Endosulfan, Fenarimol, Imazalil, Oryzalin, Sodium Acifluorfen, Trifluralin, and Ziram; Tolerance Actions, 54423-54434 [E6-15258]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 179 (Friday, September 15, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54423-54434]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-15258]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0459; FRL-8077-9]


Endosulfan, Fenarimol, Imazalil, Oryzalin, Sodium Acifluorfen, 
Trifluralin, and Ziram; Tolerance Actions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is revoking certain tolerances for the insecticide 
endosulfan; the fungicides fenarimol, imazalil, and ziram; and the 
herbicide trifluralin. Also, EPA is modifying certain tolerances for 
the insecticide endosulfan, the fungicides fenarimol and imazalil, and 
the herbicides sodium acifluorfen and trifluralin. EPA is not modifying 
tolerances for ziram. In addition, EPA is establishing new tolerances 
for the insecticide endosulfan, the fungicides fenarimol and imazalil, 
and the herbicides oryzalin and trifluralin. The regulatory actions in 
this document are part of the Agency's reregistration program under the 
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

DATES: This regulation is effective September 15, 2006. However, 
certain regulatory actions will not occur until the date specified in 
the regulatory text. Objections and requests for hearings must be 
received on or before November 14, 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-2005-0459. 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 Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., 
Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility 
telephone number is (703) 305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kendra Tyler, Special Review and 
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-0125; e-mail 
address: tyler.kendra@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.

[[Page 54424]]

     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 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 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. 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 the docket 
ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0459 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 November 14, 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-2005-0459, 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 Pennsylvania 
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South 
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., 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 Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    In the Federal Register of April 26, 2006 (71 FR 24615) (FRL-7771-
9), EPA issued a proposed rule to revoke, modify, and establish certain 
tolerances and tolerance exemptions for residues of endosulfan, 
fenarimol, imazalil, oryzalin, sodium acifluorfen, trifluralin, and 
ziram. The proposal also provided a 60-day comment period which invited 
public comment for consideration and for support of tolerance retention 
under FFDCA standards.
    EPA is revoking, removing, modifying, and/or establishing specific 
tolerances for residues of the insectcide endosulfan; the fungicides 
fenarimol, imazalil, and ziram; and the herbicides oryzalin, sodium 
acifluorfen, and trifluralin in or on commodities listed in the 
regulatory text of this document.
    EPA is finalizing these tolerance actions in order to implement the 
tolerance recommendations made during the reregistration and when 
taking action on tolerances and exemptions (including follow-up on 
canceled or additional uses of pesticides). As part of the 
reregistration and tolerance reassessment processes, EPA is required to 
determine whether each of the amended tolerances meets the safety 
standards under FQPA. The safety finding determination of ``reasonable 
certainty of no harm'' is found in detail in each RED and TRED for the 
active ingredient. REDs and TREDs recommend certain tolerance actions 
to be implemented to reflect current use patterns, to meet safety 
findings, and to change commodity names and groupings in accordance 
with new EPA policy. Printed copies of REDs and TREDs may be obtained 
from EPA's National Service Center for Environmental Publications (EPA/
NSCEP), P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati, OH 45242-2419; telephone number: 1-
800-490-9198; fax number: 1-513-489-8695; Internet address: https://
www.epa.gov/ncepihom and from the National Technical Information 
Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161; telephone 
number: 1-800-553-6847 or 703-605-6000; Internet address: https://
www.ntis.gov. Electronic copies of REDs and TREDs are available on the 
Internet at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/status.htm.
    In this final rule, EPA is revoking certain tolerances and 
tolerance exemptions because the specific tolerances and exemptions 
correspond 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:
     Prior to EPA's issuance of a FFDCA section 408(f) order 
requesting additional data or issuance of a FFDCA 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.
     EPA independently verifies that the tolerance is no longer 
needed.

[[Page 54425]]

