Alachlor, Carbaryl, Diazinon, Disulfoton, Pirimiphos-methyl, and Vinclozolin; Tolerance Revocations, 44488-44492 [05-15335]
Download as PDF
44488
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ This final rule
directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food
retailers, not States. This action does not
alter the relationships or distribution of
power and responsibilities established
by Congress in the preemption
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of the
FFDCA. For these same reasons, the
Agency has determined that this rule
does not have any ‘‘tribal implications’’
as described in Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000). Executive
Order 13175, requires EPA to develop
an accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal
officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications’’ is defined in the
Executive order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.’’ This
rule will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
X. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added 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 this final
rule in theFederal Register. This final
rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:20 Aug 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
Dated: July 1, 2005.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—AMENDED
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.1258 is added to subpart
D to read as follows:
I
§ 180.1258 Acetic acid; exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance.
An exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance is established for residues
of the biochemical pesticide acetic acid
when used as a preservative on postharvest agricultural commodities
intended for animal feed, including
alfalfa, barley grain, Bermuda grass,
bluegrass, brome grass, clover, corn
grain, cowpea hay, fescue, lespedeza,
lupines, oat grain, orchard grass, peanut
grass, Timothy, vetch, and wheat grain,
or commodities described as grain or
hay.
[FR Doc. 05–15148 Filed 8–2–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP–2005–0183; FRL–7725–6]
Alachlor, Carbaryl, Diazinon,
Disulfoton, Pirimiphos-methyl, and
Vinclozolin; Tolerance Revocations
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is revoking certain
tolerances for residues of the herbicide
alachlor, insecticides carbaryl, diazinon,
disulfoton, and pirimiphos-methyl, and
the fungicide vinclozolin because these
specific tolerances are no longer needed
or are associated with food uses that are
no longer current or registered in the
United States. The regulatory actions in
this document contribute toward the
Agency’s tolerance reassessment
requirements of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section
408(q), as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996. By law,
EPA is required by August 2006 to
reassess the tolerances in existence on
August 2, 1996. The regulatory actions
in this document pertain to the
revocation of 15 tolerances of which 9
count as tolerance reassessments toward
the August, 2006 review deadline.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This regulation is effective
August 3, 2005. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
before October 3, 2005.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written
objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in
Unit IV. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number OPP–2005–
0183. All documents in the docket are
listed in the EDOCKET index
at https://www.epa.gov/edocket.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in
EDOCKET or in hard copy at the Public
Information and Records Integrity
Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall
#2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This
docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The docket
telephone number is (703) 305–5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph Nevola, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508C), Office
of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–
0001; telephone number: (703) 308–
8037; e-mail address:
nevola.joseph@epa.gov.
DATES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. 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 entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111),
e.g., agricultural workers; greenhouse,
nursery, and floriculture workers;
farmers.
• Animal production (NAICS code
112), e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers,
dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311), e.g., agricultural workers; farmers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators.
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532), e.g., agricultural workers;
commercial applicators; farmers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
workers; residential users.
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies
of this Document and Other Related
Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET
(https://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may
access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A
frequently updated electronic version of
40 CFR part 180 is available at E-CFR
Beta Site Two at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.
II. Background
A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
In the Federal Register of March 23,
2005 (70 FR 14618) (FRL–7701–4), EPA
issued a proposed rule to revoke certain
tolerances for residues of the herbicide
alachlor, insecticides carbaryl, diazinon,
disulfoton, and pirimiphos-methyl, and
the fungicide vinclozolin. Also, the
proposal of March 23, 2005 provided a
60–day comment period which invited
public comment for consideration and
for support of tolerance retention under
the FFDCA standards. In this final rule,
EPA is revoking these tolerances
because they pertain to commodities
which are either no longer considered to
be significant livestock feed items or
which have restrictions against feeding
to livestock, or to uses no longer current
or registered under FIFRA in the United
States. The tolerances revoked by this
final rule are no longer necessary to
cover residues of the relevant pesticides
in or on domestically treated
commodities or commodities treated
outside but imported into the United
States. It is EPA’s general practice to
revoke those tolerances and tolerance
exemptions for residues of pesticide
active ingredients on crop uses for
which there are no active registrations
under FIFRA, unless any person in
comments on the proposal indicates a
need for the tolerance or tolerance
exemption to cover residues in or on
imported commodities or domestic
commodities legally treated.
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:20 Aug 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
EPA has historically been concerned
that retention of tolerances that are not
necessary to cover residues in or on
legally treated foods may 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
commenting on the proposal
demonstrates a need for the tolerance to
cover residues in or on imported
commodities or domestic commodities
legally treated.
Generally, EPA will proceed with the
revocation of these tolerances on the
grounds discussed in Unit II.A. if one of
the following conditions applies:
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 that demonstrate that the tolerance
meets the requirements under FQPA.
