Fenhexamid; Pesticide Tolerance, 19150-19154 [E8-7038]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 9, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19150-19154]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-7038]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0303; FRL-8357-2]


Fenhexamid; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of 
fenhexamid in or on asparagus. Interregional Research Project Number 4 
(IR-4) requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective April 9, 2008. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 9, 2008, 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-2007-0303. 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 website 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: Shaja R. Brothers, Registration 
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number: (703) 308-3194; e-mail address: 
brothers.shaja@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

[[Page 19151]]

not limited to those engaged in the following activities:
     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 to 
provide 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 EPA's tolerance regulations at 
40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR 
site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, any person may file an objection to 
any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those 
objections. 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-2007-0303 in the subject line on the first page of 
your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or 
delivered to the Hearing Clerk as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or 
before June 9, 2008.
    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 this copy, identified by docket ID number 
EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0303, 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. Petition for Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of June 27, 2007 (72 FR 35237) (FRL-8133-
4), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 
7E7187) by IR-4, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 
08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.553 be amended by 
establishing a tolerance for residues of the fungicide, fenhexamid, (N-
2,3-dichloro-4-hydroxyphenyl)-1-methyl cyclohexanecarboxamide), in or 
on asparagus at 0.02 parts per million (ppm). This notice referenced a 
summary of the petition prepared by Arysta LifeScience, the registrant, 
which is available to the public in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the 
notice of filing.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a 
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a 
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a 
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure 
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary 
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable 
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in 
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. 
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special 
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide 
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there 
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and 
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.'' 
These provisions were added to FFDCA by the Food Quality Protection Act 
(FQPA) of 1996.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors 
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available 
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this 
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a 
determination on aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for tolerance 
for residues of fenhexamid on asparagus at 0.02 ppm. EPA's assessment 
of exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerance 
follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its 
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of 
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered 
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities 
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and 
children. In general, the toxicology studies conducted on fenhexamid 
demonstrated that it has few or no biologically significant toxic 
effects at relatively low dose levels in many animal studies and only 
mild or no toxic effects at high dose levels which often approach or 
exceed the limit dose. In subchronic and chronic oral studies, the most 
toxicologically significant effects were anemia in dogs, and decreased 
body weights, increased food consumption and mild liver and/or kidney 
effects in rats and mice. Fenhexamid is not acutely toxic, neurotoxic, 
carcinogenic, or mutagenic and is not a developmental or reproductive 
toxicant. Although no increased susceptibility of fetuses was 
demonstrated in developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, 
equivocal results, with respect to evaluating potentially increased 
sensitivity of pups, were observed in the reproduction study in rats. 
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of

[[Page 19152]]

the adverse effects caused by fenhexamid as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in the final rule 
published in the Federal Register of April 13, 2000 (65 FR 19842) (FRL-
6553-7)https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2000/April/Day-13/
p9144.htm.

B. Toxicological Endpoints

    For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no 
appreciable risk, the toxicological level of concern (LOC) is derived 
from the highest dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the 
NOAEL) in the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in 
risk assessment. However, if a NOAEL cannot be determined, the lowest 
dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL) is 
sometimes used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs) 
are used in conjunction with the LOC to take into account uncertainties 
inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and 
in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population 
as well as other unknowns. Safety is assessed for acute and chronic 
risks by comparing aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the acute 
population adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic population adjusted dose 
(cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all 
applicable UFs. Short, intermediate, and long-term risks are evaluated 
by comparing aggregate exposure to the LOC to ensure that the margin of 
exposure (MOE) called for by the product of all applicable UFs is not 
exceeded.
    For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of 
exposure will lead to some degree of risk and estimates risk in terms 
of the probability of occurrence of additional adverse cases. 
Generally, cancer risks are considered non-threshold. For more 
information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization 
and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for fenhexamid used for 
human risk assessment can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in 
document Fenhexamid Human Health Risk Assessment for a Proposed Section 
3 Registration for Use on Asparagus on pages 25-26 in docket ID number 
EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0303.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary 
exposure to fenhexamid, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing fenhexamid tolerances in (40 CFR 
180.553). EPA assessed dietary exposures from fenhexamid in food as 
follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk 
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological 
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring 
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
    No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for 
fenhexamid; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment 
is unnecessary.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure 
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996, 
and 1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance 
level residues for all commodities with existing and proposed 
tolerances, DEEM default processing factors, and assumed 100% crop 
treated.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the studies of carcinogenicity studies in 
rats and mice, EPA has concluded that fenhexamid is ``not likely to be 
carcinogenic to humans.'' Consequently, a quantitative cancer exposure 
and risk assessment is not appropriate for fenhexamid.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks 
sufficient monitoring data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure 
analysis and risk assessment for fenhexamid in drinking water. Because 
the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data, drinking water 
concentration estimates are made by reliance on simulation or modeling 
taking into account data on the environmental fate characteristics of 
fenhexamid. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models 
used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at https://
www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and 
Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models, the 
estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) of fenhexamid for surface 
water are estimated to be 29 parts per billion (ppb) for acute and 1.1 
ppb for chronic exposure. The EECs for groundwater are estimated to be 
0.0007 ppb for acute and chronic exposure.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly 
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk 
assessment, the water concentration of value 1.1 ppb was used to access 
the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is 
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary 
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, 
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
    Fenhexamid is not registered for use on any sites that would result 
in residential exposure.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of 
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when 
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the 
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative 
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances 
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative 
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made 
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to fenhexamid and any other 
substances and fenhexamid does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite 
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance 
action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that fenhexamid has a common 
mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding 
EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of 
toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see 
EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1.  In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply 
an additional tenfold (``10X'') margin of safety for infants and 
children in the case of threshold effects to account for pre-natal and 
post-natal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity 
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a 
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This 
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA safety 
factor. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default 
value of 10X when reliable data do not support the choice of a 
different factor, or, if reliable data are available, EPA uses a 
different additional FQPA safety factor value based on the use of 
traditional UFs and/or special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.

