[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 21, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39049-39053]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-18611]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-300898; FRL-6092-7]
RIN 2070-AB78
Biphenyl, Calcium cyanide, and Captafol, et al.; Final Tolerance
Actions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule revokes specific tolerances and/or exemptions
for residues of the herbicides chloramben, 2-chloro-N,N-
diallylacetamide, chloroxuron, diethatyl-ethyl, terbutryn, and 2,3,6-
trichlorophenylacetic acid; the fungicides biphenyl, captafol,
chlorosulfamic acid, and sulfur dioxide; and the insecticides calcium
cyanide, 2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate,
chlorthiophos, and ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate [chlorobenzilate]; as
listed in the regulatory text. The regulatory actions in this document
are part of the Agency's reregistration program under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and the tolerance
reassessment requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA). By law, EPA is required to reassess 33% of the tolerances in
existence on August 2, 1996, by August 1999, or about 3,200 tolerances.
This document revokes 138 tolerances and/or exemptions which would be
counted among reassessments made toward the August, 1999 review
deadline of FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
DATES: This final rule becomes effective October 19, 1999. Objections
and requests for hearings, identified by docket control number [OPP-
300898] must be received by EPA on or before September 20, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Objections and hearing requests can be submitted by mail or
in person. Please follow the detailed instructions provided in Unit V
of the ``SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION'' section of this document. To
ensure proper identification of your objection or hearing request, you
must identify the docket control number [OPP-300898] in the subject
line on the first page of your request.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Joseph Nevola, Special Review Branch, (7508C), Special Review and
Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.
Office location: Special Review Branch, CM#2, 6th floor, 1921 Jefferson
Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. Telephone: (703) 308-8037; e-mail:
nevola.joseph@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected categories and entities may include, but are not
limited to:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of Potentially
Categories NAICS Affected Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry............................. 111 Crop production
112 Animal production
311 Food manufacturing
32532 Pesticide manufacturing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This listing is not exhaustive, but is a guide to entities likely
to be regulated by this action. The North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes will assist you in determining
whether this action applies to you. If you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the ``FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT'' section.
II. How Can I Get Additional Information or Copies of this or Other
Support Documents?
A. Electronically
You may obtain electronic copies of this document and various
support documents from the EPA Internet Home Page at http://
www.epa.gov/. On the Home Page select ``Laws and Regulations'' and then
look up the entry for this document under ``Federal Register -
Environmental Documents.'' You can also go directly to the ``Federal
Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/homepage/fedrgstr/.
B. In Person or by Phone
If you have any questions or need additional information about this
action, please contact the technical person identified in the ``FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT'' section. In addition, the official record
for this final rule, including the public version, has been established
under docket control number [OPP-300898], (including comments and data
submitted electronically as described below). A public version of this
record, including printed, paper versions of any electronic comments,
which does not include any information claimed as Confidential Business
Information (CBI), is available for inspection in Room 119, Crystal
Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Public
Information and Records Integrity Branch telephone number is (703) 305-
5805.
III. What Action is being Taken?
This final rule revokes specific FFDCA tolerances and/or exemptions
for residues of the herbicides chloramben, 2-chloro-N,N-
diallylacetamide, chloroxuron, diethatyl-ethyl, terbutryn, and 2,3,6-
trichlorophenylacetic acid; the fungicides biphenyl, captafol,
chlorosulfamic acid, and sulfur dioxide; and the insecticides calcium
cyanide, 2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate,
chlorthiophos, and ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate [Chlorobenzilate] in or
on certain specified commodities.
EPA is revoking these tolerances because they are not necessary to
cover residues of the relevant pesticides in or on domestically treated
commodities or commodities treated outside but imported into the United
States. These pesticides are no longer used on commodities within the
United States and no person has provided comment identifying a need for
EPA to retain the tolerances to cover residues in or on imported foods.