In response to the proposal published
in the Federal Register of March 23,
2005 (70 FR 14618) (FRL–7701–4), EPA
received one comment during the 60–
day public comment period, as follows:
Comment. A private citizen expressed
a general concern about the sale of
existing pesticide stocks.
Agency response. The private citizen’s
comment did not take issue with the
Agency’s proposal to revoke certain
tolerances which were no longer needed
or whose associated food uses were no
longer current or registered in the
United States. It is EPA’s general
practice to revoke tolerances for
residues of pesticide active ingredients
on crop uses for which FIFRA
registrations no longer exist. However,
cancellation orders issued by EPA will
generally permit a registrant to sell or
distribute existing pesticide stocks for
1–year after the date the cancellation
request was received by the Agency.
This policy is in accordance with the
Agency’s statement of policy as
prescribed in the Federal Register of
June 26, 1991 (56 FR 29362) (FRL–
3846–4). Typically, existing stocks of
registered pesticide products in the
hands of dealers or users can be
distributed, sold, or used legally until
they are exhausted, provided that such
further sale and use comply with EPAapproved label and labeling of affected
product. In the proposal of March 23,
2005 (70 FR 14618), EPA noted that
certain registrations had been canceled
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44489
for several years. The Agency believes
that the existing stocks of canceled
pesticide products have been exhausted
and treated commodities have had
sufficient time for passage through the
channels of trade.
No comments were received by the
Agency concerning the following.
1. Alachlor. Active registrations for
use of the herbicide alachlor have
restrictions against feeding peanut
forage; peanut, hay; soybean, forage; and
soybean, hay to livestock. Also, peanut
forage is no longer considered a
significant livestock feed item. On June
22, 1994, EPA canceled the two
registrations which had lacked the
restriction. These cancellations had
followed publication of a notice in the
Federal Register of March 17, 1994 (59
FR 12599) (FRL–4764–1), which
announced EPA’s receipt of requests to
voluntarily cancel certain registrations.
The restrictions against the feeding of
alachlor treated peanut forage and hay
for all alachlor products have been on
labels since 1993.
The tolerances for peanut forage,
peanut hay, soybean forage, and
soybean hay were recommended by the
Agency for revocation in the 1998
Alachlor Reregistration Eligibility
Decision (RED). A printed copy of the
Alachlor RED may be obtained from
EPA’s National Service Center for
Environmental Publications (EPA/
NSCEP), P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati,
OH 45242–2419, telephone 1–800–490–
9198; fax 1–513–489–8695; internet at
https://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/ and
from the National Technical Information
Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, VA 22161, telephone 1–
800–553–6847 or 703–605–6000;
internet at https://www.ntis.gov/. An
electronic copy of the Alachlor RED is
available on the internet at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/
status.htm. Therefore, because there is
no longer a need for them, EPA is
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.249 for the combined residues of
the herbicide alachlor and its
metabolites (calculated as alachlor) in or
on peanut, forage; peanut, hay; soybean,
forage; and soybean, hay.
2. Carbaryl. Because flax straw is no
longer a regulated feed item (no longer
considered a raw agricultural
commodity (RAC) of flax), the tolerance
is no longer needed. Therefore, EPA is
revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR
180.169(a)(1) for residues of the
insecticide carbaryl, including its
hydrolysis product 1-naphthol,
calculated as 1-naphthyl Nmethylcarbamate, in or on flax, straw.
Because bean forage and bean hay are
no longer considered significant
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
44490
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
livestock feed items, the tolerances are
no longer needed. Therefore, EPA is
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.169(a)(1) for residues of the
insecticide carbaryl, including its
hydrolysis product 1-naphthol,
calculated as 1-naphthyl Nmethylcarbamate, in or on bean, forage
and bean, hay.
Because pineapple bran is no longer
a regulated feed item (no longer
considered a RAC of pineapple), the
tolerance is no longer needed.
Therefore, EPA is revoking the tolerance
in 40 CFR 180.169(a)(4) for residues of
the insecticide carbaryl in or on
pineapple bran.
3. Diazinon. There have been no
registered uses of diazinon on coffee
beans and dandelions since 1995 and
1991, respectively. Therefore, EPA is
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.153(a)(1) for residues of the
insecticide diazinon (O,O-diethyl O-[6methyl-2-(1-methylethyl)-4pyrimidinyl]phosphorothioate) in or on
coffee bean and dandelion, leaves.
4. Disulfoton. There have been no
registered uses of disulfoton on hops
since 1991. Therefore, EPA is revoking
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.183(a) for
the combined residues of the insecticide
O,O-diethyl S-[2(ethylthio)ethyl]phosphorodithioate and
its cholinesterase-inhibiting metabolites,
calculated as demeton, in or on hop,
dried cones.