     The tolerance is not supported by data that demonstrate 
that the tolerance meets the requirements under FQPA.
    This final rule does not revoke those tolerances for which EPA 
received comments stating a need for the tolerance to be retained. In 
response to the proposed rule of April 26, 2006, EPA received one 
comment during the 60-day public comment period, as follows:
     Comment by private citizen. A private citizen stated that 
only zero tolerances should be acceptable. In addition, the commenter 
expressed a concern for pesticide use in general and their possible 
toxic effects on plants, wildlife, and humans.
     Agency response. The private citizen's comments did not 
take issue with any of the Agency's specific conclusions to modify, 
revoke, or establish certain tolerances. Also, the commenter did not 
refer to any specific scientific studies which pertained to the 
reregistration of any active ingredient, or Agency decision document 
which pertained to the reregistration eligibility of any active 
ingredient.
    Section 4 of FIFRA directs EPA to make decisions about the future 
use of older pesticides. Under the pesticide reregistration program, 
EPA examines health and safety data for pesticide active ingredients 
initially registered before November 1, 1984, and determines whether 
they are eligible for reregistration to ensure that they meet current 
scientific and regulatory standards. During reregistration, EPA 
considers the human health and ecological effects of pesticides and 
addresses actions to reduce risks that are of concern.
    Of the 613 cases subject to reregistration, about 40% have been 
canceled for various reasons, including request for voluntary 
cancellation by the registrant, cancellation by EPA because required 
fees were not paid, or cancellation by EPA because unacceptable risk 
existed that could not be reduced by other actions, such as voluntary 
cancellation of selected uses or changes in the way the pesticide is 
used.
    Reducing pesticide risks is an important aspect of the 
reregistration program. In developing REDs, EPA works with 
stakeholders, pesticide registrants, growers and other pesticide users, 
environmental and public health interests, the States, the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture (USDA), other Federal agencies, and others to 
develop voluntary measures or regulatory controls needed to effectively 
reduce risks of concern. Such options include voluntary cancellation of 
pesticide products or deletion of uses, declaring certain uses 
ineligible or not yet eligible, restricting use of products to 
certified applicators, limiting the amount or frequency of use, 
improving use directions and precautions, adding more protective 
clothing and equipment requirements, requiring special packaging or 
engineering controls, requiring no-treatment buffer zones, employing 
environmental and ecological safeguards, and other measures.
    Also, for all pesticides with food uses, EPA is reassessing 
tolerances (pesticide residue limits in food) to ensure that they met 
the safety standard of FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a, as amended by 
FQPA. Under FFDCA, EPA must make a determination that pesticide 
residues remaining in or on food are safe; that is, that there is 
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure 
to the pesticide residue from dietary and other sources. EPA has 
integrated reregistration and tolerance reassessment to most 
effectively accomplish the goals of both programs.
    At the end of the reregistration process, after EPA has issued a 
RED and declared a pesticide reregistration case eligible for 
reregistration, individual end-use products that contain pesticide 
active ingredients included in the case still must be reregistered. 
During this product reregistration, EPA sends registrants a Data Call-
In (DCI) notice requesting any product specific data and specific 
revised labelling needed to complete reregistration for each of the 
individual pesticide products covered by the RED. Based on the results 
of EPA's review of these data and labelling, products found to meet 
FIFRA and FFDCA standards may be reregistered.
    Therefore, EPA believes that the tolerance actions in the proposed 
rule of April 26, 2006, should be implemented and made final as 
expressed in this final rule.
    No comments were received by the Agency specific to endosulfan, 
fenarimol, imazalil, oryzalin, and sodium acifluorfen.
    1. Endosulfan. Currently, the tolerance expression for residues is 
defined in terms of endosulfan and its metabolite endosulfan sulfate in 
40 CFR 180.182. Because the tolerance expression should reflect the 
alpha- and beta- isomers of the parent compound, EPA is modifying the 
tolerance expression in 40 CFR 180.182 in order to specify the alpha- 
and beta- isomers of the parent. Also, EPA is removing the ``(N)'' 
designation from all entries to conform to current Agency 
administrative practice (``N'' designation means negligible residues).
    Because no active registrations exist for use of endosulfan on 
artichoke, globe; beet, sugar, roots; raspberry; safflower, seed; and 
sunflower, seed, the tolerances are no longer needed. Therefore, EPA is 
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) on artichoke, globe; 
beet, sugar, roots; raspberry; safflower, seed; and sunflower, seed.
    Based on available data on almond that show combined endosulfan 
residues of concern are non-detectable (<0.1 parts per million (ppm) 
for each residue of concern) in or on almond kernels, the Agency has 
determined that the tolerance on almond should be increased to 0.3 ppm, 
the combined limits of detection. Therefore, EPA is increasing the 
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for combined endosulfan residues of 
concern in or on almond from 0.2 to 0.3 ppm. The Agency determined that 
the increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty 
that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide 
chemical residue.
    Based on available data on the grain and straw of barley and wheat 
that show combined endosulfan residues of concern as high as 0.30, 
0.30, 0.35, and 0.38 ppm in or on barley grain, wheat grain, barley 
straw, and wheat straw, respectively, the Agency has determined that 
the tolerances on barley and wheat grain should be increased to 0.3 ppm 
and tolerances on barley and wheat straw should be increased to 0.4 
ppm. Therefore, EPA is increasing the tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.182(a)(1) for combined endosulfan residues of concern in or on 
barley, grain and wheat, grain from 0.1 to 0.3 ppm, and barley, straw 
and wheat, straw from 0.2 to 0.4 ppm. The Agency determined that the 
increased tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty 
that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide 
chemical residue.
    Based on available data on blueberry that show combined endosulfan 
residues of concern are non-detectable (<0.1 ppm), the Agency has 
determined that the tolerance on blueberry should be increased to 0.3 
ppm, the combined limits of detection. Therefore, EPA is increasing the 
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for combined endosulfan residues of 
concern in or on blueberry from 0.1 to 0.3 ppm. The Agency determined 
that the increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable 
certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the 
pesticide chemical residue.

[[Page 54426]]

