Chlorpropham, Linuron, Pebulate, Asulam, and Thiophanate-methyl; Tolerance Actions, 37646-37655 [E7-13420]
Download as PDF
37646
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
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 180.503 is amended by
revising the table in paragraph (a); and
by adding text to paragraph (c) to read
as follows:
I
§ 180.503 Cymoxanil, tolerance for
residues.
(a)
*
*
*
Commodity
Parts per million
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2006–0483. To access the
electronic docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, select ‘‘Advanced
0.05 Search,’’ then ‘‘Docket Search.’’ Insert
the docket ID number where indicated
0.2
and select the ‘‘Submit’’ button. Follow
1
the instructions on the regulations.gov
There is no U.S. registration for lychee.
web site to view the docket index or
*
*
*
*
*
access available documents. All
(c) Tolerances with a regional
documents in the docket are listed in
registration. Tolerances with a regional
the docket index available in
registration as defined in § 180.1(n) are
regulations.gov. Although listed in the
established for the residues of the
index, some information is not publicly
fungicide cymoxanil, 2-cyano -Navailable, e.g., Confidential Business
[(ethylamino)carbonyl]-2(methoxyimino) acetamide) in or on the Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
raw agricultural commodities:
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
Commodity
Parts per million
the Internet and will be publicly
Grape ..............................
0.10 available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
*
*
*
*
*
available in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
[FR Doc. E7–13419 Filed 7–10–07; 8:45 am]
available in hard copy, at the OPP
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400,
One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The
AGENCY
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
40 CFR Part 180
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is (703) 305–
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0483; FRL–8131–6]
5805.
Chlorpropham, Linuron, Pebulate,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane
Asulam, and Thiophanate–methyl;
Smith, Special Review and
Tolerance Actions
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office
of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Agency (EPA).
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–
ACTION: Final rule.
0001; telephone number: (703) 308–
SUMMARY: EPA is revoking certain
0048; e-mail address: smith.janetolerances for the herbicides linuron
scott@epa.gov.
and pebulate and the fungicide
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
thiophanate–methyl. Also, EPA is
modifying certain tolerances for the
I. General Information
herbicides chlorpropham, linuron,
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
asulam and the fungicide thiophanate–
methyl. In addition, EPA is establishing
You may be potentially affected by
new tolerances for the herbicides
this action if you are an agricultural
chlorpropham, linuron, asulam and the
producer, food manufacturer, or
fungicide thiophanate–methyl. The
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
Caneberry .......................
Hop, dried cones ............
Lettuce, head ..................
Lychee1 ...........................
Potato .............................
Vegetable, cucurbit,
group 9 ........................
Vegetable, fruiting, group
8 ..................................
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
regulatory actions in this document are
part of the Agency’s reregistration
program under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section
408(q), as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
DATES: This regulation is effective July
11, 2007. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 10, 2007, and must be filed
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also
Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
4.0
7.0
4.0
1.0
0.05
Jkt 211001
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
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–2006–0483 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
requests must be in writing, and must be
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
11JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk
on or before September 10, 2007.
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–2006–0483, 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
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
In the Federal Register of September
20, 2006 (71 FR 54953) (FRL–8078–2),
EPA issued a proposed rule to revoke,
remove, modify, and establish certain
tolerances and/or tolerance exemption
for residues for the herbicides
chlorpropham, linuron, asulam and
pebulate and the fungicide thiophanatemethyl. Also, the proposal of September
20, 2006 (71 FR 54953) (FRL–8078–2)
provided a 60–day comment period
which invited public comment for
consideration and for support of
tolerance retention under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
standards.
EPA is revoking, removing,
modifying, and establishing specific
tolerances for residues of the herbicides
chlorpropham, linuron, asulam and
pebulate and the fungicide thiophanatemethyl in or on commodities listed in
the regulatory text.
EPA is finalizing these tolerance
actions in order to implement the
tolerance recommendations made
during the reregistration and tolerance
reassessment processes (including
follow-up on canceled or additional
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 the FQPA. The safety
finding determination of ‘‘reasonable
certainty of no harm’’ is found in detail
in each Reregistration Eligibility
Decision (RED) and Report on FQPA
Tolerance Reassessment Progress and
Interim Risk Management Decision
(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 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: 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.
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 these 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’s policy is 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
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37647
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.
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 proposal published in the Federal
Register of September 20, 2006 (71 FR
54953) (FRL–8078–2), EPA received two
comments during the 60–day public
comment period, as follows:
Comment. A comment was received
from a private citizen that expressed
concern with pesticide residues in
general and that pesticide residue levels
should be zero. Concern was also
expressed for the number of chemicals
found in the bodies of adults and
children.
Agency response. The private citizen’s
comment did not take issue with the
Agency’s conclusion that certain
tolerances should be revoked,
established and modified. The Agency
conducts a detailed risk assessment to
determine whether establishing and/or
increasing tolerances is safe; i.e., there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to
the pesticide chemical residue. Also, it
is EPA’s general practice to propose
revocation of tolerances for residues of
pesticide active ingredients on crop uses
for which FIFRA registrations no longer
exist.
Comment. Cerexagri, Inc. commented
that the term postharvest associated
with the tolerances for thiophanatemethyl residues of concern on apple,
apricot, cherry, peach and plum is not
appropriate because the use patterns are
based on pre-harvest applications.
Cerexagri, Inc. also took issue with the
increase of the tolerance for
thiophanate-methyl residues of concern
on canola at 0.1 parts per million (ppm)
to 0.2 ppm. They cited data and
analytical methods which indicate the
tolerance increase is not appropriate.
Agency response. The thiophanatemethyl Residue Chemistry Chapter and
RED included recommendations that
certain tolerances be designated as
postharvest. The Agency agrees that the
uses of thiophanate-methyl include preharvest applications such that the postharvest designation is not appropriate.
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
11JYR1
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
37648
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Therefore, the Agency has determined
that the postharvest designation should
not be linked to the tolerances in the 40
CFR. Therefore, EPA is removing the
references to ‘‘postharvest’’ from the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.371. Cerexagri,
Inc, also commented on the proposed
tolerance level increase for canola from
0.1 to 0.2 ppm.
Setting the tolerance on canola at 0.2
ppm was recommended in the
thiophanate-methyl RED based on an
enforcement method limit of
quantitation (LOQ) of 0.05 ppm.
Crexagri believes that the tolerance on
canola should remain at 0.1 ppm, the
current tolerance level, based on an
appropriate enforcement method LOQ
of 0.025 ppm. The field trial data
showed non-detectable residues of
thiophanate-methyl and one sample
with detection equivalent to 0.018 ppm
of the metabolite methyl 2benzimidazolyl carbamate (MBC). Later,
Cerexagri submitted an addendum to
the crop field trial data which details an
estimation of a practical limit of
detection (LOD) of 0.005 ppm in/on
canola seed for MBC. The Agency
believes that a viable LOQ is usually
about 3x the method LOD, and
therefore, an LOD would correspond to
about a 0.015 ppm for the method.
Consequently, the Agency believes that
an LOD of 0.025 ppm is a conservative
estimate. Based on the estimated
method LOQ for the metabolite MBC,
the Agency agrees that the canola seed
tolerance should remain at 0.1 ppm in
40 CFR 180.371(c).
1. Chlorpropham. A plant commodity
tolerance on potato for chlorpropham is
currently regulated for residues of CIPC
(isopropyl m-chlorocarbanilate) and its
metabolite 1-hydroxy-2-propyl 3’chlorocarbanilate (calculated as CIPC) in
40 CFR 180.181. Because the regulated
metabolite was not detected in potato
following treatment with radiolabelled
14C-chlorpropham, EPA determined
that the tolerance expression for plants
should be expressed in terms of
chlorpropham per se. Meanwhile, the
current interim milk and livestock
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.319 are
regulated for isopropyl mchlorocarbanilate (CIPC) residues.
However, based on available ruminant
data that show residues of
chlorpropham and its metabolite 4hydroxychlorpropham-O-sulfonic acid
(4-HSA) in milk and edible tissues, EPA
determined that the tolerance
expression should be expressed in terms
of the combined residues of
chlorpropham and 4hydroxychlorpropham-O-sulfonic acid
(4-HSA) and recodified under 40 CFR
180.181 as permanent tolerances.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
Therefore, EPA is recodifying plant
tolerances for chlorpropham from 40
CFR 180.181(a) to (a)(1) and regulate the
plant regulator and herbicide
chlorpropham (isopropyl mchlorocarbanilate (CIPC) in plants. Also,
EPA is removing the interim milk and
livestock tolerances (meat, fat, and meat
byproducts of cattle, hog, horse, goat,
and sheep) for chlorpropham in 40 CFR
180.319, recodify them as permanent
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.181(a)(2) and
regulate tolerances there for the plant
growth regulator and herbicide
chlorpropham (isopropyl mchlorocarbanilate [CIPC]) and its
metabolite 4-hydroxychlorpropham-Osulfonic acid (4-HSA).
In addition, based on ruminant
feeding data and the calculated
maximum theoretical dietary burden
(MTDB) estimates, EPA determined that
tolerances on the meat of cattle, hog,
horse, goat, and sheep should be
increased from 0.05 to 0.06 parts per
million (ppm), the limit of quantitation
(LOQ). Also, based on exaggerated
feeding study data that showed
combined residues of concern in kidney
at about 0.3 ppm, the Agency
determined that tolerances for kidney of
cattle, hog, horse, goat, and sheep
should be separated from their existing
meat byproduct tolerances at 0.05 ppm
and increased to 0.30 ppm. Since the
combined residues of concern were
shown to be near or below the LOQ
(0.06 ppm), the Agency determined that
tolerances for meat byproducts, except
kidney of cattle, hog, horse, goat, and
sheep should be increased from 0.05 to
0.06 ppm. In addition, based on
ruminant feeding data that showed
combined residues of concern in fat at
0.17 ppm, the Agency determined that
tolerances for the fat of cattle, hog,
horse, goat, and sheep should be
increased from 0.05 to 0.20 ppm.
Moreover, based on ruminant feeding
data and the maximum tolerated dietary
burden (MTDB) burden estimates that
showed combined residues of concern
to be 0.25 ppm, the Agency determined
that the tolerance for milk should be
increased from 0.05 to 0.30 ppm.
