Acephate, Chlorpyrifos, Fenbutatin-Oxide (Hexakis), Metolachlor, MCPA, Pyrethrins and Triallate; Proposed Tolerance Actions, 44439-44451 [E7-15336]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 8, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44439-44451]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15336]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0445; FRL-8138-8]


Acephate, Chlorpyrifos, Fenbutatin-Oxide (Hexakis), Metolachlor, 
MCPA, Pyrethrins and Triallate; Proposed Tolerance Actions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to revoke certain tolerances for the 
herbicide metolachlor, and the insecticides acephate, chlorpyrifos, and 
pyrethrins. Also, EPA is proposing to modify certain tolerances for the 
herbicide metolachlor, and the insecticides acephate, chlorpyrifos, and 
pyrethrins. In addition, EPA is proposing to establish new tolerances 
for the herbicides metolachlor, MCPA, and triallate, and the 
insecticides chlorpyrifos, fenbutatin-oxide (hexakis), and pyrethrins. 
The regulatory actions proposed in this document are in follow-up to 
the Agency's reregistration program under the Federal Insecticide, 
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and tolerance reassessment 
program under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 
408(q).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 9, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification 
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0445, 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.
     Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number 
EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0445. EPA's policy is that all comments received will 
be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-
line at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, 
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part 
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the 
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you 
include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
     Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
docket index available in regulations.gov. 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. Although listed in the index, some information is not 
publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available 
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either 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 hours of operation of this 
Docket Facility are 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

[[Page 44440]]

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).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    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. To determine 
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should 
carefully examine the applicability provisions in Unit II.A. 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. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through 
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or 
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as 
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying 
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to 
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and 
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information 
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and 
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of 
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

C. What Can I do if I Wish the Agency to Maintain a Tolerance that the 
Agency Proposes to Revoke?

    This proposed rule provides a comment period of 60 days for any 
person to state an interest in retaining a tolerance proposed for 
revocation. If EPA receives a comment within the 60-day period to that 
effect, EPA will not proceed to revoke the tolerance immediately. 
However, EPA will take steps to ensure the submission of any needed 
supporting data and will issue an order in the Federal Register under 
FFDCA section 408(f) if needed. The order would specify data needed and 
the time frames for its submission, and would require that within 90 
days some person or persons notify EPA that they will submit the data. 
If the data are not submitted as required in the order, EPA will take 
appropriate action under FFDCA.
    EPA issues a final rule after considering comments that are 
submitted in response to this proposed rule. In addition to submitting 
comments in response to this proposal, you may also submit an objection 
at the time of the final rule. If you fail to file an objection to the 
final rule within the time period specified, you will have waived the 
right to raise any issues resolved in the final rule. After the 
specified time, issues resolved in the final rule cannot be raised 
again in any subsequent proceedings.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is proposing to revoke, remove, modify, and establish specific 
tolerances for residues of the acephate, chlorpyrifos, fenbutatin-
oxide, metolachlor, MCPA, pyrethrins, and triallate in or on 
commodities listed in the regulatory text.
    EPA is proposing these tolerance actions 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 these processes, EPA is required to 
determine whether each of the amended tolerances meets the safety 
standard of FFDCA. The safety finding determination of ``reasonable 
certainty of no harm'' is discussed in detail in each Reregistration 
Eligibility Decision (RED) and Report of the Food Quality Protection 
Act (FQPA) Tolerance Reassessment Progress and Risk Management Decision 
(TRED) for the active ingredient. REDs and TREDs recommend the 
implementation of certain tolerance actions, including modifications to 
reflect current use patterns, meet safety findings, and change 
commodity names and groupings in accordance with new EPA policy. 
Printed copies of many 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 1-00-490-9198; 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 and in the public dockets EPA-HQ-OPP-
2007-0445 or for EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0154 (fenbutatin-oxide/hexakis), EPA-
HQ-OPP-2002-0223 (metolachlor), EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0156 (MCPA), and EPA-
HQ-OPP-2005-0043 (pyrethrins), EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0586 (triallate) at 
https://www.regulations.gov and at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
reregistration/status.htm.
    The selection of an individual tolerance level is based on crop 
field residue studies designed to produce the maximum residues under 
the existing or proposed product label. Generally, the level selected 
for a tolerance is a value slightly above the maximum residue found in 
such studies, provided that the tolerance is safe. The evaluation of

[[Page 44441]]