    Based on available data on broccoli that show combined endosulfan 
residues of concern as high as 2.41 ppm, the Agency has determined that 
the tolerance on broccoli should be increased to 3.0 ppm. Therefore, 
EPA is increasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for combined 
endosulfan residues of concern in or on broccoli from 2.0 to 3.0 ppm. 
The Agency determined that the increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there 
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate 
exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available data that show combined endosulfan residues of 
concern as high as 3.1 ppm on cabbage with wrapper leaves, the Agency 
has determined that the tolerance on cabbage should be increased to 4.0 
ppm. Therefore, EPA is increasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) 
for combined endosulfan residues of concern in or on cabbage from 2.0 
to 4.0 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased tolerance is safe; 
i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from 
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available data on celery that show combined endosulfan 
residues of concern as high as 7.0 ppm, the Agency has determined that 
the tolerance on celery should be increased to 8.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA 
is increasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for combined 
endosulfan residues of concern in or on celery from 2.0 to 8.0 ppm. The 
Agency determined that the increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is 
a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure 
to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available data that show combined endosulfan residues of 
concern as high as 10.11 ppm in or on head lettuce with wrapper leaves 
and 5.72 ppm in or on leaf lettuce, the Agency has determined that the 
existing tolerance on lettuce should be split into separate tolerances 
for head lettuce and leaf lettuce, and increased to 11.0 ppm and 6.0 
ppm, respectively. Therefore, EPA is separating the tolerance in 40 CFR 
180.182(a)(1) on lettuce into lettuce, head and lettuce, leaf and 
increasing them for combined endosulfan residues of concern from 2.0 to 
11.0 and 6.0 ppm, respectively. The Agency determined that the 
increased tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty 
that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide 
chemical residue.
    Based on available data on oat grain, oat straw, rye grain, and rye 
straw that show combined endosulfan residues of concern as high as 
0.30, 0.32, 0.30, and 0.30 ppm, respectively, the Agency has determined 
that the tolerances on oat grain, oat straw, rye grain, and rye straw 
should be increased to 0.3, 0.4, 0.3, and 0.3 ppm, respectively. 
Therefore, EPA is increasing the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for 
combined endosulfan residues of concern in or on oat, grain from 0.1 to 
0.3 ppm; oat, straw from 0.2 to 0.4 ppm; rye, grain from 0.1 to 0.3 
ppm; and rye, straw from 0.2 to 0.3 ppm. The Agency determined that the 
increased tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty 
that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide 
chemical residue.
    Available ruminant metabolism data indicate that combined 
endosulfan residues of concern at 1.1x and 1.7x the maximum dietary 
burden for beef and dairy cattle, respectively were detected at 0.78 
ppm in milk, 12 ppm in fat, 0.85 ppm in kidney, 4.6 ppm in liver, and 
2.0 ppm in muscle. The Agency determined that separate tolerances for 
liver should be established and that the tolerances for meat byproducts 
should be revised to meat byproducts, except liver and the appropriate 
tolerances for fat, meat byproducts (except liver), liver, and meat of 
cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep should be increased to 13.0, 
1.0, 5.0, and 2.0 ppm, respectively. Also, the Agency determined that 
the tolerance for milk fat should be increased to 2.0 ppm. Therefore, 
EPA is increasing the commodity tolerances in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for 
combined endosulfan residues of concern in or on cattle, fat; goat, 
fat; hog, fat; horse, fat; and sheep, fat from 0.2 to 13.0 ppm; cattle, 
meat byproducts, except liver; goat, meat byproducts, except liver; 
hog, meat byproducts, except liver; horse, meat byproducts, except 
liver; and sheep, meat byproducts, except liver, from 0.2 to 1.0 ppm; 
cattle, meat; goat, meat; hog, meat; horse, meat; and sheep, meat from 
0.2 to 2.0 ppm; milk, fat from 0.5 to 2.0 ppm; and establish tolerances 
at 5.0 ppm for cattle, liver; goat, liver; hog, liver; horse, liver; 
and sheep, liver. The Agency determined that the increased tolerances 
are safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will 
result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available data on cantaloupes, cucumbers, and summer 
squash that show combined endosulfan residues of concern as high as 
0.76, 0.66, and 0.25 ppm, respectively, the Agency has determined that 
the tolerances on melon, cucumber, and summer squash should be 
decreased to 1.0 ppm. Also, the available data for melon, cucumber, and 
summer squash may be translated to pumpkin and winter squash. 
Therefore, EPA is combining the individual tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.182(a)(1) on cucumber, melon, pumpkin, squash, summer; and squash, 
winter into vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 and decreasing the tolerance 
for combined endosulfan residues of concern from 2.0 to 1.0 ppm.
    Based on available data on tomato that show combined endosulfan 
residues of concern as high as 0.97 ppm, respectively, the Agency has 
determined that the tolerance on tomato should be decreased to 1.0 ppm. 
Also, the available data for tomato may be translated to eggplant. 
Therefore, EPA is decreasing the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for 
combined endosulfan residues of concern in or on eggplant from 2.0 to 
1.0 ppm and tomato from 2.0 to 1.0 ppm.
    Based on available data on sweet potatoes that show combined 
endosulfan residues of concern are non-detectable (<0.05 ppm), the 
Agency has determined that the tolerance on sweet potato should be 
decreased to 0.15 ppm. Therefore, EPA is decreasing the tolerance in 40 
CFR 180.182(a)(1) for combined endosulfan residues of concern in or on 
sweet potato, roots from 0.2 to 0.15 ppm.
    Based on available data on apple that show combined endosulfan 
residues of concern as high as 0.84 ppm, the Agency has determined that 
the tolerance on apple should be decreased to 1.0 ppm. This level is 
also compatible with CODEX Alimentarius Commission Maximum Residue 
Limits (MRLs) for endosulfan residues on pome fruits. Therefore, EPA is 
decreasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for combined 
endosulfan residues of concern in or on apple from 2.0 to 1.0 ppm.
    Apple processing data indicate that combined endosulfan residues of 
concern concentrate by 6x in wet apple pomace. Based on the highest 
average field trial (HAFT) combined residues of 0.77 ppm in or on 
apples, combined residues as high as 4.62 ppm would be expected. 
Therefore, EPA is establishing a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for 
combined endosulfan residues of concern in or on apple, wet pomace at 
5.0 ppm.
    Based on available data on pineapple that show combined endosulfan 
residues of concern as high as 0.5 ppm, the Agency has determined that 
the tolerance on pineapple should be decreased to 1.0 ppm. Therefore, 
EPA is decreasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for combined 
endosulfan residues of concern in or on pineapple from 2.0 to 1.0 ppm.
    Based on processing data that indicate combined endosulfan residues 
of

[[Page 54427]]