Therefore, EPA is increasing tolerances
in newly recodified 40 CFR
180.181(a)(2) for the combined residues
of chlorpropham and 4hydroxychlorpropham-O-sulfonic acid
(4-HSA) as follows: Milk from 0.05 to
0.30 ppm; cattle, fat; hog, fat; horse, fat;
goat, fat; and sheep, fat from 0.05 to 0.20
ppm; cattle, meat; hog, meat; horse,
meat; goat, meat; and sheep, meat from
0.05 to 0.06 ppm; cattle, meat
byproducts, except kidney; hog, meat
byproducts, except kidney; horse, meat
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
byproducts, except kidney; goat, meat
byproducts, except kidney; and sheep,
meat byproducts, except kidney from
0.05 to 0.06 ppm; and cattle, kidney;
hog, kidney; horse, kidney; goat, kidney;
and sheep, kidney from 0.05 to 0.30
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 potato field trial
data that show chlorpropham residues
as high as 24 ppm, the Agency
determined that the tolerance in newly
recodified 40 CFR 180.181(a)(1) should
be decreased from 50 to 30 ppm. The
term ‘‘postharvest’’ associating these
tolerances with the timing of the use is
being removed, since the enforcement
Agency would not know whether a
commodity bore residues resulting from
postharvest treatment. Therefore, EPA is
decreasing the tolerance in newly
recodified 40 CFR 180.181(a)(1) in or on
potato, postharvest from 50 to 30 ppm
and revising potato, postharvest to
potato.
Based on available potato processing
data that demonstrate an average
concentration factor of chlorpropham
residues at 3X, and the highest average
field trial (HAFT) whole potato residue
of 12.0 ppm, the Agency determined
that residues in the wet potato peel
would be 36 ppm; therefore, a tolerance
should be established on potato, wet
peel at 40 ppm. (Residues did not
concentrate in potato granules, flakes or
chips.) Therefore, EPA is establishing a
tolerance in newly recodified 40 CFR
180.181(a)(1) for the chlorpropham
residues of concern or on potato, wet
peel at 40 ppm.
2. Linuron. According to the TRED,
the tolerance expression, which is
currently expressed as ‘‘residues of the
herbicide linuron (3-(3,4-dichloro
phenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea)’’ in
40 CFR 180.184(a) and (c), should be
modified to include metabolites that can
be converted to 3,4-dichloroaniline that
are of toxicological concern.
Consequently, EPA is establishing the
tolerance expression in 40 CFR
180.184(a) to regulate the combined
residues of the herbicide linuron (3-(3,4dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1methylurea) and its metabolites
convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline,
calculated as linuron in/on food
commodities and in 40 CFR 180.184(c)
to regulate the combined residues of the
herbicide linuron (3-(3,4dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1methylurea) and its metabolites
convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline,
calculated as linuron in/on food
commodities.
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
11JYR1
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
The feeding of treated soybean forage
or hay to livestock is prohibited as
stated on the registration labels and
therefore, the tolerances are no longer
needed. Consequently, EPA is revoking
the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.184(a)
soybean, forage and soybean, hay.
Based on field trial data that indicate
linuron residues of concern in or on
field corn stover are as high as 5.5 ppm,
the Agency determined that a tolerance
should be 6.0 ppm on corn, field, stover.
The RED indicates a data deficiency for
corn, sweet, stover; however, the field
corn stover data can be translated to
sweet corn stover, therefore, the Agency
has determined the tolerance for corn,
sweet, stover can be increased from 1.0
to 6.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is increasing
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for
the combined residues of the herbicide
linuron and its metabolites convertible
to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as
linuron in or on corn, field, stover and
corn, sweet, stover from 1.0 to 6.0 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.
In order to conform to current Agency
practice, EPA is revising the commodity
terminology in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for
corn, grain (inc. pop) at 0.25 ppm into
corn, field, grain and corn, pop, grain.
However, because there are no active
U.S. registrations for the use of linuron
on popcorn, the tolerance is no longer
needed and should be revoked.
Therefore, EPA is revoking the tolerance
in 40 CFR 180.184(a) on corn, pop,
grain. In addition, based on field trial
data that indicate linuron residues of
concern in or on corn grain as high as
0.06 ppm, the Agency determined that
the corn, field, grain tolerance should be
decreased from 0.25 to 0.1 ppm.
Therefore, EPA is decreasing the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the
combined residues of the herbicide
linuron and its metabolites convertible
to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as
linuron in or on corn, field, grain from
0.25 to 0.1 ppm.
Ruminant feeding data at an
exaggerated level (6.9x) show that
linuron residues of concern expected at
a 1x feeding level are 0.16 ppm in fat,
0.07 ppm in meat, 1.9 ppm in liver and
kidney, and 0.05 ppm in milk. Based on
these expected residue levels, the
Agency determined that the tolerances
for the fat of cattle, goat, horse and
sheep should be decreased from 1.0 to
0.2 ppm; meat tolerances of cattle, goat,
horse and sheep should be decreased
from 1.0 to 0.1 ppm; meat byproduct
tolerances of cattle, goat, horse, and
sheep should be separated into
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
tolerances for meat byproducts, except
kidney and liver, and decreased from
1.0 to 0.1 ppm; kidney of cattle, goat,
horse, and sheep, which should be
established separately and increased
from 1.0 to 2.0 ppm; liver of cattle, goat,
horse, and sheep, which should be
established separately and increased
from 1.0 to 2.0 ppm; and a tolerance for
milk should be established at 0.05 ppm.
Therefore, EPA is decreasing tolerances
from 1.0 ppm in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for
the following: Cattle, fat; goat, fat; horse,
fat; and sheep, fat; each to 0.2 ppm;
cattle, meat; cattle, meat byproducts,
except kidney and liver; goat, meat;
goat, meat byproducts, except kidney
and liver; horse, meat; horse, meat
byproducts, except, kidney and liver;
sheep, meat and sheep, meat
byproducts, except kidney and liver;
each from 1.0 ppm to 0.1 ppm. Also,
EPA is establishing separate tolerances
in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the following
commodities: Cattle, kidney; cattle,
liver; goat, kidney; goat, liver; horse,
kidney; horse, liver; sheep, kidney; and
sheep, liver; each at 2.0 ppm. In
addition, EPA is establishing a tolerance
in 40 CFR 180.184(a) in milk at 0.05
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 ruminant feeding data and
an estimated dietary burden in swine
that is much less than that for beef and
dairy cattle, the Agency calculated
likely linuron residues of concern to be
less than 0.007 ppm in hog fat, 0.003
ppm in hog meat, and 0.08 ppm in hog
liver and kidney; therefore, the Agency
determined the tolerances should be
decreased to 0.05 ppm, 0.05 ppm and
0.1 ppm for hog fat, hog meat and hog
meat byproducts, respectively.
Therefore, EPA is decreasing tolerances
in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the combined
residues of the herbicide linuron and its
metabolites convertible to 3,4dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron in
or on hog, fat and hog, meat from 1.0 to
0.05 ppm; and hog, meat byproducts
from 1.0 to 0.1 ppm.
Based on field trial data, the Agency
determined that linuron residues of
concern were non-detectable (<0.05
ppm) in or on parsnips. Therefore, EPA
is decreasing the tolerance in 40 CFR
180.184(a) for the combined residues of
the herbicide linuron and its
metabolites convertible to 3,4dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron in
or on parsnip (with or without tops)
from 0.5 to 0.05 ppm and revising the
commodity terminology to parsnip,
roots and parsnip, tops.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37649
Since completion of the Linuron
TRED, data deficiencies for cotton gin
byproducts have been adequately
addressed. Based on more recent cotton
storage stability and field trial data
reflecting all cotton growing regions of
the U.S. submitted in response to the
TRED, the maximum residues of linuron
in or on stripper cotton gin byproducts
were 3.32 ppm, the Agency determined
that the tolerance should be established
for cotton gin byproducts at 5.0 ppm.
Therefore, EPA is establishing a
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the
combined residues of the herbicide
linuron and its metabolites convertible
to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as
linuron in or on cotton, gin byproducts
at 5.0 ppm.
Because use of linuron on potatoes
and celery is restricted to east of the
Rocky Mountains, and use on wheat is
restricted to the states of Idaho, Oregon,
and Washington, the Agency
determined that tolerances on celery,
potato, and the forage, grain, hay and
straw of wheat should be recodified as
regional registrations. Also, based on
field trial data that indicate combined
linuron residues of concern were
nondetectable (<0.05 ppm) in or on all
but one sample (0.07 ppm) of potato,
nondetectable (<0.03 ppm) in or on
wheat grain, and as high as 2.0 ppm in
or on wheat straw, the Agency
determined that the tolerances should
be decreased from 1.0 to 0.2 ppm on
potato and from 0.25 to 0.05 ppm on
wheat, grain, and increased to 0.5 to 2.0
ppm on wheat straw. Therefore, EPA is
recodifying tolerances on celery, potato,
and the forage, grain, hay and straw of
wheat from 40 CFR 180.184(a) to (c) for
the combined residues of the herbicide
linuron and its metabolites convertible
to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as
linuron as follows: Potato decreased
from 1.0 to 0.2 ppm; wheat, grain
decreased from 0.25 to 0.05 ppm; and
wheat, straw increased from 0.5 to 2.0
ppm and correcting 180.1(N) to
180.1(M). 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.
Interregional Research Project #4 (IR4) has submitted petitions (PP 8E5027
and PP 8E5028) requesting the
establishment of tolerances on celeriac
and rhubarb based on use directions and
data translated from carrots and celery,
respectively. Based on field trial data
that show linuron residues of concern
for carrot samples treated at 0.75X were
as high as 0.56 ppm and celery samples
treated at 1X were as high as 0.42 ppm,
the Agency determined that tolerances
should be established at 1.0 ppm on
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
11JYR1
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
37650
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
celeriac and 0.5 ppm on rhubarb.
Therefore, EPA is establishing
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the
combined residues of the herbicide
linuron and its metabolites convertible
to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as
linuron in or on celeriac at 1.0 ppm and
rhubarb at 0.5 ppm.
Although additional data are
anticipated in 2007 in response to the
TRED, tolerances associated with
sorghum and sweet corn have been
reassessed at the current tolerance
levels. The Agency determined that the
tolerances are safe; i.e. there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residues. EPA is
maintaining the tolerance level and
revising the commodity terminology in
40 CFR 180.184(a) to conform to current
Agency practice as follows: ‘‘Sorghum,
forage’’ to ‘‘sorghum, grain, forage’’ at
1.0 ppm; ‘‘corn, fresh (inc. sweet, kernel
plus cob with husks removed)’’ to
‘‘corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with
husks removed’’ at 0.25 ppm; and
splitting ‘‘soybean, (dry or succulent)’’
to separate tolerances fo ‘‘soybean,
seed’’ and ‘‘soybean, vegetable’’ both at
1.0 ppm.
3. Pebulate. The last U.S. registration
was cancelled October 24, 2003 due to
non-payment of registration fees and a
notice was published in the Federal
Register on November 6, 2003 (68 FR
62785, FRL–7331–3). Therefore,
tolerances are no longer needed and
EPA is revoking the tolerances in 40
CFR 180.238 for residues of pebulate (Spropyl butylethylthiocarbamate) in or
on beet, sugar roots; beet sugar, tops;
and tomato.