EPA has historically expressed a concern that retention of tolerances
that are not necessary to cover residues in or on legally treated foods
has the potential to encourage misuse of pesticides within the United
States. Thus, it is EPA's policy to issue a final rule revoking those
tolerances for residues of pesticide chemicals for which there are no
active registrations under FIFRA, unless any person in comments on the
proposal demonstrates a need for the tolerance to cover residues in or
on imported commodities or domestic commodities legally treated.
EPA is not issuing today a final rule to revoke those tolerances
for which EPA received comments demonstrating a need for the tolerance
to be retained. Generally, EPA will proceed with the revocation of
these tolerances on the grounds discussed above only if, (1)
[[Page 39050]]
prior to EPA's issuance of a section 408(f) order requesting additional
data or issuance of a section 408(d) or (e) order revoking the
tolerances on other grounds, commenters retract the comment identifying
a need for the tolerance to be retained, (2) EPA independently verifies
that the tolerance is no longer needed, (3) the tolerance is not
supported by data, or (4) the tolerance does not meet the requirements
under FQPA. EPA had proposed these revocations since the registrations
for these pesticide chemicals were canceled because the registrant
failed to pay the required maintenance fee and/or the registrant
voluntarily canceled all registered uses associated with the tolerance
revocations for these pesticides.
1. Captafol and ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate [chlorobenzilate]. In
the Federal Register on June 9, 1993 (58 FR 32320) (FRL-4183-6) (OPP-
300273), EPA issued a document which proposed to revoke tolerances for
captafol, ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate (chlorobenzilate) and
monocrotophos. Monocrotophos was addressed in a final rule (64 FR
19489, April 21, 1999) (FRL-6074-4).
i. Captafol. EPA published a Registration Standard for captafol on
September 30, 1984. In that document, the Agency's concerns about
captafol's carcinogenic effects and hazard to fish are summarized. In
the Federal Register of January 9, 1985 (50 FR 1103), EPA issued a
notice initiating Special Review for captafol. This resulted in the
voluntary cancellation of all captafol registrations, effective April
30, 1987, with the exception of one intrastate registration that was
canceled in March, 1991. The sale of existing stocks of captafol by
registrants was permitted until December 31, 1987. Other persons were
allowed to continue to distribute, sell, and use existing stocks until
exhausted. Generally, a tolerance is not necessary for a pesticide
chemical which is not registered for the particular food use.
Therefore, in the Federal Register of June 9, 1993 (58 FR 32320), EPA
proposed to revoke the tolerances listed in 40 CFR 180.267 for residues
of captafol. The Agency revoked the tolerance for captafol residues in
or on peanuts, hulls in the Federal Register of December 17, 1997 (62
FR 66020) (FRL-5753-1).
Today's document revokes the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.267 for
captafol residues in or on apples; apricots; blueberries; cherries,
sour; cherries, sweet; citrus fruits; corn, fresh (inc sweet K+CWHR);
cranberries; cucumbers; macadamia nuts; melons; nectarines; peanuts,
meats (hulls removed); peaches; pineapples; plums (fresh prunes); and
taro (corm).
ii. Ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate (chlorobenzilate). This document
also revokes the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.109 for ethyl 4,4'-
dichlorobenzilate (chlorobenzilate) residues in or on cattle, fat;
cattle, mbyp; cattle, meat; citrus fruits; sheep, fat; sheep, mbyp; and
sheep, meat; by removing Sec. 180.109.
2. Sulfur dioxide. The proposal to revoke the exemptions in 40 CFR
180.1013 for sulfur dioxide was published in the Federal Register on
June 22, 1994 (59 FR 32172) (FRL-4776-9) (OPP-300336). Today's document
revokes the exemptions in 40 CFR 180.1013(a) for sulfur dioxide
residues in or on barley; buckwheat; corn; oats; popcorn; rice; rye;
sorghum, grain (milo); wheat; and in 40 CFR 180.1013(b) for sulfur
dioxide residues in or on corn (for feed use), by removing
Sec. 180.1013.
