-8029; e-mail: 
    morris.jeffrey@epamail.epa.gov.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following issuance of a proposed rule to 
    revoke folpet tolerances (59 FR 61859, December 2, 1994)(FRL-4912-6) 
    and considering comments that EPA received in response to the proposed 
    rule, this rule serves as a final order to revoke tolerances for folpet 
    residues in or on the following commodities: celery, cherries, leeks, 
    onions (green), shallots, blackberries, blueberries, boysenberries, 
    crabapples, currants, dewberries, gooseberries, huckleberries, 
    loganberries, raspberries, citrus fruits, garlic, pumpkins, summer 
    squash, and winter squash. The tolerance for folpet residues in or on 
    avocados will remain as currently listed in 40 CFR 180.191, and will be 
    addressed through the reregistration process (the avocado tolerance was 
    not subject to the December 2, 1994 proposed rule). In a separate 
    notice, EPA will address the remaining tolerances that were subject to 
    the proposed rule; the registrant is currently generating data to 
    support those tolerances.
    
     I. Legal Authorization
    
        The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 301 et 
    seq.) authorizes the establishment of tolerances (maximum legal residue 
    levels) and exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance for residues 
    of pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities pursuant 
    to section 408 [21 U.S.C. 346(a)]. Without such tolerances or 
    exemptions, a food containing pesticide residues is considered to be 
    ``adulterated'' under section 402 of FFDCA, and hence may not legally 
    be moved in interstate commerce [21 U.S.C. 342]. To establish a 
    tolerance or an exemption under section 408 of FFDCA, EPA must make a 
    finding that the promulgation of the rule would ``protect the public 
    health'' [21 U.S.C. 346a(b)]. For a pesticide to be sold and 
    distributed, the pesticide must not only have appropriate tolerances 
    under FFDCA, but also must be registered under the Federal Insecticide,
    
    [[Page 37219]]
    
    Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.).
        In 1988, Congress amended FIFRA and required EPA to review and 
    reassess the potential hazards arising from currently registered uses 
    of pesticides registered prior to November 1, 1984. As part of this 
    process, EPA must determine whether a pesticide is eligible for 
    reregistration or whether any subsequent actions are required to fully 
    attain reregistration status. EPA has chosen to include in the 
    reregistration process a reassessment of existing tolerances or 
    exemptions from the need for a tolerance. Through this reassessment 
    process, based on more recent data, EPA can determine whether a 
    tolerance must be amended, revoked, or established, or whether an 
    exemption from the requirement of one or more tolerances must be 
    amended or is necessary.
        Tolerance procedures are discussed in 40 CFR parts 177 through 180. 
    Part 177 establishes the procedures for establishing, amending, or 
    revoking tolerances or exemptions from the requirement of tolerances; 
    part 178 contains procedures for filing objections and requests for 
    hearings; part 179 contains rules governing formal evidentiary 
    hearings; and part 180 contains regulations establishing tolerances or 
    exemptions from the requirements of a tolerance. The Administrator of 
    EPA, or any person by petition, may initiate an action proposing to 
    establish, amend, revoke, or exempt a tolerance for a pesticide 
    registered for food uses. Each petition or request for a new tolerance, 
    an amendment to an existing tolerance, or a new exemption from the 
    requirement of a tolerance must be accompanied by a fee. Comments 
    submitted in response to EPA's published proposals are reviewed; EPA 
    then publishes its final determination regarding the specific tolerance 
    actions. Monitoring and enforcement of pesticide tolerances are carried 
    out by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. 
    Department of Agriculture (USDA). This includes monitoring for 
    pesticide residues in or on commodities imported into the United 
    States.
    
    II. Background
    
        Folpet is a broad-spectrum fungicide registered for industrial use 
    in paints, stains, coatings, and plastics. In addition, two folpet 
    products are registered for food use. One product is actively 
    registered for use on avocados in Florida only; the other is a 
    registration for all folpet food uses, including the food uses covered 
    by the tolerances that are subject to this rule, that EPA suspended in 
    1987 for failure of the registrant to supply the data required by EPA 
    to support the continued registration of these uses. EPA has classified 
    folpet as a B2 (probable) human carcinogen.
    