whether a tolerance is safe is a separate inquiry. EPA recommends the 
raising of a tolerance when data show that:
    1. Lawful use (sometimes through a label change) may result in a 
higher residue level on the commodity; and
    2. The tolerance remains safe, notwithstanding increased residue 
level allowed under the tolerance.
 In REDs, Chapter IV on ``Risk management, Reregistration, and 
Tolerance reassessment'' typically describes the regulatory position, 
FQPA assessment, cumulative safety determination, determination of 
safety for U.S. general population, and safety for infants and 
children. In particular, the human health risk assessment document 
which supports the RED describes risk exposure estimates and whether 
the Agency has concerns. In TREDs, the Agency discusses its evaluation 
of the dietary risk associated with the active ingredient and whether 
it can determine that there is a reasonable certainty (with appropriate 
mitigation) that no harm to any population subgroup will result from 
aggregate exposure. EPA also seeks to harmonize tolerances with 
international standards set by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, as 
described in Unit III.
    Explanations for proposed modifications in tolerances can be found 
in the RED and TRED document and in more detail in the Residue 
Chemistry Chapter document which supports the RED and TRED. Copies of 
the Residue Chemistry Chapter documents are found in the Administrative 
Record and EPA's electronic copies are available through EPA's 
electronic public docket and comment system, regulations.gov at https://
www.regulations.gov You may search for docket number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-
0445 and also EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0154 (fenbutatin-oxide/hexakis), EPAHQ-
OPP-2002-0223 (metolachlor), EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0156 (MCPA), and EPA-HQ-
OPP-2005-0043 (pyrethrins), EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0586 (triallate), then 
click on that docket number to view its contents.
    EPA has determined that the aggregate exposures and risks are not 
of concern for the above mentioned pesticide active ingredients based 
upon the data identified in the RED or TRED which lists the submitted 
studies that the Agency found acceptable.
    EPA has found that the tolerances that are proposed in this 
document to be modified, are safe; i.e., that there is a reasonable 
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from 
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residues, in accordance 
with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C). (Note that changes to tolerance 
nomenclature do not constitute modifications of tolerances). These 
findings are discussed in detail in each RED or TRED. The references 
are available for inspection as described in this document under 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    In addition, EPA is proposing to revoke certain specific tolerances 
because either they are no longer needed or are associated with food 
uses that are no longer registered under FIFRA. Those instances where 
registrations were canceled were because the registrant failed to pay 
the required maintenance fee and/or the registrant voluntarily 
requested cancellation of one or more registered uses of the pesticide. 
It is EPA's general practice to propose revocation of those tolerances 
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 to cover 
residues in or on imported commodities or domestic commodities legally 
treated.
    1. Acephate. Tolerances for residues of acephate in/on plant and 
animal commodities in 40 CFR 180.108 are currently expressed in terms 
of the combined residues of acephate and methamidophos (O,S-
dimethylphosphura-midothioate). Although the available plant and animal 
metabolism studies indicate that the residues of concern are acephate 
and methamidophos, the Agency has determined that acephate tolerances 
should be expressed in terms of acephate per se for permanent and 
regional tolerances because residues of methamidophos (O,S-
dimethylphosphura-midothioate) resulting from acephate applications are 
regulated under 40 CFR 180.315 and this change also provides 
compatibility between the EPA and CODEX in terms of the residue 
definition for acephate. Since the tolerance expression is being 
revised to acephate per se, the terminology ``of which no more than 1 
part per million (ppm) or 0.5 ppm is O,S-dimethyl 
acetylphosphoramidothioate'' associated with certain tolerances is no 
longer needed in 40 CFR 180.108. Lastly, for clarity, the Agency 
determined a footnote is necessary stating that residues of the 
acephate metabolite, methamidophos, are regulated under 40 CFR part 
180.315. Therefore, the Agency proposes revising the residues for 
regulation in 40 CFR part180.108(a)(1), (a)(2) and (c) from ``acephate 
(O,S-dimethyl acetylphosphoramidothioate) and its cholinesterase-
inhibiting metabolite O,S-dimethylphosphura-midothioate'' to ``acephate 
per se (O,S-dimethyl acetylphosphoramidothioate)'' and remove the 
terminology ``of which no more than 1 ppm, 0.5 ppm, or 0.1 ppm is O,S-
dimethyl acetylphosphoramidothioate'' from the tolerances on bean 
(succulent and dry form), Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, celery, 
cranberry, lettuce, mint hay, and pepper and adding in 40 CFR 
180.108(a)(1) a footnote. 1Residues of the acephate 
metabolite, methamidophos, are regulated under 40 CFR 180.315.
    Based on the available field trial data that indicate residues of 
acephate average 0.16 ppm in or on cottonseed and 0.32 ppm in/on 
cottonseed meal (concentration factor 2x) and hulls (4x), the Agency 
determined that the tolerances should be decreased to 0.5 ppm in/on 
cottonseed and 1.0 ppm in/on cottonseed hulls and cottonseed meal. 
Based on the available field trial data that indicate residues of 
acephate average 9.5 ppm in/on mint, the Agency determined that the 
tolerance should be increased to 27 ppm in/on mint hay. EPA is also 
revising commodity terminology to conform to current Agency practice. 
Therefore, EPA proposes decreasing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.108(a)(1) 
for residues of acephate per se in/on cotton, undelinted seed from 2 to 
0.5 ppm; cotton, hulls from 4 to 1.0 ppm; cotton, meal from 8 to 1.0 
ppm; increasing the tolerance in/on mint, hay from 15.0 to 27 ppm; and 
revising mint, hay to peppermint, tops and spearmint, tops. 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 the reevaluation of the soybean processing data that 
indicate residues of acephate do not concentrate and will not exceed 
the tolerance on soybeans, the Agency has determined that a separate 
tolerance is not needed on soybean meal. Therefore, EPA proposes 
revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.108(a)(1) for the residues of 
acephate per se in/on soybean, meal at 4 ppm.
    EPA is revising commodity terminology to conform to current Agency 
practice and removing the term ``additive'' because pesticides are no 
longer defined as food additives in FFDCA. Therefore, the Agency 
proposes revising tolerances in 40 CFR 180.108(a)(1) from bean 
(succulent and dry form) to bean, dry, seed and bean, succulent; and 
soybean to soybean, seed; in 40 CFR 180.108(a)(2) delete the

[[Page 44442]]