concern concentrate 7x in peel and 41x in bran processed from whole 
pineapple and a HAFT combined residues of 0.44 ppm for in or on 
pineapple, residues as high as 18.04 ppm would be expected and the 
Agency determined that a tolerance for pineapple process residue (also 
known as wet bran) should be established at 20.0 ppm. Although, the RED 
and Residue Chemistry Chapters have tables which inadvertently are 
listed as 18 ppm; the text within the RED and Residue Chemistry Chapter 
both state that 20.0 ppm is appropriate. Therefore, EPA is establishing 
a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for combined endosulfan residues of 
concern in or on pineapple, process residue at 20.0 ppm.
    Based on available data on sweet corn that show combined endosulfan 
residues of concern as high as 12.0 ppm in or on sweet corn forage and 
13.92 ppm in or on sweet corn stover, the Agency has determined that 
tolerances should be established at 12.0 and 14.0 ppm, respectively. 
Therefore, EPA is establishing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for 
combined endosulfan residues of concern in or on corn, sweet, forage at 
12.0 ppm and corn, sweet, stover at 14.0 ppm.
    Based on available data on cotton gin byproducts that show combined 
endosulfan residues of concern as high as 27.5 ppm, the Agency has 
determined that a tolerance on cotton gin byproducts should be 
established at 30.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is establishing a tolerance in 
40 CFR 180.182(a)(1) for combined endosulfan residues of concern in or 
on cotton, gin byproducts at 30.0 ppm.
    Based on the translation of data from carrot and potato, the Agency 
determined that a tolerance should be established for turnip roots at 
0.2 ppm. Therefore, EPA is establishing a tolerance in 40 CFR 
180.182(a)(1) for combined endosulfan residues of concern in or on 
turnip, roots at 0.2 ppm.
    EPA is revising commodity terminology in 40 CFR 180.182 to conform 
to current Agency practice as follows: Cherry to cherry, sweet and 
cherry, tart; pecans to pecan; filbert to hazelnut; and turnip, greens 
to turnip, tops.
    Some U.S. tolerances for endosulfan (such as on broccoli, cabbage, 
celery, lettuce head, lettuce leaf, pineapple, the vegetable curcurbit 
group, and wheat grain) may be incompatible with the CODEX MRLs because 
of differences in registrations or good agricultural practices.
    2. Fenarimol. Because dry apple pomace, grape pomace (wet and dry), 
and raisin waste are no longer considered to be significant livestock 
feed items, the tolerances are no longer needed. Therefore, EPA is 
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.421(a)(1) for residues of the 
fungicide fenarimol in or on apple, dry pomace; and in 40 CFR 
180.421(a)(2) for residues of the fungicide fenarimol and its 
metabolites in or on grape pomace (wet and dry) and grape, raisin, 
waste.
    Based on available grape processing data, the Agency determined 
that combined residues of fenarimol and its metabolites marginally 
concentrated in juice and raisins. However, calculations using the 
anticipated residue for grape with the processing factors, show that 
the anticipated combined residues for the grape processed commodities 
(juice and raisin) are each less than the reassessed tolerance for 
grape (0.1 ppm). The tolerances for grape juice at 0.6 ppm and raisins 
at 0.6 ppm are no longer needed. Therefore, EPA is revoking the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.421(a)(2) for residues of the fungicide 
fenarimol and its metabolites in or on grape, juice and grape, raisin.
    The Agency extrapolated data from a 28-day ruminant feeding study 
of exaggerated dietary burdens to the 1x feeding rate, and examined the 
expected impact of the average theoretical dietary burden from wet 
apple pomace (calculated using Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 
monitoring data for apples). Of the currently registered uses of 
fenarimol, wet apple pomace is the only commodity considered a 
livestock feed item. For cattle, goats, horses, and sheep, the Agency 
concluded from monitoring, feeding, and metabolism data that expected 
fenarimol residues in muscle, fat, and kidney are calculated to be less 
than or near the enforcement method's limit of detection (0.003 ppm). 
Therefore, the Agency determined that for muscle, fat, and kidney of 
ruminants it is not possible to establish with certainty whether finite 
residues will be incurred, but there is a reasonable expectation of 
finite residues under 40 CFR 180.6(a)(2). For cattle, goats, horses, 
and sheep, EPA reassessed meat, kidney, and fat tolerances at 0.01 ppm, 
the method limit of quantitation. Therefore, EPA is decreasing the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.421(a)(1) for residues of the fungicide 
fenarimol in or on cattle, fat; cattle, kidney; goat, fat; goat, 
kidney; horse, fat; horse, kidney; sheep, fat; and sheep, kidney; each 
from 0.1 to 0.01 ppm, and maintaining the tolerances at 0.01 ppm for 
cattle, meat; goat, meat; horse, meat; and sheep, meat.
    Based on field trial data that show residues of fenarimol per se 
were non-detectable (less than 0.002 ppm, the method limit of 
detection) in pecan nut meat samples from six trials and in one trial 
were detected at 0.02 ppm, the Agency determined that the tolerance 
should be decreased from 0.1 to 0.02 ppm. Therefore, EPA is decreasing 
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.421(a)(1) for residues of fenarimol in or 
on pecan from 0.1 to 0.02 ppm.
    FDA monitoring data for apples during the period 1996-1999 showed 
non-detectable (less than 0.003 ppm, the method limit of detection) 
residues of fenarimol per se on apples. Based on the HAFT residue of 
0.059 ppm for apples and a concentration factor of 3.7-fold for wet 
pomace, the maximum expected residue in wet pomace is 0.22 ppm and the 
Agency determined that a tolerance of 0.3 ppm on wet apple pomace is 
appropriate. Therefore, EPA is decreasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 
180.421(a)(1) for residues of fenarimol in or on apple, wet pomace from 
2.0 to 0.3 ppm.
    FDA monitoring data for grapes during the period 1996-1999 showed 
non-detectable (less than 0.003 ppm, the method limit of detection) 
residues of fenarimol per se on grapes. Based on field trial data that 
indicate residues as high as 0.042 ppm for fenarimol and 0.073 for its 
metabolites in or on grapes harvested after 30 days following the last 
of 4 applications, the Agency determined that a tolerance of 0.1 ppm on 
grapes is appropriate. However, since the August 2002 fenarimol TRED 
the registrant, Gowan Company has requested that the Agency shorten the 
pre-harvest interval (PHI) from 30 days to 21 days on grapes. Based on 
the grape residue data submitted reflecting the 21 day PHI, the 
decrease in the tolerance reflected in the August 2002 TRED is 
appropriate at 0.1 ppm in or on grapes with a PHI of 21 days. However, 
EPA concluded that residues be expressed as fenarimol parent only, 
rather than the combined residues of fenarimol and its metabolites 
because parent only would be an adequate indicator of misuse and would 
harmonize with the CODEX MRLs. Therefore, EPA is decreasing the 
tolerance for residues of fenarimol and its metabolites in or on grape 
from 0.2 to 0.1 ppm.
    Currently, a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.421(a)(2) for combined 
residues of fenarimol and its metabolites in or on banana exists at 0.5 
ppm where not more than 0.25 ppm shall be present in the pulp after 
peel is removed. Fenarimol is presently not registered for use on 
banana in the United States. Based on foreign field trial data that 
indicate residues of fenarimol as high as 0.19 ppm and 0.075 ppm for 
its