    A. Proposed Revocation of Tolerances and Comment Period Extension
    
        At the time the proposed rule was published, with the exception of 
    data to support the avocado use, the registrant had not submitted the 
    following residue chemistry data, which, according to the June 1987 
    folpet registration standard, are needed to support registration of the 
    commodities subject to this rule: nature of the residues (metabolism) 
    studies (guideline no. 171-4a) for representative crops; analytical 
    method validation (guideline no. 171-4c); storage stability studies 
    (guideline no. 171-4e) for representative crops; crop field trials 
    (guideline no. 171-4k) for the subject commodities; and processing 
    studies (guideline no. 171-4l) for applicable commodities. These data 
    are required under 40 CFR part 158, and are needed to allow EPA to 
    determine whether a proposed tolerance level is practical and 
    achievable. Because the establishment of a tolerance under section 408 
    of FFDCA requires a finding that a tolerance will protect the public 
    health, and because EPA did not have adequate data to make such a 
    finding, EPA issued a proposed rule to revoke all folpet tolerances, 
    except the avocado tolerance. The proposed rule was published in the 
    Federal Register on December 2, 1994 (59 FR 61859).
        In a Federal Register notice dated January 3, 1995 (60 FR 89)(FRL-
    4982-3), EPA extended the end of the comment period for the proposed 
    rule from January 3, 1995, to March 3, 1995. The January 3 notice also 
    requested the following: (1) That interested parties identify which 
    tolerances they were willing to support by providing the data necessary 
    to maintain the tolerances, and (2) that interested parties identify 
    specific existing data they were prepared to submit in support of the 
    tolerances.
    
    B. Registrant's Response to the Proposed Rule
    
        1. Commitment to support tolerances. In its comments to the 
    December 2, 1994 proposed rule, Makhteshim-Agan, the sole folpet 
    registrant, committed to generate the data necessary to establish 
    tolerances in or on the following nine commodities: apples, 
    cranberries, cucumbers, grapes, lettuce, melons, onions, strawberries, 
    and tomatoes. (Makhteshim-Agan had previously submitted the required 
    data for the use of folpet on avocados.) Makhteshim-Agan also submitted 
    use information on the other nine commodities and a summary of the 
    residue chemistry data that had thus far been generated for those 
    commodities.
        2. Request to delete uses. In a letter to EPA dated June 11, 1995, 
    Makhteshim-Agan requested that EPA delete the following uses from its 
    folpet registration number 66222-8: blackberries, boysenberries, 
    dewberries, loganberries, raspberries, blueberries, huckleberries, 
    summer/winter squash, pumpkins, celery, cherries (red tart), citrus 
    (oranges, grapefruit, lemons, limes, tangelos, and tangerines), 
    gooseberries, currants, and garlic. EPA published a notice of receipt 
    of this request in a Federal Register notice dated April 17, 1996 (61 
    FR 16779)(FRL-5360-5). Following the 90-day comment period for this 
    notice, the deletion of the uses is expected to take effect on July 16, 
    1996.
    
    III. Final Actions
    
        In response to comments made to the December 2, 1994 proposed rule, 
    through meetings and other communication with the folpet registrant, 
    and in accord with EPA's policy regarding data requirements to support 
    tolerances, EPA is issuing this final order to revoke the 20 tolerances 
    that have received no commitment for support.
        This final rule revokes the following folpet tolerances listed in 
    40 CFR 180.191: blackberries, blueberries, boysenberries, celery, 
    cherries, citrus fruits, crabapples, currants, dewberries, garlic, 
    gooseberries, huckleberries, leeks, loganberries, onions (green), 
    pumpkins, raspberries, shallots, summer squash, and winter squash. EPA 
    is revoking these tolerances for two reasons: (1) The registrant is no 
    longer supporting the uses on its folpet registrations, and (2) EPA 
    does not have the data necessary to make a finding that the tolerances 
    are protective of the public health, as is required by section 408 of 
    FFDCA and 40 CFR part 158. The 25 ppm avocado tolerance is being 
    supported through the reregistration program for domestic registrations 
    and is not subject to this rule, and therefore remains unchanged. The 
    remaining nine supported tolerances will be the subject of a separate 
    notice that EPA will issue in the future.
        Because folpet food-use registrations have been suspended since 
    1987 and therefore commodities may not be legally treated with any 
    existing folpet stocks, EPA expects no folpet residues to be in or on 
    the commodities associated with the tolerances subject to
    