5. Pirimiphos-methyl. There have
been no registered uses of pirimiphosmethyl on kiwifruits for at least 10–
years. Therefore, EPA is revoking the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.409(a)(1) for the
combined residues of the insecticide
pirimiphos-methyl, O-(2-diethylamino6-methyl-4-pyrimidinyl) O,O-dimethyl
phosphorothioate, the metabolite O-(2ethylamino-6-methyl-pyrimidin-4-yl)
O,O-dimethyl phosphorothioate and, in
free and conjugated form, the
metabolites 2-diethylamino-6-methylpyrimidin-4-ol, 2-ethylamino-6- methylpyrimidin-4-ol, and 2-amino-6-methylpyrimidin-4-ol in or on kiwifruit.
In 2001, EPA published an Interim
Reregistration Eligibility Decision
(IRED) for pirimiphos-methyl and made
a determination that pirimiphos-methyl
residues of concern do not concentrate
in wheat flour. Because the tolerance is
no longer needed, EPA is revoking the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.409(a)(2) for
residues of the insecticide pirimiphosmethyl and its metabolite O-(2ethylamino-6-methyl-pyrimidin-4-yl)
O,O-dimethyl phosphorothioate and, in
free and conjugated form, the
metabolites 2-diethylamino-6-methylpyrimidin-4-ol, 2-ethylamino-6-methylpyrimidin-4-ol, and 2-amino-6-methyl-
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:20 Aug 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
pyrimidin-4-ol in or on wheat flour as
a result of application to stored wheat
grain.
A printed copy of the pirimiphosmethyl IRED may be obtained from
EPA’s National Service Center for
Environmental Publications (EPA/
NSCEP), P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati,
OH 45242–2419, telephone 1–800–490–
9198; fax 1–513–489–8695; internet at
https://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/ and
from the National Technical Information
Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, VA 22161, telephone 1–
800–553–6847 or 703–605–6000;
internet at https://www.ntis.gov/. An
electronic copy of the pirimiphosmethyl IRED is available on the internet
at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
reregistration/status.htm.
6. Vinclozolin. In the Federal Register
notice of August 22, 2001 (66 FR 44134)
(FRL–6795–7), EPA announced use
cancellations for certain vinclozolin
registrations, including uses of the
fungicide vinclozolin on onions and
raspberries with a last date for legal use
as December 15, 2001. EPA believes that
there has been sufficient time for treated
commodities to have cleared the
channels of trade. Therefore, EPA is
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.380(a) for the combined residues of
the fungicide vinclozolin and its
metabolites containing the 3,5dichloroaniline moiety in or on onion,
dry bulb and raspberry.
B. What is the Agency’s Authority for
Taking this Action?
EPA’s general practice is to revoke
tolerances for residues of pesticide
active ingredients on crops for which
FIFRA registrations no longer exist and
on which the pesticide may therefore,
no longer be used in the United States.
EPA has historically been concerned
that retention of tolerances that are not
necessary to cover residues in or on
legally treated foods may encourage
misuse of pesticides within the United
States. Nonetheless, EPA will establish
and maintain tolerances even when
corresponding domestic uses are
canceled if the tolerances, which EPA
refers to as ‘‘import tolerances,’’ are
necessary to allow importation into the
United States of food containing such
pesticide residues. However, where
there are no imported commodities that
require these import tolerances, the
Agency believes it is appropriate to
revoke tolerances for unregistered
pesticides in order to prevent potential
misuse.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
C. When Do These Actions Become
Effective?
The actions in this final rule become
effective on the date of publication of
this final rule in the Federal Register
because the specific tolerances revoked
herein are no longer needed or are
associated with food uses that have been
canceled for several years. The Agency
believes that treated commodities have
had sufficient time for passage through
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
residues of these pesticides in or on
such food shall not render the food
adulterated so long as it is shown to the
satisfaction of the Food and Drug
Administration (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.
D. What is the Contribution to Tolerance
Reassessment?
By law, EPA is required by August
2006 to reassess the tolerances in
existence on August 2, 1996. As of June
29, 2005, EPA has reassessed over 7,330
tolerances. This document revokes a
total of 15 tolerances of which 9 are
counted as tolerance reassessments
toward the August, 2006 review
deadline of FFDCA section 408(q), as
amended by FQPA in 1996. Alachlor
and vinclozolin tolerances revoked
herein were previously reassessed.
III. 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
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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. EPA has developed
guidance concerning submissions for
import tolerance support in the Federal
Register of June 1, 2000 (65 FR 35069)
(FRL–6559–3). This guidance will be
made available to interested persons.
Electronic copies are available on the
internet at https://www.epa.gov/. On the
Home Page select ‘‘Laws and
Regulations,’’ then select ‘‘Regulations
and Proposed Rules’’ 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 https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
IV. Objections and Hearing Requests
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as
amended by FQPA, any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this
regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. The EPA
procedural regulations which govern the
submission of objections and requests
for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178.