4. Asulam. The tolerance expression
in 40 CFR 180.360 currently regulates
asulam (methyl sulfanilylcarbamate) per
se. The Agency recommended in the
asulam TRED that the tolerance
expression be revised to include
metabolites containing the
sulfanilamide moiety because in the
absence of toxicological data the Agency
assumed these compounds to be
potentially comparable in toxicity to the
parent compound, asulam. Therefore,
EPA is revising the tolerance expression
in 40 CFR 180.360 to read as follows:
‘‘(a) General. Tolerances are established
for the combined residues of asulam
(methyl sulfanilylcarbamate) and its
metabolites containing the
sulfanilamide moiety in or on the
following food commodities.’’
Based on field trial data that showed
asulam residues of concern as high as
0.23 ppm and a correction for a 70%
loss of residues during storage, the
Agency calculated that the maximum
residue should be 0.71 ppm, and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
determined that the tolerance on
sugarcane should be increased form 0.1
to 1.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is increasing
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.360(a) for
the combined residues of asulam and its
metabolites containing the
sulfanilamide moiety in or on
sugarcane, cane from 0.1(N) to 1.0 ppm.
The Agency is removing the ‘‘N’’
(negligible residues) to conform to
current Agency Administrative practice.
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 sugarcane
processing data that show an average
concentration factor of asulam residues
at 48x and a HAFT residue value that
when corrected for a 70% loss in storage
is expected to be 0.557 ppm (0.167
ppm/0.3), the Agency calculated that
the residues would be about 26.7 ppm
and determined a tolerance should be
established for sugarcane molasses at 30
ppm. Therefore, EPA is establishing a
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.360(a) for the
combined residues of asulam and its
metabolites containing the
sulfanilamide moiety in or on
sugarcane, molasses at 30 ppm.
Based on a 1.2x exaggerated feeding
study, animal metabolism data and a
ruminant diet containing 10% molasses
(a livestock feed item), the Agency
determined that because the anticipated
residues of asulam and sulfanilamide
containing metabolites in milk are
<0.025 ppm, in/on fat, liver, and muscle
are <0.05 ppm, and kidney is 0.12 ppm,
that tolerances should be established in
milk, and on the fat and meat of cattle,
goats, hogs, horses, and sheep at 0.05
ppm, and meat byproducts of cattle,
goats, hogs, horses, and sheep at 0.2
ppm. Therefore, EPA is establishing
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.360(a) for the
combined residues of asulam and its
metabolites containing the
sulfanilamide moiety in/on
commodities, as follows: Cattle, fat;
goat, fat; hog, fat; horse, fat; and sheep,
fat; cattle, meat; goat, meat; hog, meat;
horse, meat; and sheep, meat at 0.05
ppm; and cattle, meat byproducts; goat,
meat byproducts; hog, meat byproducts;
horse, meat byproducts; and sheep,
meat byproducts at 0.2 ppm; and milk
at 0.05 ppm.
5. Thiophanate-methyl. Currently, the
tolerances for thiophanate-methyl are
expressed in 40 CFR 180.371(a) in terms
of thiophanate-methyl(dimethyl
regulates thiophanate-methyl and its
oxygen analogue dimethyl-4,4-ophenylenebis(allophonate), and its
benzimidazole-containing metabolites
(calculated as thiophanate-methyl); and
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
in 40 CFR 180.371(b) and (c) in terms
of thiophanate-methyl and its
metabolite (methyl 2-benzimidazoyl
carbamate (MBC)). The Agency has
determined that the residues of concern
for plant and animal commodities for
tolerance enforcement consists of the
parent and its metabolite methyl 2benzimidazolyl carbamate (MBC).
Therefore, EPA is amending the
tolerance expression in 40 CFR
180.371(a), (b), and (c) so as to regulate
tolerances for the combined residues of
thiophanate-methyl (dimethyl[(1,2phenylene) bis(iminocarbonothioyl)]
bis(carbamate)) and its metabolite
methyl 2-benzimidazoyl carbamate
(MBC), calculated as thiophanatemethyl in/on food commodities.
EPA no longer considers dry apple
pomace, banana pulp, and bean forage
and hay, and peanut forage to be
significant animal feed items and
tolerances are no longer needed (A
listing of significant food and feed
commodities is found in ‘‘Table 1.—
Raw Agricultural and Processed
Commodities and Feedstuffs Derived
from Crops’’ which is found in Residue
Chemistry Test Guidelines OPPTS
860.1000 dated August 1996, available
athttps://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/
publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/ 860_
Residue_Chemistry_Test_Guidelines/
Series/). Currently, there is a tolerance
in 40 CFR 180.371 on peanut (forage
and hay). Based on field trial data that
show thiophanate-methyl residues of
concern as high as 3.76 ppm, the
Agency has determined that the
tolerance on peanut hay should be
decreased from 15.0 to 5.0 ppm. In
addition, thiophanate-methyl
registrations were approved by EPA to
be amended to delete use on celery by
request of the registrant in 1997 (62 FR
67365, FRL–5761–8). Therefore, EPA is
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.371(a) on apple, dry pomace;
banana, pulp; bean (forage and hay), and
celery, and revise the commodity
terminology from peanut (forage and
hay) into separate tolerance for peanut,
forage and peanut, hay, and revoke
peanut forage, and decrease peanut, hay
from 15.0 to 5.0 ppm.
Based on available exaggerated (10x)
poultry feeding data, EPA determined
that there is no reasonable expectation
of finite thiophanate-methyl residues of
concern in poultry commodities and
therefore, the tolerance for egg (the only
existing poultry commodity tolerance) is
no longer needed under 40 CFR
180.6(a)(3). Therefore, EPA is revoking
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371 for egg.
Based on the available ruminant
feeding study, the Agency determined
that the thiophanate-methyl residues of
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
11JYR1
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
concern in milk and animal tissues were
at the combined limit of quantitations
(LOQs) of 0.05 ppm. Therefore, the
tolerances for the milk and fat, meat and
meat byproducts of cattle, goat, horse,
and sheep should be increased to 0.15
ppm. Since the tolerance should be 0.15
ppm for all meat byproducts which
includes liver and kidney tissues, the
tolerances should be revised from ‘‘meat
byproducts, except liver and kidney’’ to
‘‘meat byproducts’’ and the tolerances
for ‘‘horse, liver’’ and ‘‘cattle, goat, and
sheep liver and kidney’’ should be
removed. Further, the Agency is
removing the ‘‘(N)’’ (negligible residues)
designation to conform to current
Agency administrative practice.
Therefore, EPA is increasing the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.371 for the
combined residues of thiophanatemethyl and methyl 2-benzimidazolyl
carbamate in or on milk from 0.1 to 0.15
ppm; cattle, goats, horses, and sheep
meat and fat from 0.1(N) to 0.15 ppm;
revising ‘‘cattle, goats, and sheep meat
byproducts, except liver and kidney at
0.1(N)’’ and ‘‘horse, meat byproducts,
except liver at 0.1(N)’’ to ‘‘cattle, goats,
horses, and sheep meat byproducts at
0.15 ppm’’; and removing cattle, goats,
and sheep liver each at 2.5 ppm; horse,
liver at 1.0 ppm; cattle, kidney at 0.2(N)
ppm; and goat and sheep kidney each at
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.
Based on field trial data that show
thiophanate-methyl residues of concern
as high as 16.25 ppm in/on tart and
sweet cherries, 6.22 ppm on
strawberries, less than the LOQ (<0.1
ppm) on wheat, the Agency determined
that the tolerances should be increased
on cherries from 15.0 to 20.0, on
strawberries from 5.0 to 7.0 ppm, and on
wheat, grain from 0.05 to 0.1 ppm.
Therefore, EPA is increasing and
revising the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.371(a) for the combined residues of
thiophanate-methyl and methyl 2benzimidazolyl carbamate in/on cherry,
postharvest at 15.0 to cherry, sweet and
cherry, tart at 20.0 ppm, strawberry from
5.0 to 7.0 ppm, and wheat, grain from
0.05 to 0.1 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 the available field trial data
that indicate thiophanate-methyl and
methyl 2-benzimidazolyl carbamate
residues of concern were less than 2.0
ppm in/on apples, less than the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
combined LOQs (<0.1 ppm each) in/on
almond nutmeat and as high as 0.49
ppm in/on almond hulls, <0.1 ppm in/
on pecans and peanut nutmeat, as high
as 0.19 ppm in/on dry beans (as high as
1.43 ppm on snap beans), as high as
2.55 ppm in/on peaches, and less than
0.5 ppm in/on plums, the Agency
determined that established tolerances
should be decreased for apples;
almonds; almond, hulls; dry beans;
peaches; peanuts; peanut hay; pecans;
and plums. Therefore, EPA is decreasing
the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.371(a) for
the combined residues of thiophanatemethyl and methyl 2-benzimidazolyl
carbamate in/on apple, postharvest from
7.0 to 2.0 ppm; almond from 0.2(N) to
0.1 ppm; almond, hulls from 1.0 to 0.5
ppm; dry, beans from 2.0 to 0.2 ppm
and revise the commodity terminology
from bean (snap and dry) to bean, snap,
succulent at 0.2 ppm and bean, dry,
seed at 0.2 ppm; peach, postharvest
from 15.0 to 3.0 ppm; peanut from
0.2(N) to 0.1 ppm; pecans from 0.2 ppm
to 0.1 ppm, and revise the commodity
terminology from plum, postharvest
from 15.0 to 0.5 ppm.
In accordance with 40 CFR 180.1(h),
residues in/on nectarines are covered by
the reassessed tolerance on peaches, and
therefore the tolerance on postharvest
nectarines is no longer needed.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to remove
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371(a) on
nectarine, postharvest.
Based on plum processing data form
plums treated at 10x that show
thiophanate-methyl residues of concern
do not concentrate in prunes, the
Agency determined that the tolerance
on plum, prune, postharvest is no longer
needed since residues in/on prunes
would be covered by the reassessed
tolerance on plum, postharvest at 0.5
ppm. Therefore, EPA is removing the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371(a) on plum,
prune, postharvest.
Based on field trial data that show
thiophanate-methyl residues of concern
in or on dry bulb onions as high as 0.30
ppm, the Agency determined that the
tolerance onion, dry should be
decreased from 3.00 to 0.5 ppm and
residues on garlic are covered by the
bulb onion tolerance in accordance with
40 CFR 180.1(h). EPA is decreasing the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371 for the
combined thiophanate-methyl residues
of concern in/on onion, dry from 3.0 to
0.5 ppm and revising the term to onion,
bulb.
Based upon the HAFT residues of 0.2
ppm in/on soybeans and the observed
6.5X concentration factor for hulls, the
Agency determined that a separate
tolerance should be established on
soybean hulls at 1.5 ppm. Therefore,
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37651
EPA is establishing a tolerance in 40
CFR 180.371(a) for the combined
residues of thiophanate-methyl and
methyl 2-benzimidazolyl carbamate in/
on soybean, hulls at 1.5 ppm.