    [[Page 37220]]
    
    this rule; nor, for the same reason, are folpet residues expected to 
    persist in the environment. Following revocation of the tolerances, any 
    imported commodities containing folpet residues will be subject to 
    seizure as a result of FDA and USDA monitoring; this should prohibit 
    any treated imported commodities from entering domestic channels of 
    trade. Therefore, final expiration of the tolerances will occur 60 days 
    from the date of publication of this rule in the Federal Register, 
    barring submission of a petition for a stay of the effective date of 
    this rule, and EPA will not require action levels following expiration 
    of the tolerances.
    
    IV. Comments Received on Proposed Rule and Response to Comments
    
        The following section summarizes the comments received to the 
    December 2, 1994 proposed revocation of folpet tolerances, and EPA's 
    response to those comments. The actual comments are in the folpet 
    docket.
    
    A. Revocation Will Negatively Impact Importation of Commodities
    
        Many commentors stated that the revocation of the U.S. folpet 
    tolerances may have a significant negative impact on the present and 
    future importation of agricultural products into the United States. 
    Commentors were particularly concerned that revocation of the grape 
    tolerance would negatively affect wine imports.
        EPA responds that the folpet registrant has committed to generate 
    the necessary data for nine tolerances, including a grape tolerance. 
    EPA will not revoke tolerances for those commodities if adequate data 
    are submitted by the agreed-upon due date.
    
    B. Need for an Import Tolerance Policy
    
        Other commentors expressed concern regarding the lack of a policy 
    outlining the data necessary to establish import tolerances, and that 
    the approach taken in EPA's Federal Register notice of December 2, 1994 
    is not an efficient regulatory process. They stated that deciding 
    complex issues, such as data requirements, on a case-by-case basis 
    cannot be efficient and detracts from regulatory transparency; they 
    added that an import tolerance policy presented for public comment 
    would permit EPA to evaluate the appropriateness of the data required 
    in the December 2, 1994 notice.
        EPA's response is that it has an import tolerance policy. EPA's May 
    3, 1995 letter to Makhteshim-Agan states: ``EPA requires the same 
    product chemistry and toxicology data for import tolerances as are 
    required to support U.S. registrations of pesticide products and any 
    resulting tolerances. In addition, EPA needs residue chemistry data 
    that are representative of growing conditions in exporting countries.'' 
    It is because EPA has received neither the data required in the 1987 
    Registration Standard nor a commitment to generate the data necessary 
    to establish tolerances, that EPA is revoking the tolerances subject to 
    this rule. EPA is currently reviewing its import tolerance policy to 
    address issues raised by folpet and other similar cases. In application 
    of its policy, EPA is committed to consistency and, when possible, 
    harmonization with international standards.
    
    C. Potential GATT and NAFTA Violations
    
        Some commentors claimed that EPA's proposed action would violate 
    international obligations of the United States. They stated that the 
    World Trade Organizations's Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement 
    permits EPA to deviate from Codex in exceptional circumstances, but any 
    higher level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection must have a 
    scientific justification. Such justification requires a finding by EPA 
    that the forthcoming Codex standard for folpet is not sufficient to 
    achieve its appropriate level of protection.
        EPA responds that Codex has proposed to revoke most of the folpet 
    Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs), including the grape MRL, because the 
    data submitted to Codex are inadequate. The crop field trial program 
    for the supported import-only tolerances initiated by the folpet 
    registrant is expected to provide data adequate for setting U.S. and 
    international residue levels for folpet. Since no data are available 
    for the remaining tolerances subject to this rule, EPA is revoking 
    those tolerances.
    