term ``additive''; in 40 CFR 180.108(c) from macadamia nut to nut, 
macadamia and correcting 180.1(n) to 180.1(m).
    The proposed tolerance actions herein for acephate, to implement 
the recommendations of the acephate TRED will result in harmonized 
residues for regulation between the U. S. and Codex.
    2. Chlorpyrifos. Based on available field trial data that indicate 
residues of chlorpyrifos are less than the level of detection (0.01 
ppm) in/on apples, and less than 0.05 ppm in/on corn, the Agency 
determined that the tolerances should be decreased to 0.01 ppm in/on 
apple and 0.05 ppm in/on corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks 
removed. Based on the available processing data that indicate residues 
of chlorpyrifos concentrate in corn oil by a factor of 3.3x, the Agency 
has determined the tolerance in/on refined corn oil should be decreased 
to 0.25 ppm. Based on revisions for calculating processed food 
tolerances, the Agency has determined the tolerance in/on citrus oil 
should be decreased from 25 ppm to 20 ppm. Based on available field 
trial data that indicate residues of chlorpyrifos are less than 0.5 ppm 
in/on sorghum forage and grain; less than 2.0 ppm in/on sorghum stover 
and less than 1.0 ppm in/on sunflower seeds, the Agency determined that 
the tolerances should be decreased to 0.5 ppm in/on sorghum forage; 0.5 
ppm in/on sorghum, grain, grain; 2.0 ppm in/on sorghum, grain, stover; 
and 0.1 ppm in/on sunflower, seed. The Agency is also revising 
commodity terminology to conform to current Agency practice. Therefore, 
EPA proposes decreasing the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.342(a)(1) for the 
combined chlorpyrifos residues of concern in/on apple from 1.5 to 0.01 
ppm; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed from 0.1 to 0.05 
ppm; corn, field, refined oil from 3.0 to 0.25 ppm; citrus, oil from 
25.0 to 20 ppm; sorghum, forage from 1.5 to 0.5 ppm; sorghum, grain, 
grain from 0.75 to 0.50 ppm; sorghum, grain, stover from 6.0 to 2.0 ppm 
and sunflower, seed from 0.25 to 0.1 ppm; and revise sorghum, forage to 
sorghum, grain, forage.
    Because there are currently no active registrations for uses of 
chlorpyrifos in/on blueberries and tomatoes, the Agency determined that 
the tolerances in/on blueberry and tomato are no longer needed. The 
Agency is revising commodity terminology to conform to current Agency 
practice. Therefore, EPA proposes revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.342(a)(1) for the combined chlorpyrifos residues of concern in/on 
blueberry at 2 ppm (of which no more than 1 ppm is chlorpyrifos) and 
tomato at 0.5 ppm; and revising fruit, citrus to fruit, citrus, group 
10; and onion, dry bulb to onion, bulb.
    Based on available field trial data that indicate average residues 
of chlorpyrifos at 0.11 ppm and a concentration factor of 1.7x in/on 
peanut oil, the Agency determined that the tolerance in/on peanut oil 
should be decreased to 0.2 ppm and revise the tolerance to conform to 
current Agency commodity terminology. Therefore, EPA proposes 
decreasing and revising the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.342(a)(2) for 
chlorpyrifos per se residues of concern in/on peanut, oil from 0.4 to 
peanut, refined oil at 0.2 ppm.
    Based on revisions for calculating processed food tolerances, the 
Agency has determined the tolerance in/on wheat milling fractions will 
be covered by the current wheat, grain tolerance of 0.5 ppm; therefore, 
the tolerance in/on ``milling fractions (except flour) of wheat'' are 
no longer needed. Because the grazing of livestock and feeding of 
soybean forage and hay to livestock is prohibited for foliar type 
applications to soybeans, the Agency determined that the tolerance for 
soybean forage is no longer needed. Banana pulp is no longer regulated 
as a commodity in accordance with 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 at https://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS Harmonized/
860 Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines/Series; consequently, the Agency 
has determined that a banana pulp tolerance is no longer needed. 
Therefore, EPA proposes removing the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.342(a)(2) 
for chlorpyrifos per se residues of concern in/on milling fractions 
(except flour) of wheat at 1.5 ppm; soybean, forage at 0.7 ppm; and 
banana pulp at 0.01 ppm.
    The Agency is revising commodity terminology to conform to current 
Agency practice. Therefore, EPA proposes revising the tolerances in 40 
CFR 180.342(a)(2) for chlorpyrifos per se residues of concern in/on 
cattle, meat and meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; to cattle, meat at 0.05 
ppm; and cattle, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; cherry to cherry, sweet 
and cherry, tart; corn, forage and fodder at 8 ppm to corn, field, 
forage; corn, field, stover; corn, sweet, forage; and corn, sweet, 
stover each at 8 ppm; goat, meat and meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; to 
goat, meat at 0.05 ppm; and goat, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; hog, 
meat and meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; to hog, meat at 0.05 ppm; and 
hog, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; sheep, meat and meat byproducts at 
0.05 ppm; to sheep, meat at 0.05 ppm; and sheep, meat byproducts at 
0.05 ppm; horse, meat, fat, and meat byproducts at 0.25 ppm; to horse, 
fat at 0.25 ppm; horse, meat at 0.25 ppm; and horse, meat byproducts at 
0.25 ppm; mint, hay to peppermint, tops and spearmint, tops; mint oil 
to peppermint, oil and spearmint, oil; plum to plum, prune, fresh; 
poultry, meat, fat, and meat byproducts (inc. turkeys) at 0.1 ppm; to 
poultry, fat at 0.1 ppm; poultry, meat at 0.1 ppm;, and poultry, meat 
byproducts at 0.1 ppm; rutabagas to rutabaga; turnip, greens to turnip, 
tops; and turnip to turnip, roots.
    Currently 40 CFR 180.342(a)(1) regulates the combined residues of 
chlorpyrifos and its metabolite 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCP). The 
Agency has concluded that the 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCP) 
metabolite is not of toxicological concern and in accordance with FFDCA 
Sec. 408(a)(3) no longer needs to be regulated. The residue for 
regulation is chlorpyrifos per se which is the regulated residue in 40 
CFR 180.342(a)(2). Therefore, EPA proposes transferring the tolerances 
in 40 CFR 180.342(a)(1) to (a)(2) and changing the designations of 40 
CFR 180.342 (a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(4) to 40 CFR 180.342(a)(1), (a)(2), 
and (a)(3).
    The established crop group tolerance for tree nut group 14 should 
be revoked because the use rates are not identical, i.e. the rate on 
pecans differs. In lieu of the tree nut crop group, the Agency has 
determined that individual tolerances should be established for 
hazelnut (the preferred commodity term), and pecan each at 0.2 ppm and 
there are currently tolerances in place for almonds and walnuts. 
Therefore, EPA proposes revoking the tolerance in newly proposed 40 CFR 
180.342(a)(1) for residues of chlorpyrifos per se in/on nut, tree, 
group 14 and establishing the tolerances for hazelnut at 0.2 ppm; and 
pecan at 0.2 ppm.
    There is currently a tolerance for ``vegetable, brassica, leafy, 
group 5 at 2.0 ppm which covers broccoli; Bussels sprouts; cabbage; 
cabbage Chinese; and cauliflower each at 1 ppm; therefore, the Agency 
has determined that the individual tolerances on these commodities are 
no longer needed and vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 5 at 2.0 ppm 
should be decreased to 1 ppm consistent with the individual tolerance 
levels. Further, the footnote (of which no more than 1.0 ppm is 
chlorpyrifos) associated with the vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 5 
at 12.0 ppm is no longer needed since the residues of concern are 
chlorpyrifos per se. There is currently a tolerance for ``legume 
vegetables, succulent or dried (except soybean)'' at

[[Page 44443]]

