99-14069. Phosphine; Pesticide Tolerances  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 9, 1999)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 30939-30949]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-14069]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Parts 180, 185 and 186
    
    [OPP-300865; FRL-6082-4]
    RIN 2070-AB78
    
    
    Phosphine; Pesticide Tolerances
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Proposed rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: Tolerances are being revised and consolidated for residues of 
    phosphine in or on certain agricultural commodities and animal feeds. 
    None of these proposed tolerances are new, although this change would 
    facilitate new application methods. The Agency is merely changing the 
    tolerance expression to eliminate references
    
    [[Page 30940]]
    
    concerning how the phosphine gas is generated.
    
    DATES: Comments, identified by the docket control number [OPP-300865], 
    must be received on or before July 9, 1999.
    
    ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written comments to: Public Information and 
    Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and Services Division 
    (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 
    401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. In person, deliver comments to: 
    Rm. 119, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA.
        Comments and data may also be submitted electronically to: docket@epamail.epa.gov. Follow the instructions under Unit VI. of this 
    document. No Confidential Business Information (CBI) should be 
    submitted through e-mail.
        Information submitted as a comment concerning this document may be 
    claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that information as 
    CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance 
    with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the comment that 
    does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public 
    record. Information not marked confidential will be included in the 
    public docket by EPA without prior notice. The public docket is 
    available for public inspection in Rm. 119 at the Virginia address 
    given above, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
    legal holidays.
        Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposed 
    regulation. Comments must bear a notation indicating the docket control 
    number [OPP-300865].
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Dennis McNeilly, Registration 
    Division [7505C], Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental 
    Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. Office 
    location, telephone number, and e-mail address: Crystal Mall #2, 1921 
    Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, (703) 308-6742, e-mail: 
    McNeilly.dennis@epamail.epa.gov.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of December 23, 
    1998, (FRL-6053-6), EPA announced the availability of the 
    Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for aluminum and magnesium 
    phosphide, which was signed on September 30, 1998. This document 
    discusses in detail the Agency's risk assessment for these two very 
    similar pesticides.
        Current tolerances established for aluminum and magnesium phosphide 
    are expressed in terms of residues of the fumigant phosphine resulting 
    from the use of aluminum and/or magnesium phosphide, respectively. Both 
    of these chemicals have very similar use patterns, chemical properties 
    and both result in the same residue (hydrogen phosphide), both 
    qualitatively and quantitatively. In fact, due to the high reactivity 
    and volatility of these two compounds the detection of finite residues 
    is not expected and the residue data indicate non- detectable levels of 
    phosphine, when label directions concerning aeration for 48 hours 
    before entering into commerce are followed. The Agency has decided to 
    revise the current tolerance expressions because it does not matter 
    from a safety or practical standpoint, i.e. tolerance enforcement 
    purposes, whether residues of phosphine result from treatment with 
    aluminum phosphide or magnesium phosphide. In fact, having tolerances 
    expressed in this manner precludes treatment of the food and/or feed 
    commodities with phosphine gas delivered or generated via different 
    technology. Different application techniques involving direct 
    application of phosphine gas have the potential to reduce worker 
    exposure because fumigators would not need to enter the facility being 
    fumigated.
        The aluminum and magnesium phosphide RED states that the tolerances 
    listed under 40 CFR 180.225 (a) and (b), 185.200, and 186.200 and 
    tolerances for magnesium phosphine listed under 40 CFR 180.375 (a) and 
    (b), 185.3800, and 186.3800 should be amended to consolidate all of 
    these tolerances in the Code of Federal Regulations. Following passage 
    of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), tolerances for pesticide 
    residues in all types of food (raw or processed) are set under the same 
    provision of the law and EPA is including all such tolerances in part 
    180 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The Agency will list all 
    aluminum phosphide and magnesium phosphide tolerances under 40 CFR 
    180.225 and be subdivided into paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), and 
    (a)(4). Tolerances in the new paragraph (a)(1) concern residues 
    resulting in or on Raw Agricultural Commodities (RACs) from post-
    harvest fumigation uses. Tolerances in paragraph (a)(2) concern 
    residues in or on RACs from preharvest treatment of pest burrows in 
    agricultural and non-crop land areas. The Agency notes that this use 
    involves control of vector borne disease, especially in the 
    southwestern United States. Paragraph (a)(3) concerns residues 
    resulting from fumigation of processed foods. Finally, paragraph (a)(4) 
    concerns residues resulting from fumigation of animal feeds. There are 
    no tolerances established, nor are there any uses registered, for the 
    direct treatment of any field crop or greenhouse-grown food commodity.
        The Agency recently updated the list of raw agricultural and 
    processed commodities and foodstuffs derived from crops (Table 1 OPPTS 
    GLN 860.1000). As a result of changes to this table, commodity 
    definitions used in the CFR also need to be updated. For example, 
    instead of a tolerance expressed as corn, it should now specify corn, 
    grain or corn, forage, etc. Further, since the tolerances for phosphide 
    will be combined under a single tolerance expression for phosphine, 
    several commodities with tolerances currently listed under both 
    aluminum and magnesium phosphide would need only one tolerance. The 
    Agency notes that it is impossible for a laboratory to determine from 
    strictly analytical methods whether phosphine residues resulted from Al 
    or Mg phosphide application and for risk assessment it is irrelevant. 
    In addition, with the required 48-hour aeration period required on all 
    labels, finite residues are not expected in/on any food commodity.
    
    I. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings
    
        New section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish a 
    tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a 
    food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 
    408(b)(2)(A)(ii) defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable 
    certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the 
    pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures 
    and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.'' This 
    includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, 
    but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) 
    requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and 
    children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance 
    and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will 
    result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide 
    chemical residue. . . .''
        EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from 
    aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the 
    regulatory requirements of section 408 and a complete description of 
    the risk assessment process, see the Final Rule on Bifenthrin Pesticide 
    Tolerances (62
    
    [[Page 30941]]
    
    FR 62961, November 26, 1997)(FRL-5754-7).
    
    II. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
    
        Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the 
    available scientific data and other relevant information in support of 
    this action, EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of phosphine 
    and to make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with 
    section 408(b)(2), for residues of phosphine in or on almond, nutmeat 
    at 0.1 parts per million (ppm); avocadoes at 0.01 ppm; bananas at 0.01 
    ppm; barley, grain at 0.1 ppm; Brazil nut at 0.1 ppm; Cabbage,Chinese 
    at 0.01 ppm; cacao, bean at 0.1 ppm; cashews at 0.1 ppm; citrus, citron 
    at 0.01 ppm; coffee, bean, green at 0.1 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.1 
    ppm; corn, pop, grain at 0.1 ppm; cotton, seed, undelinted at 0.1 ppm; 
    date, dried at 0.1 ppm; eggplants at 0.01 ppm; endive (escarole) at 
    0.01 ppm; filbert at 0.1 ppm; grapefruit at 0.01 ppm; kumquats at 0.01 
    ppm; Legume vegetables succulent or dried group(excluding soybeans) at 
    0.0 1 ppm; lemons at 0.01 ppm; lettuce at 0.01 ppm; limes at 0.01 ppm; 
    mangoes at 0.01 ppm; millet, grain at 0.1 ppm; mushrooms at 0.01 ppm; 
    oats, grain at 0.1 ppm; oranges at 0.01 ppm; papayas at 0.01 ppm; 
    peanut, nutmeat at 0.1 ppm; pecans at 0.1 ppm; peppers at 0.01 ppm; 
    persimmons at 0.0 1 ppm; pistachios at 0.1 ppm; rice, grain at 0.1 ppm; 
    rye at 0.1 ppm; safflower seed at 0.1 ppm; salsify tops at 0.01 ppm; 
    sesame seed at 0.1 ppm; sorghum grain at 0.1 ppm; soybeans at 0.1 ppm; 
    sunflower, seed at 0.1 ppm; sweet potatoes at 0.01 ppm; tangelos at 
    0.01 ppm; tangerines at 0.01 ppm; tomatoes at 0.01 ppm; walnuts at 0.1 
    ppm; wheat, grain at 0.1 ppm; all Raw Agricultural Commodities (RAC) 
    resulting from preharvest treatment of pest burrows in agricultural and 
    non-cropland areas, 0.01 ppm; phosphine residues resulting from 
    fumigation of processed foods, 0.01 ppm; and phosphine residues 
    resulting from fumigation of animal feeds, 0.01 ppm.
        EPA's assessment of the dietary exposures and risks associated with 
    establishing the tolerance follows.
    