    D. U.S. Standards Must Not Be Compromised
    
        One commentor argued that EPA should revoke folpet tolerances 
    unless the existing data enable EPA to make the FFDCA public health 
    finding, and that the unsupported tolerances should not remain in 
    effect while the data are being developed and submitted. The commentor 
    also stated that nothing in international trade agreements requires any 
    deviation from FFDCA's public health mandate.
        EPA agrees that its mandate to protect the public health must not 
    be compromised. All remaining permanent folpet tolerances will be based 
    on adequate data that demonstrate that such tolerances are protective 
    of the public health.
    
    V. Effective Date and Stays of Effective Date
    
        This final rule shall become effective September 16, 1996. A person 
    filing objections to this Order may submit with the objections a 
    petition to stay the effective date of this Order. Such stay petitions 
    must be submitted to the Hearing Clerk on or before August 16, 1996. A 
    copy of the stay request filed with the Hearing Clerk shall be 
    submitted to the Office of Pesticide Programs Public Docket. A stay may 
    be requested for a specific time period or for an indefinite time 
    period. The stay petition must include a citation to this Order and the 
    specific food additive regulation(s) as to which the stay is sought, 
    the length of time for which the stay is requested, and a full 
    statement of the factual and legal grounds upon which the petitioner 
    relies for the stay. If a petition for a stay is submitted, EPA will 
    automatically stay the effective date of the Order as to the particular 
    regulation(s) for which the stay is sought for such time as is required 
    to review the stay petition, if necessary. In determining whether to 
    grant a stay, EPA will consider the criteria set out in FDA's 
    regulations regarding stays of administrative proceedings at 21 CFR 
    10.35. Under those rules, a stay will be granted if it is determined 
    that: (1) The petitioner will otherwise suffer irreparable injury; (2) 
    the petitioner's case is not frivolous and is being pursued in good 
    faith; (3) the petitioner has demonstrated sound public policy grounds 
    supporting the stay; and (4) the delay resulting from the stay is not 
    outweighed by public health or other public interests. Under FDA's 
    criteria, EPA may also grant a stay if EPA finds that such action is in 
    the public interest and in the interest of justice.
        If a stay petition is submitted, EPA will publish a notice of 
    receipt in the Federal Register, stating that the effective date of 
    this Order is stayed as to the regulation(s) to which the stay is 
    requested pending EPA consideration of the stay request. Any affected 
    person may submit objections to a stay request to the Hearing Clerk on 
    or before 15 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register 
    of the notice of receipt. Any decision lifting the stay will be 
    published in the Federal Register.
    
    VI. Hearing Request
    
        Any person adversely affected by this regulation may, within 30 
    days after publication of this document in the Federal Register, file 
    written objections to the regulation and may also request
    
    [[Page 37221]]
    
    a hearing on those objections. Objections and hearing requests must be 
    filed with the Hearing Clerk, at the address given above (40 CFR 
    178.20). A copy of the objections and/or hearing requests filed with 
    the Hearing Clerk should be submitted to the OPP docket for this 
    rulemaking. The objections submitted must specify the provisions of the 
    regulation deemed objectionable and the grounds for the objections (40 
    CFR 178.25). Each objection must be accompanied by the fee prescribed 
    by 40 CFR 180.33(i). If a hearing is requested, the objections must 
    include a statement of the factual issue(s) on which a hearing is 
    requested, the requestor's contentions on such issues, and a summary of 
    any evidence relied upon by the objector (40 CFR 178.27). A request for 
    a hearing will be granted if the Administrator determines that the 
    material submitted shows the following: There is genuine and 
    substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable possibility that 
    available evidence identified by the requestor would, if established, 
    resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the requestor, taking 
    into account uncontested claims or facts to the contrary; and 
    resolution of the factual issue(s) in the manner sought by the 
    requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested (40 CFR 
    178.32).
    