0.05 ppm which covers lima beans and succulent snap beans; therefore, 
the Agency has determined that the tolerances for bean, lima and bean, 
snap, succulent are no longer needed. Additionally, the milk fat 
tolerance covers the whole milk tolerance and the whole milk tolerance 
is no longer needed. EPA is also revising commodity terminology to 
conform to current Agency practice. Therefore, EPA proposes removing 
the tolerances in newly proposed 40 CFR 180.342(a)(1) for residues of 
chlorpyrifos per se in/on broccoli; Bussels sprouts; cabbage; cabbage, 
chinese; and cauliflower each at 1.0 ppm; bean, lima and bean, snap, 
succulent each at 0.05 ppm; the footnote1 of which no more 
than 1.0 ppm is chlorpyrifos; milk, whole at 0.01 ppm; revise ``legume 
vegetables, succulent or dried (except soybean)'' to ``vegetable, 
legume, group 6, except soybean''; milk fat to milk, fat (reflecting 
0.01 ppm in whole milk); and decreasing vegetable, brassica, leafy, 
group 5 from 2.0 ppm to 1.0 ppm.
    Based on the available apple processing data that indicate 
chlorpyrifos concentrates at 2.1x in wet apple pomace, the Agency has 
determined that a tolerance should be established in/on apple, wet 
pomace at 0.02 ppm. Based on available field trial studies that 
indicate residues of chlorpyrifos are less than 1 ppm in/on lettuce, 
the Agency determined a tolerance should be established in/on lettuce 
at 1 ppm. Therefore, EPA proposes establishing a tolerance in newly 
proposed 40 CFR 180.342(a)(1) for residues of chlorpyrifos per se in/on 
apple, wet pomace at 0.02 ppm and lettuce at 1.0 ppm.
    Based on current U.S. use patterns of chlorpyrifos on grapes the 
residues are expected to be less than the level of quantitation (<0.01 
ppm); therefore, the Agency has determined the tolerance should be 
decreased in/on grapes to 0.01 ppm. Therefore, EPA proposes decreasing 
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.342(c)(1) for residues of chlorpyrifos per 
se in/on grape from 0.05 to 0.01 ppm.
    Currently 40 CFR 180.342(c)(1) regulates the combined residues of 
chlorpyrifos and its metabolite 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCP). The 
Agency has concluded that the 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCP) 
metabolite is not of toxicological concern and no longer needs to be 
regulated. The residue for regulation is chlorpyrifos per se which is 
the regulated residue in 40 CFR 180.342(c)(2). Additionally, because 
there are currently no active registrations having uses on leeks, 
cherimoya, feijoa, and sapote, the Agency has determined the tolerances 
on leek, cherimoya, feijoa and sapote should be revoked. Therefore, EPA 
proposes transferring the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.342(c)(1) in/on 
asparagus, grape and leek (of which no more than 0.2 ppm is 
chlorpyrifos) to (c)(2) for residues of chlorpyrifos per se; revoking 
the tolerances in proposed recodified 40 CFR 180.342(c)(2) in/on leek 
(of which no more than 0.2 ppm is chlorpyrifos) at 0.5 ppm, cherimoya 
at 0.05 ppm, feijoa (pineapple guava) at 0.05 ppm and sapote at 0.05 
ppm; and redesignate 40 CFR 180.342(c)(2) to 40 CFR 180.342(c).
    The proposed tolerance actions herein for chlorpyrifos, to 
implement the recommendations of the chlorpyrifos TRED, reflect use 
patterns in the U.S. which support a different tolerance than the Codex 
level on broccoli (vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 5) and grape, 
because of differences in good agricultural practices. However, 
compatibility exists for eggs, field corn (maize) and will exist 
between the proposed reassessed U.S. tolerances and Codex MRLs for 
chlorpyrifos residues in or on Chinese cabbage, citrus fruits, sorghum, 
and cabbage head.
    3. Fenbutatin-oxide (Hexakis). The Interregional Research Project 
No. 4 (IR-4) submitted a petition (PP 6E7052) which published as a 
notice of filing document in the Federal Register of July 5, 2006 (71 
FR 38153) (FRL-8074-1), requesting a tolerance of 0.5 ppm for residues 
of fenbutatin-oxide in pistachio. Currently, there are individual 
tolerances for almonds, pecans, and walnuts each at 0.5 ppm. The Agency 
proposed that the data for almond, pecan, and walnut support a crop 
group tolerance for the nut, tree, group 14 at 0.5 ppm in a document 
published in the Federal Register of August 4, 2004 (69 FR 47051) (FRL-
7368-7). The Agency has determined that the data to support the tree 
nut crop group should also be used to support a separate tolerance for 
pistachio at 0.5 ppm. Therefore, EPA proposes establishing a tolerance 
in 40 CFR 180.362(a) for the combined fenbutatin-oxide residues of 
concern in/on pistachio at 0.5 ppm.
    Currently, there are no Codex MRLs in place for fenbutatin-oxide on 
pistachio.
    4. MCPA. Based on available data that indicate MCPA residues of 
concern as high as 2.6 ppm, the Agency determined that a tolerance 
should be established in/on aspirated grain fractions at 3.0 ppm. This 
action was inadvertently omitted in the proposal of September 27, 2006 
(71 FR 56429)(FRL-8089-5). Therefore, EPA proposes establishing the 
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.339(a)(1) for the combined MCPA residues of 
concern in/on grain, aspirated fractions at 3.0 ppm.
    5. Metolachlor (including S-Metolachlor). Tolerances for residues 
of metolachlor in/on barley, buckwheat, millet, oats, rice, rye, wheat, 
and the nongrass livestock feeds group were initially established to 
cover residues of metolachlor in these crops when planted as rotational 
crops following a primary crop that was treated with metolachlor; 
therefore, the Agency has determined that these tolerances should be 
considered inadvertent or indirect residues in a new subsection 40 CFR 
180.368(d)(1). Further, based on available field trial data that 
indicate the combined metolachlor residues of concern were as high as 
0.54 ppm in/on nongrass forage and < 0.47 ppm in/on nongrass hay, the 
Agency determined the tolerance should be decreased to 1.0 ppm in/on 
nongrass animal feed (forage, fodder, straw, hay), group 18. The Agency 
is also revising the commodity terminology for certain tolerances to 
current Agency practice. Therefore, EPA proposes transferring 
tolerances from 40 CFR 180.368(a)(1) to a new section designated 40 CFR 
180.368 (d)(1) for the combined residues (free and bound) of the 
herbicide metolachlor [(2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-
methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide] and its metabolites, determined as the 
derivatives, 2-[(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)amino]-1-propanol and 4-(2-
ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-2-hydroxy-5-methyl-3-morpholinone, each expressed 
as the parent compound, in or on barley, grain at 0.1; barley straw at 
0.5 ppm; buckwheat, grain at 0.1 ppm; millet, fodder at 0.5 ppm; 
millet, forage at 0.5 ppm; millet, grain at 0.1 ppm; oat, forage 0.5 
ppm; oat, grain at 0.1 ppm; oat, straw at 0.5 ppm; rice, grain at 0.1 
ppm; rice, straw at 0.5 ppm; rye, forage 0.5 ppm; rye, grain at 0.1 
ppm; rye, straw at 0.5 ppm; wheat, forage at 0.5 ppm; wheat, grain at 
0.1 ppm; and wheat, straw at 0.5 ppm; decreasing and revising nongrass 
animal feed (forage, fodder, straw, and hay), group 18 from 3.0 to 
animal feed, nongrass, group 18 at 1.0 ppm; revising millet, fodder to 
millet, straw; and changing the designation of 40 CFR 180.368(d) to 40 
CFR 180.368(d)(2).
    Extrapolating the residue data from the ruminant feeding study to a 
1x feeding level for cattle, goats, horses, and sheep the maximum 
combined residues of concern for metolachlor would be 0.011 ppm in fat, 
0.057 ppm in liver, 0.016 ppm in meat and <0.04 ppm in meat byproducts; 
therefore, the Agency determined that the tolerances