The available field trial residue data
in/on cucumbers, melons, pumpkins,
and squash are adequate to support a
cucurbit vegetable group 9 tolerance at
1.0 ppm. Because a crop group tolerance
covers all of the cucurbit vegetables,
individual tolerances are no longer
needed. Therefore, EPA is removing the
individual tolerances in 40 CFR
180.371(a) in/on cucumber, melon,
pumpkin, and squash at 1.0 ppm, and
combining them into a crop group
tolerance on vegetable, cucurbit, group
9 at 1.0 ppm.
As discussed in the comments in Unit
II.A., the thiophanate-methyl Residue
Chemistry Chapter and RED included
recommendations that certain tolerances
be designated as postharvest when the
use is not solely postharvest. Therefore,
the term postharvest should be
removed. The Agency has determined
that timings of treatment should not be
included as part of these tolerances
because a tolerance enforcement agency
collecting and analyzing samples
wouldn’t know whether a commodity
bore residues resulting from a seed
treatment. The Agency is revising
commodity terminology to conform to
current Agency practice. Therefore, EPA
is revising tolerances in 40 CFR
180.371(a) as follows: ‘‘Apple,
postharvest’’ to ‘‘apple;’’ ‘‘apricot,
postharvest’’ to ‘‘apricot;’’ ‘‘cherry,
postharvest’’ to ‘‘cherry;’’ ‘‘peach,
postharvest’’ to ‘‘peach;’’ ‘‘plum,
postharvest’’ to ‘‘plum;’’ ‘‘sugar beet,
roots’’ to ‘‘beet, sugar, roots;’’ ‘‘sugar
beet, tops’’ to ‘‘beet, sugar, tops;’’
‘‘soybean’’ to ‘‘soybean, seed;’’
‘‘sugarcane, seed piece treatment PREH’’ to ‘‘sugarcane, cane’’ and in 40 CFR
180.371(b) from ‘‘cotton’’ to ‘‘cotton,
undelinted seed.’’
B. What is the Agency’s Authority for
Taking this Action?
EPA may issue a regulation
establishing, modifying, or revoking a
tolerance under section 408(e) of
FFDCA. 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 followup 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 the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA). The safety
finding determination is found in detail
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
11JYR1
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
37652
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
in each Reregistration Eligibility
Document (RED) and Tolerance
Reassessment Document (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
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
pebulate and thiophanate-methyl and
TREDs for chlorpropham, linuron, and
asulam, which had REDs completed
prior to FQPA. REDs and TREDs contain
the Agency’s evaluation of the data base
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.
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 raw
agricultural commodities, 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 180.6(c)).
effort to harmonize with Codex MRLs is
summarized in the tolerance
reassessment section of individual REDs
and TREDs, and in the Residue
Chemistry document which supports
the RED and TRED, as mentioned in the
proposed rule cited in Unit II.A.
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 their
associated uses 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
section 408(1)(5) of FFDCA, 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 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.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
In this final rule EPA establishes
tolerances under section 408(e) of
FFDCA, and also modifies and revokes
specific tolerances established under
section 408 of FFDCA. 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 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 104–13, 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
establishment of tolerances, exemptions
from tolerances, raising of tolerance
levels, expansion of exemptions, or
revocations might significantly impact a
substantial number of small entities and
concluded that, as a general matter,
III. Are There Any International Trade
Issues Raised by this Final Action?
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international Maximum Residue Limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission, as required
by Section 408(b)(4) of FFDCA. The
Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food
and Agriculture Organization/World
Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an
international food safety standardssetting organization in trade agreements
to which the United States is a party.
EPA may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
section 408(b)(4) of FFDCA requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level in a notice
published for public comment. EPA’s
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
11JYR1
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
these actions do not impose a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. These analyses
for tolerance establishments and
modifications, and for tolerance
revocations were published on May 4,
1981 (46 FR 24950) and on December
17, 1997 (62 FR 66020), respectively,
and were 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. 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 proposed 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’’
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
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., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report 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 2, 2007.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
2. Section 180.181 is amended by
revising the heading and paragraph (a)
to read as follows:
I
§180.181 Chlorpropham; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are
established for residues of the plant
regulator and herbicide chlorpropham
(isopropyl m-chlorocarbanilate (CIPC) in
or on the following food commodities:
Commodity
Potato .............................
Potato, wet peel ..............
Commodity
Cattle, fat ........................
Cattle, kidney ..................
Cattle, meat ....................
Cattle, meat byproducts
except kidney ..............
Goat, fat ..........................
Goat, kidney ...................
Goat, meat ......................
Goat, meat byproducts
except kidney ..............
Hog, fat ...........................
Hog, kidney .....................
Hog, meat .......................
Hog, meat byproducts
except kidney ..............
Horse, fat ........................
Horse, kidney ..................
Horse, meat ....................
Horse, meat byproducts
except kidney ..............
Milk .................................
Sheep, fat .......................
Sheep, kidney .................
Sheep, meat ...................
Sheep, meat byproducts
except kidney ..............
PO 00000
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30
40
Parts per million
0.20
0.30
0.06
0.06
0.20
0.30
0.06
0.06
0.20
0.30
0.06
0.06
0.20
0.30
0.06
0.06
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.06
0.06
*
*
*
*
*
3. Section 180.184, paragraphs (a) and
(c) are revised to read as follows:
I
§180.184
Linuron; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for the combined residues of
the herbicide linuron (3-(3,4dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1methylurea) and its metabolites
convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline,
calculated as linuron, in or on the
following food commodities:
Commodity
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
Parts per million
(2) Tolerances are established for the
combined residues of the plant regulator
and herbicide chlorpropham (isopropyl
m-chlorocarbanilate (CIPC) and its
metabolite 4-hydroxychlorpropham-Osulfonic acid (4-HSA) in or on the
following food commodities:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
I
37653
Asparagus .......................
Carrot, roots ....................
Cattle, fat ........................
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
11JYR1
Parts per million
7.0
1.0
0.2
37654
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Commodity
Parts per million
Cattle, kidney ..................
Cattle, liver ......................
Cattle, meat ....................
Cattle, meat byproducts
except kidney and liver
Celeriac ...........................
Corn, field, forage ...........
Corn, field, grain .............
Corn, field, stover ...........
Corn, sweet, forage ........
Corn, sweet, kernel plus
cob with husks removed .........................
Corn, sweet, stover ........
Cotton, gin byproducts ...
Cotton, undelinted seed
Goat, fat ..........................
Goat, kidney ...................
Goat, liver .......................
Goat, meat ......................
Goat, meat byproducts
except kidney and liver
Hog, fat ...........................
Hog, meat .......................
Hog, meat byproducts ....
Horse, fat ........................
Horse, kidney ..................
Horse, liver .....................
Horse, meat ....................
Horse, meat byproducts
except kidney and liver
Milk .................................
Parsnip, roots .................
Parsnip, tops ...................
Rhubarb ..........................
Sheep, fat .......................
Sheep, kidney .................
Sheep, liver .....................
Sheep, meat ...................
Sheep, meat byproducts
except kidney and liver
Sorghum, grain, forage ...
Sorghum, grain, grain .....
Sorghum, grain, stover ...
Soybean, seed ................
Soybean, vegetable ........
2.0
2.0
0.1
0.1
1.0
1.0
0.1
6.0
1.0
Commodity
Celery .............................
Parsley, leaves ...............
Potato .............................
Wheat, forage .................
Wheat, grain ...................
Wheat, hay .....................
Wheat, straw ...................
*
*
§ 180.238
I
0.25
6.0
5.0
0.25
0.2
2.0
2.0
0.1
bis(carbamate)) and its metabolite
methyl 2-benzimidazoyl carbamate
0.5 (MBC), calculated as thiophanate0.25 methyl in or on the following
0.2 commodities:
Parts per million
*
*
0.5
0.05
0.5
2.0
*
[Removed]
4. Section 180.238 is removed.
§ 180.319
[Amended]
5. Section 180.319 is amended by
removing from the table the entry
isopropyl m-chlorocarbanilate (IPC).
I 6. Section 180.360, paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
I
§ 180.360
Asulam; tolerances for residues.
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.2
2.0
2.0
0.1
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for the combined residues of
asulam (methyl sulfanilylcarbamate)
and its sulfanilamide containing
metabolites in or on the following food
commodities:
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.5
0.2
2.0
2.0
0.1
Cattle, fat ........................
Cattle, meat ....................
Cattle, meat byproducts
Goat, fat ..........................
Goat, meat ......................
Goat, meat byproducts ...
Hog, fat ...........................
Hog, meat .......................
Hog, meat byproducts ....
Horse, fat ........................
Horse, meat ....................
Horse, meat byproducts
Milk .................................
Sheep, fat .......................
Sheep, meat ...................
Sheep, meat byproducts
Sugarcane, cane ............
Sugarcane, molasses .....
0.1
1.0
0.25
1.0
1.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. Tolerances with regional
registrations, as defined in §180.1(m),
are established for the combined
residues of the herbicide linuron (3-(3,4dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1methylurea) and its metabolites
convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline,
calculated as linuron, in or on the
following food commodities:
Commodity
Parts per million
0.05
0.05
0.2
0.05
0.05
0.2
0.05
0.05
0.2
0.05
0.05
0.2
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.2
1.0
30
*
*
*
*
*
7. Section 180.371, paragraphs (a), (b),
and (c) are revised to read as follows:
I
§ 180.371 Thiophanate-methyl; tolerances
for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for the combined residues of
thiophanate-methyl (dimethyl [(1,2phenylene) bis (iminocarbonothioyl)]
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Commodity
Commodity
Almond ............................
Almond, hulls ..................
Apple ...............................
Apricot .............................
Banana ...........................
Bean, dry, seed ..............
Bean, snap, succulent ....
Beet, sugar, roots ...........
Beet, sugar, tops ............
Cattle, fat ........................
Cattle, meat ....................
Cattle, meat byproducts
Cherry, sweet .................
Cherry, tart ......................
Goat, fat ..........................
Goat, meat ......................
Goat, meat byproducts ...
Grape ..............................
Horse, fat ........................
Horse, meat ....................
Horse, meat byproducts
Milk .................................
Onion, bulb .....................
Onion, green ...................
Peach ..............................
Peanut ............................
Peanut, hay ....................
Pear ................................
Pecan ..............................
Pistachio .........................
Plum ................................
Potato .............................
Sheep, fat .......................
Sheep, meat ...................
Sheep, meat byproducts
Soybean, seed ................
Soybean, hulls ................
Strawberry ......................
Sugarcane, cane ............
Vegetable, cucurbit,
group 9 ........................
Wheat, grain ...................
Wheat, hay .....................
Wheat, straw ...................