    A. Toxicological Profile
    
         EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its 
    validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of 
    the results of the studies to human risk.
        The Agency does not normally use inhalation studies for oral 
    (dietary) risk assessments. However, inhalation studies were used for 
    these chemicals because: (1) Use of an inhalation ``dose'' provides a 
    conservative approach for oral risk assessments; (2) these studies 
    enable the Agency to quantify the dosage of phosphine exposed to 
    laboratory animals; (3) the Agency required inhalation studies (rather 
    than oral studies) for this chemical because exposure to this chemical 
    via inhalation is much more likely for those individuals who would have 
    occupational exposure.
        EPA has also considered available information concerning the 
    variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of 
    consumers, including infants and children. The nature of the toxic 
    effects caused by phosphine are discussed below.
        1. Acute toxicity. A rat acute inhalation study on phosphine 
    indicated an LC50 greater than 11 ppm, the highest dose 
    tested (HDT). This puts phosphine in Toxicity Category I, i.e., Highly 
    Toxic.
        Given aluminum and magnesium phosphide's use patterns and chemical 
    characteristics, the other acute toxicity 81-series guideline studies 
    used to establish precautionary labeling were waived for these 
    chemicals as they would not change the Toxicity Category or effect 
    protective clothing requirements. The material of concern is phosphine 
    gas which is the material with pesticidal properties, when either 
    aluminum or magnesium phosphide are used.
        2. Subchronic toxicity. In a 90 day rat inhalation study, Fischer 
    344 rats (10/sex/dose) were exposed to phosphine 6 hours/day, 5 days/
    week for 13 weeks at levels of 0, 0.3, 1.0 or 3.0 ppm. Additional 
    groups (3-5/sex/group) were exposed at 0 or 10 ppm starting at week 8, 
    and 0 or 5 ppm starting at week 12. Recovery groups were included in 
    the study at each dose level and sacrificed after 4 weeks of post-
    exposure observations. In the groups exposed at levels up to 3.0 ppm, 
    there was a transient decrease in body weight gain accompanied by 
    decreased food consumption. Red blood cell counts, hemoglobin 
    concentration, and hematocrit values were slightly decreased in males 
    exposed at 3.0 ppm (at 4 weeks only), but no effects were observed in 
    these males at 13 weeks or in females at either interval. No exposure-
    related gross or histologic findings were observed at levels up to and 
    including 3.0 ppm. Exposure at 10 ppm for 3 days caused 40% mortality 
    in females but no mortality in males. Exposure at 10 ppm for 4 weeks 
    caused 80% death in females. Both males and females exposed at 10 ppm 
    had coagulative necrosis in the tubules of the kidneys and pulmonary 
    congestion was observed in the females that died. No histologic 
    findings related to dosing were apparent in the rats exposed for 2 
    weeks at 5 ppm; an increase in the BUN and alkaline phosphatase were 
    observed in males but not females exposed at 5 ppm. An LEL for 
    subchronic exposure (13 weeks) was not established in this study. The 
    no-observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) for 13 weeks was 3 ppm (HDT). 
    An LEL of 10 ppm for 4 weeks was based on lethality (4/5 deaths for 
    females) due to the sharp dose-response curve.
        3. Chronic toxicity/carcinogenity. In a 2-year rat feeding study, 
    diets were treated with Phostoxin pellets at 48 and 90 gm/metric ton, 
    fumigated for 48 hours and 72 hours, mixed for 2 hours, and then 
    aerated for one hour. The feed was then stored frozen in small sealed 
    containers until used as laboratory rat feed. Sixteen separate batches 
    of feed were treated utilizing this methodology over the 2-year period. 
    Samples of diet were taken to determine phosphine at the time the feed 
    was removed from the freezer. Phosphine levels ranged from 0.2 to 7.5 
    ppm and averaged approximately 1 ppm. The amounts of phosphine that 
    remained in the feed offered to the rats as food was not measured (but 
    would be expected to be less because of dissipation). Therefore, the 
    actual dosages in this study are unknown. Two groups of 60 rats each 
    (30 males and 30 females) were used, one as treatment group and other 
    as controls. The rats were observed for the effects on growth, food 
    consumption, survival, morbidity, hematology, blood chemistry and gross 
    and microscopic pathology. No differences were seen between the 
    controls and the treated animals for any toxicity parameter. No 
    increased oncogenicity resulted from fumigation residues. The study was 
    not considered guideline since toxicity, secondary to phosphine 
    residues, is not possible when aeration is adequate. However, the study 
    shows that toxic levels of residues were not achieved even with the 
    excessive fumigation treatment rates.
        In a chronic/oncogenicity study, Charles River Fischer CDF Rats 
    (60/sex/group) were exposed, under dynamic chamber conditions, to 0, 
    0.3, 1 and 3 ppm of phosphine. The rats were kept under standard 
    laboratory conditions, observed twice daily and sacrificed (10/sex/
    group) during week 52 of the study. Body weights; food consumption; 
    routine hematologic, serum biochemical and urinary analyses were all 
    comparable to control animals. There were no adverse effects observed 
    for the initial 12 month period. Body weights;
    
    [[Page 30942]]
    
    food consumption; routine hematologic, serum biochemical and urinary 
    analyses were all comparable to control animals. Ophthalmological 
    observations, gross pathology, organ weights and histopathology 
    indicated no adverse effects from the phosphine exposures. The NOAEL 
    for the 52 week period was 3.0 ppm, the HDT.
        4. Mutagencity. In a Salmonella typhimurium reverse gene mutation 
    assay, the test was negative with hydrogen phosphide (PH3) 
    in all strains up to cytotoxic concentrations (488 ppm/plate 
    +/-S9).
        i. Chromosome aberrations. In an in vitro cytogenetic assay with 
    Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells phosphine was positive at 2,500 and 
    5,000 ppm without S9 activation. This resulted in a significant but not 
    dose-related increases in the frequency of cells with structural 
    chromosome aberrations. Significant clastogenic effects were also noted 
    at 2,500 ppm with S9 activation but not at the HDT (5,000 ppm).
        ii. Other genotoxic mechanisms. In an in vivo unscheduled DNA 
    Synthesis (UDS) in primary rat hepatocytes, the test was negative in 
    male Fischer rats exposed via inhalation to PH3 doses of 0, 
    4.8, 13, 18 or 23 ppm (equiv. to 0, 11.4, 30.8, 42.6 or 54.5 mg/
    m3, respectively) for 6 hours. Overt toxicity (i.e., 
    difficulty in breathing) but no target cell cytotoxicity was observed 
    at the HTD.
        Based on the findings reported by Garry et al., (1989) that 
    pesticide applicators exposed to phosphine had increased levels of 
    chromosome damage, the USEPA sponsored a series of acute (Kligerman et 
    al.,1994a) and subacute (Kligerman et al., 1994b) inhalation 
    cytogenetic studies with phosphine. A summary of these studies are as 
    follows:
        (a) Phosphine was negative for the induction of micronucleated 
    polychromatic erythrocytes (MPE) in bone marrow cells and splenocytes 
    and negative for the induction of sister chromatid exchange or 
    chromosomal aberrations in splenocytes of CD-1 male mice exposed by 
    inhalation to 0, 5, 10 or 15 ppm for 6 hours. Overt toxicity, 
    manifested as lethargy and shallow breathing was seen at the HDT. There 
    was a dose-related and significant reduction of splenocyte cell cycling 
    at all levels, which indicates that phosphine was cytotoxic to 
    splenocytes. There was, however, no adverse effect on bone marrow cells 
    (Kligerman, et al., 1994).
        (b) Male B6C3F1 mice and male F344 rats were exposed by inhalation 
    to 0, 1.25, 2.5 or 5.0 ppm phosphine, 6 hours/day, 5 days/week over an 
    11-day period. Bone marrow cells and/or peripheral blood lymphocytes 
    were harvested and examined for sister chromatid exchanges and 
    chromosomal aberrations (mouse and rat peripheral blood lymphocytes) 
    and for MPEs (rat bone marrow and mouse bone marrow and peripheral 
    blood lymphocytes). In addition, B6C3F1 males were exposed via 
    inhalation to 0 or 5 ppm as above over a 12-day period and mated with 
    untreated females in a dominant lethal assay. Results show that 
    phosphine was not genotoxic at any endpoint.
        iii. Additional in vivo data summarized below were available for 
    review:
        (a) Following subchronic inhalation exposure (0, 0.3, 1.0 or 4.5 
    ppm, 6 hours/ day, 5 days/week for 13 weeks) but not acute inhalation 
    exposure (0 or 5.5 ppm, 2 weeks, 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 2 weeks), 
    phosphine at 4.5 ppm caused a statistically significant increase in 
    micronucleus induction in the spleen lymphocytes and bone marrow cells 
    of Balb-c male and female mice. There was, however, no increase in gene 
    mutations at the hypoxanthine guanine phosphoribosyl transferase locus 
    in the recovered spleen lymphocytes.
        (b) After 6 hours of inhalation exposure, phosphine, at the HDT (19 
    ppm) induced a significant increase in chromosomal aberrations in the 
    bone marrow of Sprague Dawley male rats but not in the female rats. The 
    effect is considered equivocal because increased chromosomal aberration 
    frequencies were only seen in high-dose males with severely reduced 
    mitotic indices (MIs). Females did not show increased chromosome 
    aberrations and did not have decreased MIs. There was also no effect on 
    peripheral lymphocytes.
        (c) In an Australian study of workers exposed to phosphine, 31 
    phosphine fumigators and 21 controls, all employed at the New South 
    Wales Grain Corporation, were examined for micronucleus incidence in 
    peripheral blood lymphocytes and their concentrated urine was assessed 
    for mutagenicity in TA100 and TA98 strains of S. typhimurium. In 
    addition, serum bile acids were measured. The subjects, all males, were 
    matched for medication, X-ray exposure within the past year and smoking 
    habits. There was no indication how often the fumigators were exposed, 
    or the most recent exposure date or the length of the various 
    fumigators employed. No individual data were presented to identify if 
    certain individuals showed unusually high micronuclei incidence, or 
    presence of mutagens in the urine.
        Urine samples were concentrated 75-fold and the procedure of 
    Yamaski and Ames (1977) was used to test mutagenicity to TA100 and TA98 
    in the presence or absence of metabolic activation (S9). There was no 
    increase in the mutagenicity of urine from the fumigators (N-27) vs 
    controls (N=-19) in this assay.
        Serum bile acids showed no changes related to phosphine exposure. 
    Cholesterol and some liver enzymes (gamma-glutamyl transferase were 
    elevated in the exposed group. Micronuclei formation was measured in 
    isolated peripheral blood lymphocytes cultured for 44 hours in the 
    presence of phytohemagglutinin to stimulate mitosis, arrested at 
    metaphase with cytochalasin-B and harvested by cytocentrifugation after 
    72 hours in culture. The micronucleus incidence was comparable among 
    the fumigators and the control groups (overall MI for fumigators = 6.9 
    vs 7.1 for controls).
        Phosphine is not mutagenic in bacteria but is clastogenic in vitro. 
    Both the negative Ames test and the positive CHO cell chromosome assay 
    are consistent with the in vitro test results for zinc phosphide. 
    Studies conducted in vivo indicate that phosphine is not clastogenic in 
    mice or rats and does not cause dominant lethal mutations in mice 
    following acute exposures for up to 2 weeks. There is, however, 
    evidence that inhalation exposures of phosphine for up to 13 weeks 
    induced significant clastogenic and/or an euploidogenic effects in male 
    and female mice. The biological relevance of this finding can not be 
    fully ascertained until the results of the 2-year rat inhalation study 
    currently underway are submitted and reviewed.
        5. Neurotoxicity. In an acute neurotoxicity study, 11 
    Crl:CDBR VAF/Plus rats/sex/exposure group were 
    exposed to 0, 20, 30, or 40 ppm of phosphine (1% a.i. in nitrogen) for 
    four hours. Each treatment group was exposed on a different day, with 
    the first exposure occurring six days prior to the final exposure. 11 
    rats/sex/exposure group were selected for functional observational 
    battery (FOB) and motor activity (MA) testing prior to and following 
    exposure, and on days 7 and 14 post-exposure; six rats/sex/exposure 
    group were perfused for neuropathology. All animals survived to 
    scheduled termination. There were no exposure-related clinical signs. 
    FOB and MA parameters were characterized by variability both within and 
    among control and exposed groups; this variability (which may be partly 
    due to the unbalanced treatment schedule) confounded interpretation of 
    some of
    