3. 2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate and
terbutryn. The proposal to revoke the tolerances for 2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-
trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate and terbutryn was published
in the Federal Register on July 20, 1994 (59 FR 37019) (FRL-4868-7)
(OPP-300346).
i. 2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate.
Today's document revokes the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.252 for residues
2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate in or on
apples; cherries; corn, field, fodder; corn, field, forage; corn, fresh
(inc. sweet K+CWHR); corn, grain; corn, pop, fodder; corn, pop, forage;
corn, sweet, fodder; corn, sweet, forage; cranberries; peaches; pears;
and tomatoes. EPA will revise commodity terminology to conform to
current practice.
ii. Terbutryn. This document also revokes the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.265 for terbutryn residues in or on barley, fodder; barley, grain;
barley, green; barley, straw; sorghum, grain; wheat, fodder; wheat,
grain; wheat, green; and wheat, straw, by removing Sec. 180.265.
4. Biphenyl; calcium cyanide; 2-chloro-N,N-diallylacetamide;
chlorosulfamic acid; chlorthiophos; 2,3,6-trichlorophenylacetic acid;
chloramben; chloroxuron; and diethatyl-ethyl. The proposal to revoke
the tolerances for the herbicides 2-chloro-N,N-diallylacetamide,
chloramben, chloroxuron, 2,3,6-trichlorophenylacetic acid, and
diethatyl-ethyl; the fungicides biphenyl and chlorosulfamic acid; and
the insecticides calcium cyanide and chlorthiophos was published in the
Federal Register on April 3, 1996 (61 FR 14694) (FRL-4971-1) (OPP-
300396).
i. Biphenyl. In this document, EPA is revoking the tolerance in
40 CFR 180.141 for biphenyl residues in or on fruits, citrus (and
hybrids thereof), by removing Sec. 180.141.
ii. Calcium cyanide. In this document, EPA is revoking the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.125 for calcium cyanide residues in or on
barley, grain (POST-H); buckwheat, grain (POST-H); corn, grain (POST-
H); cucumbers; lettuce; oats, grain (POST-H); radishes; rice, grain
(POST-H); rye, grain (POST-H); sorghum, grain (POST-H); tomatoes; and
wheat, grain (POST-H), by removing Sec. 180.125.
iii. 2-Chloro-N,N-diallylacetamide. In this document, EPA is
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.282 for 2-Chloro-N,N-
diallylacetamide residues in or on beans, dried; beans, lima; beans,
lima, forage; beans, snap; beans, snap, forage; cabbage; castor beans;
celery; corn, field, fodder; corn, field, forage; corn, fresh (inc
sweet K+ CWHR); corn, grain (inc popcorn); corn, pop, fodder; corn,
pop, forage; corn, sweet, fodder; corn, sweet, forage; onions; peas;
peas, forage; potatoes; sorghum, forage; sorghum, grain; soybeans;
soybeans, forage; sugarcane; sweet potatoes; and tomatoes; by removing
Sec. 180.282.
iv. Chlorosulfamic acid. In this document, EPA is revoking the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.201 for chlorosulfamic acid residues in or on
asparagus (POST-H); carrots (POST-H); cauliflower (POST-H); celery
(POST-H); potatoes (POST-H); and radishes (POST-H); by removing
Sec. 180.201.
v. Chlorthiophos. In this document, EPA is revoking the tolerance
in 40 CFR 180.398 for chlorthiophos residues in or on tomatoes, by
removing Sec. 180.398.
vi. 2,3,6-Trichlorophenylacetic acid. In this document, EPA is
revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.283 for 2,3,6-
Trichlorophenylacetic acid residues in or on sugarcane, by removing
Sec. 180.283.
vii. Chloramben; Chloroxuron; and Diethatyl-ethyl. Since
chloramben, chloroxuron, and diethatyl-ethyl still had usages on
certain crops as late as 1994 and 1995, EPA proposed to delay the
revocation of chloramben, chloroxuron, and diethatyl-ethyl until March
1, 1999, to allow domestic growers, who may have had stocks, to use up
their supplies and to permit any treated raw commodities and products
processed from such commodities to move through marketing channels. The
time-limited tolerances for chloramben, chloroxuron, and diethatyl-
ethyl, which were proposed in the Federal Register of April 3, 1996 (61
FR 14694), are no longer needed because the proposed
[[Page 39051]]
expiration date of March 1, 1999 has passed.