[[Page 44444]]

should be increased for cattle, goat, horse, and sheep fat to 0.04 ppm, 
liver to 0.10 ppm, meat to 0.04 ppm, and meat byproducts (except kidney 
and liver) at 0.04 ppm. Based on feeding studies in hens dosed up to 
3.9x the maximum theoretical dietary burden, metolachlor residues of 
concern were not detected (<0.04 ppm the combined levels of 
quantitation (LOQ)) in eggs, liver, meat and meat byproducts; 
therefore, the Agency determined the tolerance for eggs, poultry meat, 
poultry fat, and poultry meat byproducts should each be increased to 
0.04 ppm and revoked for poultry liver. Therefore, EPA proposes 
increasing the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368(a)(1) for the combined 
metolachlor residues of concern in/on cattle, fat; goat, fat; horse, 
fat; and sheep, fat from 0.02 to 0.04 ppm; cattle, liver; goat, liver; 
horse, liver; and sheep, liver from 0.05 to 0.10 ppm; cattle, meat; 
goat, meat; horse, meat; and sheep, meat from 0.02 to 0.04 ppm; cattle, 
meat byproducts (except kidney and liver); goat, meat byproducts 
(except kidney and liver); horse, meat byproducts (except kidney and 
liver); and sheep, meat byproducts (except kidney and liver) from 0.02 
to 0.04 ppm; egg; poultry, fat; poultry, meat; and poultry, meat 
byproducts (except liver) from 0.02 to 0.04 ppm; revoking poultry, 
liver at 0.05 ppm and revising poultry meat byproducts (except liver) 
to poultry meat byproducts. 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.
    There are no longer any active registrations with uses of 
metolachlor on cabbage, celery, stone fruits, and bell peppers; 
therefore, the Agency determined the tolerances for these commodities 
are no longer needed. The tolerances for sorghum cover the tolerances 
for milo; therefore, the tolerances for milo are not needed. Rice 
forage and peanut forage are no longer regulated commodities in 
accordance with 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 at https://
www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS Harmonized/860 Residue 
Chemistry Test Guidelines/Series; consequently, the Agency has 
determined that the rice, forage and peanut forage tolerances are no 
longer needed. Therefore, EPA proposes revoking the tolerances in 40 
CFR 180.368 (a)(1) for the combined residues of metolachlor in/on 
cabbage at 1.0 ppm; celery at 0.1 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12 at 0.1 
ppm; bell, pepper at 0.1 ppm; milo, fodder 0.5 ppm; milo, forage at 0.5 
ppm; milo, grain at 0.1 ppm; peanut, forage at 30 ppm and rice, forage 
at 0.5 ppm.
    Based on the available field trial data that indicate the combined 
residues of metolachlor were as high as 2.28 ppm on field corn stover, 
5.54 ppm in/on sweet corn stover, 3.02 ppm on field corn forage, and 
5.75 ppm in/on sweet corn forage, the Agency determined the tolerances 
for corn, fodder and corn, forage should be decreased to 6.0 ppm. Based 
on the available field trial data that indicate the combined residues 
of metolachlor were as high as 0.19 ppm in/on peanut, 16.5 ppm in/on 
peanut hay, 0.45 ppm in/on sorghum forage, 3.19 ppm in/on sorghum 
fodder, and 4.37 ppm in/on soybean forage; the Agency determined the 
tolerances should be decreased to 0.20 ppm in/on peanut, 20.0 ppm in/on 
peanut hay; 5.0 ppm in /on soybean, forage, and 1.0 ppm in/on sorghum, 
forage and increased to 4.0 ppm in/on sorghum fodder. The EPA is also 
revising commodity terminology. Therefore, EPA proposes decreasing the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368 (a)(1) for the combined residues of 
metolachlor in/on corn, fodder from 8.0 to 6.0 ppm; corn, forage from 
8.0 to 6.0 ppm; peanut from 0.5 to 0.20 ppm; and peanut, hay from 30 to 
20.0 ppm; and sorghum, forage from 2.0 to 1.0 ppm; soybean, forage from 
8.0 to 5.0 ppm; increasing sorghum, fodder from 2.0 to 4.0 ppm; and 
revising corn, fodder to corn, field, stover and corn, sweet, stover; 
corn, forage to corn, field, forage and corn, sweet, forage; corn, 
grain to corn, field, grain; sorghum, forage to sorghum, grain, forage; 
sorghum, fodder to sorghum, grain, stover; sorghum, grain to sorghum, 
grain, grain and soybean to soybean, seed.
    Based on the available field trial data that indicate the 
metolachlor residues of concern were as high as 4.37 ppm in/on soybean 
forage and 6.9 ppm in/on soybean hay, the Agency determined tolerances 
should be separated and decreased to 5.0 ppm on soybean, forage and 
maintained at 8.0 ppm in/on soybean hay. Therefore, EPA proposes 
decreasing and separating the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368(a)(1) for 
the combined metolachlor residues of concern from soybean, forage and 
hay at 8.0 ppm to soybean, forage at 5.0 ppm and soybean, hay at 8.0 
ppm.
    EPA is revising commodity terminology to current Agency practice. 
The current terminology for seed and pod vegetables (except soybean) 
crop group is vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A; pea and 
bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B; and pea and bean, dried shelled, 
except soybean, subgroup 6C. Based on the available field trial data 
that indicate the combined residues of metolachlor were as high as 0.11 
ppm in/on dried shelled peas and beans and 0.44 ppm in/on edible-podded 
legumes, the Agency determined the tolerances should be increased on 
edible-podded legumes from 0.3 to 0.5 ppm and decreased in/on dried 
shelled peas and beans from 0.3 to 0.10 ppm. Therefore, EPA proposes 
revising the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368(a)(1) for the combined 
metolachlor residues of concern in/on seed and pod vegetables (except 
soybean) at 0.3 ppm to vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A at 
0.5 ppm; pea and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B at 0.3 ppm; and 
pea and bean, dried shelled, subgroup 6C, except soybean at 0.10 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 the available field trial and processing data that 
indicate the metolachlor residues of concern were as high as 3.2 ppm 
in/on cotton gin byproducts and <3.83 ppm in/on peanut meal, the Agency 
determined tolerances should be established in/on cotton, gin 
byproducts at 4.0 ppm and peanut, meat at 0.40 ppm. Therefore, EPA 
proposes establishing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368(a)(1) for the 
combined metolachlor residues of concern in/on cotton, gin byproducts 
at 4.0 ppm and peanut, meal at 0.40 ppm.
    There are no longer any active registered uses of metolachlor in/on 
dry bulb onions, chili peppers and cubanelle peppers; therefore, the 
tolerances are no longer needed. EPA is also revising commodity 
terminology. Finally, the regional registrations are defined in 40 CFR 
180.1(m) rather than 180.1(n) as currently appears in the 40 CFR 
180.368(c). Therefore, EPA proposes revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.368 (c)(1) for the combined metolachlor residues of concern in/on 
onion, dry bulb; pepper, chili; and pepper, cubanelle; and revising in 
40 CFR 180.368(c)(1) and (2) the terms pepper, tabasco to pepper, 
nonbell and 180.1(n) to 180.1(m).
    Subsequent to the revised TRED, the tolerance expression for S-
metolachlor was modified to include the R-enantiomer; therefore, the 
Agency has determined the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368(a)(2) and 40 CFR 
180.368(a)(3) should be combined and regulated in accordance with the 
tolerance