    [[Page 30943]]
    
    the results. Palpebral closure was noted in some exposed groups on day 
    1 and was significant in females exposed to 30 and 40 ppm and in males 
    at 20 and 40 ppm. Body temperatures were significantly lowered for 
    males and females on day 1 in all exposure groups. The remainder of the 
    differences in the FOB parameters were random statistical variations 
    that occurred both pre- and post-test, were not dose related, and were 
    not consistent between the sexes. Motor activity (horizontal, vertical, 
    total distance, and stereotypic time) was decreased at 20, 30, and 40 
    ppm, primarily during the 10 and 20 minute post-exposure time intervals 
    (data comparing motor activity for the entire 30-minute assessment 
    period was neither presented nor analyzed). With one exception, these 
    reductions no longer occurred at 7 or 14 days after exposure. For males 
    during the first 10-minute post-exposure interval, horizontal activity 
    decreased significantly by 76.4, 71.7 and 83.8% in the 20, 30, and 40 
    ppm groups, respectively. Males in the 20 ppm group had the following 
    decreases in horizontal activity: 76.4%, 77.6% (both statistically 
    significant), and 89.4% (non-statistically significant) during the 10, 
    20, and 30 minute intervals, respectively. For females during the first 
    10-minute post-exposure interval, horizontal activity decreased 
    significantly by 71.3, 48.0, and 83.5% in the 20, 30, and 40 ppm 
    groups, respectively. Females in the 20 ppm group had the following 
    decreases in horizontal activity: 71.3%, 85.8% (both significant), and 
    54.1% (non-statistically significant) during the 10, 20, and 30 minute 
    intervals, respectively. Similar decreases occurred for both sexes for 
    vertical activity, total distance, and stereotypic time. No phosphine-
    related neuropathological changes were observed in any exposure group. 
    Significant increases in absolute and relative (body and brain weights) 
    adrenal gland weights in males from the 40 ppm group were of 
    questionable biological significance and did not show a concentration-
    response relationship. The significant decrease in temperature and 
    motor activity, seen at all exposure levels in spite of the flaws in 
    the study, are considered treatment-related. The LOEL for 
    neurobehavioral findings is 20 ppm based on decreased body temperatures 
    and decreased motor activity in males and females. The NOAEL is <20 ppm.="" based="" on="" lack="" of="" systemic="" toxicity,="" the="" noael="" for="" systemic="" toxicity="" is="" 40="" ppm.="" it="" must="" be="" noted="" that="" the="" agency="" has="" asked="" for="" additional="" information="" regarding="" this="" study="" and="" has="" not="" accepted="" the="" study="" until="" the="" requested="" data="" are="" submitted="" and="" reviewed.="" in="" a="" subchronic="" inhalation="" neurotoxicity="" study,="" 16="">BE VAF/Plus rats/sex/exposure group were 
    exposed to phosphine (1% a.i. in nitrogen) for six hours/day, 5 days/
    week for approximately 90 days at 0, 0.3, 1, or 3 ppm. An additional 
    six rats/sex were assigned to the 0 and 3 ppm groups for a 2-week 
    recovery group. Eleven rats/sex/exposure group were assigned for 
    neurobehavioral evaluations. Six of the eleven rats/sex/exposure group 
    were designated for neuropathological evaluations. No exposure-related 
    deaths occurred in this study. Body weights were slightly higher in 
    high-concentration males (2.4%) and females (1.2%) after 13 weeks of 
    treatment, and became equal or less than the control body weights after 
    the 2 week recovery period. Palpebral closure was consistently 
    increased in high-concentration animals compared to controls. The 
    increase was significant (p  0.05) in high-concentration 
    males at week 4 and was exposure related. The increased palpebral 
    closure in high-concentration females was not significantly different 
    from the control group. The incidence of high-concentration males found 
    sleeping was consistently higher than the controls and was 
    significantly higher (p  0.05) at week 4. The sleep 
    incidence in males showed an exposure effect at weeks 4 and 13. A 
    similar trend was observed in females, but the differences were not 
    statistically significant. Body temperatures of high-concentration 
    males were consistently lower than the controls and reached statistical 
    significance (p  0.05) at week 13. The decreased body 
    temperature was exposure- related at weeks 4 and 13. Females did not 
    show a treatment-related change in body temperature. The horizontal and 
    vertical motor activities were significantly lower in high-
    concentration males than the control group at week 13, and were 
    consistently, but not significantly lower at other time intervals. 
    Motor activity measurements in females were compromised by high 
    variations and significant decreases in the high-concentration group at 
    the pretest interval. There were no treatment-related findings at 
    necropsy or during the neurohistopathological examination of collected 
    tissues. The effects seen in high-concentration males that could be 
    treatment-related are slight, but are consistent and mutually 
    supportive. The effects in females either did not occur, were not 
    statistically significant, or were compromised by variations in pretest 
    measurements. Due to the equivocal nature of the effects seen in high-
    concentration males, and the lack of effects seen in females, the 
    tentative NOAEL for systemic/neurobehavioral findings is 3.0 ppm for 
    males and females, a LOEL was not determined in this study. Since the 
    procedures used in this study have not been validated, and since 
    positive effects may be obscured by insensitive methods, the NOAEL is 
    tentative and will be re-evaluated upon receipt of information 
    requested from the sponsor. It must be noted that the Agency has asked 
    for additional information regarding this study and has not accepted 
    the study until the requested data are submitted and reviewed.
    