In this document, EPA is revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.266
for chloramben residues in or on beans, dried; beans, lima; beans,
snap; beans, vines; cantaloupes; corn, field, fodder; corn, field,
forage; corn, field, grain; cucumbers; peanuts; peanuts, forage; peas,
pigeon; peas, pigeon, forage; peppers; pumpkins; soybeans; soybeans,
forage; squash, summer; squash, winter; sunflower seed; sweet potatoes;
and tomatoes; by removing Sec. 180.266. The Agency revokes the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.216 for chloroxuron residues in or on carrots;
celery; onions (dry bulb); soybeans; soybeans, forage; and
strawberries; by removing Sec. 180.216. Also, the Agency revokes the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.402 for diethatyl-ethyl residues in or on red
beet, roots; red beet, tops; spinach; sugar beets, roots; and sugar
beets, tops; by removing Sec. 180.402.
Response to comments. EPA issued proposed rules for the specific
pesticides mentioned herein announcing the proposed revocation of
certain tolerances and/or exemptions and invited public comment for
consideration and for support of tolerance retention under FFDCA
standards. With the exception of captafol, no comments were received by
the Agency concerning the pesticides mentioned in this final rule.
In response to the proposed rule published in the Federal Register
of June 9, 1993 (58 FR 32320), the following comments were received
regarding captafol:
1. Comments from Citrus Grower Groups, Citrus Growers, and the
Florida Cooperative Extension Service at the University of Florida. In
general, comments requested that the revocation of the tolerance for
captafol residues on citrus fruits be postponed for 1 to 2 years (until
June, 1994 or June, 1995) to allow growers enough time to exhaust
existing stocks of captafol for use on citrus.
2. Comment from Maberry Enfield Maberry Berry Associates (MEMBA). A
comment was received by the Agency from MEMBA, which cited the
occasional use of captafol to control Godronia canker in blueberries.
MEMBA acknowledged that they have not needed captafol for several years
and that little material remains in the hands of growers and pesticide
brokers.
3. Comment from Nestle Peru S.A. A comment was received by the
Agency from Nestle Peru S.A. which stated that captafol was used in
combination with other active materials such as thiophanate-methyl
(Cercobin-M) and triadimefon (Bayleton).
4. Comment from Ministry of Agriculture, Republic of Indonesia. A
comment received by the Agency from the Embassy of the Republic of
Indonesia mentioned that the captafol tolerances on commodities,
including onions, potatoes, and tomatoes were too small in comparison
with Codex Alimentarius Commission/Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations (CAC/FAO) MRLs. The Ministry of Agriculture of the
Republic of Indonesia claimed that capatafol was being reevaluated due
to its potential negative impact on man or the environment. Also, the
Ministry stated there is a possibility of phasing out captafol in the
future.
Agency response. EPA will not revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.267 for captafol use on onions, potatoes, and tomatoes at this
time. EPA will follow-up with the Republic of Indonesia to see if
Indonesia has taken further actions on captafol and whether the
proposed U.S. tolerance revocation for onions, potatoes, and tomatoes
should be finalized. If Indonesia desires any import tolerances, then
certain data requirements need to be met. EPA has developed guidance on
import tolerances that is available to interested persons. The Agency
will revise commodity terminology for onions; potatoes; and tomatoes;
to conform to current practice; i.e., change to onion, potato, and
tomato, respectively. In addition, EPA is removing the ``(N)''
designation to conform to current Agency administrative practice (``N''
designation means negligible residues).