[[Page 54428]]

metabolites, the Agency determined that a tolerance of 0.25 ppm is 
appropriate for whole banana. It is current Agency practice to 
establish a tolerance on the whole commodity (including peel after 
removing and discarding crown tissue and stalk). Therefore, EPA is 
revising the tolerance commodity terminology in 40 CFR 180.421(a)(2) 
from banana (Not more than 0.25 ppm shall be present in the pulp after 
peel is removed) to banana and decreasing the tolerance from 0.5 to 
0.25 ppm.
    Currently, tolerances in 40 CFR 180.421(a)(1) are expressed in 
terms of residues of fenarimol, while tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.421(a)(2) are expressed in terms of combined residues of fenarimol 
and specific metabolites (calculated as fenarimol). As stated in the 
October 2001 Fenarimol Product and Residue Chemistry Chapter, EPA 
concluded that for enforcement purposes, the tolerances for plant 
commodities should be expressed in terms of parent only; i.e., residues 
of fenarimol per se would be an adequate indicator of misuse. The 
tolerances for banana, cherry, grape are currently regulated under 40 
CFR 180.421(a)(2), which has been recodified to 40 CFR 180.421(a). 
Also, in order to conform to Agency commodity terminology, the current 
commodity term for cherry should be changed to cherry, sweet and 
cherry, tart, both at 1.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is reclassifying the 
tolerances for residues of fenarimol and it metabolites in or on banana 
at 0.25 ppm, cherry at 1.0 ppm, and grape at 0.1 ppm. EPA is combining 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.421(a)(2) with tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.421(a)(1) to create a single paragraph, 40 CFR 180.421(a), for 
residues of fenarimol. Also, EPA is revising the tolerance in 40 CFR 
180.421(a) for residues of fenarimol in/on cherry to ``cherry, sweet'' 
and ``cherry, tart'' at 1.0 ppm.
    Some U.S. tolerances for fenarimol (such as on banana, cattle 
kidney, grape, and wheat grain) and the CODEX MRLs may be incompatible 
because of differences in registrations or good agricultural practices.
    Since the Agency's proposed rule of April 26, 2006, EPA published a 
final rule in the Federal Register on June 7, 2006 (71 FR 32841) (FRL-
8061-4) as a follow-up to a notice of filing of a pesticide petition 
published on August 31, 2005 (70 FR 51802) (FRL-7733-1). The final rule 
of June 7, 2006, established a tolerance for fenarimol in 40 CFR 
180.421 on filbert at 0.02 ppm, which is reflected in the regulatory 
text of this document, as ``hazelnut,'' the current commodity 
terminology.
    3. Imazalil. Tolerances for residues in livestock commodities are 
currently expressed as the combined residues of imazalil, 1-[2-(2,4-
dichlorophenyl)-2-(2-propenyloxy)ethyl]-1H-imidazole, and its 
metabolites, 1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-2-(1H-imidazole-1-yl)-1-ethanol and 
3-[1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-2-(1H-imidazole-1-yl)ethoxyl]-1,2-propane 
diol. EPA has found that any metabolite containing the 2,4-
dichlorophenyl moiety is of toxicological concern and must be included 
in the tolerance expression along with the parent compound imazalil. In 
order to account for the 2,4-dichlorophenyl group moiety toxicological 
concerns, the total toxic residues for imazalil will be adjusted using 
the ratios of imazalil and the marker metabolites (FK772 and FK284) 
that were found to account for a high percentage of the total toxic 
residues in the livestock metabolism studies rather than the currently 
regulated metabolites. Metabolites (FK772 and FK284), with their parent 
compound, should serve as marker compounds which should be used to 
determine residue values for the dietary risk assessment. Therefore, 
EPA is revising the tolerance expression for livestock commodities for 
imazalil in 40 CFR 180.413 (a)(2) to regulate imazalil, 3-[2-(2,4-
dichlorophenyl)-2-(2,3-dihydroxypropoxy)ethyl]-2,4-imidazolidinedione 
(FK772), and 3-[2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-2-(hydroxy)]-2,4-
imidazolidinedione (FK284).
    Because a tolerance exists for combined imazalil residues of 
concern on whole banana at 3.0 ppm and whole bananas are defined as the 
peel and the pulp after discarding the crown tissue and stalk, the 
tolerance on banana pulp at 0.2 ppm is no longer necessary. Therefore, 
the Agency is revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.413(a)(1) for the 
combined imazalil residues of concern in or on banana, pulp and 
revising the tolerance commodity terminology from banana (whole) to 
banana.
    Because dried citrus is no longer considered to be a significant 
feed item for hogs, and because there are no other hog feeding 
commodities associated with existing imazalil tolerances, there is no 
reasonable expectation of finite residues of imazalil in hog tissues. 
Therefore, the Agency believes that tolerances on hog fat, hog liver, 
hog meat, and hog meat byproduct are no longer needed. Hence, the EPA 
is revoking, in 40 CFR 180.413(a)(2), tolerances for combined imazalil 
residues of concern in or on the following: Hog, fat; hog, liver; hog, 
meat; and hog, meat byproducts.
    In the tolerance summary table for both the imazalil TRED and 
Residue Chemistry Chapter, the recommendation to revoke horse fat was 
an inadvertent entry. There is no basis for revocation of horse fat 
listed in either document. Consequently, the Agency has revised the 
Imazalil Residue Chemistry Chapter accordingly and the horse, fat 
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.413(a)(2) will be maintained.
    Cattle feeding data show that combined imazalil residues of concern 
ranged as high as just slightly greater than 0.05 ppm in milk at an 
exaggerated 5x feeding level, and therefore, the tolerance for milk 
should be increased from 0.01 to 0.02 ppm. Consequently, EPA is 
increasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.413(a)(2) for combined imazalil 
residues of concern in milk to 0.02 ppm. The Agency determined that the 
increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that 
no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical 
residue.
    Also, the cattle feeding data show that combined imazalil residues 
of concern ranged as high as 14.7 ppm in liver at an exaggerated 70x 
feeding level, and therefore, the liver tolerances of cattle, goats, 
horse, and sheep should be decreased from 0.5 to 0.2 ppm. In addition, 
because exaggerated feeding data show combined imazalil regulated 
residues were highest in liver and the tolerance for meat byproducts 
should be equivalent to the level which is highest for either meat or 
any individual organ for which residues were measured, tolerances for 
the meat byproducts of cattle, goats, horses, and sheep should each be 
increased from 0.01 to 0.2 ppm. Therefore, EPA is increasing the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.413(a)(2) for cattle, meat byproducts; goat, 
meat byproducts; horse, meat byproducts; and sheep, meat byproducts 
from 0.01 to 0.2 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased 
tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm 
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. 
However, because increasing these meat byproduct tolerances to 0.2 ppm 
would cover their respective animal liver commodities, separate 
tolerances at 0.2 ppm in 40 CFR 180.413(a)(2) for cattle, liver; goat, 
liver; horse, liver; and sheep, liver are not needed. Therefore, EPA is 
removing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.413(a)(2) for cattle, liver; goat, 
liver; horse, liver; and sheep, liver rather than modifying them 
because these commodities would be covered.
    Based on grain data that indicate the regulated residues of 
imazalil in or on barley grain and wheat grain are above the limit of 
quantitation (LOQ) of 0.08 ppm, the Agency determined to increase the 
tolerances for barley grain and wheat grain, each to 0.1 ppm. 
Therefore, the Agency is increasing, in 40 CFR

