[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 147 (Monday, August 2, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41818-41823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-19785]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 180 and 186
[OPP-300906; FRL-6096-2]
RIN 2070-AB78
Fenbutatin oxide, Glyphosate, Linuron, and Mevinphos; Tolerance
Actions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule revokes specific tolerances for the herbicides
glyphosate and linuron, and the insecticides fenbutatin oxide (hexakis
(2-methyl-2-phenylpropyl)distannoxane) and mevinphos (methyl 3-
[(dimethoxyphosphinyl)oxy]butenoate, alpha and beta isomers). EPA is
revoking these tolerances because the Agency has canceled the food uses
associated with them. All registrations for mevinphos were canceled in
1994. These revocations were proposed in the Federal Register, as given
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 58 tolerances and/or exemptions. Since 3
tolerances were previously reassessed, 55 of the 58 revocations are
counted here as 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 November 1, 1999. Objections
and requests for hearings, identified by docket control number [OPP-
300906], must be received by EPA on or before October 1, 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-300906] 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/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 notice, including the public version, has been established
under docket control number [OPP-300906] (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 the FFDCA tolerances for residues of
certain specified pesticides 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 those specified
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
[[Page 41819]]
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) 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.
Except for mevinphos, EPA had issued a Registration Eligibility
Decision (RED) for the pesticide active ingredients listed in this
document before the passage of FQPA. The RED contains the Agency's
evaluation of the data base of a chemical, including requirements for
additional data on the active ingredients to confirm the potential
human health and environmental risk assessments associated with current
product uses, and the Agency's decisions and conditions under which
these uses and products will be eligible for reregistration. In the
Federal Register, EPA issued several documents based on those REDs
which proposed the establishment, modification, and revocation of
specific tolerances and invited public comment for consideration and
for support of tolerance retention under FFDCA standards (see below).
Actions which were included in the original proposals, such as
establishing or modifying tolerances, require assessment under the FQPA
standard of ``reasonable certainty of no harm'', and will be re-
proposed after that is completed. However, the tolerance revocations in
this document may be taken without such assessment, because the
tolerances are no longer necessary.
Hexakis (2-methyl-2 phenylpropyl)distannoxane, also known as
fenbutatin oxide, is a miticide/acaricide first registered in 1974. EPA
issued a Registration Standard for fenbutatin oxide in 1987 and a RED
in November 1994. In the Federal Register of March 20, 1996 (61 FR
11359) (FRL-5347-6), EPA proposed to revoke the tolerances for
marigolds, fresh in 40 CFR 180.362; and for marigolds (dried and
extract) in Sec. 186.3550. Fresh and dried marigolds are not considered
to be significant food or feed commodities in Table II, updated in
August, 1996 as Table I ``Raw Agricultural and Processed Commodities
and Feedstuffs Derived from Crops''. In addition, the Agency proposed
tolerance revocations for dried grape pomace and raisin waste, which
were revoked in the Federal Register of December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020)
(FRL-5753-1). A comment to the March 20, 1996 document was received.
EPA completed its RED for glyphosate in September 1993. In the
Federal Register of June 27, 1996 (61 FR 33469) (FRL-5380-9), EPA
proposed to revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.364 for cotton, forage
and cotton, hay; and for citrus molasses in Sec. 186.3500, which was
later transferred to the table in paragraph (a) of Sec. 180.364 (62 FR
17723, April 11, 1997) (FRL-5598-6). Cotton, forage; cotton, hay; and
citrus molasses are not considered to be significant food or feed
commodities. In addition, the Agency proposed tolerance revocation for
peanut, hulls (shells), which was revoked in the Federal Register of
December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020) (FRL-5753-1). No significant comments
were received concerning glyphosate (61 FR 33469). Therefore, EPA is
revoking those three tolerances in 40 CFR 180.364 for glyphosate
residues in or on cotton, forage; cotton, hay; and citrus molasses.