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Parts per million
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
0.1
0.5
2.0
15.0
2.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
15.0
0.15
0.15
0.15
20.0
20.0
0.15
0.15
0.15
5.0
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.5
3.0
3.0
0.1
5.0
3.0
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.1
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.2
1.5
7.0
0.1
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
Tolerances are established for the
combined residues of thiophanatemethyl (dimethyl [(1,2-phenylene) bis
(iminocarbonothioyl)] bis(carbamate))
and its metabolite methyl 2benzimidazoyl carbamate (MBC),
calculated as thiophanate-methyl in or
on the following commodities:
Blueberry ..................................................................................................................................
Citrus ........................................................................................................................................
Cotton, gin byproducts .............................................................................................................
Cotton, undelinted seed ...........................................................................................................
Mushroom ................................................................................................................................
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8 .....................................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Parts per million
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
1.5
0.5
5.0
0.05
0.01
0.5
11JYR1
Expiration/Revocation Date
6/30/09
6/30/09
12/31/07
12/31/07
12/31/07
12/31/08
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. Tolerances with a regional
registration, as defined in 180.1(m), are
established for the combined residues of
thiophanate-methyl(dimethyl[(1,2phenylene)bis(iminocarbonothioyl)]
bis(carbamate)) and its metabolite
methyl 2-benzimidazoyl carbamate
(MBC), calculated as thiophanatemethyl in or on the following
commodities:
invites the general public to comment
on the information collection
requirements contained in this
document as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13. Public and agency comments are
due September 10, 2007.
Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Room TW–A325, Washington, DC
20554. You may submit your Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) comments by
Parts per
Commodity
electronic mail or U.S. mail. To submit
million
your PRA comments by electronic mail,
Canola, seed ............................
0.1 send comments to: PRA@fcc.gov. To
submit your PRA comments by U.S.
*
*
*
*
*
mail, mark them to the attention of
[FR Doc. E7–13420 Filed 7–10–07; 8:45 am]
Judith B. Herman and address them to
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
the Federal Communications
Commission, Room 1–C804, 445 12th
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean
COMMISSION
Ann Collins, Deputy Chief,
Communications Systems Analysis
47 CFR Part 12
Division, Public Safety and Homeland
[EB Docket No. 06–119; WC Docket No. 06–
Security Bureau, Federal
63; FCC 07–107]
Communications Commission at (202)
418–2792. For additional information
Recommendations of the Independent
concerning the Paperwork Reduction
Panel Reviewing the Impact of
Hurricane Katrina on Communications Act information collection requirements
contained in this document, send an eNetworks
mail to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Judith B.
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Herman at (202) 418–0214.
Commission.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
ACTION: Final rule.
Commission further orders the PSHSB
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal
to report to it on PSHSB’s efforts three
Communications Commission
months from the date of release of this
(Commission or FCC) directs the Public
Order and nine months from the date of
Safety and Homeland Security (PSHSB) release of this Order. This is a summary
to implement several of the
of the Commission’s Order in EB Docket
recommendations made by the
No. 06–119 and WC Docket No. 06–63,
Independent Panel Reviewing the
FCC 07–107, adopted May 31, 2007, and
Impact of Hurricane Katrina on
released June 8, 2007. The complete text
Communications Networks (Katrina
of this document is available for
Panel). The Commission also adopts
inspection and copying during normal
rules requiring some communications
business hours in the FCC Reference
providers to have emergency/back-up
Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th
power and to conduct analyses and
Street, SW., Room CY–A257,
submit reports on the redundancy and
Washington, DC 20554. This document
resiliency of their 911 and E911
may also be purchased from the
networks. Finally, the Commission
Commission’s duplicating contractor,
extended limited regulatory relief from
Best Copy and Printing, Inc., in person
Section 272 of the Communications Act at 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
of 1934, as amended, accorded last year Washington, DC 20554, via telephone at
by the Wireline Competition Bureau
(202) 488–5300, via facsimile at (202)
(WCB).
488–5563, or via e-mail at
DATES: Effective August 10, 2007, except FCC@BCPIWEB.COM. Alternative
formats (computer diskette, large print,
for § 12.3 which contains information
audio cassette, and Braille) are available
collection requirements that have not
to persons with disabilities by sending
been approved by the Office of
an e-mail to FCC504@fcc.gov or calling
Management and Budget (OMB). The
Commission will publish a document in the Consumer and Governmental Affairs
the Federal Register announcing the
Bureau at (202) 418–0530, TTY (202)
effective date of this section. The
418–0432. This document is also
Commission, as part of its continuing
available on the Commission’s Web site
effort to reduce paperwork burdens,
at https://www.fcc.gov.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jul 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37655
Synopsis of the Order
Preparation for Disasters
1. Readiness Checklists. The Katrina
Panel recommended that the
Commission work with and encourage
each industry sector, through their
organizations or associations, to develop
and publicize sector-specific readiness
recommendations. This
recommendation further stated that
‘‘such a checklist should be based upon
relevant industry best practices as set
forth by groups such as the Media
Security and Reliability Council
(‘‘MSRC’’) and the Network Reliability
and Interoperability Council (‘‘NRIC’’).
The Katrina Panel also stated that such
checklists should include: (i)
Developing and implementing business
continuity plans; (ii) conducting
exercises to evaluate business
continuity plans and train personnel;
(iii) developing and practicing a
communications plan to identify ‘‘key
players’’ and multiple means of
contacting them; and (iv) routinely
archiving critical system backups and
providing for their storage in ‘‘secure
off-site’’ facilities.
2. Commenters generally supported
the creation of voluntary sector-based
readiness checklists with input from
industry. Some commenters specifically
encouraged development by industry
trade associations with encouragement
from the Commission. In fact, one such
readiness checklist has already been
developed for the telecommunications
industry by the Alliance for
Telecommunication Industry Solutions
(‘‘ATIS’’) Network Reliability Steering
Committee (‘‘NRSC’’).
3. Testimony before the Katrina Panel
revealed that industry sectors had not
adequately prepared for a disaster of
Hurricane Katrina’s magnitude. We find
that implementation of the Panel’s
recommendations in this area will
improve the security and reliability of
the Nation’s communications
infrastructure. Hence, we direct the
Public Safety & Homeland Security
Bureau to work with the industry to
develop voluntary industry-sector
readiness checklists to ensure that
industry is better prepared for future
disasters and emergencies, including an
influenza pandemic. MSRC and NRIC
best practices and other materials
should serve as a foundation for
developing these checklists. To ensure
that the checklists take into account the
needs of different types of companies,
we direct the Bureau to reach out to a
variety of trade organizations including
those representing small
communications companies. The
Bureau should also publicize and
E:\FR\FM\11JYR1.SGM
11JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 11, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37646-37655]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-13420]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0483; FRL-8131-6]
Chlorpropham, Linuron, Pebulate, Asulam, and Thiophanate-methyl;
Tolerance Actions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is revoking certain tolerances for the herbicides linuron
and pebulate and the fungicide thiophanate-methyl. Also, EPA is
modifying certain tolerances for the herbicides chlorpropham, linuron,
asulam and the fungicide thiophanate-methyl. In addition, EPA is
establishing new tolerances for the herbicides chlorpropham, linuron,
asulam and the fungicide thiophanate-methyl. The regulatory actions in
this document are part of the Agency's reregistration program under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 408(q), as amended
by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
DATES: This regulation is effective July 11, 2007. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 10, 2007,
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-2006-0483. To access the
electronic docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced
Search,'' then ``Docket Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where
indicated and select the ``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on
the regulations.gov web site to view the docket index or access
available documents. All documents in the docket are listed in the
docket index available in regulations.gov. 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: Jane Smith, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-0048; e-mail
address: smith.jane-scott@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.
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-2006-0483 in the
subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be
in writing, and must be
[[Page 37647]]
mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before September 10,
2007.
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-2006-0483, 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 September 20, 2006 (71 FR 54953) (FRL-
8078-2), EPA issued a proposed rule to revoke, remove, modify, and
establish certain tolerances and/or tolerance exemption for residues
for the herbicides chlorpropham, linuron, asulam and pebulate and the
fungicide thiophanate-methyl. Also, the proposal of September 20, 2006
(71 FR 54953) (FRL-8078-2) provided a 60-day comment period which
invited public comment for consideration and for support of tolerance
retention under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
standards.
EPA is revoking, removing, modifying, and establishing specific
tolerances for residues of the herbicides chlorpropham, linuron, asulam
and pebulate and the fungicide thiophanate-methyl in or on commodities
listed in the regulatory text.
EPA is finalizing these tolerance actions in order to implement the
tolerance recommendations made during the reregistration and tolerance
reassessment processes (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 the FQPA. The
safety finding determination of ``reasonable certainty of no harm'' is
found in detail in each Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) and
Report on FQPA Tolerance Reassessment Progress and Interim Risk
Management Decision (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 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: 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. 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 these 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's policy is 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.
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 proposal published in the Federal Register of September
20, 2006 (71 FR 54953) (FRL-8078-2), EPA received two comments during
the 60-day public comment period, as follows:
Comment. A comment was received from a private citizen that
expressed concern with pesticide residues in general and that pesticide
residue levels should be zero. Concern was also expressed for the
number of chemicals found in the bodies of adults and children.
Agency response. The private citizen's comment did not take issue
with the Agency's conclusion that certain tolerances should be revoked,
established and modified. The Agency conducts a detailed risk
assessment to determine whether establishing and/or increasing
tolerances is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
Also, it is EPA's general practice to propose revocation of tolerances
for residues of pesticide active ingredients on crop uses for which
FIFRA registrations no longer exist.
Comment. Cerexagri, Inc. commented that the term postharvest
associated with the tolerances for thiophanate-methyl residues of
concern on apple, apricot, cherry, peach and plum is not appropriate
because the use patterns are based on pre-harvest applications.
Cerexagri, Inc. also took issue with the increase of the tolerance for
thiophanate-methyl residues of concern on canola at 0.1 parts per
million (ppm) to 0.2 ppm. They cited data and analytical methods which
indicate the tolerance increase is not appropriate.
Agency response. The thiophanate-methyl Residue Chemistry Chapter
and RED included recommendations that certain tolerances be designated
as postharvest. The Agency agrees that the uses of thiophanate-methyl
include pre-harvest applications such that the post-harvest designation
is not appropriate.
[[Page 37648]]
Therefore, the Agency has determined that the postharvest designation
should not be linked to the tolerances in the 40 CFR. Therefore, EPA is
removing the references to ``postharvest'' from the tolerances in 40
CFR 180.371. Cerexagri, Inc, also commented on the proposed tolerance
level increase for canola from 0.1 to 0.2 ppm.