[[Page 54429]]

180.413(a)(1), tolerances for residues of imazalil in or on barley, 
grain and wheat, grain. from 0.05 to 0.1 ppm. The Agency determined 
that the increased tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a reasonable 
certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the 
pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on residue data that indicate levels of imazalil and its 
metabolite in citrus oil as high as 187 ppm, the Agency determined that 
a tolerance of 200 ppm is warranted for citrus oil. Citrus oils are not 
considered ready-to-eat and are used primarily as a minor ingredient in 
chewing gums, baked goods, gelatins, and puddings. The dilution factor 
for citrus oil (238x) in its conversion to ready-to-eat form exceeds 
the average concentration factor (28x based on oranges) from the raw 
agricultural commodity (RAC) to the oil by a factor of 8.5. As 
consumed, the concentration of imazalil and its metabolite, expressed 
as imazalil equivalents, are expected to be less than the concentration 
in the RAC (whole fruit). Therefore, EPA is increasing the tolerance in 
40 CFR 180.413(a)(1), for residues of imazalil in citrus oil from 25.0 
to 200.0 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased tolerance is 
safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result 
from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Because the Agency now considers barley hay and wheat hay to be 
RACs, tolerances are warranted. Based on residue data for forage and 
straw of barley and wheat that indicate residues of concern as high as 
0.12 ppm for spring barley straw and 0.24 ppm for winter wheat straw 
(each after a 2x correction factor for storage stability), and by 
translating available data for barley forage and straw to barley hay 
and available data for wheat forage and straw to wheat hay, EPA 
determined that tolerances on hay should be established at 0.5 ppm. 
Therefore, EPA is establishing separate tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.413(a)(1) for residues of imazalil in or on barley, hay and wheat, 
hay at 0.5 ppm each.
    4. Oryzalin. In order to conform to current Agency practice, EPA is 
revising the commodity terminology in 40 CFR 180.304(a) for small fruit 
at 0.05 ppm into individual tolerances for berry, group 13; cranberry; 
grape; and strawberry; each at 0.05 ppm. Also, EPA is revising 
commodity terminology to conform to current Agency practice as follows: 
Fruit, citrus to fruit, citrus, group 10; fruit, pome to fruit, pome, 
group 11; and fruit, stone to fruit, stone, group 12.
    In addition, in order to conform to current Agency practice, EPA is 
recodifying the regional tolerances for guava and papaya from 40 CFR 
180.304(b) to (c), and establishing and reserving sections for 
emergency exemptions in 40 CFR 180.304(b) and indirect or inadvertent 
residues in 40 CFR 180.304(d).
    5. Sodium acifluorfen. Tolerances for sodium acifluorfen are 
currently expressed as the combined residues of the herbicide sodium 
salt of acifluorfen (sodium 5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-
nitrobenzoic acid) and its metabolites (the corresponding acid, methyl 
ester, and amino analogues). Typically, the salt form of an acid is 
expressed with the suffix ``ate,'' and therefore a salt of nitrobenzoic 
acid should be termed a nitrobenzoate. While the tolerance expression 
for sodium acifluorfen in 40 CFR 180.383 is appropriate, EPA is 
revising only the name of the sodium salt of acifluorfen in the 
tolerance expression from sodium 5-[2-chloro-4-
(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acid to sodium 5-[2-chloro-4-
(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoate.
    Based on field trial data that indicate residues of sodium 
acifluorfen in or on rice straw as high as 0.124 ppm, the Agency 
determined that the tolerance for rice, straw should be increased to 
0.2 ppm. Therefore, EPA is increasing the tolerance for rice, straw in 
40 CFR 180.383 from 0.1 to 0.2 ppm. The Agency determined that the 
increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that 
no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical 
residue.
    In order to conform to current Agency practice in 40 CFR 180.383, 
EPA is revising commodity terminology for soybean to soybean, seed.
     Comment. A comment was received by the Agency from Steve 
McMaster of Dow AgroSciences (DAS) pertaining to the chemical 
trifluralin. The Agency proposed revocation of the tolerance for the 
commodity mung bean sprouts because there are no active registrations 
for the commodity. DAS pointed out that there is an active registration 
for mung bean sprouts on a supplemental label for a triflualin product. 
DAS also asks that the Agency review residue chemistry data that was 
submitted in November 1998 and January 2005 in support of the mung bean 
tolerance. They would like to maintain the tolerance for bean, mung, 
sprouts at 2.0 ppm.
     Agency Response. Because there is an active registration 
for mung bean sprouts, EPA re-evaluated and reassessed the safety of 
trifluralin, taking into account the mung bean sprout tolerance. With 
the addition of the mung bean sprout tolerance, EPA has determined that 
tolerances for trifluralin remain safe.
    6. Trifluralin. Because there have been no active registered uses 
for trifluralin on upland cress since 1989, and therefore the 
tolerances are no longer needed, EPA is revoking the tolerances in 40 
CFR 180.207 for residues of trifluralin in or on cress, upland.
    Because adequate residue data exists for field corn grain and data 
may be bridged from wheat and sorghum processing studies to barley, 
sorghum, and wheat, the Agency has determined that the commodity group 
for grain, crops, except corn, sweet and rice is inappropriate and 
should be revoked concomitant with the establishment of individual 
tolerances for barley grain and sorghum grain. No active registrations 
have existed on oats since cancellation of a soil treatment for oats in 
May 2001, and therefore an oat grain tolerance is not needed. Separate 
tolerances already exist for corn and wheat grain. Based on translating 
available residue data from wheat and sorghum processing studies which 
showed that trifluralin residues were non-detectable (<0.01 ppm) in or 
on wheat grain and sorghum grain, the Agency determined that the 
tolerances for barley grain and sorghum grain should each be 
established at 0.05 ppm (the enforcement method LOQ). Therefore, EPA is 
revoking the group tolerance in 40 CFR 180.207 for grain, crop, except 
corn, sweet and rice grain at 0.05 ppm and establishing individual 
tolerances for barley, grain and sorghum, grain, grain each at 0.05 
ppm.
    In order to conform to current Agency practice, the obsolete 
commodity definition for legume, forage should be revised to vegetable, 
foliage of legume, group 7 and alfalfa, forage. Based on field residue 
data that indicate residues of trifluralin as high as 2.2 ppm on 
alfalfa forage, the Agency determined that the appropriate tolerance 
should be increased from 0.05 to 3.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is revising 
the commodity tolerance for legume, forage in 40 CFR 180.207 at 0.05 
ppm into vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7 at 0.05 ppm and an 
individual tolerance for alfalfa, forage, increasing the tolerance for 
alfalfa, forage from 0.05 to 3.0 ppm. The Agency determined that the 
increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that 
no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical 
residue.