Although the procedures in those
regulations require some modification to
reflect the amendments made to FFDCA
by FQPA, EPA will continue to use
those procedures, with appropriate
adjustments, until the necessary
modifications can be made. The new
section 408(g) of FFDCA provides
essentially the same process for persons
to ‘‘object’’ to a regulation for an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance issued by EPA under new
section 408(d) of FFDCA, as was
provided in the old sections 408 and
409 of FFDCA. However, the period for
filing objections is now 60 days, rather
than 30 days.
A. What Do I Need to Do to File an
Objection or Request a Hearing?
You must file your objection or
request a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
provided in this unit and in 40 CFR part
178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
you must identify docket ID number
OPP–2005–0183 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
requests must be in writing, and must be
mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk
on or before October 3, 2005.
1. Filing the request. Your objection
must specify the specific provisions in
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:20 Aug 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
the regulation that you object to, and the
grounds for the objections (40 CFR
178.25). If a hearing is requested, the
objections must include a statement of
the factual issues(s) on which a hearing
is requested, the requestor’s contentions
on such issues, and a summary of any
evidence relied upon by the objector (40
CFR 178.27). Information submitted in
connection with an objection or hearing
request 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
information that does not contain CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public record. Information not marked
confidential may be disclosed publicly
by EPA without prior notice.
Mail your written request to: Office of
the Hearing Clerk (1900L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001. You may also deliver
your request to the Office of the Hearing
Clerk in Suite 350, 1099 14th St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20005. The Office of
the Hearing Clerk is open from 8 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Office of the Hearing
Clerk is (202) 564–6255.
2. Copies for the Docket. In addition
to filing an objection or hearing request
with the Hearing Clerk as described in
Unit IV.A.1., you should also send a
copy of your request to the PIRIB for its
inclusion in the official record that is
described in ADDRESSES. Mail your
copies, identified by docket ID number
OPP–2005–0183, to: Public Information
and Records Integrity Branch,
Information Resources and Services
Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001. In person
or by courier, bring a copy to the
location of the PIRIB described in
ADDRESSES. You may also send an
electronic copy of your request via email to: opp-docket@epa.gov. Please use
an ASCII file format and avoid the use
of special characters and any form of
encryption. Copies of electronic
objections and hearing requests will also
be accepted on disks in WordPerfect
6.1/8.0 or ASCII file format. Do not
include any CBI in your electronic copy.
You may also submit an electronic copy
of your request at many Federal
Depository Libraries.
B. When Will the Agency Grant a
Request for a Hearing?
A request for a hearing will be granted
if the Administrator determines that the
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44491
material submitted shows the following:
There is a genuine and substantial issue
of fact; there is a reasonable possibility
that available evidence identified by the
requestor would, if established resolve
one or more of such issues in favor of
the requestor, taking into account
uncontested claims or facts to the
contrary; and resolution of the factual
issues(s) in the manner sought by the
requestor would be adequate to justify
the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
In this final rule, EPA is revoking
specific tolerances established under
section 408 of FFDCA. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this type of action (i.e., a
tolerance revocation for which
extraordinary circumstances do not
exist) from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this rule has
been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any
enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public
Law 104–4). Nor does it require any
special considerations as required by
Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994); or OMB review or
any other Agency action under
Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This 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). Pursuant to
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency
previously assessed whether revocations
of tolerances might significantly impact
a substantial number of small entities
and concluded that, as a general matter,
these actions do not impose a significant
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
44492
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This analysis
was published on December 17, 1997
(62 FR 66020), and was provided to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration. Taking into
account this analysis, and available
information concerning the pesticides
listed in this rule, the Agency hereby
certifies that this final rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Specifically, as per the 1997 notice, EPA
has reviewed its available data on
imports and foreign pesticide usage and
concludes that there is a reasonable
international supply of food not treated
with canceled pesticides. Furthermore,
for the pesticides named in this final
rule, the Agency knows of no
extraordinary circumstances that exist
as to the present revocations that would
change EPA’s previous analysis. In
addition, the Agency has determined
that this action will not have a
substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires
EPA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies
that have federalism implications’’ is
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ This final rule
directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food
retailers, not States. This action does not
alter the relationships or distribution of
power and responsibilities established
by Congress in the preemption
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of
FFDCA. For these same reasons, the
Agency has determined that this rule
does not have any ‘‘tribal implications’’
as described in Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000). Executive
Order 13175, requires EPA to develop
an accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal
officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:20 Aug 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
implications’’ is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.’’ This
rule will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
VI. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added 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 this final
rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: July 25, 2005.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
§ 180.153
[Amended]
2. In § 180.153 is amended by
removing the entries for coffee bean and
dandelion, leaves from the table under
paragraph (a)(1).