Setting the tolerance on canola at 0.2 ppm was recommended in the
thiophanate-methyl RED based on an enforcement method limit of
quantitation (LOQ) of 0.05 ppm. Crexagri believes that the tolerance on
canola should remain at 0.1 ppm, the current tolerance level, based on
an appropriate enforcement method LOQ of 0.025 ppm. The field trial
data showed non-detectable residues of thiophanate-methyl and one
sample with detection equivalent to 0.018 ppm of the metabolite methyl
2-benzimidazolyl carbamate (MBC). Later, Cerexagri submitted an
addendum to the crop field trial data which details an estimation of a
practical limit of detection (LOD) of 0.005 ppm in/on canola seed for
MBC. The Agency believes that a viable LOQ is usually about 3x the
method LOD, and therefore, an LOD would correspond to about a 0.015 ppm
for the method. Consequently, the Agency believes that an LOD of 0.025
ppm is a conservative estimate. Based on the estimated method LOQ for
the metabolite MBC, the Agency agrees that the canola seed tolerance
should remain at 0.1 ppm in 40 CFR 180.371(c).
1. Chlorpropham. A plant commodity tolerance on potato for
chlorpropham is currently regulated for residues of CIPC (isopropyl m-
chlorocarbanilate) and its metabolite 1-hydroxy-2-propyl 3'-
chlorocarbanilate (calculated as CIPC) in 40 CFR 180.181. Because the
regulated metabolite was not detected in potato following treatment
with radiolabelled 14C-chlorpropham, EPA determined that the tolerance
expression for plants should be expressed in terms of chlorpropham per
se. Meanwhile, the current interim milk and livestock tolerances in 40
CFR 180.319 are regulated for isopropyl m-chlorocarbanilate (CIPC)
residues. However, based on available ruminant data that show residues
of chlorpropham and its metabolite 4-hydroxychlorpropham-O-sulfonic
acid (4-HSA) in milk and edible tissues, EPA determined that the
tolerance expression should be expressed in terms of the combined
residues of chlorpropham and 4-hydroxychlorpropham-O-sulfonic acid (4-
HSA) and recodified under 40 CFR 180.181 as permanent tolerances.
Therefore, EPA is recodifying plant tolerances for chlorpropham from 40
CFR 180.181(a) to (a)(1) and regulate the plant regulator and herbicide
chlorpropham (isopropyl m-chlorocarbanilate (CIPC) in plants. Also, EPA
is removing the interim milk and livestock tolerances (meat, fat, and
meat byproducts of cattle, hog, horse, goat, and sheep) for
chlorpropham in 40 CFR 180.319, recodify them as permanent tolerances
in 40 CFR 180.181(a)(2) and regulate tolerances there for the plant
growth regulator and herbicide chlorpropham (isopropyl m-
chlorocarbanilate [CIPC]) and its metabolite 4-hydroxychlorpropham-O-
sulfonic acid (4-HSA).
In addition, based on ruminant feeding data and the calculated
maximum theoretical dietary burden (MTDB) estimates, EPA determined
that tolerances on the meat of cattle, hog, horse, goat, and sheep
should be increased from 0.05 to 0.06 parts per million (ppm), the
limit of quantitation (LOQ). Also, based on exaggerated feeding study
data that showed combined residues of concern in kidney at about 0.3
ppm, the Agency determined that tolerances for kidney of cattle, hog,
horse, goat, and sheep should be separated from their existing meat
byproduct tolerances at 0.05 ppm and increased to 0.30 ppm. Since the
combined residues of concern were shown to be near or below the LOQ
(0.06 ppm), the Agency determined that tolerances for meat byproducts,
except kidney of cattle, hog, horse, goat, and sheep should be
increased from 0.05 to 0.06 ppm. In addition, based on ruminant feeding
data that showed combined residues of concern in fat at 0.17 ppm, the
Agency determined that tolerances for the fat of cattle, hog, horse,
goat, and sheep should be increased from 0.05 to 0.20 ppm. Moreover,
based on ruminant feeding data and the maximum tolerated dietary burden
(MTDB) burden estimates that showed combined residues of concern to be
0.25 ppm, the Agency determined that the tolerance for milk should be
increased from 0.05 to 0.30 ppm. Therefore, EPA is increasing
tolerances in newly recodified 40 CFR 180.181(a)(2) for the combined
residues of chlorpropham and 4-hydroxychlorpropham-O-sulfonic acid (4-
HSA) as follows: Milk from 0.05 to 0.30 ppm; cattle, fat; hog, fat;
horse, fat; goat, fat; and sheep, fat from 0.05 to 0.20 ppm; cattle,
meat; hog, meat; horse, meat; goat, meat; and sheep, meat from 0.05 to
0.06 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts, except kidney; hog, meat byproducts,
except kidney; horse, meat byproducts, except kidney; goat, meat
byproducts, except kidney; and sheep, meat byproducts, except kidney
from 0.05 to 0.06 ppm; and cattle, kidney; hog, kidney; horse, kidney;
goat, kidney; and sheep, kidney from 0.05 to 0.30 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 potato field trial data that show chlorpropham
residues as high as 24 ppm, the Agency determined that the tolerance in
newly recodified 40 CFR 180.181(a)(1) should be decreased from 50 to 30
ppm. The term ``postharvest'' associating these tolerances with the
timing of the use is being removed, since the enforcement Agency would
not know whether a commodity bore residues resulting from postharvest
treatment. Therefore, EPA is decreasing the tolerance in newly
recodified 40 CFR 180.181(a)(1) in or on potato, postharvest from 50 to
30 ppm and revising potato, postharvest to potato.
Based on available potato processing data that demonstrate an
average concentration factor of chlorpropham residues at 3X, and the
highest average field trial (HAFT) whole potato residue of 12.0 ppm,
the Agency determined that residues in the wet potato peel would be 36
ppm; therefore, a tolerance should be established on potato, wet peel
at 40 ppm. (Residues did not concentrate in potato granules, flakes or
chips.) Therefore, EPA is establishing a tolerance in newly recodified
40 CFR 180.181(a)(1) for the chlorpropham residues of concern or on
potato, wet peel at 40 ppm.
2. Linuron. According to the TRED, the tolerance expression, which
is currently expressed as ``residues of the herbicide linuron (3-(3,4-
dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea)'' in 40 CFR 180.184(a) and (c),
should be modified to include metabolites that can be converted to 3,4-
dichloroaniline that are of toxicological concern. Consequently, EPA is
establishing the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 180.184(a) to regulate
the combined residues of the herbicide linuron (3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-
1-methoxy-1-methylurea) and its metabolites convertible to 3,4-
dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron in/on food commodities and in 40
CFR 180.184(c) to regulate the combined residues of the herbicide
linuron (3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea) and its
metabolites convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron
in/on food commodities.
[[Page 37649]]
The feeding of treated soybean forage or hay to livestock is
prohibited as stated on the registration labels and therefore, the
tolerances are no longer needed. Consequently, EPA is revoking the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.184(a) soybean, forage and soybean, hay.
Based on field trial data that indicate linuron residues of concern
in or on field corn stover are as high as 5.5 ppm, the Agency
determined that a tolerance should be 6.0 ppm on corn, field, stover.
The RED indicates a data deficiency for corn, sweet, stover; however,
the field corn stover data can be translated to sweet corn stover,
therefore, the Agency has determined the tolerance for corn, sweet,
stover can be increased from 1.0 to 6.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is
increasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the combined residues
of the herbicide linuron and its metabolites convertible to 3,4-
dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron in or on corn, field, stover and
corn, sweet, stover from 1.0 to 6.0 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.
In order to conform to current Agency practice, EPA is revising the
commodity terminology in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for corn, grain (inc. pop)
at 0.25 ppm into corn, field, grain and corn, pop, grain. However,
because there are no active U.S. registrations for the use of linuron
on popcorn, the tolerance is no longer needed and should be revoked.
Therefore, EPA is revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.184(a) on corn,
pop, grain. In addition, based on field trial data that indicate
linuron residues of concern in or on corn grain as high as 0.06 ppm,
the Agency determined that the corn, field, grain tolerance should be
decreased from 0.25 to 0.1 ppm. Therefore, EPA is decreasing the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the combined residues of the
herbicide linuron and its metabolites convertible to 3,4-
dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron in or on corn, field, grain from
0.25 to 0.1 ppm.
Ruminant feeding data at an exaggerated level (6.9x) show that
linuron residues of concern expected at a 1x feeding level are 0.16 ppm
in fat, 0.07 ppm in meat, 1.9 ppm in liver and kidney, and 0.05 ppm in
milk. Based on these expected residue levels, the Agency determined
that the tolerances for the fat of cattle, goat, horse and sheep should
be decreased from 1.0 to 0.2 ppm; meat tolerances of cattle, goat,
horse and sheep should be decreased from 1.0 to 0.1 ppm; meat byproduct
tolerances of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep should be separated into
tolerances for meat byproducts, except kidney and liver, and decreased
from 1.0 to 0.1 ppm; kidney of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep, which
should be established separately and increased from 1.0 to 2.0 ppm;
liver of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep, which should be established
separately and increased from 1.0 to 2.0 ppm; and a tolerance for milk
should be established at 0.05 ppm. Therefore, EPA is decreasing
tolerances from 1.0 ppm in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the following: Cattle,
fat; goat, fat; horse, fat; and sheep, fat; each to 0.2 ppm; cattle,
meat; cattle, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver; goat, meat;
goat, meat byproducts, except kidney and liver; horse, meat; horse,
meat byproducts, except, kidney and liver; sheep, meat and sheep, meat
byproducts, except kidney and liver; each from 1.0 ppm to 0.1 ppm.
Also, EPA is establishing separate tolerances in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for
the following commodities: Cattle, kidney; cattle, liver; goat, kidney;
goat, liver; horse, kidney; horse, liver; sheep, kidney; and sheep,
liver; each at 2.0 ppm. In addition, EPA is establishing a tolerance in
40 CFR 180.184(a) in milk at 0.05 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 ruminant feeding data and an estimated dietary burden in
swine that is much less than that for beef and dairy cattle, the Agency
calculated likely linuron residues of concern to be less than 0.007 ppm
in hog fat, 0.003 ppm in hog meat, and 0.08 ppm in hog liver and
kidney; therefore, the Agency determined the tolerances should be
decreased to 0.05 ppm, 0.05 ppm and 0.1 ppm for hog fat, hog meat and
hog meat byproducts, respectively. Therefore, EPA is decreasing
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the combined residues of the
herbicide linuron and its metabolites convertible to 3,4-
dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron in or on hog, fat and hog, meat
from 1.0 to 0.05 ppm; and hog, meat byproducts from 1.0 to 0.1 ppm.
Based on field trial data, the Agency determined that linuron
residues of concern were non-detectable (<0.05 ppm) in or on parsnips.
Therefore, EPA is decreasing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the
combined residues of the herbicide linuron and its metabolites
convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron in or on
parsnip (with or without tops) from 0.5 to 0.05 ppm and revising the
commodity terminology to parsnip, roots and parsnip, tops.
Since completion of the Linuron TRED, data deficiencies for cotton
gin byproducts have been adequately addressed. Based on more recent
cotton storage stability and field trial data reflecting all cotton
growing regions of the U.S. submitted in response to the TRED, the
maximum residues of linuron in or on stripper cotton gin byproducts
were 3.32 ppm, the Agency determined that the tolerance should be
established for cotton gin byproducts at 5.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is
establishing a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the combined residues
of the herbicide linuron and its metabolites convertible to 3,4-
dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron in or on cotton, gin byproducts
at 5.0 ppm.