[[Page 54430]]

    Because celery data will be translated to endive, and because 
residue data are not available on all of the representative commodities 
from crop group 4, the Agency determined that the commodity group for 
vegetable, leafy should be revised to vegetable, leaves of root and 
tuber, group 2 and vegetable, brassica, leafy group 5 with separate 
tolerances for celery and endive. Therefore, EPA is removing the 
commodity group in 40 CFR 180.207 for vegetable, leafy, except brassica 
and replacing it with separate tolerances for celery; endive; 
vegetable, leaves of root and tuber, group 2; and vegetable, brassica, 
leafy group 5 at 0.05 ppm.
    In order to conform to current Agency practice, the obsolete 
commodity definition for vegetables, root (exc. carrots) should be 
revised to vegetable, root and tuber, group 1, except carrot and 
vegetable, bulb, group 3. Based on available trifluralin residue data 
for the representative commodities from each group (residues on 
radishes as high as 0.026 ppm; residues on green onions as high as 
0.016 ppm), EPA determined that a tolerance of 0.05 ppm is appropriate 
for each group. Therefore, EPA is revising the commodity tolerance for 
vegetable, root (exc. carrot) in 40 CFR 180.207 at 0.05 ppm to 
vegetable, root and tuber, group 1, except carrot and vegetable, bulb, 
group 3, each at 0.05 ppm.
    In addition, the commodity group, ``vegetable, seed and pod,'' is 
obsolete. The commodity term has been revised to ``vegetable, legume 
group 6.'' Because of this terminology change, a separate tolerance is 
being established for okra which is not included in the newly revised 
``vegetable, crop group 6.'' Based on the available data for okra and 
selected members of crop group 6, a tolerance of 0.05 ppm would be 
appropriate for each. Therefore, EPA is revising the commodity 
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.207 for vegetables, seed and pod at 0.05 ppm to 
vegetable, legume, group 6 and okra each at 0.05 ppm.
    Based on data that indicate residues of trifluralin in or on 
alfalfa hay as high as 1.6 ppm, the Agency determined that the alfalfa 
hay tolerance should be increased to 2.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is 
increasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.207 for residues of trifluralin 
in or on alfalfa, hay from 0.2 to 2.0 ppm. The Agency determined that 
the increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty 
that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide 
chemical residue.
    Based on data that indicate residues of trifluralin in or on peanut 
hay as high as 0.014 ppm, the Agency determined that a tolerance should 
be established for peanut hay at 0.05 ppm. Therefore, EPA is 
establishing a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.207 for residues of trifluralin 
in or on peanut, hay at 0.05 ppm.
    The available mustard seed data indicate residues of concern are 
non-detectable (<0.01 ppm). Tree nut field trial data and weight of 
evidence for trifluralin residues in tree nut indicate residues of 
trifluralin are non-detectable (<0.01 ppm) in almond hulls. Based on 
these data supporting each commodity, the Agency determined that 
tolerances should be established for mustard seed and almond hulls each 
at 0.05 ppm, the enforcement method LOQ. Therefore, EPA is establishing 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.207 for residues of trifluralin in or on 
mustard, seed and almond, hulls each at 0.05 ppm.
    Available data show that residues of trifluralin in or on cotton 
gin byproducts are warranted at 0.05 ppm. Therefore, EPA is 
establishing a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.207 for residues of trifluralin 
in or on cotton, gin byproducts at 0.05 ppm.
    EPA is revising commodity terminology in 40 CFR 180.207 to conform 
to current Agency practice as follows: Hop to hop, dried cones; and 
sorghum, forage to sorghum, grain, forage.
    i. Comment. A comment was received by the Agency from VJP 
Consulting, Inc., on behalf of the Ziram Task Force (ZTF). The comment 
states that the crop commodity quince may be a commodity of interest in 
the future, and VJP Consulting, Inc., asks that the tolerance for ziram 
residues in/on quince not be revoked, as proposed. ZTF requested that 
residue data for apples and pears could support the quince tolerance.
    ii. Comment. A comment was also received from VJP Consulting, Inc., 
on behalf of Taminco, a member of the ZTF consortium. Taminco has 
requested that the tolerances for residues of ziram in/on onion and 
melon not be revoked. The commenter stated that ziram is registered and 
used on these crops outside the United States, and import tolerances 
are needed.
     Agency Response. The Agency is not addressing tolerances 
for quince, onion, and melon in this final rule, but will address the 
tolerances in a future Federal Register document.
    7. Ziram. Because the associated commodity registrations have not 
been active since 1991 and the tolerances are no longer needed, EPA is 
revoking, in 40 CFR 180.116, tolerances for residues of ziram in or on 
the following: Broccoli; brussel sprouts; carrot, roots; collards; 
gooseberry; kale; kohlrabi; lettuce; loganberry; peanut; pea; radish, 
roots; radish, tops; raspberry; rutabaga, roots; rutabaga, tops; 
spinach; turnip, greens; and turnip, roots.
    Because registrations for the ziram use on eggplant and the use on 
pepper have not been active since 1994, and the tolerances are no 
longer needed, EPA is revoking, in 40 CFR 180.116, tolerances for 
residues of ziram in or on the following: Eggplant and pepper.
    Because registrations for ziram use on bean, celery, cranberry, 
cucumber, pumpkin, and squash have not been active since 1995, and the 
tolerances are no longer needed, EPA is revoking, in 40 CFR 180.116, 
tolerances for residues of ziram in or on the following: Bean, celery, 
cranberry, cucumber, pumpkin, squash, and squash, summer.
    The last U.S. registration for beet, garden, roots; beet, garden, 
tops; cabbage; and cauliflower was cancelled due to non-payment of the 
year 2005 maintenance fee as announced in a Federal Register notice 
published on August 3, 2005 (70 FR 44637) (FRL-7726-4). The Agency 
permitted the sale and distribution of existing stocks until January 
15, 2006. The Agency believes that there is sufficient time for end 
users to exhaust those existing stocks and treated commodities to clear 
the channels of trade by January 15, 2007. Therefore, EPA is revoking 
the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.116 for ziram residues in or on beet, 
garden, roots; beet, garden, tops; cabbage; and cauliflower; each with 
an expiration/revocation date of January 15, 2007.
    Active ziram registrations currently exist for blackberry. However, 
ziram tolerances at 7.0 ppm on boysenberry, dewberry, and youngberry 
are no longer needed because their uses are covered by the existing 
tolerance at 7.0 ppm on blackberry. Therefore, EPA is revoking the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.116 for boysenberry, dewberry, and youngberry.
    In accordance with 40 CFR 180.1(h) which indicates that the 
tolerance for peach also covers the use in or on nectarines, the 
tolerance on nectarine is no longer needed. Therefore, EPA is removing 
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.116 for residues of ziram in or on 
nectarine.
    Also, while the ziram RED recommends revocation for the tolerance 
on strawberry, active registrations associated with the commodity use 
currently exist, and therefore the tolerance will not be proposed for 
revocation at this time. The Agency intends to follow up with the 
registrants and expects to propose revocation in a future Federal 
Register document.
    In order to conform to current Agency practice in 40 CFR 180.116, 
EPA is revising the commodity terminology