    B. Toxicological Endpoints
    
        1. Acute toxicity. The acute dietary endpoint is based upon the 
    results of the 90-day inhalation study. The dose and endpoint for risk 
    assessment was 5 ppm or 1.8 milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) based 
    on the lack of treatment-related effects following 15 days of exposure. 
    This includes a 100 fold Uf to account for inter and intra species 
    variation.
         2. Short - and intermediate - term toxicity. Based on the use 
    pattern and the fact that phosphine is a gas, an end-point and risk 
    assessment were not conducted for short- and intermediate-term, oral or 
    dermal exposures.
         3. Chronic toxicity. EPA has established the chronic reference 
    dose (RfD) for phosphine at 0.0113 mg/kg/day. This RfD is based on an 
    interim report (one year) for a 2-year chronic/oncogenicity inhalation 
    toxicity in rats. The dose for the risk assessment was a NOAEL=3 ppm = 
    0.004 mg/L=1.13 mg/kg/day. A 100 fold Uf was applied to account for 
    inter and intra species variation.
        4. Carcinogenicity. The results of a non-guideline 2-year rat 
    feeding study did not indicate a carcinogenic concern. Additionally, an 
    interim (one year) report for a 2-year inhalation carcinogenicity study 
    has been reviewed and does not indicate a carcinogenic concern. The 
    final report was submitted to the Agency in November, 1998 and is being 
    reviewed; however, it is unlikely to change the Agency's evaluation of 
    phosphine's carcinogenic potential.
    
    C. Exposures and Risks
    
        1. From food and feed uses. Tolerances have been established under 
    (40 CFR 180.225 (a) and (b), 185.200, 186.200, 180.375, 185.3800, and 
    186.3800) for the residues of phosphine, in or on a variety of raw 
    agricultural
    
    [[Page 30944]]
    