Regarding the comments on citrus fruits and blueberries, 6 years
have passed since the proposed revocation of all captafol tolerances in
the Federal Register of June 9, 1993 (58 FR 32320). EPA now believes
that more than enough time has transpired for existing stocks to be
used and/or legally treated agricultural commodities to have gone
through the channels of trade. Therefore, EPA is revoking the other
tolerances for captafol listed in 40 CFR 180.267 for residues on
apples; apricots; blueberries; cherries, sour; cherries, sweet; citrus
fruits; corn, fresh (inc sweet K+CWHR); cranberries; cucumbers;
macadamia nuts; melons; nectarines; peanuts, meats (hulls removed);
peaches; pineapples; plums (fresh prunes); and taro (corm).
IV. When Do these Actions Become Effective?
These actions become effective 90 days after publication in the
Federal Register. EPA has delayed the effectiveness of these
revocations for 90 days following publication to ensure that all
affected parties receive notice of EPA's action. Consequently, the
effective date is October 19, 1999. For this particular final rule, the
actions will affect uses which have been canceled for more than a year.
Therefore, commodities should have cleared the channels of trade.
Any commodities listed in the regulatory text of this document that
are treated with the pesticides subject to this final rule, and that
are in the channels of trade following the tolerance revocations, shall
be subject to FFDCA section 408(l)(5), as established by the FQPA.
Under this section, any residue of these pesticides in or on such food
shall not render the food adulterated so long as it is shown to the
satisfaction of FDA that, (1) the residue is present as the result of
an application or use of the pesticide at a time and in a manner that
was lawful under FIFRA, and (2) the residue does not exceed the level
that was authorized at the time of the application or use to be present
on the food under a tolerance or exemption from tolerance. Evidence to
show that food was lawfully treated may include records that verify the
dates that the pesticide was applied to such food.
V. Can I Submit Objections or Hearing Requests?
Yes. Any person can file written objections to any aspect of this
regulation and can also request a hearing on those objections.
Objections and hearing requests are currently governed by the
procedures in 40 CFR part 178, modified as needed to reflect the
requirements of FFDCA section 408(g).
A. When and Where to Submit
Objections and hearing requests must be mailed or delivered to the
Hearing Clerk no later than September 20, 1999. The address of the
Hearing Clerk is Hearing Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection Agency,
Rm. M3708, 401 M St. SW, Washington, DC 20460.
B. Fees for Submission
1. Each objection must be accompanied by a fee of $3,275 or a
request for waiver of fees. Fees accompanying objections and hearing
requests must be labeled ``Tolerance Petition Fees'' and forwarded to
EPA Headquarters Accounting Operations Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees),
P.O. Box 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251.
2. EPA may waive any fee when a waiver or refund is equitable and
not contrary to the purposes of the Act. A request for a waiver of
objection fees
[[Page 39052]]
should be submitted to James Hollins, Information Resources and
Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460. The request for
a waiver must be accompanied by a fee of $1,650, unless the objector
has no financial interest in the matter. The fee, if required, must be
submitted to the address in Unit V.B.1 of this document. For additional
information on tolerance objection fee waivers, contact James Tompkins,
Registration Division (7505C), at the same mailing address, or by phone
at 703-305-5697 or e-mail at tompkins.jim@epa.gov.
C. Information to be Submitted
Objections must specify the provisions of the regulation considered
objectionable and the grounds for the objections. 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. You may claim information that you submit in response to this
document as 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.
D. Granting a Hearing Request
A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator
determines that the material submitted shows the following:
1. There is a genuine and substantial issue of fact.
2. 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.
3. Resolution of the factual issue(s) in the manner sought by the
requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested.
VI. How Do the Regulatory Assessment Requirements Apply to this
Final Action?
A. Is this a ``Significant Regulatory Action''?
No. Under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this final action is not a
``significant regulatory action.'' The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that tolerance actions, in general, are not
``significant'' unless the action involves the revocation of a
tolerance that may result in a substantial adverse and material affect
on the economy. In addition, this final action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because this final action is not an economically significant
regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866. Nonetheless,
environmental health and safety risks to children are considered by the
Agency when determining appropriate tolerances. Under FQPA, EPA is
required to apply an additional 10-fold safety factor to risk
assessments, in order to ensure the protection of infants and children,
unless reliable data support a different safety factor.
