Inorganic Bromide; Tolerance Actions, 45400-45403 [E6-12964]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 9, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45400-45403]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-12964]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0123; FRL-8077-6]


Inorganic Bromide; Tolerance Actions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is revoking twelve specific inorganic bromide tolerances 
because they are no longer needed. These twelve tolerances are for 
residues of inorganic bromide from pre-plant (non-food) use in or on 
raw agricultural commodities grown in soil fumigated with combinations 
of chloropicrin, methyl bromide, and propargyl bromide. Although methyl 
bromide is used as an agricultural pesticide, the Agency considers its 
application as a soil fumigant to be a non-food use because it is 
quickly degraded or metabolized in the soil, and subsequently 
incorporated into natural plant constituents. Methyl bromide is also 
emitted to the atmosphere. Residues of the parent compound are not 
likely to be found in foods as a result of prior treatment of fields. 
While residues of inorganic bromide may be present, these residues are 
indistinguishable from background because of inorganic bromide's 
ubiquity in the environment. Consequently, EPA is revoking them because 
no tolerances are needed for those non-food uses. Furthermore, since 
methyl bromide, when applied as a pre-plant soil fumigant is a non-food 
use, the Agency is adding it as an entry to 40 CFR 180.2020 noting the 
non-food use determination.

DATES: This regulation is effective August 9, 2006. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 10, 2006, 
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket 
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0123. All documents in the 
docket are listed in the index for the docket. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential 
Business Information (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 in the electronic docket at https://www.regulations.gov, or, 
if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in 
Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, 
Arlington, VA. The 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: Steven Weiss, Special Review and 
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8293; e-mail 
address: weiss.steven@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 111), e.g., agricultural workers; 
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
     Animal production (NAICS 112), e.g., cattle ranchers and 
farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
     Food manufacturing (NAICS 311), e.g., agricultural 
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; 
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 32532), e.g., agricultural 
workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and 
floriculture workers; residential users.
    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?

    In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal 
Register document through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access this ``Federal Register'' document 
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register'' 
listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a 
frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the 
Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the 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. You must file your objection or 
request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the 
instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by 
EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0123 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 10, 2006.
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the 
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of 
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public 
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked 
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA 
without prior notice. Submit your copies, identified by docket ID 
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0123, by one of the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public 
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200

[[Page 45401]]

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South 
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only 
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special 
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The 
Docket telephone number is (703) 305-5805.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    In the Federal Register of May 31, 2006 (71 FR 30845) (FRL-8061-7), 
EPA issued a proposed rule to revoke twelve specific tolerances for 
residues of inorganic bromide. The proposal provided a 60-day comment 
period.
    In response to the proposal published in the Federal Register of 
May 31, 2006 (71 FR 30845), EPA received no comments during the 60-day 
public comment period.
    These twelve tolerances are for residues of inorganic bromide from 
pre-plant use in or on raw agricultural commodities grown in soil 
fumigated with combinations of chloropicrin, methyl bromide, and 
propargyl bromide. There are no active registrations for the use of 
propargyl bromide. Although methyl bromide is used as an agricultural 
pesticide, the Agency considers its application as a soil fumigant to 
be a non-food use because it is quickly degraded or metabolized in the 
soil, and subsequently incorporated into natural plant constituents. 
Residues of the parent compound are not likely to be found in foods as 
a result of prior soil fumigation treatment of fields and are 
indistinguishable from background because of inorganic bromide's 
ubiquity in the environment. Accordingly, because the tolerances are no 
longer needed, EPA is revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.199(a) for 
residues of inorganic bromides in or on broccoli, cauliflower, 
eggplants, muskmelons, peppers, pineapples, strawberries, and tomatoes; 
in 40 CFR 180.199(b) in or on asparagus, lettuce, and onions (dry 
bulb); and in 40 CFR 180.199(c) in or on ginger, roots.
    Furthermore, because methyl bromide application as a pre-plant soil 
fumigant is a non-food use, EPA is adding methyl bromide as an entry to 
40 CFR 180.2020 noting the non-food use determination for all pre-plant 
soil uses.
    Currently, there are CODEX Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) for 
bromide ion on broccoli, head lettuce, sweet peppers, strawberry, and 
tomato. However, as noted above, residues of bromide ion may be 
expected to occur in both domestic and imported foods as a result of 
inorganic bromide's ubiquity in the environment and residue levels 
resulting from use of methyl bromide are expected to be 
indistinguishable from those background, or naturally occurring levels. 
Thus, no international trade issues due to absence bromide ion 
tolerances in the U.S. are expected as a result of this final action.