[[Page 54431]]

cherries to cherry, sweet, and cherry, tart.
    The Agency will address other tolerance actions for ziram in a 
future Federal Register document.

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

    EPA may issue a regulation establishing, modifying, or revoking a 
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(e). In this final rule, EPA is 
establishing, modifying, and revoking tolerances to implement the 
tolerance recommendations made during the reregistration and tolerance 
reassessment processes, and as follow-up on canceled uses of 
pesticides. As part of these processes, EPA is required to determine 
whether each of the amended tolerances meets the safety standards under 
FQPA. The safety finding determination is found in detail in each RED 
and TRED for the active ingredient. REDs and TREDs recommend the 
implementation of certain tolerance actions, including modifications to 
reflect current use patterns, to meet safety findings, and to change 
commodity names and groupings in accordance with new EPA policy. 
Printed and electronic copies of the REDs and TREDs are available as 
provided in Unit II.A.
    EPA has issued post-FQPA REDs for endosulfan, imazalil, sodium 
acifluorfen, and ziram, and TREDs for oryzalin and trifluralin. The 
imazalil RED was completed after its TRED, and fenarimol had no RED 
because it was registered after November 1, 1984, and not subject to 
reregistration. Also, EPA issued a RED prior to FQPA for oryzalin and 
trifluralin and made a safety finding which reassessed their tolerances 
according to the FQPA standard, maintaining them when new tolerances 
were established as noted in Unit II.A. REDs and TREDs contain the 
Agency's evaluation of the database for these pesticides, including 
statements regarding additional data on the active ingredients that may 
be needed to confirm the potential human health and environmental risk 
assessments associated with current product uses, and REDs state 
conditions under which these uses and products will be eligible for 
reregistration. The REDs and TREDs recommended the establishment, 
modification, and/or revocation of specific tolerances. RED and TRED 
recommendations such as establishing or modifying tolerances, and in 
some cases revoking tolerances, are the result of assessment under the 
FQPA standard of ``reasonable certainty of no harm.'' However, 
tolerance revocations recommended in REDs and TREDs that are made final 
in this document do not need such assessment when the tolerances are no 
longer necessary.
    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.
    When EPA establishes tolerances for pesticide residues in or on 
RACs, the Agency gives consideration to possible pesticide residues in 
meat, milk, poultry, and/or eggs produced by animals that are fed 
agricultural products (for example, grain or hay) containing pesticides 
residues (40 CFR 180.6). If there is no reasonable expectation of 
finite pesticide residues in or on meat, milk, poultry, or eggs, then 
tolerances do not need to be established for these commodities (40 CFR 
180.6(b) and (c)).

C. When Do These Actions Become Effective?

    With the exception of certain tolerances for ziram for which EPA is 
revoking certain tolerances with specific expiration/revocation dates, 
the Agency is revoking, modifying, establishing tolerances, and 
revising specific commodity terminologies effective on the date of 
publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. With the 
exception of ziram, the Agency believes that existing stocks of 
pesticide products labeled for the uses associated with the revoked 
tolerances have been completely exhausted and that treated commodities 
have cleared the channels of trade. EPA is revoking certain ziram 
tolerances with an expiration/revocation date of January 15, 2007. The 
Agency believes that this revocation date allows users to exhaust 
stocks and allows sufficient time for passage of treated commodities 
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 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 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.
    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.

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

    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. 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, Regulations, & Dockets'' 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 establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 
408(e), and also modifies and revokes specific

[[Page 54432]]

tolerances established under FFDCA section 408. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions (i.e., 
establishment and modification of a tolerance and 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 d