Because use of linuron on potatoes and celery is restricted to east
of the Rocky Mountains, and use on wheat is restricted to the states of
Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, the Agency determined that tolerances on
celery, potato, and the forage, grain, hay and straw of wheat should be
recodified as regional registrations. Also, based on field trial data
that indicate combined linuron residues of concern were nondetectable
(<0.05 ppm) in or on all but one sample (0.07 ppm) of potato,
nondetectable (<0.03 ppm) in or on wheat grain, and as high as 2.0 ppm
in or on wheat straw, the Agency determined that the tolerances should
be decreased from 1.0 to 0.2 ppm on potato and from 0.25 to 0.05 ppm on
wheat, grain, and increased to 0.5 to 2.0 ppm on wheat straw.
Therefore, EPA is recodifying tolerances on celery, potato, and the
forage, grain, hay and straw of wheat from 40 CFR 180.184(a) to (c) for
the combined residues of the herbicide linuron and its metabolites
convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron as follows:
Potato decreased from 1.0 to 0.2 ppm; wheat, grain decreased from 0.25
to 0.05 ppm; and wheat, straw increased from 0.5 to 2.0 ppm and
correcting 180.1(N) to 180.1(M). 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.
Interregional Research Project 4 (IR-4) has submitted
petitions (PP 8E5027 and PP 8E5028) requesting the establishment of
tolerances on celeriac and rhubarb based on use directions and data
translated from carrots and celery, respectively. Based on field trial
data that show linuron residues of concern for carrot samples treated
at 0.75X were as high as 0.56 ppm and celery samples treated at 1X were
as high as 0.42 ppm, the Agency determined that tolerances should be
established at 1.0 ppm on
[[Page 37650]]
celeriac and 0.5 ppm on rhubarb. Therefore, EPA is establishing
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.184(a) for the combined residues of the
herbicide linuron and its metabolites convertible to 3,4-
dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron in or on celeriac at 1.0 ppm and
rhubarb at 0.5 ppm.
Although additional data are anticipated in 2007 in response to the
TRED, tolerances associated with sorghum and sweet corn have been
reassessed at the current tolerance levels. The Agency determined that
the tolerances are safe; i.e. there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residues. EPA is maintaining the tolerance level and revising the
commodity terminology in 40 CFR 180.184(a) to conform to current Agency
practice as follows: ``Sorghum, forage'' to ``sorghum, grain, forage''
at 1.0 ppm; ``corn, fresh (inc. sweet, kernel plus cob with husks
removed)'' to ``corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed'' at
0.25 ppm; and splitting ``soybean, (dry or succulent)'' to separate
tolerances fo ``soybean, seed'' and ``soybean, vegetable'' both at 1.0
ppm.
3. Pebulate. The last U.S. registration was cancelled October 24,
2003 due to non-payment of registration fees and a notice was published
in the Federal Register on November 6, 2003 (68 FR 62785, FRL-7331-3).
Therefore, tolerances are no longer needed and EPA is revoking the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.238 for residues of pebulate (S-propyl
butylethylthiocarbamate) in or on beet, sugar roots; beet sugar, tops;
and tomato.
4. Asulam. The tolerance expression in 40 CFR 180.360 currently
regulates asulam (methyl sulfanilylcarbamate) per se. The Agency
recommended in the asulam TRED that the tolerance expression be revised
to include metabolites containing the sulfanilamide moiety because in
the absence of toxicological data the Agency assumed these compounds to
be potentially comparable in toxicity to the parent compound, asulam.
Therefore, EPA is revising the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 180.360
to read as follows: ``(a) General. Tolerances are established for the
combined residues of asulam (methyl sulfanilylcarbamate) and its
metabolites containing the sulfanilamide moiety in or on the following
food commodities.''
Based on field trial data that showed asulam residues of concern as
high as 0.23 ppm and a correction for a 70% loss of residues during
storage, the Agency calculated that the maximum residue should be 0.71
ppm, and determined that the tolerance on sugarcane should be increased
form 0.1 to 1.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is increasing the tolerance in 40
CFR 180.360(a) for the combined residues of asulam and its metabolites
containing the sulfanilamide moiety in or on sugarcane, cane from
0.1(N) to 1.0 ppm. The Agency is removing the ``N'' (negligible
residues) to conform to current Agency Administrative practice. 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 sugarcane processing data that show an average
concentration factor of asulam residues at 48x and a HAFT residue value
that when corrected for a 70% loss in storage is expected to be 0.557
ppm (0.167 ppm/0.3), the Agency calculated that the residues would be
about 26.7 ppm and determined a tolerance should be established for
sugarcane molasses at 30 ppm. Therefore, EPA is establishing a
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.360(a) for the combined residues of asulam and
its metabolites containing the sulfanilamide moiety in or on sugarcane,
molasses at 30 ppm.
Based on a 1.2x exaggerated feeding study, animal metabolism data
and a ruminant diet containing 10% molasses (a livestock feed item),
the Agency determined that because the anticipated residues of asulam
and sulfanilamide containing metabolites in milk are <0.025 ppm, in/on
fat, liver, and muscle are <0.05 ppm, and kidney is 0.12 ppm, that
tolerances should be established in milk, and on the fat and meat of
cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep at 0.05 ppm, and meat byproducts
of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep at 0.2 ppm. Therefore, EPA is
establishing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.360(a) for the combined residues
of asulam and its metabolites containing the sulfanilamide moiety in/on
commodities, as follows: Cattle, fat; goat, fat; hog, fat; horse, fat;
and sheep, fat; cattle, meat; goat, meat; hog, meat; horse, meat; and
sheep, meat at 0.05 ppm; and cattle, meat byproducts; goat, meat
byproducts; hog, meat byproducts; horse, meat byproducts; and sheep,
meat byproducts at 0.2 ppm; and milk at 0.05 ppm.
5. Thiophanate-methyl. Currently, the tolerances for thiophanate-
methyl are expressed in 40 CFR 180.371(a) in terms of thiophanate-
methyl(dimethyl regulates thiophanate-methyl and its oxygen analogue
dimethyl-4,4-o-phenylenebis(allophonate), and its benzimidazole-
containing metabolites (calculated as thiophanate-methyl); and in 40
CFR 180.371(b) and (c) in terms of thiophanate-methyl and its
metabolite (methyl 2-benzimidazoyl carbamate (MBC)). The Agency has
determined that the residues of concern for plant and animal
commodities for tolerance enforcement consists of the parent and its
metabolite methyl 2-benzimidazolyl carbamate (MBC). Therefore, EPA is
amending the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 180.371(a), (b), and (c) so
as to regulate tolerances for the combined residues of thiophanate-
methyl (dimethyl[(1,2-phenylene) bis(iminocarbonothioyl)]
bis(carbamate)) and its metabolite methyl 2-benzimidazoyl carbamate
(MBC), calculated as thiophanate-methyl in/on food commodities.
EPA no longer considers dry apple pomace, banana pulp, and bean
forage and hay, and peanut forage to be significant animal feed items
and tolerances are no longer needed (A listing of significant food and
feed commodities is found in ``Table 1.--Raw Agricultural and Processed
Commodities and Feedstuffs Derived from Crops'' which is found in
Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines OPPTS 860.1000 dated August 1996,
available athttps://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/
860_Residue_Chemistry_Test_Guidelines/Series/). Currently, there is
a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371 on peanut (forage and hay). Based on
field trial data that show thiophanate-methyl residues of concern as
high as 3.76 ppm, the Agency has determined that the tolerance on
peanut hay should be decreased from 15.0 to 5.0 ppm. In addition,
thiophanate-methyl registrations were approved by EPA to be amended to
delete use on celery by request of the registrant in 1997 (62 FR 67365,
FRL-5761-8). Therefore, EPA is revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.371(a) on apple, dry pomace; banana, pulp; bean (forage and hay),
and celery, and revise the commodity terminology from peanut (forage
and hay) into separate tolerance for peanut, forage and peanut, hay,
and revoke peanut forage, and decrease peanut, hay from 15.0 to 5.0
ppm.
Based on available exaggerated (10x) poultry feeding data, EPA
determined that there is no reasonable expectation of finite
thiophanate-methyl residues of concern in poultry commodities and
therefore, the tolerance for egg (the only existing poultry commodity
tolerance) is no longer needed under 40 CFR 180.6(a)(3). Therefore, EPA
is revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371 for egg.
Based on the available ruminant feeding study, the Agency
determined that the thiophanate-methyl residues of
[[Page 37651]]
concern in milk and animal tissues were at the combined limit of
quantitations (LOQs) of 0.05 ppm. Therefore, the tolerances for the
milk and fat, meat and meat byproducts of cattle, goat, horse, and
sheep should be increased to 0.15 ppm. Since the tolerance should be
0.15 ppm for all meat byproducts which includes liver and kidney
tissues, the tolerances should be revised from ``meat byproducts,
except liver and kidney'' to ``meat byproducts'' and the tolerances for
``horse, liver'' and ``cattle, goat, and sheep liver and kidney''
should be removed. Further, the Agency is removing the ``(N)''
(negligible residues) designation to conform to current Agency
administrative practice. Therefore, EPA is increasing the tolerances in
40 CFR 180.371 for the combined residues of thiophanate-methyl and
methyl 2-benzimidazolyl carbamate in or on milk from 0.1 to 0.15 ppm;
cattle, goats, horses, and sheep meat and fat from 0.1(N) to 0.15 ppm;
revising ``cattle, goats, and sheep meat byproducts, except liver and
kidney at 0.1(N)'' and ``horse, meat byproducts, except liver at
0.1(N)'' to ``cattle, goats, horses, and sheep meat byproducts at 0.15
ppm''; and removing cattle, goats, and sheep liver each at 2.5 ppm;
horse, liver at 1.0 ppm; cattle, kidney at 0.2(N) ppm; and goat and
sheep kidney each at 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.
Based on field trial data that show thiophanate-methyl residues of
concern as high as 16.25 ppm in/on tart and sweet cherries, 6.22 ppm on
strawberries, less than the LOQ (<0.1 ppm) on wheat, the Agency
determined that the tolerances should be increased on cherries from
15.0 to 20.0, on strawberries from 5.0 to 7.0 ppm, and on wheat, grain
from 0.05 to 0.1 ppm. Therefore, EPA is increasing and revising the
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.371(a) for the combined residues of
thiophanate-methyl and methyl 2-benzimidazolyl carbamate in/on cherry,
postharvest at 15.0 to cherry, sweet and cherry, tart at 20.0 ppm,
strawberry from 5.0 to 7.0 ppm, and wheat, grain from 0.05 to 0.1 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 the available field trial data that indicate thiophanate-
methyl and methyl 2-benzimidazolyl carbamate residues of concern were
less than 2.0 ppm in/on apples, less than the combined LOQs (<0.1 ppm
each) in/on almond nutmeat and as high as 0.49 ppm in/on almond hulls,
<0.1 ppm in/on pecans and peanut nutmeat, as high as 0.19 ppm in/on dry
beans (as high as 1.43 ppm on snap beans), as high as 2.55 ppm in/on
peaches, and less than 0.5 ppm in/on plums, the Agency determined that
established tolerances should be decreased for apples; almonds; almond,
hulls; dry beans; peaches; peanuts; peanut hay; pecans; and plums.