    commodities at either 0.01 ppm or 0.1 ppm level including food and feed 
    tolerances. This rule does not propose any new tolerances but rather 
    changes the existing tolerance expressions and eliminates reference to 
    the source of the phosphine gas, i.e., generated from either aluminum 
    or magnesium phosphide. Tolerances are set at 0.01 ppm for those 
    commodities for which direct treatment is not permitted. Tolerances of 
    0.1 ppm were established for those commodities listed above for which 
    aluminum and magnesium are allowed to come into direct contact, e.g., 
    tablets are added directly to corn grain as it is stored in silos . The 
    Agency does not expect finite residues at the consumer's dinner plate, 
    even for those commodities with a 0.1 ppm tolerance. This is because 
    these commodities are aerated for 48 hours, cooked, shelled, washed, or 
    otherwise prepared in some other way before they are actually consumed. 
    For example, nuts are shelled and further processed before reaching the 
    consumer. Other commodities such as dates are washed and graded for 
    packaging which would remove any unreacted phosphine residue. The 
    Agency has residue data from numerous studies on a wide variety of raw 
    agricultural commodities and processed foods that confirm, with 
    adequate aeration (48 hours is required) there will not be finite 
    residues in or on food commodities. Still the FDA does at times sample 
    RACs before the further processing described above occurs and there is 
    the potential that small amounts of unreacted phosphine residues of up 
    to 0.1 ppm could be observed in one of the RACs listed. All aluminum 
    and magnesium phosphide product labels are carefully reviewed to 
    restrict direct addition of the fumigant to commodities that are 
    further processed in a manner that it would preclude the possibility of 
    unreacted fumigant being in or on the food supply presented to the 
    consumer. Risk assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary 
    exposures and risks from phosphine as follows:
        i.  Acute exposure and risk. Acute dietary risk assessments are 
    performed for a food-use pesticide if a toxicological study has 
    indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result 
    of a one day or single exposure. Dietary exposure to aluminum and 
    magnesium phosphide can potentially occur via residues of phosphine gas 
    remaining in treated commodities. A large number of studies involving 
    numerous types of raw agricultural commodities and processed 
    commodities submitted to the Agency for establishment of food 
    tolerances indicate that residues of phosphine gas will be non- 
    detectable with adequate aeration. One of these studies involved the 
    analysis of 49 different processed foods, with all residues being 
    <0.004 ppm="" (limit="" of="" detection="" for="" this="" study).="" there="" are="" many="" other="" studies="" cited="" in="" the="" registration="" standard="" (pb87-117172)="" that="" support="" the="" conclusion="" that="" residues="" will="" typically="" be="" non-detectable="" with="" adequate="" aeration,="" i.e.,=""><0.004 ppm.="" tolerances="" were="" established="" based="" on="" the="" limits="" of="" quantification="" of="" the="" analytical="" method="" for="" phosphine="" gas="" for="" those="" commodities="" that="" may="" not="" come="" into="" direct="" contact="" phosphine="" during="" the="" fumigation="" procedure.="" tolerances="" of="" 0.1="" ppm="" were="" established="" for="" those="" commodities="" for="" which="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" are="" allowed="" to="" come="" in="" direct="" contact.="" this="" tolerance="" level="" allows="" for="" any="" small="" amount="" of="" unreacted="" product="" compound="" left="" in="" the="" food="" or="" feed="" that="" would="" be="" removed="" later="" during="" processing.="" direct="" addition="" (="" with="" it's="" 0.1="" ppm="" tolerance)="" is="" not="" allowed="" for="" processed="" commodities,="" and="" is="" strictly="" prohibited="" by="" the="" product="" use="" manuals.="" anticipated="" residues,="" were="" used="" for="" both="" the="" chronic="" and="" acute="" dietary="" exposure="" analysis.="" the="" agency="" conducted="" a="" dietary="" exposure="" evaluation="" model="" (deem)="" analysis,="" for="" both="" acute="" and="" chronic="" exposure="" scenarios,="" making="" the="" very="" conservative="" assumption="" (protective="" of="" human="" health)="" that="" all="" food="" contained="" in="" the="" deem="" consumption="" database="" (except="" meat/milk/poultry/eggs),="" i.e.,="" the="" food="" consumed="" by="" an="" individual="" in="" a="" given="" day,="" would="" contain="" residues="" of="" phosphine="" gas="" at="" the="" anticipated="" residue="" level="" of="" 0.006="" ppm.="" this="" was="" the="" highest="" limit="" of="" detection="" for="" any="" of="" the="" residue="" studies="" in="" the="" agency's="" tolerance="" petition="" files="" and="" was="" used="" for="" both="" the="" acute="" and="" chronic="" analysis.="" the="" agency="" considers="" this="" to="" be="" a="" ``worst-case''="" scenario.="" acute="" dietary="" exposure="" from="" food="" does="" not="" exceed="" the="" agency's="" level="" of="" concern.="" the="" percent="" of="" the="" acute="" rfd="" occupied,="" at="" the="" 99.9th="" percentile,="" is="" less="" than="" 30%="" for="" the="" population="" subgroups="" examined.="" the="" agency="" again="" notes="" that="" tolerances="" are="" based="" upon="" non-detectable="" residues="" in="" residue="" field="" trials.="" because="" phosphine="" gas="" will="" dissipate="" into="" the="" atmosphere,="" especially="" as="" foods="" are="" cooked="" (heated)="" or="" prepared,="" residues="" are="" unlikely="" to="" be="" found="" on="" food="" at="" the="" time="" of="" consumption.="" table="" 1.="" acute="" dietary="" (food)="" exposure="" at="" the="" 99.9th="" percentile="" ------------------------------------------------------------------------="" exposure="" (mg/kg/="" population="" subgroup="" day)="" percent="" acute="" rfd="" ------------------------------------------------------------------------="" u.s.="" population...................="" 0.003872="" 22="" non-nursing="" infants=""><1 yr="" old)..="" 0.004943="" 27="" children="" (1-6="" yr="" old).............="" 0.004440="" 25="" ------------------------------------------------------------------------="" in="" addition,="" the="" acute="" dietary="" endpoint="" is="" based="" on="" a="" noael="" which="" is="" the="" highest="" dose="" in="" the="" study.="" the="" true="" noael="" may="" well="" be="" higher="" than="" that="" observed="" in="" the="" study.="" therefore,="" the="" agency="" concludes="" that="" there="" is="" a="" reasonable="" certainty="" of="" no="" harm="" from="" acute="" dietary="" exposure.="" ii.="" chronic="" exposure="" and="" risk.="" the="" results="" of="" the="" deem="" chronic="" exposure="" analysis="" for="" exposure="" are="" summarized="" in="" table="" 2.="" chronic="" exposure="" does="" not="" exceed="" the="" agency's="" level="" of="" concern.="" the="" percent="" of="" the="" chronic="" rfd="" occupied,="" is="" less="" than="" 10%="" for="" the="" population="" subgroups="" examined.="" these="" estimates="" of="" exposure="" are="" partially="" refined,="" yet="" still="" conservative="" in="" that="" it="" was="" assumed="" that="" all="" food="" (except="" meat/milk/="" poultry/eggs)="" consumed="" by="" an="" individual="" would="" contain="" phosphine="" gas="" residues="" at="" 0.006="" ppm.="" this="" anticipated="" residue="" level="" is="" based="" on="" the="" highest="" limit="" of="" detection="" reported="" in="" tolerance="" petitions.="" the="" agency="" again="" notes="" that="" all="" tolerances="" are="" based="" upon="" non-detectable="" residues="" in="" residue="" field="" trials.="" because="" phosphine="" gas="" will="" dissipate="" into="" the="" atmosphere,="" especially="" as="" foods="" are="" cooked="" (heated)="" or="" prepared,="" residues="" are="" unlikely="" to="" be="" found="" on="" food="" at="" the="" time="" of="" consumption.="" [[page="" 30945]]="" table="" 2.="" chronic="" dietary="" (food)="" exposure="" ------------------------------------------------------------------------="" exposure="" (mg/kg/="" percent="" chronic="" population="" subgroup="" day)="" rfd="" ------------------------------------------------------------------------="" u.s.="" population..................="" 0.000261="" 2="" non-nursing="" infants=""><1 yr="" old)..="" 0.001004="" 9="" children="" (1-6="" yr="" old).............="" 0.000474="" 4="" ------------------------------------------------------------------------="" chronic="" aggregate="" dietary="" exposure="" (food="" and="" water)="" does="" not="" exceed="" hed's="" level="" of="" concern.="" using="" conservative="" assumptions,="" chronic="" risk="" estimates="" from="" exposure="" in="" food="" were="" less="" than="" 10%="" for="" all="" population="" subgroups="" examined.="" in="" fact,="" due="" to="" the="" rapid="" dissipation="" of="" gaseous="" phosphine,="" the="" agency="" does="" not="" expect="" finite="" residues="" on="" treated="" commodities="" at="" all="" if="" used="" according="" to="" label="" directions.="" therefore,="" the="" agency="" concludes="" that="" there="" is="" a="" reasonable="" certainty="" of="" no="" harm="" from="" chronic="" dietary="" exposure.="" section="" 408(b)(2)(e)="" authorizes="" epa="" to="" consider="" available="" data="" and="" information="" on="" the="" anticipated="" residue="" levels="" of="" pesticide="" residues="" in="" food="" and="" the="" actual="" levels="" of="" pesticide="" chemical="" that="" have="" been="" measured="" in="" food.="" if="" epa="" relies="" on="" such="" information,="" epa="" must="" require="" that="" data="" be="" provided="" 5="" years="" after="" the="" tolerance="" is="" established,="" modified="" or="" left="" in="" effect="" demonstrating="" that="" the="" levels="" in="" food="" are="" not="" above="" the="" levels="" anticipated.="" following="" the="" initial="" data="" submission,="" epa="" is="" authorized="" to="" require="" similar="" data="" on="" a="" time="" frame="" it="" deems="" appropriate="" as="" required="" by="" section="" 408(b)(2)(e).="" epa="" will="" issue="" a="" data="" call-in="" for="" information="" relating="" to="" anticipated="" residues="" to="" be="" submitted="" no="" later="" than="" five="" years="" from="" the="" date="" of="" issuance="" of="" this="" tolerance.="" 2.="" from="" drinking="" water.="" phosphine="" degrades="" in="" days="" (half-life="" is="" estimated="" to="" be="" 5="" hours)="" and="" has="" a="" low="" exposure="" potential="" for="" contaminating="" ground="" and="" surface="" water="" because="" it="" is="" a="" gas.="" therefore,="" epa="" believes="" these="" uses="" will="" not="" result="" in="" any="" exposure="" through="" ground="" or="" surface="" water.="" therefore,="" aggregate="" exposure="" is="" limited="" only="" to="" food.="" if="" new="" uses="" are="" added="" in="" the="" future,="" the="" agency="" will="" reassess="" the="" potential="" impacts="" of="" phosphine="" on="" drinking="" water="" as="" a="" part="" of="" the="" aggregate="" risk="" assessment="" process.="" due="" to="" the="" nature="" of="" these="" insecticides,="" addition="" of="" crop="" or="" residential="" uses="" is="" not="" likely.="" 3.="" from="" non-dietary="" exposure.="" phosphine="" is="" restricted="" use="" pesticide="" that="" is="" used="" to="" fumigate="" grains="" and="" other="" non-food="" commodities.="" phosphine="" is="" also="" used="" to="" control="" rodents="" in="" burrows.="" it="" has="" no="" residential="" uses.="" residential="" exposure="" is="" not="" expected;="" therefore,="" no="" risk="" assessment="" for="" these="" scenarios="" were="" conducted.="" 4.="" cumulative="" exposure="" to="" substances="" with="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity.="" section="" 408(b)(2)(d)(v)="" 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.''