[[Page 44445]]

expression in 40 CFR 180.368(a)(3) which includes regulation of the R-
enantiomer. Therefore, EPA proposes combining 40 CFR 180.368(a)(2) and 
(a)(3) by transferring the tolerances from 40 CFR 180.368(a)(2) on 
asparagus at 0.1 ppm; beet, sugar, molasses at 2.0 ppm; beet, sugar, 
roots at 0.5 ppm; beet, sugar, tops at 15 ppm; grass, forage at 10 ppm; 
grass, hay at 0.2 ppm; spinach at 0.5 ppm; sunflower, seed at 0.5 ppm; 
sunflower, meal at 1 ppm to 40 CFR 180.368(a)(3) and changing the 
designation of 40 CFR 180.368(a)(3) to 40 CFR 180.368(a)(2).
    EPA is revising commodity terminology to current Agency practice. 
Therefore, EPA proposes revising the tolerance in the proposed 
recodified 40 CFR 180.368(d)(2) from nongrass, animal feed (forage, 
fodder, straw, hay) group 18 to animal feed, nongrass, group 18 and 
revising the tolerance in proposed recodified 40 CFR 180.368 (a)(2) 
from vegetable, fruiting group 8, (except tabasco pepper) to vegetable, 
fruiting, group 8, except nonbell pepper and onion, dry bulb to onion, 
bulb.
    Currently, there are no Codex MRLs in place for metolachlor.
    6. Pyrethrins. Currently, the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 
180.128(a)(1) is for the residues of the insecticide pyrethrins 
(insecticidally active principles of chrysanthemum cinerariaefolium). 
Since residues of pyrethrins are identified by a marker compound, the 
Agency has determined that tolerances in 40 CFR 180.128(a)(1) should be 
updated. Therefore, EPA proposes the tolerance expression be revised in 
40 CFR 180.128(a)(1) for residues of pyrethrins ((1S)-2-methyl-4-oxo-3-
(2Z)-2,4-pentadienylcyclopenten-1-yl (1R,3R)-2,2-dimethyl-3-(2-methyl-
1-propenyl)cyclopropanecarboxylate (pyrethrin 1), (1S)-2-methyl-4-oxo-
3-(2Z)-2,4-pentadienyl-2-cyclopenten-1-yl (1R,3R)-3-[(1E)-3-methoxy-2-
methyl-3-oxo-1-propenyl]-2,2-dimethylcyclopropane-carboxylate 
(pyrethrin 2), (1S)-3-(2Z)-2-butenyl-2-methyl-4-oxo-2-cyclopenten-1-yl 
(1R,3R)-2,2-dimethyl-3-(2-methyl-1-propenyl)cyclopropanecarboxylate 
(cinerin 1), (1S)-3-(2Z)-2-butenyl-2-methyl-4-oxo-2-cyclopenten-1-yl 
(1R,3R)-3-[(1E)-3-methoxy-2-methyl-3-oxo-1-propenyl]-2,2-
dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate (cinerin 2), (1S)-2-methyl-4-oxo-3-
(2Z)-2-pentenyl-2-cyclopenten-1-yl (1R, 3R)-2,2-dimethyl-3-(2-methyl-1-
propenyl)cyclopropanecarboxylate (jasmolin 1), and (1S)-2-methyl-4-oxo-
3-(2Z)-pentenyl-2-cyclopenten-1-yl (1R,3R)-3-[(1E)-3-methoxy-2-methyl-
3-oxo-1-propenyl]-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate (jasmolin 2)), 
the insecticidally active principles of Chrysanthemum cinerariaefolium, 
which are measured as cumulative residues of pyrethrin 1, cinerin 1, 
and jasmolin 1.
    The last active product involving uses of pyrethrins on food stored 
in multi-walled paper or cloth bags was cancelled October 15, 1989. 
Therefore, the Agency has determined that the stored food tolerances in 
40 CFR 180.128(a)(2)(iii)(B), 180.128(a)(2)(iii)(D) and 180.128(a)(3) 
(all subsections) should be removed. Also, the language in 40 CFR 
180.128(a)(2)(iv) is outdated and no longer used in the CFR, therefore, 
the Agency has determined it should be removed. Therefore, EPA is 
proposing to remove 40 CFR 180.128(a)(2)(iii)(B), 
180.128(a)(2)(iii)(D), 180.128(a)(3)(i)(A, B), (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), 
and 180.128(a)(2)(iv).
    Currently, 40 CFR 180.128(a)(2)(iii)(C) refers to ``foods treated 
in accordance with 180.367(a)(2)''. To provide clarity, the citation 40 
CFR 180.367(a)(2) is being replaced with the statement to which the 
citation refers as follows:
     ``A tolerance of 1.0 ppm is established for residues of 
the insecticide pyrethrins in or on all food items in food handling 
establishments where food and food products are held, processed, 
prepared and/or served. Food must be removed or covered prior to use'' 
and recodify 40 CFR 180.128(a)(2)(iii)(C) as 40 CFR 180.128 (a)(3) in 
accordance will all the subsection changes. Therefore, EPA proposes 
revising 40 CFR 180.128(a)(2)(iii)(C) to read as follows:
     ``A tolerance of 1.0 ppm is established for residues of 
the insecticide pyrethrins in or on all food items in food handling 
establishments where food and food products are held, processed, 
prepared and/or served. Food must be removed or covered prior to use'' 