Therefore, EPA is decreasing the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.371(a) for
the combined residues of thiophanate-methyl and methyl 2-benzimidazolyl
carbamate in/on apple, postharvest from 7.0 to 2.0 ppm; almond from
0.2(N) to 0.1 ppm; almond, hulls from 1.0 to 0.5 ppm; dry, beans from
2.0 to 0.2 ppm and revise the commodity terminology from bean (snap and
dry) to bean, snap, succulent at 0.2 ppm and bean, dry, seed at 0.2
ppm; peach, postharvest from 15.0 to 3.0 ppm; peanut from 0.2(N) to 0.1
ppm; pecans from 0.2 ppm to 0.1 ppm, and revise the commodity
terminology from plum, postharvest from 15.0 to 0.5 ppm.
In accordance with 40 CFR 180.1(h), residues in/on nectarines are
covered by the reassessed tolerance on peaches, and therefore the
tolerance on postharvest nectarines is no longer needed. Therefore, EPA
is proposing to remove the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371(a) on nectarine,
postharvest.
Based on plum processing data form plums treated at 10x that show
thiophanate-methyl residues of concern do not concentrate in prunes,
the Agency determined that the tolerance on plum, prune, postharvest is
no longer needed since residues in/on prunes would be covered by the
reassessed tolerance on plum, postharvest at 0.5 ppm. Therefore, EPA is
removing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371(a) on plum, prune,
postharvest.
Based on field trial data that show thiophanate-methyl residues of
concern in or on dry bulb onions as high as 0.30 ppm, the Agency
determined that the tolerance onion, dry should be decreased from 3.00
to 0.5 ppm and residues on garlic are covered by the bulb onion
tolerance in accordance with 40 CFR 180.1(h). EPA is decreasing the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371 for the combined thiophanate-methyl
residues of concern in/on onion, dry from 3.0 to 0.5 ppm and revising
the term to onion, bulb.
Based upon the HAFT residues of 0.2 ppm in/on soybeans and the
observed 6.5X concentration factor for hulls, the Agency determined
that a separate tolerance should be established on soybean hulls at 1.5
ppm. Therefore, EPA is establishing a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371(a)
for the combined residues of thiophanate-methyl and methyl 2-
benzimidazolyl carbamate in/on soybean, hulls at 1.5 ppm.
The available field trial residue data in/on cucumbers, melons,
pumpkins, and squash are adequate to support a cucurbit vegetable group
9 tolerance at 1.0 ppm. Because a crop group tolerance covers all of
the cucurbit vegetables, individual tolerances are no longer needed.
Therefore, EPA is removing the individual tolerances in 40 CFR
180.371(a) in/on cucumber, melon, pumpkin, and squash at 1.0 ppm, and
combining them into a crop group tolerance on vegetable, cucurbit,
group 9 at 1.0 ppm.
As discussed in the comments in Unit II.A., the thiophanate-methyl
Residue Chemistry Chapter and RED included recommendations that certain
tolerances be designated as postharvest when the use is not solely
postharvest. Therefore, the term postharvest should be removed. The
Agency has determined that timings of treatment should not be included
as part of these tolerances because a tolerance enforcement agency
collecting and analyzing samples wouldn't know whether a commodity bore
residues resulting from a seed treatment. The Agency is revising
commodity terminology to conform to current Agency practice. Therefore,
EPA is revising tolerances in 40 CFR 180.371(a) as follows: ``Apple,
postharvest'' to ``apple;'' ``apricot, postharvest'' to ``apricot;''
``cherry, postharvest'' to ``cherry;'' ``peach, postharvest'' to
``peach;'' ``plum, postharvest'' to ``plum;'' ``sugar beet, roots'' to
``beet, sugar, roots;'' ``sugar beet, tops'' to ``beet, sugar, tops;''
``soybean'' to ``soybean, seed;'' ``sugarcane, seed piece treatment
PRE-H'' to ``sugarcane, cane'' and in 40 CFR 180.371(b) from ``cotton''
to ``cotton, undelinted seed.''
B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?
EPA may issue a regulation establishing, modifying, or revoking a
tolerance under section 408(e) of FFDCA. 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
the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). The safety finding
determination is found in detail
[[Page 37652]]
in each Reregistration Eligibility Document (RED) and Tolerance
Reassessment Document (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 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 pebulate and thiophanate-methyl
and TREDs for chlorpropham, linuron, and asulam, which had REDs
completed prior to FQPA. REDs and TREDs contain the Agency's evaluation
of the data base 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. 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 raw
agricultural commodities, 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 180.6(c)).
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 their associated uses 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 section 408(1)(5) of FFDCA, 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 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.
III. Are There Any International Trade Issues Raised by this Final
Action?
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, as required by Section 408(b)(4)
of FFDCA. The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it
is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party.
EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL;
however, section 408(b)(4) of FFDCA requires that EPA explain the
reasons for departing from the Codex level in a notice published for
public comment. EPA's effort to harmonize with Codex MRLs is summarized
in the tolerance reassessment section of individual REDs and TREDs, and
in the Residue Chemistry document which supports the RED and TRED, as
mentioned in the proposed rule cited in Unit II.A.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
In this final rule EPA establishes tolerances under section 408(e)
of FFDCA, and also modifies and revokes specific tolerances established
under section 408 of FFDCA. 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 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 104-13, 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 establishment of
tolerances, exemptions from tolerances, raising of tolerance levels,
expansion of exemptions, or revocations might significantly impact a
substantial number of small entities and concluded that, as a general
matter,
[[Page 37653]]
these actions do not impose a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. These analyses for tolerance
establishments and modifications, and for tolerance revocations were
published on May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950) and on December 17, 1997 (62 FR
66020), respectively, and were 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. 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 proposed 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., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report 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 2, 2007.
Debra Edwards,
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.
0
2. Section 180.181 is amended by revising the heading and paragraph (a)
to read as follows:
Sec. 180.181 Chlorpropham; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of the
plant regulator and herbicide chlorpropham (isopropyl m-
chlorocarbanilate (CIPC) in or on the following food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potato............................................... 30
Potato, wet peel..................................... 40
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Tolerances are established for the combined residues of the
plant regulator and herbicide chlorpropham (isopropyl m-
chlorocarbanilate (CIPC) and its metabolite 4-hydroxychlorpropham-O-
sulfonic acid (4-HSA) in or on the following food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, fat.......................................... 0.20
Cattle, kidney....................................... 0.30
Cattle, meat......................................... 0.06
Cattle, meat byproducts except kidney................ 0.06
Goat, fat............................................ 0.20
Goat, kidney......................................... 0.30
Goat, meat........................................... 0.06
Goat, meat byproducts except kidney.................. 0.06
Hog, fat............................................. 0.20
Hog, kidney.......................................... 0.30
Hog, meat............................................ 0.06
Hog, meat byproducts except kidney................... 0.06
Horse, fat........................................... 0.20
Horse, kidney........................................ 0.30
Horse, meat.......................................... 0.06
Horse, meat byproducts except kidney................. 0.06
Milk................................................. 0.30
Sheep, fat........................................... 0.20
Sheep, kidney........................................ 0.30
Sheep, meat.......................................... 0.06
Sheep, meat byproducts except kidney................. 0.06
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
3. Section 180.184, paragraphs (a) and (c) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 180.184 Linuron; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for the combined residues
of the herbicide linuron (3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-
methylurea) and its metabolites convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline,
calculated as linuron, in or on the following food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asparagus............................................ 7.0
Carrot, roots........................................ 1.0
Cattle, fat.......................................... 0.2
[[Page 37654]]
Cattle, kidney....................................... 2.0
Cattle, liver........................................ 2.0
Cattle, meat......................................... 0.1
Cattle, meat byproducts except kidney and liver...... 0.1
Celeriac............................................. 1.0
Corn, field, forage.................................. 1.0
Corn, field, grain................................... 0.1
Corn, field, stover.................................. 6.0
Corn, sweet, forage.................................. 1.0
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed...... 0.25
Corn, sweet, stover.................................. 6.0
Cotton, gin byproducts............................... 5.0
Cotton, undelinted seed.............................. 0.25
Goat, fat............................................ 0.2
Goat, kidney......................................... 2.0
Goat, liver.......................................... 2.0
Goat, meat........................................... 0.1
Goat, meat byproducts except kidney and liver........ 0.1
Hog, fat............................................. 0.05
Hog, meat............................................ 0.05
Hog, meat byproducts................................. 0.1
Horse, fat........................................... 0.2
Horse, kidney........................................ 2.0
Horse, liver......................................... 2.0
Horse, meat.......................................... 0.1
Horse, meat byproducts except kidney and liver....... 0.1
Milk................................................. 0.05
Parsnip, roots....................................... 0.05
Parsnip, tops........................................ 0.05
Rhubarb.............................................. 0.5
Sheep, fat........................................... 0.2
Sheep, kidney........................................ 2.0
Sheep, liver......................................... 2.0
Sheep, meat.......................................... 0.1
Sheep, meat byproducts except kidney and liver....... 0.1
Sorghum, grain, forage............................... 1.0
Sorghum, grain, grain................................ 0.25
Sorghum, grain, stover............................... 1.0
Soybean, seed........................................ 1.0
Soybean, vegetable................................... 1.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. Tolerances with
regional registrations, as defined in Sec. 180.1(m), are established
for the combined residues of the herbicide linuron (3-(3,4-
dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea) and its metabolites convertible
to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as linuron, in or on the following
food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Celery............................................... 0.5
Parsley, leaves...................................... 0.25
Potato............................................... 0.2
Wheat, forage........................................ 0.5
Wheat, grain......................................... 0.05
Wheat, hay........................................... 0.5
Wheat, straw......................................... 2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sec. 180.238 [Removed]
0
4. Section 180.238 is removed.
Sec. 180.319 [Amended]
0
5. Section 180.319 is amended by removing from the table the entry
isopropyl m-chlorocarbanilate (IPC).
0
6. Section 180.360, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 180.360 Asulam; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for the combined residues
of asulam (methyl sulfanilylcarbamate) and its sulfanilamide containing
metabolites in or on the following food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, fat.......................................... 0.05
Cattle, meat......................................... 0.05
Cattle, meat byproducts.............................. 0.2