B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    As a general matter, EPA believes that retention of tolerances not 
needed to cover any residues on food may result in unnecessary 
restriction on trade of pesticides and foods. In an assessment of 
aggregate exposure to a pesticide, EPA must consider potential 
contributions to such exposure from all tolerances. If the aggregate 
risk is such that the tolerances in aggregate are not safe, then every 
one of these tolerances is potentially vulnerable to revocation. 
Furthermore, if unneeded tolerances are included in the aggregate 
assessment, the estimated exposure to the pesticide would be inflated. 
Consequently, it may be more difficult for others to obtain needed 
tolerances or to register needed new uses. To avoid potential trade 
restrictions, the Agency believes it is appropriate to revoke 
tolerances that are no longer needed.

C. When Do These Actions Become Effective?

    These actions become effective on the date of publication of this 
final rule in the Federal Register because application of pre-plant 
uses in or on raw agricultural commodities grown in soil fumigated with 
combinations of chloropicrin, methyl bromide, and propargyl bromide 
have been determined by EPA to be a non-food use and no tolerances are 
needed for those non-food uses.

D. What is the Contribution to Tolerance Reassessment?

    By law, EPA is required by August 3, 2006 to reassess the 
tolerances in existence on August 2, 1996. As of July 31, 2006, EPA has 
reassessed over 9,700 tolerances. This document revokes a total of 12 
tolerances which have been previously considered to be reassessed and 
counted toward the August, 2006 review deadline of FFDCA section 
408(q), as amended by FQPA in 1996.

III. Are There Any International Trade Issues Raised by this Final 
Action?

    No. As stated previously there are no international trade issues 
raised by this final action. EPA is working to ensure that the U.S. 
tolerance reassessment program under FQPA does not disrupt 
international trade. EPA considers Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) 
in setting U.S. tolerances and in reassessing them. MRLs are 
established by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, a committee 
within the Codex Alimentarius Commission, an international organization 
formed to promote the coordination of international food standards. 
When possible, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with Codex MRLs. 
EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; 
however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain in a Federal 
Register document the reasons for departing from the Codex level. EPA's 
effort to harmonize with Codex MRLs is summarized in the tolerance 
reassessment section of individual REDs. The U.S. EPA has developed 
guidance concerning submissions for import tolerance support (65 FR 
35069, June 1, 2000) (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. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    In this final rule, EPA revokes specific tolerances established 
under FFDCA section 408. 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

[[Page 45402]]

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 104-13, 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 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 the fact that there is no reasonable expectation that 
residues of the pesticides listed in this rule will be found on the 
commodities discussed in this rule (so that the lack of the tolerance 
could not prevent sale of the commodity), the Agency hereby certifies 
that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. In a memorandum dated May 25, 
2001, EPA determined that eight conditions must all be satisfied in 
order for an import tolerance or tolerance exemption revocation to 
adversely affect a significant number of small entity importers, and 
that there is a negligible joint probability of all eight conditions 
holding simultaneously with respect to any particular revocation. (This 
Agency document is available in the docket of this final rule). 
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.

V. 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: August 2, 2006.
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.  180.199  [Removed]

0
2. Section 180.199 is removed.

0
3. Section 180.2020 is amended by adding alphabetically the following 
entry to the table to read as follows:


Sec.  180.2020  Non-food determinations.

* * * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Pesticide Chemical                          CAS Reg.No.                      Limits                               Uses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methyl Bromide                                                           74-83-9    When applied as a pre-plant soil             All pre-plant soil uses
                                                                                                            fumigant
                                                                        * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 45403]]

[FR Doc. E6-12964 Filed 8-8-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S