The linuron RED was completed in March, 1995. In the Federal
Register on June 26, 1996 (61 FR 33054) (FRL-5368-7), EPA proposed to
revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.184 for barley, grain; barley, hay;
barley, straw; corn, pop, fodder; corn, pop, forage; oats, forage;
oats, grain; oats, hay; oats, straw; rye, forage; rye, grain; rye, hay;
and rye, straw. These uses are no longer registered, and, as discussed
above, it is the Agency's policy to revoke tolerances in such cases.
The tolerance for parsnips, tops, was also proposed for revocation,
since it is not considered to be a significant food or feed commodity.
No significant comments were received concerning linuron (61 FR 33054).
Therefore, EPA is revoking those 14 tolerances in 40 CFR 180.184.
In the case of mevinphos, on June 30, 1994, Amvac Chemical
Corporation submitted a request for voluntary cancellation when EPA was
prepared to issue a Notice of Intent to Suspend all mevinphos
registrations because of acute poisoning incidents involving
agricultural workers. EPA accepted this request. All U.S. registrations
for the insecticide mevinphos were canceled on July 1, 1994. The Agency
subsequently published a Notice of Receipt of Request for Cancellation,
Announcement of Cancellation Order, and FIFRA section 6(g) Notification
for Mevinphos in the Federal Register on August 1, 1994 (59 FR 38973).
The Cancellation Order was subsequently modified on January 13, 1995 to
extend the sale and distribution from December 30, 1994 to November 30,
1995, and to extend use from February 28, 1995 to November 30, 1995 (60
FR 17357, April 5, 1995) (FRL-4943-4). EPA proposed to revoke all
tolerances for the insecticide mevinphos on August 2, 1995 (60 FR
39302) (FRL-4967-1), proposing the effective date of revocation as May
31, 1996.
The following comments were received by the Agency in response to
the documents published in the Federal Register of March 20, 1996 (61
FR 11359) for fenbutatin oxide and of August 2, 1995 (60 FR 39302) for
mevinphos.
A. Fenbutatin oxide
Comment from DuPont Agricultural Products. A comment was received
from DuPont requesting that EPA consider a revision to the hexakis
(fenbutatin oxide) tolerance on citrus, dried citrus pulp, and citrus
oil. DuPont claimed that new data supports a tolerance of 4 ppm on
citrus, 20 ppm on citrus pulp, and 28 ppm on citrus oil.
Agency response. Since an FQPA reassessment will need to be made,
the Agency will not revise tolerances for fenbutatin oxide in this
document. EPA will address the issue of tolerance revision for citrus,
citrus pulp, and citrus oil through the tolerance petition process. The
Agency is revoking the tolerances for ``marigolds, fresh'' in 40 CFR
180.362 and for ``marigolds (dried and extract)'' in Sec. 186.3550.
B. Mevinphos
1. Comments from the Farmworker Justice Fund, Inc. and from the
United Farmworkers of America. These groups supported revocation of
mevinphos tolerances, and supported an earlier effective date of the
tolerance revocations.
2. Comments from Rogers Foods Chili Products, from Cal-Compack
Foods, and from Basic Vegetable Products. EPA received comments which
requested a delay in the revocation of the mevinphos tolerance for
dehydrated parsley to May 31, 1997.
3. Comment from the Association of Fruit and Vegetable Processors
and Exporters in General, A.C. EPA received a request that the
tolerances for mevinphos use on broccoli and cauliflower not be
revoked.
4. Comments from Amvac Chemical Corporation. Comments were received
from Weinberg, Bergeson, and Neuman
[[Page 41820]]
on behalf of the manufacturer of mevinphos, Amvac Chemical Corporation.