B. Does this Final Action Contain Any Reporting or Recordkeeping
Requirements?
No. This final action does not impose any information collection
requirements subject to OMB review or approval pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
C. Does this Final Action Involve Any ``Unfunded Mandates''?
No. This final 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).
D. Do Executive Orders 12875 and 13084 Require EPA to Consult with
States and Indian Tribal Governments Prior to Taking the Final Action
in this Document?
No. Under Executive Order 12875, entitled ``Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership'' (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 final 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.
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 final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. This final rule 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.
E. Does this Final Action Involve Any Environmental Justice Issues?
No. This action does not involve special considerations of
environmental-justice related issues pursuant to Executive Order 12898,
entitled ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
F. Does this Final Action Have a Potentially Significant Impact on a
Substantial Number of Small Entities?
No. The Agency has certified that tolerance actions, including the
[[Page 39053]]
tolerance final actions in this document, are not likely to result in a
significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The factual basis for the Agency's determination, along with
its generic certification under section 605(b) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), appears at 63 FR 55565,
October 16, 1998 (FRL-6035-7). This generic certification has been
provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
G. Does this Final Action Involve Technical Standards?
No. This tolerance final action does not involve any technical
standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law
104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Section 12(d) directs EPA
to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures,
business practices, etc.) that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA requires EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available
and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
H. Are there Any International Trade Issues Raised by this Final
Action?
EPA is working to ensure that the U.S. tolerance reassessment
program under FQPA does not disrupt international trade. EPA considers
Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) in setting U.S. tolerances and in
reassessing them. MRLs are established by the Codex Committee on
Pesticide Residues, a committee within the Codex Alimentarius
Commission, an international organization formed to promote the
coordination of international food standards. When possible, EPA seeks
to harmonize U.S. tolerances with Codex MRLs. EPA may establish a
tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section
408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain in a Federal Register document the
reasons for departing from the Codex level. EPA's effort to harmonize
with Codex MRLs is summarized in the tolerance reassessment section of
individual Reregistration Eligibility Decisions. The U.S. EPA has
developed guidance concerning submissions for import tolerance support.
This guidance will be made available to interested persons.
I. Is this Final Action Subject to Review under the Congressional
Review Act?
Yes. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801 et seq., as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this
rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House
of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States
prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This action
is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 13, 1999.
Jack E. Housenger,
Acting Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is amended to read 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), 346a and 371.
Secs. 180.109, 180.125, 180.141, 180.201, and 180.216 [Removed]
b. By removing Secs. 180.109, 180.125, 180.141, 180.201, and
180.216.
c. By revising Sec. 180.252 to read as follows:
Sec. 180.252 2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl
phosphate; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
insecticide 2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate
in or on the following food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alfalfa.................................................... 110
Cattle, fat................................................ 1.5
Egg........................................................ 0.1
Goat, fat.................................................. 0.5
Hog, fat................................................... 1.5
Horse, fat................................................. 0.5
Milk, fat (reflecting negligible residues in whole milk)... 0.5
Poultry, fat............................................... 0.75
Sheep, fat................................................. 0.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
Secs. 180.265 and 180.266 [Removed]
d. By removing Secs. 180.265 and 180.266.
e. By revising Sec. 180.267 to read as follows:
Sec. 180.267 Captafol; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
fungicide captafol (cis-N-[(1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethyl)thio]-4-
cyclohexene-1,2-dicarboximide) in or on the following food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onion...................................................... 0.1
Potato..................................................... 0.5
Tomato..................................................... 15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
Secs. 180.282, 180.283, 180.398, 180.402, and 180.1013 [Removed]
f. By removing Secs. 180.282, 180.283, 180.398, 180.402, and
180.1013.
[FR Doc. 99-18611 Filed 7-20-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