="" the="" agency="" believes="" that="" ``available="" information''="" in="" this="" context="" might="" include="" not="" only="" toxicity,="" chemistry,="" and="" exposure="" data,="" but="" also="" scientific="" policies="" and="" methodologies="" for="" understanding="" common="" mechanisms="" of="" toxicity="" and="" conducting="" cumulative="" risk="" assessments.="" for="" most="" pesticides,="" although="" the="" agency="" has="" some="" information="" in="" its="" files="" that="" may="" turn="" out="" to="" be="" helpful="" in="" eventually="" determining="" whether="" a="" pesticide="" shares="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity="" with="" any="" other="" substances,="" epa="" does="" not="" at="" this="" time="" have="" the="" methodologies="" to="" resolve="" the="" complex="" scientific="" issues="" concerning="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity="" in="" a="" meaningful="" way.="" epa="" has="" begun="" a="" pilot="" process="" to="" study="" this="" issue="" further="" through="" the="" examination="" of="" particular="" classes="" of="" pesticides.="" the="" agency="" hopes="" that="" the="" results="" of="" this="" pilot="" process="" will="" increase="" the="" agency's="" scientific="" understanding="" of="" this="" question="" such="" that="" epa="" will="" be="" able="" to="" develop="" and="" apply="" scientific="" principles="" for="" better="" determining="" which="" chemicals="" have="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity="" and="" evaluating="" the="" cumulative="" effects="" of="" such="" chemicals.="" the="" agency="" anticipates,="" however,="" that="" even="" as="" its="" understanding="" of="" the="" science="" of="" common="" mechanisms="" increases,="" decisions="" on="" specific="" classes="" of="" chemicals="" will="" be="" heavily="" dependent="" on="" chemical="" specific="" data,="" much="" of="" which="" may="" not="" be="" presently="" available.="" although="" at="" present="" the="" agency="" does="" not="" know="" how="" to="" apply="" the="" information="" in="" its="" files="" concerning="" common="" mechanism="" issues="" to="" most="" risk="" assessments,="" there="" are="" pesticides="" as="" to="" which="" the="" common="" mechanism="" issues="" can="" be="" resolved.="" these="" pesticides="" include="" pesticides="" that="" are="" toxicologically="" dissimilar="" to="" existing="" chemical="" substances="" (in="" which="" case="" the="" agency="" can="" conclude="" that="" it="" is="" unlikely="" that="" a="" pesticide="" shares="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" activity="" with="" other="" substances)="" and="" pesticides="" that="" produce="" a="" common="" toxic="" metabolite="" (in="" which="" case="" common="" mechanism="" of="" activity="" will="" be="" assumed).="" epa="" does="" not="" have,="" at="" this="" time,="" available="" data="" to="" determine="" whether="" phosphine="" has="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity="" with="" other="" substances="" or="" how="" to="" include="" this="" pesticide="" in="" a="" cumulative="" risk="" assessment.="" unlike="" other="" pesticides="" for="" which="" epa="" has="" followed="" a="" cumulative="" risk="" approach="" based="" on="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity,="" phosphine="" does="" not="" appear="" to="" produce="" a="" toxic="" metabolite="" produced="" by="" other="" substances.="" for="" the="" purposes="" of="" this="" tolerance="" action,="" therefore,="" epa="" has="" not="" assumed="" that="" phosphine="" has="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity="" with="" other="" substances.="" d.="" aggregate="" risks="" and="" determination="" of="" safety="" for="" u.s.="" population="" 1.="" acute="" risk.="" the="" aggregate="" acute="" risk="" reflects="" food="" source="" risk="" only,="" therefore="" an="" additional="" aggregate="" risk="" assessment="" is="" not="" needed="" (see="" unit="" ii.c.2="" in="" the="" preamble="" of="" this="" document).="" the="" use="" patterns="" associated="" with="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" phosphide="" are="" not="" expected="" to="" impact="" water="" resources="" through="" labeled="" uses;="" therefore,="" exposure="" to="" humans="" through="" drinking="" water="" is="" not="" expected.="" in="" addition,="" all="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" phosphide="" products="" are="" restricted="" use="" pesticides,="" which="" have="" no="" indoor="" residential="" uses;="" therefore,="" residential="" exposure="" is="" not="" expected="" for="" these="" restricted="" use="" products="" (which="" do="" not="" have="" residential="" use="" other="" that="" rodent="" control="" in="" burrows).="" the="" acute="" risk="" from="" food="" exposure="" to="" phosphine="" is="" 22%="" of="" the="" rfd,="" which="" indicates="" an="" adequate="" margin="" of="" safety.="" 2.="" chronic="" risk.="" using="" the="" anticipated="" residues="" and="" 100%="" crop="" treated="" exposure="" assumptions="" described="" above,="" epa="" has="" concluded="" that="" aggregate="" exposure="" to="" phosphine="" from="" food="" will="" utilize="" less="" than="" 10%="" of="" the="" rfd="" for="" the="" u.s.="" population.="" the="" subgroup="" with="" the="" highest="" aggregate="" exposure="" is="" 9%="" for="" non-nursing="" infants=""><1 year="" old).="" epa="" generally="" has="" no="" concern="" for="" exposures="" below="" 100%="" of="" the="" rfd="" because="" the="" rfd="" represents="" the="" level="" at="" or="" below="" which="" daily="" aggregate="" dietary="" exposure="" over="" a="" lifetime="" will="" not="" pose="" appreciable="" risks="" to="" human="" health.="" the="" potential="" residues="" [[page="" 30946]]="" in="" drinking="" water="" are="" considered="" to="" be="" zero;="" therefore,="" the="" combined="" exposure="" of="" chronic="" food="" and="" drinking="" water="" exposure="" to="" phosphine="" would="" be="" no="" greater="" than="" less="" than="" 10%="" of="" the="" rfd="" for="" children="" or="" the="" general="" u.s.="" population.="" due="" to="" the="" nature="" of="" the="" non-dietary="" use,="" epa="" believes="" that="" the="" commercial="" use="" of="" phosphine="" as="" a="" fumigant="" and="" in="" pest="" burrows="" will="" not="" result="" in="" any="" significant="" residential="" exposure.="" therefore="" the="" chronic="" risk="" is="" based="" on="" food="" only.="" 3.="" short-="" and="" intermediate-term="" risk.="" short-="" and="" intermediate-="" term="" risks="" are="" assessed="" in="" tolerance="" actions="" where="" a="" pesticide="" has="" the="" potential="" for="" residential="" exposure="" through="" a="" route="" other="" than="" the="" diet.="" no="" such="" potential="" exists="" for="" phosphine.="" the="" acute="" and="" chronic="" risk="" assessments="" fully="" capture="" the="" risks="" associated="" with="" this="" tolerance="" action.="" 4.="" aggregate="" cancer="" risk="" for="" u.s.="" population.="" epa="" has="" determined="" that="" there="" is="" no="" evidence="" of="" carcinogenicity="" in="" the="" available="" studies.="" based="" upon="" this="" determination="" it="" can="" be="" concluded="" that="" phosphine="" does="" not="" pose="" a="" cancer="" risk.="" 5.="" conclusion.="" the="" agency="" concludes="" that="" there="" is="" reasonable="" certainty="" that="" no="" harm="" will="" result="" from="" aggregate="" exposure="" to="" phosphine="" residues.="" e.="" aggregate="" risks="" and="" determination="" of="" safety="" for="" infants="" and="" children="" and="" the="" general="" population="" 1.="" safety="" factor="" for="" infants="" and="" children--="" i.="" in="" general.="" in="" assessing="" the="" potential="" for="" additional="" sensitivity="" of="" infants="" and="" children="" to="" residues="" of="" phosphine,="" epa="" considered="" data="" from="" a="" prenatal="" inhalation="" developmental="" toxicity="" study="" in="" rats.="" ffdca="" section="" 408="" provides="" that="" epa="" shall="" apply="" an="" additional="" tenfold="" margin="" of="" safety="" for="" infants="" and="" children="" in="" the="" case="" of="" threshold="" effects="" to="" account="" for="" pre-and="" post-natal="" toxicity="" and="" the="" completeness="" of="" the="" database="" unless="" epa="" determines="" that="" a="" different="" margin="" of="" safety="" will="" be="" safe="" for="" infants="" and="" children.="" margins="" of="" safety="" are="" incorporated="" into="" epa="" risk="" assessments="" either="" directly="" through="" use="" of="" a="" moe="" analysis="" or="" through="" using="" uncertainty="" (safety)="" factors="" in="" calculating="" a="" dose="" level="" that="" poses="" no="" appreciable="" risk="" to="" humans.="" epa="" believes="" that="" reliable="" data="" support="" using="" the="" standard="" moe="" and="" uncertainty="" factor="" (usually="" 100="" for="" combined="" inter-="" and="" intra-="" species="" variability)="" and="" not="" the="" additional="" tenfold="" moe/uncertainty="" factor="" when="" epa="" has="" a="" complete="" data="" base="" under="" existing="" guidelines="" and="" when="" the="" severity="" of="" the="" effect="" in="" infants="" or="" children="" or="" the="" potency="" or="" unusual="" toxic="" properties="" of="" a="" compound="" do="" not="" raise="" concerns="" regarding="" the="" adequacy="" of="" the="" standard="" moe/safety="" factor.="" ii.="" developmental="" toxicity="" studies.="" in="" a="" developmental="" study,="" cd="" derived="" sprague="" dawley="" mated="" female="" rats="" (24-27/dosage="" group)="" were="" exposed="" in="" inhalation="" chambers="" to="" concentrations="" of="" phosphine="" gas="" at="" 0,="" 0.03,="" 0.3,="" 3.0,="" 5.0="" and="" 7.5="" ppm,="" 6="" hours="" per="" day="" on="" gestation="" days="" 6="" through="" 15.="" the="" highest="" dose="" group="" was="" terminated="" after="" 10="" days="" of="" exposures="" due="" to="" high="" mortalities="" (14/24).="" the="" treated="" females="" were="" observed="" twice="" daily="" for="" toxicity,="" and="" body="" weights="" and="" food="" consumption="" were="" monitored="" throughout="" the="" study.="" at="" day="" 20="" post-coitus,="" the="" females="" were="" sacrificed="" and="" examined="" for="" corpora="" lutea,="" implantations,="" live="" and="" dead="" fetuses="" and="" early="" and="" late="" resorptions.="" pups="" were="" identified,="" sexed="" and="" examined="" for="" external="" malformations="" and="" visceral="" and="" skeletal="" defects.="" the="" females="" and="" their="" fetuses="" from="" the="" high="" dose="" group="" were="" not="" examined="" for="" developmental="" effects.="" the="" only="" abnormalities="" observed="" were="" increased="" resorptions="" in="" liters="" (16="" litters,="" 76="" pups).="" increased="" resorptions="" were="" not="" seen="" in="" the="" 0.3,="" 3.0="" or="" 5.0="" ppm="" groups.="" all="" other="" observations="" were="" comparable="" to="" the="" control="" females="" and="" pups.="" the="" maternal="" noael="" was="" 5="" ppm="" and="" the="" maternal="" lel="" was="" 7.5="" ppm="" based="" on="" the="" high="" incidence="" of="" maternal="" deaths.="" the="" reproductive="" noael="" is="" 5="" ppm="" and="" the="" developmental="" noael="" was="" 5="" ppm.="" iii.="" reproductive="" toxicity="" study.="" this="" study="" was="" not="" required="" for="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" phosphide.="" the="" complete="" toxicology="" data="" requirements="" for="" food-="" use="" chemicals="" are="" not="" required="" for="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" phosphide="" since="" little="" phosphine="" exposure="" is="" expected="" from="" use="" on="" foods="" as="" a="" fumigant.="" in="" fact,="" the="" agency="" does="" not="" routinely="" require="" the="" standard="" toxicological="" data="" base="" for="" a="" food="" use="" chemical="" for="" fumigants.="" fumigants="" are="" gases,="" which="" dissipate="" rapidly="" and="" provide="" for="" no="" residual="" control.="" phosphine="" diffuses="" rapidly="" through="" the="" stored="" product="" because="" it="" is="" a="" small="" molecule="" and="" does="" not="" absorb="" to="" most="" commodities.