I
§ 180.169
[Amended]
3. In § 180.169 is amended by
removing the entries for bean, forage;
bean, hay; and flax, straw from the table
under paragraph (a)(1) and the entry for
I
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
pineapple bran from the table under
paragraph (a)(4).
§ 180.183
[Amended]
4. In § 180.183 is amended by
removing the entry for hop, dried cones
from the table under paragraph (a).
I
§ 180.249
[Amended]
5. In § 180.249 is amended by
removing the entries for peanut, forage;
peanut, hay; soybean, forage; and
soybean, hay from the table under the
paragraph.
I
§ 180.380
[Amended]
6. In § 180.380 is amended by
removing the entries for onion, dry bulb
and raspberry from the table under
paragraph (a).
I
§ 180.409
[Amended]
7. In § 180.409 is amended by
removing the entry for kiwifruit from the
table under paragraph (a)(1), removing
paragraph (a)(2) and redesignating
paragraph (a)(1) as (a).
I
[FR Doc. 05–15335 Filed 8–2–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP–2005–0068; FRL–7728–5]
Inert ingredients; Revocation of
Pesticide Tolerance Exemptions for
Three CFC Chemicals
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is revoking exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance for
three inert ingredients
(dichlorodifluoromethane,
dichlorotetrafluoroethane, and
trichlorofluoromethane) because these
substances no longer have active
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) pesticide
product registrations and/or because
their use in pesticide products sold in
the United States (U.S.) has been
prohibited under the Clean Air Act
(CAA) for over a decade due to EPA’s
ban on the sale or distribution, or offer
for sale or distribution in interstate
commerce of certain nonessential
products that contain or are
manufactured with ozone depleting
compounds. The regulatory actions in
this document contribute toward the
Agency’s tolerance reassessment
requirements of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section
408(q), as amended by the Food Quality
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 148 (Wednesday, August 3, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44488-44492]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-15335]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-2005-0183; FRL-7725-6]
Alachlor, Carbaryl, Diazinon, Disulfoton, Pirimiphos-methyl, and
Vinclozolin; Tolerance Revocations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is revoking certain tolerances for residues of the
herbicide alachlor, insecticides carbaryl, diazinon, disulfoton, and
pirimiphos-methyl, and the fungicide vinclozolin because these specific
tolerances are no longer needed or are associated with food uses that
are no longer current or registered in the United States. The
regulatory actions in this document contribute toward the Agency's
tolerance reassessment requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 408(q), as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996. By law, EPA is required by August 2006
to reassess the tolerances in existence on August 2, 1996. The
regulatory actions in this document pertain to the revocation of 15
tolerances of which 9 count as tolerance reassessments toward the
August, 2006 review deadline.
DATES: This regulation is effective August 3, 2005. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 3, 2005.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in Unit IV. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number OPP-2005-0183. All documents in the docket
are listed in the EDOCKET index at https://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although
listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the Public Information and Records
Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S.
Bell St., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket
telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Nevola, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8037; e-mail
address: nevola.joseph@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. 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 entities may include, but are not limited to:
Crop production (NAICS code 111), e.g., agricultural
workers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
Animal production (NAICS code 112), e.g., cattle ranchers
and farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311), e.g., agricultural
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers;
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532), e.g.,
agricultural workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse,
nursery, and floriculture workers; residential users.
[[Page 44489]]
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document and Other
Related Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET (https://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may
access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at https://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
is available at E-CFR Beta Site Two at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.
II. Background
A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
In the Federal Register of March 23, 2005 (70 FR 14618) (FRL-7701-
4), EPA issued a proposed rule to revoke certain tolerances for
residues of the herbicide alachlor, insecticides carbaryl, diazinon,
disulfoton, and pirimiphos-methyl, and the fungicide vinclozolin. Also,
the proposal of March 23, 2005 provided a 60-day comment period which
invited public comment for consideration and for support of tolerance
retention under the FFDCA standards. In this final rule, EPA is
revoking these tolerances because they pertain to commodities which are
either no longer considered to be significant livestock feed items or
which have restrictions against feeding to livestock, or to uses no
longer current or registered under FIFRA in the United States. The
tolerances revoked by this final rule are no longer necessary to cover
residues of the relevant pesticides in or on domestically treated
commodities or commodities treated outside but imported into the United
States. It is EPA's general practice to revoke those tolerances and
tolerance exemptions for residues of pesticide active ingredients on
crop uses for which there are no active registrations under FIFRA,
unless any person in comments on the proposal indicates a need for the
tolerance or tolerance exemption to cover residues in or on imported
commodities or domestic commodities legally treated.
EPA has historically been concerned that retention of tolerances
that are not necessary to cover residues in or on legally treated foods
may 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 commenting on the proposal
demonstrates a need for the tolerance to cover residues in or on
imported commodities or domestic commodities legally treated.