Weinberg, Bergeson, and Neuman in comments dated September 28, 1995 and
October 16, 1995, outlined issues that concerned Amvac Chemical
Corporation regarding the revocation of the mevinphos tolerances. EPA
also received several follow-up comments from Amvac Chemical
Corporation requesting the retention of certain tolerances to allow
importation of mevinphos treated food. In a meeting with EPA on
September 26, 1995, and in the letter of September 28, 1995, Amvac
Chemical Corporation committed to support tolerances with data for 13
commodities imported into the United States. This was detailed in
follow-up letters of October 16, 1995 and March 20, 1996, and revised
on June 7, 1996 to include support for an import tolerance concerning
cauliflower. In a follow-up communication of July 6, 1999, Amvac
Chemical Corporation clarified its position and expressed agreement
with EPA that, with the exception of broccoli, cabbage, cauliflower,
celery, cucumbers, grapes, lettuce, melons, peppers, peas (succulent),
spinach, summer squash, strawberries, tomatoes, and watermelon, the
other mevinphos tolerances should be revoked. Amvac suggested that
current residue data supports the combination of the two existing
watermelon and melons tolerances into a single tolerance for the entire
melon group as the raw agricultural commodity of 0.5 ppm.
Agency response. On September 26, 1995, Amvac made a commitment to
generate data for 13 tolerances and any additional uses that they
intend to support. In fact, Amvac revised its commitment on June 7,
1996, to include cauliflower as an import tolerance. On July 6, 1999,
Amvac clarified its position to maintain the watermelon tolerance in
combination with melons, but not to maintain the peavines tolerance.
Therefore, EPA will not revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.157 for
mevinphos use on broccoli; cabbage; cauliflower; celery; cucumbers;
grapes; lettuce; melons (incl. cantaloupes, honeydew mellon, and
muskmelon, determined on the edible portion with rind removed); peas;
peppers; spinach; squash, summer; strawberries; tomatoes, and
watermelon at this time. EPA will follow-up to see that data
requirements are met. When the submitted data has been reviewed, EPA
will re-evaluate these tolerances under FQPA. The suggestion to combine
the two watermelon and melons tolerances into a single tolerance will
be considered, but not addressed at this time. In general, the Agency's
goal is to harmonize U.S. tolerances with Codex Maximum Residue Limits
(MRLs) and would consider the data used for establishing MRLs. However,
the Agency needs representative data covering all major growing areas
that mevinphos treated commodities are likely to be imported from into
the United States. EPA has developed guidance on import tolerances that
is available to interested persons.
EPA is revoking the tolerances in Sec. 180.157 for alfalfa; apples;
artichokes; beans; beets, garden (incl. tops); birdsfoot trefoil,
forage; birdsfoot trefoil, hay; Brussel sprouts; carrots; cherries;
chicory, red (tops) (also known as radicchio); citrus; clover;
collards; corn, field, forage; corn, grain, field; corn, pop, forage;
corn, pop, grain; corn, sweet (K+CWHR); corn, sweet, forage; eggplant;
kale; mustard greens; okra; onions (green); parsley; peaches; pears;
peavines; plums; potatoes; raspberries; sorghum, forage; sorghum,
grain; turnips; turnips, tops; walnuts (determined on the nut meats
with shell removed); and watercress; and the tolerance in Sec. 180.524
for dehydrated parsley. In the case of dehydrated parsley, 2 years have
passed since the requested delay date. Therefore, the requested delay
is no longer an issue.
IV. When Do these Actions Become Effective?
These actions become effective 90 days following publication of
this final rule in the Federal Register. EPA has delayed the
effectiveness of these revocations for 90 days to ensure that all
affected parties receive notice of EPA's actions. Consequently, the
effective date is November 1, 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(1)(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 a 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 October 1, 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 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
[[Page 41821]]
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 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 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 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
supports a different safety factor.
B. Does this 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 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 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 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.
E. Does this 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 Action Have a Potentially Significant Impact on a
Substantial Number of Small Entities?
No. The Agency has certified that tolerance actions, including the
tolerance 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 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
[[Page 41822]]
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 Action?
EPA is working to ensure that the U.S. tolerance reassessment
program under FQPA does not disrupt international trade. EPA considers
Codex 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 REDs. 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 Action Subject to Review under the Congressional Review Act?