="" dietary="" exposure="" to="" this="" gas="" is="" not="" expected,="" tolerances="" are="" established="" to="" prevent="" misuse="" of="" the="" fumigants.="" it="" is="" for="" this="" reason,="" lack="" of="" exposure,="" that="" the="" agency="" does="" not="" routinely="" require="" the="" complete="" battery="" of="" testing="" required="" for="" a="" food-use="" chemical,="" for="" fumigants.="" the="" very="" nature="" of="" the="" chemicals="" used="" for="" fumigation="" (very="" high="" volatility)="" make="" dietary="" exposure="" an="" unlikely="" scenario.="" the="" agency="" reevaluated="" all="" previously="" waived="" food-="" use="" data="" requirements="" while="" reassessing="" these="" fumigants="" and="" determined="" that,="" based="" on="" lack="" of="" expected="" exposure,="" the="" data="" were="" not="" required.="" the="" only="" exception="" to="" this="" is="" the="" 2-year="" combined="" cancer-chronic="" study="" because="" there="" were="" specific="" concerns="" regarding="" chronic="" effects="" from="" low="" level="" exposure="" in="" grain="" workers.="" iv.="" pre-="" and="" post-natal="" sensitivity.="" the="" available="" toxicology="" data="" indicate="" no="" increased="" susceptibility="" in="" utero="" and/or="" postnatal="" exposure="" to="" phosphine.="" aluminum/magnesium="" phosphide="" developmental="" toxicity="" to="" the="" offspring="" occurred="" at="" equivalent="" or="" higher="" doses="" than="" maternal="" toxicity.="" v.="" conclusion.="" the="" data="" base="" is="" considered="" complete,="" with="" respect="" to="" the="" usual="" data="" requirements="" for="" fumigants="" (see="" section="" e1iii="" above).="" there="" are="" no="" data="" gaps.="" the="" toxicity="" data="" for="" phosphine="" does="" not="" indicate="" increased="" susceptibility="" in="" utero="" or="" postnatal.="" exposure="" assessments="" do="" not="" indicate="" a="" concern="" of="" potential="" risk="" to="" children="" because="" phosphine="" residues="" are="" not="" expected="" in="" food="" or="" drinking="" water="" and="" there="" is="" only="" a="" minor="" use="" of="" phosphine="" near="" residential="" sites,="" i.e.,="" control="" of="" rodents="" in="" burrows.="" in="" addition,="" the="" agency="" conducted="" a="" very="" conservative="" exposure="" assessment,="" i.e.,="" protective="" of="" human="" health.="" it="" is="" for="" all="" these="" reasons="" that="" the="" agency="" concludes="" that="" the="" additional="" safety="" factor="" of="" 10="" can="" be="" removed.="" based="" on="" these="" risks="" epa="" concludes="" that="" there="" is="" reasonable="" certainty="" that="" no="" harm="" will="" result="" to="" infants="" and="" children="" or="" the="" general="" population="" from="" aggregate="" exposure="" to="" phosphine="" residues.="" iii.="" other="" considerations="" a.="" metabolism="" in="" plants="" and="" animals="" based="" on="" the="" limited="" use="" pattern="" of="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" phosphide,="" plant="" and="" animal="" metabolism="" data="" were="" not="" required.="" the="" residue="" of="" concern="" is="" phosphine.="" the="" agency="" has="" determined="" that="" decomposition="" products="" of="" phosphine="" are="" toxicologically="" insignificant="" at="" the="" levels="" found="" in="" treated="" commodities.="" b.="" analytical="" enforcement="" methodology="" the="" pesticide="" analytical="" manual="" (pam)="" vol.="" ii="" lists,="" under="" aluminum="" phosphide,="" a="" colorimetric="" method="" (lod="0.01)" and="" a="" glc="" method="" with="" a="" flame="" photometric="" detection="" (lod="0.001" ppm)="" as="" method="" a="" and="" b,="" respectively,="" for="" the="" enforcement="" of="" tolerances.="" the="" residue="" of="" concern="" is="" phosphine.="" it="" is="" noted="" that="" method="" a="" remains="" a="" lettered="" method="" because="" of="" variable="" recoveries="" observed="" in="" an="" agency="" method="" try-out.="" however,="" the="" method="" has="" been="" determined="" to="" be="" acceptable="" for="" enforcement="" because="" phosphine="" is="" highly="" reactive,="" and="" finite="" residues="" are="" [[page="" 30947]]="" not="" expected.="" data="" submitted="" in="" support="" of="" the="" established="" tolerances="" were="" collected="" by="" one="" of="" these="" two="" methods.="" the="" original="" reregistration="" standards="" for="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" phosphide="" reserved="" the="" requirements="" for="" human="" health="" studies="" until="" certain="" uncharacterized="" residues="" which="" resulted="" from="" the="" treatment="" of="" food="" were="" characterized="" and="" evaluated.="" subsequent="" to="" the="" issuance="" of="" the="" reregistration="" standards,="" the="" agency="" received="" information="" which="" identified="" these="" formerly="" unknown="" residues="" as="" oxidation="" products="" of="" phosphine.="" having="" reviewed="" these="" data,="" the="" agency="" has="" concluded="" that="" these="" decomposition="" products="" of="" phosphine="" are="" toxicologically="" insignificant="" at="" the="" levels="" found="" in="" the="" treated="" commodities.="" because="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" phosphide="" are="" inorganic="" compounds,="" recovery="" of="" residues="" using="" fda="" multiresidue="" protocols="" is="" not="" expected,="" and="" the="" requirement="" for="" such="" data="" is="" waived.="" c.="" magnitude="" of="" residues="" residue="" data="" reflecting="" registered="" postharvest="" treatments="" of="" stored="" raw="" agricultural="" and="" processed="" commodities="" indicate="" that,="" with="" adequate="" aeration="" or="" further="" processing="" after="" treatment,="" residues="" of="" phosphine="" dissipate="" to="" nondetectable="" levels="" (all=""><0.01 ppm).="" residue="" data="" also="" indicate="" that="" the="" phosphine="" release="" from="" registered="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" phosphide="" products="" are="" not="" significantly="" different.="" since="" aluminum="" and="" magnesium="" phosphide="" have="" essentially="" identical="" use="" patterns,="" the="" available="" residue="" data="" for="" aluminum="" phosphide="" has="" been="" translated="" to="" magnesium="" phosphide.="" existing="" tolerances="" reflect="" a="" 48-="" hour="" aeration="" period.="" d.="" international="" residue="" limits="" the="" following="" tolerances="" for="" phosphine="" residues="" have="" been="" established="" by="" the="" codex="" alimentary="" commission:="" cereal="" grains,="" 0.1="" ppm;="" cocoa="" beans,="" 0.01="" ppm;="" dried="" fruits,="" 0.01="" ppm;="" dried="" vegetables,="" 0.01="" ppm;="" peanuts,="" 0.01="" ppm;="" spices,="" 0.01="" ppm;="" tree="" nuts,="" 0.01="" ppm.="" these="" tolerance="" levels="" are="" at="" or="" below="" the="" equivalent="" u.s.="" tolerances="" levels.="" the="" u.s.="" has="" no="" tolerances="" for="" use="" on="" spices="" or="" a="" broad="" tolerance="" for="" use="" on="" cereal="" grains;="" however,="" use="" on="" specific="" grains="" are="" registered="" uses="" in="" the="" u.s..="" no="" u.s.="" registrants="" are="" apparently="" interested="" in="" obtaining="" such="" a="" tolerance="" for="" the="" cereal="" grains="" crop="" group="" (crop="" group="" 15)="" or="" an="" import="" tolerance="" for="" residues="" in/on="" spices.="" the="" lower="" tolerances="" probably="" reflects="" codex="" tolerances="" that="" do="" not="" allow="" direct="" addition="" of="" the="" fumigant="" to="" the="" raw="" agricultural="" commodity.="" provided="" that="" one="" of="" the="" registrants="" submits="" a="" petition,="" with="" the="" supporting="" codex="" residue="" data="" and="" any="" corresponding="" use="" restriction,="" requesting="" that="" the="" higher="" u.s.="" tolerances="" (0.1="" ppm)="" be="" reduced="" to="" 0.01="" ppm,="" the="" agency="" anticipates="" that="" harmonization="" for="" all="" commodities="" would="" be="" possible.="" the="" agency="" notes="" that="" by="" changing="" the="" tolerance="" expression,="" new="" application="" technology="" could="" be="" registered="" that="" would="" eliminate="" the="" possibility="" of="" unreacted="" residues="" resulting="" from="" direct="" addition="" of="" the="" fumigant="" to="" raw="" agricultural="" commodities.="" e.="" rotational="" crop="" restrictions="" rotational="" crop="" restrictions="" are="" not="" needed="" as="" these="" insecticides="" are="" not="" used="" on="" agricultural="" crops.="" iv.="" conclusion="" tolerances="" are="" being="" revised="" and="" consolidated="" for="" residues="" of="" phosphine="" in="" the="" food="" commodities="" as="" outlined="" in="" the="" tables="" below.="" none="" of="" these="" proposed="" tolerances="" are="" new,="" the="" agency="" is="" merely="" changing="" the="" tolerance="" expression="" to="" eliminate="" references="" concerning="" how="" the="" phosphine="" gas="" is="" generated.="" v.="" public="" comment="" procedures="" epa="" invites="" interested="" persons="" to="" submit="" written="" comments,="" information,="" or="" data="" in="" response="" to="" this="" proposed="" rule.="" after="" consideration="" of="" comments,="" epa="" may="" issue="" a="" final="" rule.="" such="" rule="" will="" be="" subject="" to="" objections.="" failure="" to="" file="" an="" objection="" within="" the="" appointed="" period="" will="" constitute="" waiver="" of="" the="" right="" to="" raise="" in="" further="" proceedings="" issues="" resolved="" in="" the="" final="" rule.="" although="" the="" standard="" comment="" period="" on="" tolerance="" proposals="" issued="" by="" epa="" is="" 60="" days,="" epa="" finds="" for="" good="" cause="" that="" it="" would="" be="" in="" the="" public="" interest="" to="" have="" a="" comment="" period="" of="" only="" 30="" days="" on="" this="" proposal.="" this="" proposed="" tolerance="" will="" allow="" registration="" under="" the="" federal="" insecticide,="" fungicide,="" and="" rodenticide="" act="" of="" phosphine="" gas="" as="" an="" insecticide.="" currently,="" phosphine="" gas="" is="" used="" as="" a="" insecticide="" but="" only="" when="" applied="" by="" means="" of="" the="" registered="" pesticides="" magnesium="" phosphide="" or="" aluminum="" phosphide.="" application="" of="" phosphine="" gas="" directly="" will="" serve="" as="" a="" replacement="" for="" the="" use="" of="" methyl="" bromide="" as="" a="" fumigant.="" methyl="" bromide="" use="" is="" generally="" being="" phased="" out="" in="" the="" united="" states="" and="" worldwide="" under="" the="" montreal="" protocol="" due="" to="" concerns="" with="" ozone="" depleting="" compounds.="" finding="" replacements="" for="" methyl="" bromide's="" insecticidal="" uses="" is="" a="" top="" priority="" for="" epa.="" additionally,="" use="" of="" phosphine="" gas="" directly="" may="" reduce="" risks="" to="" workers.="" vi.="" public="" docket="" and="" electronic="" submissions="" the="" official="" record="" for="" this="" rulemaking,="" as="" well="" as="" the="" public="" version,="" has="" been="" established="" for="" this="" rulemaking="" under="" docket="" control="" number="" [opp-300865]="" (including="" comments="" and="" data="" submitted="" electronically="" as="" described="" below).="" 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="" 8:30="" a.m.="" to="" 4="" p.m.,="" monday="" through="" friday,="" excluding="" legal="" holidays.="" the="" official="" rulemaking="" record="" is="" located="" at="" the="" virginia="" address="" in="" ``addresses''="" at="" the="" beginning="" of="" this="" document.="" electronic="" comments="" can="" 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. Comment and data 
    will also be accepted on disks in Wordperfect 5.1/6.1 or ASCII file 
    format. All comments and data in electronic form must be identified by 
    the docket control number [OPP-300865]. Electronic comments on this 
    proposed rule may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.
    