Generally, EPA will proceed with the revocation of these tolerances
on the grounds discussed in Unit II.A. if one of the following
conditions applies:
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 that demonstrate that the
tolerance meets the requirements under FQPA.
In response to the proposal published in the Federal Register of
March 23, 2005 (70 FR 14618) (FRL-7701-4), EPA received one comment
during the 60-day public comment period, as follows:
Comment. A private citizen expressed a general concern about the
sale of existing pesticide stocks.
Agency response. The private citizen's comment did not take issue
with the Agency's proposal to revoke certain tolerances which were no
longer needed or whose associated food uses were no longer current or
registered in the United States. It is EPA's general practice to revoke
tolerances for residues of pesticide active ingredients on crop uses
for which FIFRA registrations no longer exist. However, cancellation
orders issued by EPA will generally permit a registrant to sell or
distribute existing pesticide stocks for 1-year after the date the
cancellation request was received by the Agency. This policy is in
accordance with the Agency's statement of policy as prescribed in the
Federal Register of June 26, 1991 (56 FR 29362) (FRL-3846-4).
Typically, existing stocks of registered pesticide products in the
hands of dealers or users can be distributed, sold, or used legally
until they are exhausted, provided that such further sale and use
comply with EPA-approved label and labeling of affected product. In the
proposal of March 23, 2005 (70 FR 14618), EPA noted that certain
registrations had been canceled for several years. The Agency believes
that the existing stocks of canceled pesticide products have been
exhausted and treated commodities have had sufficient time for passage
through the channels of trade.
No comments were received by the Agency concerning the following.
1. Alachlor. Active registrations for use of the herbicide alachlor
have restrictions against feeding peanut forage; peanut, hay; soybean,
forage; and soybean, hay to livestock. Also, peanut forage is no longer
considered a significant livestock feed item. On June 22, 1994, EPA
canceled the two registrations which had lacked the restriction. These
cancellations had followed publication of a notice in the Federal
Register of March 17, 1994 (59 FR 12599) (FRL-4764-1), which announced
EPA's receipt of requests to voluntarily cancel certain registrations.
The restrictions against the feeding of alachlor treated peanut forage
and hay for all alachlor products have been on labels since 1993.
The tolerances for peanut forage, peanut hay, soybean forage, and
soybean hay were recommended by the Agency for revocation in the 1998
Alachlor Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED). A printed copy of
the Alachlor RED may be obtained from EPA's National Service Center for
Environmental Publications (EPA/NSCEP), P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati, OH
45242-2419, telephone 1-800-490-9198; fax 1-513-489-8695; internet at
https://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/ and from the National Technical
Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA
22161, telephone 1-800-553-6847 or 703-605-6000; internet at https://
www.ntis.gov/. An electronic copy of the Alachlor RED is available on
the internet at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/
status.htm. Therefore, because there is no longer a need for them, EPA
is revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.249 for the combined residues
of the herbicide alachlor and its metabolites (calculated as alachlor)
in or on peanut, forage; peanut, hay; soybean, forage; and soybean,
hay.
2. Carbaryl. Because flax straw is no longer a regulated feed item
(no longer considered a raw agricultural commodity (RAC) of flax), the
tolerance is no longer needed. Therefore, EPA is revoking the tolerance
in 40 CFR 180.169(a)(1) for residues of the insecticide carbaryl,
including its hydrolysis product 1-naphthol, calculated as 1-naphthyl
N-methylcarbamate, in or on flax, straw.
Because bean forage and bean hay are no longer considered
significant
[[Page 44490]]
livestock feed items, the tolerances are no longer needed. Therefore,
EPA is revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.169(a)(1) for residues of
the insecticide carbaryl, including its hydrolysis product 1-naphthol,
calculated as 1-naphthyl N-methylcarbamate, in or on bean, forage and
bean, hay.
Because pineapple bran is no longer a regulated feed item (no
longer considered a RAC of pineapple), the tolerance is no longer
needed. Therefore, EPA is revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR
180.169(a)(4) for residues of the insecticide carbaryl in or on
pineapple bran.
3. Diazinon. There have been no registered uses of diazinon on
coffee beans and dandelions since 1995 and 1991, respectively.
Therefore, EPA is revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.153(a)(1) for
residues of the insecticide diazinon (O,O-diethyl O-[6-methyl-2-(1-
methylethyl)-4-pyrimidinyl]phosphorothioate) in or on coffee bean and
dandelion, leaves.
4. Disulfoton. There have been no registered uses of disulfoton on
hops since 1991. Therefore, EPA is revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR
180.183(a) for the combined residues of the insecticide O,O-diethyl S-
[2-(ethylthio)ethyl]phosphorodithioate and its cholinesterase-
inhibiting metabolites, calculated as demeton, in or on hop, dried
cones.