    VII. Public Docket
    
        A record has been established for this rulemaking under docket 
    number [OPP-300363A] (including any comments and data submitted 
    electronically). A public version of this record, including printed, 
    paper versions of electronic comments, which does not include any 
    information claimed as CBI, is available for inspection from 8 a.m. to 
    4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The public 
    record is located in Room 1132 of the Public Response and Program 
    Resources Branch, Field Operations Division (7506C), Office of 
    Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Crystal Mall #2, 
    1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA.
        Electronic comments may be sent directly to EPA at:
        opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov.
    
    
        Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the 
    use of special characters and any form of encryption.
        The official record for this rulemaking, as well as the public 
    version, as described above will be kept in paper form. Accordingly, 
    EPA will transfer any copies of objections and hearing requests 
    received electronically into printed, paper form as they are received 
    and will place the paper copies in the official rulemaking record which 
    will also include all comments submitted directly in writing. The 
    official rulemaking record is the paper record maintained at the 
    address in ``ADDRESSES'' at the beginning of this document.
    
    VIII. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
    
        To satisfy the requirements for analysis specified by Executive 
    Order 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Paperwork Reduction 
    Act, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, and the Small Business 
    Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, EPA has considered the impacts of 
    this final rule.
    
    A. Executive Order 12866
    
        Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
    Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
    and therefore subject to all the requirements of the Executive Order 
    (i.e., Regulatory Impact Analysis, review by the Office of Management 
    and Budget (OMB)). Under section 3(f), the order defines 
    ``significant'' as those actions likely to lead to a rule (1) having an 
    annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely and 
    materially affecting a sector of the economy, productivity, 
    competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, 
    local or tribal governments or communities (also known as 
    ``economically significant''); (2) creating serious inconsistency or 
    otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned by another 
    agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement, 
    grants, user fees, or loan programs; or (4) raising novel legal or 
    policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's 
    priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive Order.
        Pursuant to the terms of this Executive Order, EPA has determined 
    that this rule is not ``significant'' and is therefore not subject to 
    OMB review.
    
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        EPA has reviewed this final rule under the Regulatory Flexibility 
    Act of 1980 [5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.], and has determined that it will not 
    have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
    businesses, small governments, or small organizations. Accordingly, I 
    certify that this final rule does not require a separate regulatory 
    flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        This regulatory action does not contain any information collection 
    requirements subject to review by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
    of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
    
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    
        This final rule contains no Federal mandates under Title II of the 
    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-4 for State, local, 
    or tribal governments or the private sector, because it would not 
    impose enforceable duties on them.
    
    E. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
    
        Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) of the Administrative Procedure Act 
    (APA) as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
    Act of 1996 (Title II of Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847), EPA submitted 
    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 General Accounting Office prior to publication of this 
    rule in today's Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as 
    defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2) of the APA as amended.
    
    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 24, 1996.
    Lois A. Rossi,
    Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of 
    Pesticide Programs.
    
    [[Page 37222]]
    
        Therefore, 40 CFR, chapter I, part 180 is amended as follows:
    
    PART 180--[AMENDED]
    
        The authority citation for part 180 would continue to read as 
    follows:
        Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.
    
    
        2. Section 180.191 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 180.191 Folpet; tolerances for residues.
    
        Tolerances are established for the fungicide folpet (N-
    (trichloromethylthio)pthalimide) in or on raw agricultural commodities 
    as follows:
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Parts per 
                             Commodity                             million  
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Apples.....................................................           25
    Avocados...................................................           25
    Cranberries................................................           25
    Cucumbers..................................................           15
    Grapes.....................................................           25
    Lettuce....................................................           50
    Melons.....................................................           15
    Onion (dry bulb)...........................................           15
    Strawberries...............................................           25
    Tomatoes...................................................           25
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    [FR Doc. 96-16588 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
9/16/1996
Published:
07/17/1996
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final Rule.
Document Number:
96-16588
Dates:
This final rule becomes effective September 16, 1996.
Pages:
37218-37222 (5 pages)
Docket Numbers:
OPP-300363B, FRL-5382-1
RINs:
2070-AC18
PDF File:
96-16588.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 180.191