    VII. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
    
        Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
    action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and since this action 
    does not impose any information collection requirements subject to 
    approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq., it 
    is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. In 
    addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty, or contain 
    any ``unfunded mandates'' as described in Title II of the Unfunded 
    Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4), or require prior 
    consultation as specified by executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093, 
    October 28, 1993), or special considerations as required by Executive 
    Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
        Pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
    (Public Law 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Administrator 
    has determined that regulations establishing exemptions from tolerance 
    requirements do not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
    number of small entities. A
    
    [[Page 30948]]
    
    certification statement explaining the factual basis for this 
    determination was published in the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 
    FR 24950).
    
    A. Executive Order 12875
    
        Under Executive Order 12875, entitled Enhancing Intergovernmental 
    Partnerships (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993), EPA may not issue a 
    regulation that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate 
    upon a State, local or tribal government, unless the Federal government 
    provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs 
    incurred by those governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must 
    provide to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a description of 
    the extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected 
    State, local and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, 
    copies of any written communications from the governments, and a 
    statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, 
    Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to develop an effective process 
    permitting elected officials and other representatives of State, local 
    and tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the 
    development of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded 
    mandates.''
        Today's proposed rule does not create an unfunded federal mandate 
    on State, local or tribal governments. The rule does not impose any 
    enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements of 
    section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.
    
    B. Executive Order 13084
    
        Under Executive Order 13084, entitled Consultation and Coordination 
    with Indian Tribal Governments (63 FR 27655, May 19,1998), EPA may not 
    issue a regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly 
    or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments, and 
    that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, 
    unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the 
    direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the 
    mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide OMB, in a separately identified 
    section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of 
    EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected tribal 
    governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement 
    supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive 
    Order 13084 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting 
    elected and other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to 
    provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory 
    policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their 
    communities.''
        Today's proposed rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
    communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve 
    or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the 
    requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to 
    this rule.
    
    List of Subjects
    
    40 CFR Part 180
    
        Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
    Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and 
    recordkeeping requirements.
    
    40 CFR Part 185
    
        Environmental protection, Food additives, Pesticides and pests.
    
    40 CFR Part 186
    
        Environmental protection, Animal feeds, Pesticides and pests.
    
        Dated: May 25, 1999.
    
    James Jones
    
    Director, Registration Division.
        Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter 1 be amended as 
    follows.
    
    PART 180--[AMENDED]
    
        1. In part 180:
        a. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as 
    follows:
        Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346(a) and 371.
    
        b. Section 180.225 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 180.225  Phosphine; tolerances for residues.
    
        (a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of the 
    insecticide phosphine in or on the following raw agricultural 
    commodities resulting from post-harvest fumigation:
    
     
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Commodity                        Parts per million
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Almond, nutmeat......................................                0.1
    Avocadoes............................................               0.01
    Bananas (includes Plantains).........................               0.01
    Barley, grain........................................                0.1
    Brazil nuts..........................................                0.1
    Cabbage, Chinese.....................................               0.01
    Cacao bean...........................................                0.1
    Cashews..............................................                0.1
    Citrus citron........................................               0.01
    Cocoa bean...........................................                0.1
    Coffee, bean, green..................................                0.1
    Corn, field, grain...................................                0.1
    Corn, pop, grain.....................................                0.1
    Cotton, seed, undelinted.............................                0.1
    Date, dried..........................................                0.1
    Eggplants............................................               0.01
    Endive/Ecarole.......................................               0.01
    Filberts.............................................                0.1
    Grapefruit...........................................               0.01
    Kumquats.............................................               0.01
    Lemons...............................................               0.01
    Lettuce..............................................               0.01
    Limes................................................               0.01
    Mangoes..............................................               0.01
    Legume vegetables (succulent or dried group,                        0.01
     excluding soybeans).................................
    Millet, grain........................................                0.1
    Mushrooms............................................               0.01
    Oats.................................................                0.1
    Oranges..............................................               0.01
    Papayas..............................................               0.01
    Peanut, nutmeat......................................                0.1
    Pecans...............................................                0.1
    Peppers..............................................               0.01
    Persimmons...........................................               0.01
    Pimentos.............................................               0.01
    Pistachio............................................                0.1
    Rice, grain..........................................                0.1
    Rye, grain...........................................                0.1
    Safflower, seed......................................                0.1
    Salsify tops.........................................               0.01
    Sesame, seed.........................................                0.1
    Sorghum, grain.......................................                0.1
    Soybeans.............................................                0.1
    Sunflower, seed......................................                0.1
    Sweet potatoes.......................................               0.01
    Tangelos.............................................               0.01
    Tangerines...........................................               0.01
    Tomatoes.............................................               0.01
    Walnuts..............................................                0.1
    Wheat................................................                0.1
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        (2) Tolerances are established for residues of the fumigant 
    phosphine in or on all raw agricultural commodities (RAC) resulting 
    from preharvest treatment of pest burrows in agricultural and non-crop 
    land areas as listed in the following table:
    
     
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Commodity                        Parts per million
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    All RACs resulting from preharvest treatment of pest                0.01
     burrows.............................................
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        (3) Residues resulting from fumigation of processed foods:
    
     
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Commodity                        Parts per million
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Processed foods......................................               0.01
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    [[Page 30949]]
    
        (4) Residues resulting from fumigation of animal feeds:
    
     
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Commodity                        Parts per million
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Animal feeds.........................................               0.01
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        (5) To assure safe use of this pesticide, it must be used in 
    compliance with the labeling conforming to that registered by the U.S. 
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under FIFRA. Labeling shall bear 
    a restriction to aerate the finished food for 48 hours before it is 
    offered to the consumer, unless EPA specifically determines that a 
    different time period is appropriate. Where appropriate, a warning 
    shall state that under no condition should any formulation containing 
    aluminum or magnesium phosphide be used so that it will come in contact 
    with any processed food, except processed brewer's rice, malt, and corn 
    grits stored in breweries for use in the manufacture of beer.
        (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
        (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
        (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
    
    
    Sec. 180.375  [Removed]
    
        b. Section 180.375 is removed.
    
    PART 185--[AMENDED]
    
        2. In part 185:
        a. The authority citation for part 185 continues to read as 
    follows:
        Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 348.
    
    Sec. 185.200  [Removed]
    
        b. Section 185.200 is removed.
    
    
    Sec. 185.3800  [Removed]
    
        c. Section 185.3800 is removed.
    
    PART 186--[AMENDED]
    
        3. In part 186:
        a. The authority citation for part 186 continues to read as 
    follows:
        Authority: 21 U.S.C. 342, 348, and 371.
    
    Sec. 186.200  [Removed]
    
        b. Section 186.200 is removed.
    
    
    Sec. 186.3800  [Removed]
    
        c. Section 186.3800 is removed.
    
    [FR Doc. 99-14069 Filed 6-8-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
06/09/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
99-14069
Dates:
Comments, identified by the docket control number [OPP-300865], must be received on or before July 9, 1999.
Pages:
30939-30949 (11 pages)
Docket Numbers:
OPP-300865, FRL-6082-4
RINs:
2070-AB78
PDF File:
99-14069.pdf
CFR: (6)
40 CFR 180.225
40 CFR 180.375
40 CFR 185.200
40 CFR 185.3800
40 CFR 186.200
More ...