5. Pirimiphos-methyl. There have been no registered uses of
pirimiphos-methyl on kiwifruits for at least 10-years. Therefore, EPA
is revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.409(a)(1) for the combined
residues of the insecticide pirimiphos-methyl, O-(2-diethylamino-6-
methyl-4-pyrimidinyl) O,O-dimethyl phosphorothioate, the metabolite O-
(2-ethylamino-6-methyl-pyrimidin-4-yl) O,O-dimethyl phosphorothioate
and, in free and conjugated form, the metabolites 2-diethylamino-6-
methyl-pyrimidin-4-ol, 2-ethylamino-6- methyl-pyrimidin-4-ol, and 2-
amino-6-methyl-pyrimidin-4-ol in or on kiwifruit.
In 2001, EPA published an Interim Reregistration Eligibility
Decision (IRED) for pirimiphos-methyl and made a determination that
pirimiphos-methyl residues of concern do not concentrate in wheat
flour. Because the tolerance is no longer needed, EPA is revoking the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.409(a)(2) for residues of the insecticide
pirimiphos- methyl and its metabolite O-(2-ethylamino-6-methyl-
pyrimidin-4-yl) O,O-dimethyl phosphorothioate and, in free and
conjugated form, the metabolites 2-diethylamino-6-methyl-pyrimidin-4-
ol, 2-ethylamino-6-methyl-pyrimidin-4-ol, and 2-amino-6-methyl-
pyrimidin-4-ol in or on wheat flour as a result of application to
stored wheat grain.
A printed copy of the pirimiphos-methyl IRED may be obtained from
EPA's National Service Center for Environmental Publications (EPA/
NSCEP), P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati, OH 45242-2419, telephone 1-800-490-
9198; fax 1-513-489-8695; internet at https://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/ and
from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal
Road, Springfield, VA 22161, telephone 1-800-553-6847 or 703-605-6000;
internet at https://www.ntis.gov/. An electronic copy of the pirimiphos-
methyl IRED is available on the internet at https://www.epa.gov/
pesticides/reregistration/status.htm.
6. Vinclozolin. In the Federal Register notice of August 22, 2001
(66 FR 44134) (FRL-6795-7), EPA announced use cancellations for certain
vinclozolin registrations, including uses of the fungicide vinclozolin
on onions and raspberries with a last date for legal use as December
15, 2001. EPA believes that there has been sufficient time for treated
commodities to have cleared the channels of trade. Therefore, EPA is
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.380(a) for the combined residues
of the fungicide vinclozolin and its metabolites containing the 3,5-
dichloroaniline moiety in or on onion, dry bulb and raspberry.
B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?
EPA's general practice is to revoke tolerances for residues of
pesticide active ingredients on crops for which FIFRA registrations no
longer exist and on which the pesticide may therefore, no longer be
used in the United States. EPA has historically been concerned that
retention of tolerances that are not necessary to cover residues in or
on legally treated foods may encourage misuse of pesticides within the
United States. Nonetheless, EPA will establish and maintain tolerances
even when corresponding domestic uses are canceled if the tolerances,
which EPA refers to as ``import tolerances,'' are necessary to allow
importation into the United States of food containing such pesticide
residues. However, where there are no imported commodities that require
these import tolerances, the Agency believes it is appropriate to
revoke tolerances for unregistered pesticides in order to prevent
potential misuse.
C. When Do These Actions Become Effective?
The actions in this final rule become effective on the date of
publication of this final rule in the Federal Register because the
specific tolerances revoked herein are no longer needed or are
associated with food uses that have been canceled for several years.
The Agency believes that treated commodities have had sufficient time
for passage through 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 residues of these pesticides in or on such food
shall not render the food adulterated so long as it is shown to the
satisfaction of the Food and Drug Administration (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.
D. What is the Contribution to Tolerance Reassessment?
By law, EPA is required by August 2006 to reassess the tolerances
in existence on August 2, 1996. As of June 29, 2005, EPA has reassessed
over 7,330 tolerances. This document revokes a total of 15 tolerances
of which 9 are counted as tolerance reassessments toward the August,
2006 review deadline of FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by FQPA in
1996. Alachlor and vinclozolin tolerances revoked herein were
previously reassessed.