Yes. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 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 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 record
keeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 186
Environmental protection, Animal feeds, Pesticides and pests.
Dated: July 28, 1999.
Jack E. Housenger,
Acting Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR parts 180 and 186 are 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), 346a and 371.
b. Section 180.157 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 180.157 Methyl 3-[(dimethoxyphosphinyl) oxy]butenoate, alpha and
beta isomers; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
insecticide methyl 3-[(dimethoxyphosphinyl)oxy]butenoate, alpha and
beta isomers, in or on the following raw agricultural commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broccoli................................................... 1.0
Cabbage.................................................... 1.0
Cauliflower................................................ 1.0
Celery..................................................... 1.0
Cucumbers.................................................. 0.2
Grapes..................................................... 0.5
Lettuce.................................................... 0.5
Melons (incl. cantaloupes, honeydew mellon, and muskmelon, 0.5
determined on the edible portion with rind removed).......
Peas....................................................... 0.25
Peppers.................................................... 0.25
Spinach.................................................... 1.0
Squash, summer............................................. 0.25
Strawberries............................................... 1.0
Tomatoes................................................... 0.2
Watermelon................................................. 0.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
Sec. 180.184 [Amended]
c. Section 180.184 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 180.184 Linuron; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
herbicide linuron (3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea) in or
on the following food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asparagus.................................................. 7.0
Carrots.................................................... 1
Cattle, fat................................................ 1
Cattle, mbyp............................................... 1
Cattle, meat............................................... 1
Celery..................................................... 0.5
Corn, field, fodder........................................ 1
Corn, field, forage........................................ 1
Corn, fresh (inc. sweet K+CWHR)............................ 0.25
Corn, grain (inc. pop)..................................... 0.25
Corn, sweet, fodder........................................ 1
Corn, sweet, forage........................................ 1
Cottonseed................................................. 0.25
Goats, fat................................................. 1
Goats, mbyp................................................ 1
Goats, meat................................................ 1
Hogs, fat.................................................. 1
Hogs, mbyp................................................. 1
Hogs, meat................................................. 1
Horses, fat................................................ 1
Horses, mbyp............................................... 1
Horses, meat............................................... 1
Parsnips (with or without tops)............................ 0.5
Potatoes................................................... 1
Sheep, fat................................................. 1
Sheep, mbyp................................................ 1
Sheep, meat................................................ 1
Sorghum, fodder............................................ 1
Sorghum, forage............................................ 1
Sorghum, grain (milo)...................................... 0.25
Soybeans, (dry or succulent)............................... 1
Soybeans, forage........................................... 1
Soybeans, hay.............................................. 1
Wheat, forage.............................................. 0.5
Wheat, grain............................................... 0.25
Wheat, hay................................................. 0.5
Wheat, straw............................................... 0.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. Tolerances with
regional registration, as defined in Sec. 180.1(n), are established for
residues of the herbicide linuron 3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-
methylurea] in or on the following food commodity:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parsley.................................................... 0.25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
Sec. 180.362 [Amended]
d. By adding a paragraph heading to paragraph (a).
e. By redesignating paragraph (b) as paragraph (c), adding a
paragraph heading to newly designated paragraph (c), and by removing
from the table in newly designated paragraph (c) the entry for
``marigolds, fresh''.
[[Page 41823]]
f. By adding and reserving with paragraph headings new paragraphs
(b) and (d).
The additions to Sec. 180.362 read as follows:
Sec. 180.362 Hexakis (2-methyl-2-phenylpropyl)distannoxane;tolerances
for residues.
(a) General. * * *
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. * * *
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
Sec. 180.364 [Amended]
g. In Sec. 180.364, in the table to paragraph (a)(1) remove the
entries for ``citrus molasses''; ``cotton, forage''; and ``cotton,
hay''.
Sec. 180.524 [Removed]
h. By removing Sec. 180.524.
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. 186.3550 [Amended]
b. In Sec. 186.3550, by removing paragraph (b).
[FR Doc. 99-19785 Filed 7-30-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