and change the designation of 40 CFR 180.128 (a)(2)(iii)(C) to 
180.128(a)(3).
    Currently, 40 CFR 180.128(a)(2)(i)(A)-(E) and (ii) indicate use in 
combination with other active ingredients (piperonyl butoxide and MGK-
264). The Agency has determined that all references to the use of 
multiple chemicals should be removed from the CFR because 40 CFR 
180.128 is solely for the regulation of pyrethrins. Therefore, EPA 
proposes removing the 40 CFR 180.128 (a)(2)(i)(A-E) and (ii) and 
recodify 40 CFR 180.128(a)(2)(iii)(A) to newly revised 40 CFR 
180.128(a)(2) to read as follows:
    ``A tolerance of 1.0 ppm is established for residues of the 
insecticide pyrethrins in or on milled fractions derived from grain, 
cereal when present as a result of its use in cereal grain mills and in 
storage areas for milled cereal grain products.'' As a result of all 
the changes in 40 CFR 180.128(a), EPA is also proposing to change the 
designation of 40 CFR 180.128(a)(2)(v) to 180.128(a)(4).
    Because 40 CFR 180.128 (a)(2)(i)(D) and (E) have been removed, 40 
CFR 180.128(a)(2)(iii)(E) which refer to these sections is no longer 
relevant and also should be removed. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 
remove 40 CFR 180.128(a)(2)(iii)(E).
    The Agency is revising commodity terminology to conform to current 
Agency practice. Therefore, EPA proposes revising commodity terminology 
for tolerances in 40 CFR 180.128(a)(1) as follows: Barley, postharvest 
to barley, grain, postharvest; bean, postharvest to bean, succulent, 
postharvest; pea, postharvest to pea, dry, seed, postharvest; rye, 
postharvest to rye, grain, postharvest; and wheat, postharvest to 
wheat, grain, postharvest.
    Based on the maximum dietary burden and assuming a linear 
relationship between feeding levels and tissue concentrations, 
estimated residues are calculated to be as high as <0.05 ppm, in milk, 
meat, and meat byproducts of cattle, goats, horses, hogs and sheep and 
0.5 ppm in/on the fat of cattle, goats, horses, hogs, and sheep. The 
Agency determined the tolerances for cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and 
sheep meat and meat byproducts and milk should be decreased to 0.05 ppm 
and tolerances for the fat of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep 
should be increased to 1.0 ppm. Also the ``N'' indicating negligible 
residues should be deleted in accordance with current Agency practice. 
Therefore, EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 180.128(a)(1) for pyrethrins 
residues of concern to decrease the tolerances in/on milk fat 
(reflecting negligible residues in milk) from 0.5 to 0.05 ppm; cattle, 
meat; cattle, meat byproducts; goat, meat; goat, meat byproducts; hog, 
meat; hog, meat byproducts; horse, meat; horse, meat byproducts; sheep, 
meat; sheep, meat byproducts from 0.1(N) to 0.05 ppm and increase the 
tolerances in/on cattle, fat; goat, fat; hog, fat; horse, fat; and 
sheep, fat from 0.1(N) to 1.0 ppm.
    Based on exaggerated feed and premise treatment studies, there are 
no reasonable expectations of finite residues in poultry, meat, meat 
byproducts, fat and eggs (Category 3 of 40 CFR 180.6(a)(3)). Therefore, 
the Agency has determined that the tolerances for pyrethrins residues 
of concern in poultry commodities are not needed and should be revoked. 
Therefore, the Agency proposes revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR

[[Page 44446]]

180.128(a)(1) for egg at 0.1 ppm; and poultry, fat; poultry, meat; 
poultry, meat byproducts each at 0.2 ppm.
    The proposed tolerance actions herein for pyrethrins, to implement 
the recommendations of the pyrethrins RED, reflect use patterns in the 
United States which support a different tolerance than the Codex level 
because of differences in good agricultural practices and the specified 
postharvest application timing.
    7. Triallate. Based on the available field trial data that indicate 
triallate residues of concern as high as 0.42 ppm, the Agency 
determined that a tolerance should be established in/on wheat forage at 
0.5 ppm. This action was inadvertently omitted in the proposal of 
September 27, 2006 (71 FR 56429) (FRL-8089-5). Therefore, EPA proposes 
establishing the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.314(c) for the combined 
triallate residues of concern in/on wheat, forage at 0.5 ppm.