[[Page 19153]]

    2. Pre-natal and post-natal sensitivity. In the rat and the rabbit 
developmental toxicity studies, neither quantitative nor qualitative 
evidence of increased susceptibility of fetuses to in utero exposure to 
fenhexamid was observed. In the rat reproduction study, qualitative 
susceptibility was evidenced as significantly decreased pup body 
weights in both generations during the lactation period (on lactation 
days 7, 14, and 21 in the F2 generation and lactation days 14 and 21 in 
the F1 generation offspring) in the presence of lesser maternal 
toxicity (alterations in clinical chemistry parameters and decreased 
organ weights without collaborative histopathology). Considering the 
overall toxicity profile and the doses and endpoints selected for risk 
assessment for fenhexamid, the degree of concern for the effects 
observed in this study was characterized as low, noting that there is a 
clear NOAEL and well-characterized dose response for the offspring 
effects observed and that these effects occurred in the presence of 
parental toxicity. No residual uncertainties were identified. The NOAEL 
of 17 milligrams/kilograms day (mg/kg/day) from the chronic dog study 
used to establish the chronic Reference Dose (cRfD) for the General 
Population is lower than the NOAEL of 38.2 mg/kg/day in the 
reproduction study in which the offspring effects of concern were 
observed (LOAEL = 406 mg/kg/day), and is therefore protective of any 
potential offspring effects.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show that it 
would be safe for infants and children to reduce the FQPA safety factor 
to 1X. That decision is based on the following findings:
    i. The toxicology data base is complete; there are no residual 
uncertainties in the expose database.
    ii. Developmental neurotoxicity studies are not required for 
fenhexamid, and no additional uncertainty factors are needed based on 
the following weight-of-the-evidence considerations:
    The lack of evidence of abnormalities in the development of the 
fetal nervous system in the pre/post natal studies; and
    Neither brain weight nor histopathological examination of the 
nervous system was affected in the subchronic and chronic studies. 
Decreased body temperatures observed in male rats in the acute 
neurotoxicity study were also not considered to be toxicologically 
significant.
    iii. As discussed above in Unit III D., there are no residual 
uncertainties for pre and/or post natal sensitivity.
    iv. The dietary (food) exposure assessment utilizes existing and 
proposed tolerance level residues and assumes 100% of crops treated 
with fenhexamid. The assessment is based on reliable data and is not 
expected to underestimate exposure/risk. Fenhexamid is not registered 
for use sites that would result in residential exposure. Conservative 
assumptions are used in the drinking water models. The drinking water 
exposure assessment is not expected to underestimate exposure/risk.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    Safety is assessed for acute and chronic risks by comparing 
aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the aPAD and cPAD. The aPAD and 
cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all applicable UFs. For 
linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the probability of additional 
cancer cases given aggregate exposure. Short, intermediate, and long-
term risks are evaluated by comparing aggregate exposure to the LOC to 
ensure that the MOE called for by the product of all applicable UFs is 
not exceeded.
    1. Acute risk. No toxicological endpoint attributable to a single 
(acute) dietary exposure was identified. Therefore, acute risk from 
exposure to fenhexamid is not expected.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this 
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to 
fenhexamid from food and water will utilize 27% of the cPAD for 
children 1-2 years old, the subpopulation at the greatest exposure. 
There are no residential uses for fenhexamid that result in chronic 
residential exposure to fenhexamid.
    3. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The Agency has 
classified fenhexamid as a ``not likely'' human carcinogen based on 
lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in male and female rats as well as 
in male and female mice, and on the lack of genotoxicity in an 
acceptable battery of mutagenicity studies. Therefore, fenhexamid is 
not expected to pose a cancer risk.
    4. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA 
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result 
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate 
exposure to fenhexamid residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (high performance liquid 
chromatography (HPLC) method using electrochemical detection (ECD)) is 
available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be 
requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental 
Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone 
number: (410) 305-2905; e-mail address: residuemethods@epa.gov.

B. International Residue Limits

    There are no established or proposed Canadian, Mexican or Codex 
MRLs for fenhexamid on asparagus, therefore there are no issues for 
international harmonization for this current petition.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, the tolerance is established for residues of fenhexamid, 
(N-2,3-dichloro-4-hydroxyphenyl)-1-methyl cyclohexanecarboxamide), in 
or on asparagus at 0.02 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of 
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions 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, 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) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children 
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 
23, 1997). 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., nor does it require any special considerations 
under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis 
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in 
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the 
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food 
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this 
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and 
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions

[[Page 19154]]

of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that 
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or 
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government 
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has 
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled 
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 
67249, November 6, 2000) do not apply to this rule. In addition, This 
rule does not 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).
    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).

VII. 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: March 26, 2008.
Daniel C. Kenny,
Acting Director, Registration Division, 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 180.553 is amended by alphabetically adding the following 
commodities to/in the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec. 180.553  Fenhexamid; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Commodity                        Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
Asparagus............................................               0.02
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------


* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-7038 Filed 4-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S