III. 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
[[Page 44491]]
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. EPA has developed guidance
concerning submissions for import tolerance support in the Federal
Register of June 1, 2000 (65 FR 35069) (FRL-6559-3). This guidance will
be made available to interested persons. Electronic copies are
available on the internet at https://www.epa.gov/. On the Home Page
select ``Laws and Regulations,'' then select ``Regulations and Proposed
Rules'' 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 https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
IV. Objections and Hearing Requests
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as amended by FQPA, any person may
file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request
a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations which
govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings appear in
40 CFR part 178. Although the procedures in those regulations require
some modification to reflect the amendments made to FFDCA by FQPA, EPA
will continue to use those procedures, with appropriate adjustments,
until the necessary modifications can be made. The new section 408(g)
of FFDCA provides essentially the same process for persons to
``object'' to a regulation for an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance issued by EPA under new section 408(d) of FFDCA, as was
provided in the old sections 408 and 409 of FFDCA. However, the period
for filing objections is now 60 days, rather than 30 days.
A. What Do I Need to Do to File an Objection or Request a Hearing?
You must file your objection or request a hearing on this
regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in this unit
and in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number OPP-2005-0183 in the subject line on the
first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and
must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before October
3, 2005.
1. Filing the request. Your objection must specify the specific
provisions in the regulation that you object to, and the grounds for
the objections (40 CFR 178.25). If a hearing is requested, the
objections must include a statement of the factual issues(s) on which a
hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions on such issues, and a
summary of any evidence relied upon by the objector (40 CFR 178.27).
Information submitted in connection with an objection or hearing
request 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
information that does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion
in the public record. Information not marked confidential may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice.
Mail your written request to: Office of the Hearing Clerk (1900L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. You may also deliver your request to the
Office of the Hearing Clerk in Suite 350, 1099 14th St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20005. The Office of the Hearing Clerk is open from 8
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Office of the Hearing Clerk is (202) 564-6255.
2. Copies for the Docket. In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit IV.A.1.,
you should also send a copy of your request to the PIRIB for its
inclusion in the official record that is described in ADDRESSES. Mail
your copies, identified by docket ID number OPP-2005-0183, to: Public
Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and
Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001. In person or by courier, bring a copy to the location of the
PIRIB described in ADDRESSES. You may also send an electronic copy of
your request via e-mail to: opp-docket@epa.gov. Please use an ASCII
file format and avoid the use of special characters and any form of
encryption. Copies of electronic objections and hearing requests will
also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file format.
Do not include any CBI in your electronic copy. You may also submit an
electronic copy of your request at many Federal Depository Libraries.
B. When Will the Agency Grant a Request for a Hearing?
A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator
determines that the material submitted shows the following: There is a
genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable
possibility that available evidence identified by the requestor would,
if established resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the
requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts to the
contrary; and resolution of the factual issues(s) in the manner sought
by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested (40
CFR 178.32).
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
In this final rule, EPA is revoking specific tolerances established
under section 408 of FFDCA. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
has exempted this type of action (i.e., a tolerance revocation for
which extraordinary circumstances do not exist) from review under
Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been exempted from
review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance,
this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor
does it require any special considerations as required by Executive
Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any other Agency action under
Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997). This 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). Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.), the Agency previously assessed whether revocations of
tolerances might significantly impact a substantial number of small
entities and concluded that, as a general matter, these actions do not
impose a significant
[[Page 44492]]
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
analysis was published on December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020), and was
provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration. Taking into account this analysis, and available
information concerning the pesticides listed in this rule, the Agency
hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Specifically, as per the 1997 notice, EPA has reviewed its available
data on imports and foreign pesticide usage and concludes that there is
a reasonable international supply of food not treated with canceled
pesticides. Furthermore, for the pesticides named in this final rule,
the Agency knows of no extraordinary circumstances that exist as to the
present revocations that would change EPA's previous analysis. In
addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a
substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has
determined that this rule does not have any ``tribal implications'' as
described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6,
2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in
the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.''
``Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive
Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.''
This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this rule.
VI. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added 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 this final rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 25, 2005.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
Sec. 180.153 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 180.153 is amended by removing the entries for coffee bean
and dandelion, leaves from the table under paragraph (a)(1).
Sec. 180.169 [Amended]
0
3. In Sec. 180.169 is amended by removing the entries for bean,
forage; bean, hay; and flax, straw from the table under paragraph
(a)(1) and the entry for pineapple bran from the table under paragraph
(a)(4).
Sec. 180.183 [Amended]
0
4. In Sec. 180.183 is amended by removing the entry for hop, dried
cones from the table under paragraph (a).
Sec. 180.249 [Amended]
0
5. In Sec. 180.249 is amended by removing the entries for peanut,
forage; peanut, hay; soybean, forage; and soybean, hay from the table
under the paragraph.
Sec. 180.380 [Amended]
0
6. In Sec. 180.380 is amended by removing the entries for onion, dry
bulb and raspberry from the table under paragraph (a).
Sec. 180.409 [Amended]
0
7. In Sec. 180.409 is amended by removing the entry for kiwifruit from
the table under paragraph (a)(1), removing paragraph (a)(2) and
redesignating paragraph (a)(1) as (a).
[FR Doc. 05-15335 Filed 8-2-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S