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

     ``A tolerance'' represents the maximum level for residues of 
pesticide chemicals legally allowed in or on raw agricultural 
commodities and processed foods. Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, 
as amended by the FQPA of 1996, Public Law 104-170, authorizes the 
establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerance requirements, 
modifications in tolerances, and revocation of tolerances for residues 
of pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities and 
processed foods. Without a tolerance or exemption, food containing 
pesticide residues is considered to be unsafe and therefore, 
``adulterated'' under section 402(a) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 342(a). Such 
food may not be distributed in interstate commerce (21 U.S.C. 331(a)). 
For a food-use pesticide to be sold and distributed, the pesticide must 
not only have appropriate tolerances under the FFDCA, but also must be 
registered under FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.). Food-use pesticides not 
registered in the United States must have tolerances in order for 
commodities treated with those pesticides to be imported into the 
United States.
    EPA is proposing these tolerance actions in follow-up to the 
tolerance recommendations made during the reregistration and tolerance 
reassessment processes (including follow-up on canceled or additional 
uses of pesticides). The safety finding determination under section 408 
of FFDCA standard is discussed in detail in each Post-FQPA RED and TRED 
for the active ingredient. REDs and TREDs recommend the implementation 
of certain tolerance actions, including modifications to reflect 
current use patterns, to meet safety findings, and 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 a Post-FQPA RED for pyrethrins , MCPA, triallate, 
and TREDs for acephate, chlorpyrifos, fenbutatin-oxide and metolachlor, 
whose REDs were both completed prior to FQPA. REDs and TREDs contain 
the Agency's evaluation of the data base for these pesticides, 
including requirements for additional data on the active ingredients to 
confirm the potential human health and environmental risk assessments 
associated with current product uses, and in 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 
FFDCA standard of ``reasonable certainty of no harm.'' However, 
tolerance revocations recommended in REDs and TREDs that are proposed 
in this document do not need such assessment when the tolerances are no 
longer necessary.
    EPA's general practice is to propose revocation of tolerances for 
residues of pesticide active ingredients on crops for which FIFRA 
registrations no longer exist and on which the pesticide may therefore 
no longer be used in the United States. EPA has historically been 
concerned that retention of tolerances that are not necessary to cover 
residues in or on legally treated foods may encourage misuse of 
pesticides within the United States. Nonetheless, EPA will establish 
and maintain tolerances even when corresponding domestic uses are 
canceled if the tolerances, which EPA refers to as ``import 
tolerances,'' are necessary to allow importation into the United States 
of food containing such pesticide residues. However, where there are no 
imported commodities that require these import tolerances, the Agency 
believes it is appropriate to revoke tolerances for unregistered 
pesticides in order to prevent potential misuse.
    Furthermore, as a general matter, the Agency believes that 
retention of import tolerances not needed to cover any imported food 
may result in unnecessary restriction on trade of pesticides and foods. 
Under section 408 of FFDCA, a tolerance may only be established or 
maintained if EPA determines that the tolerance is safe based on a 
number of factors, including an assessment of the aggregate exposure to 
the pesticide and an assessment of the cumulative effects of such 
pesticide and other substances that have a common mechanism of 
toxicity. In doing so, EPA must consider potential contributions to 
such exposure from all tolerances. If the cumulative risk is such that 
the tolerances in aggregate are not safe, then every one of these 
tolerances is potentially vulnerable to revocation. Furthermore, if 
unneeded tolerances are included in the aggregate and cumulative risk 
assessments, the estimated exposure to the pesticide would be inflated. 
Consequently, it may be more difficult for others to obtain needed 
tolerances or to register needed new uses. To avoid potential trade 
restrictions, the Agency is proposing to revoke tolerances for residues 
on crops uses for which FIFRA registrations no longer exist, unless 
someone expresses a need for such tolerances. Through this proposed 
rule, the Agency is inviting individuals who need these import 
tolerances to identify themselves and the tolerances that are needed to 
cover imported commodities.
    Parties interested in retention of the tolerances should be aware 
that additional data may be needed to support retention. These parties 
should be aware that, under FFDCA section 408(f), if the Agency 
determines that additional information is reasonably required to 
support the continuation of a tolerance, EPA may require that parties 
interested in maintaining the tolerances provide the necessary 
information. If the requisite information is not submitted, EPA may 
issue an order revoking the tolerance at issue.
    When EPA establishes tolerances for pesticide residues in or on raw 
agricultural commodities, consideration must be given to the possible 
residues of those chemicals 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). When 
considering this possibility, EPA can conclude that:
    1. Finite residues will exist in meat, milk, poultry, and/or eggs.
    2. There is a reasonable expectation that finite residues will 
exist.
    3. There is a reasonable expectation that finite residues will not 
exist. If there is no reasonable expectation of finite pesticide 
residues in or on meat, milk, poultry, or eggs, tolerances do not need 
to be established for these commodities (40 CFR 180.6(b) and (c)).

[[Page 44447]]

     EPA has evaluated certain specific meat, milk, poultry, and egg 
tolerances proposed for revocation in this rule and has concluded that 
there is no reasonable expectation of finite pesticide residues of 
concern in or on those commodities.

C. When do These Actions Become Effective?

    1. EPA is proposing that modifications, establishment, commodity 
terminology revisions, and revocation of these tolerances become 
effective on the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal 
Register because:
    i. With respect to the revocations, their associated uses have been 
canceled for several years.
    ii. None of the other tolerance actions proposed here are expected 
to result in adulterated commodities.
The Agency believes that, with respect to the tolerances proposed for 
revocation, treated commodities have had sufficient time for passage 
through the channels of trade. However, if EPA is presented with 
information that existing stocks would still be available and that 
information is verified, the Agency will consider extending the 
expiration date of the tolerance. If you have comments regarding 
existing stocks and whether the effective date allows sufficient time 
for treated commodities to clear the channels of trade, please submit 
comments as described under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    2. Any commodities listed in this proposal treated with the 
pesticides subject to this proposal, and in the channels of trade 
following the tolerance revocations, shall be subject to FFDCA section 
408(1)(5), as established by FQPA. Under this section, any residues of 
these pesticides in or on such food shall not render the food 
adulterated so long as it is shown to the satisfaction of FDA that:
    i. 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.
    ii. 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 when the 
pesticide was applied to such food.

III. Are the Proposed Actions Consistent with International 
Obligations?

    The tolerance actions in this proposal are not discriminatory and 
are designed to ensure that both domestically produced and imported 
foods meet the food safety standards established by FFDCA. The same 
food safety standards apply to domestically produced and imported 
foods.
    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, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) 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 Unit II.A. Specific tolerance actions in this rule and how 
they compare to Codex MRLs (if any) are discussed in Unit II.A.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to establish tolerances 
under FFDCA section 408(e), and also modify and revoke specific 
tolerances established under FFDCA section 408. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions (e.g., 
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 proposed rule has been exempted 
from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of 
significance, this proposed 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 proposed 
rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB 
approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as 
described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor does it require any special 
considerations as required by Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal 
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review 
or any other Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks 
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any 
technical standards that would require Agency consideration of 
voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 
104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency previously 
assessed whether 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, 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 
proposed rule, the Agency hereby certifies that this proposed action 
will not have a significant negative 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