Aldicarb, Ametryn, 2,4-DB, Dicamba, Dimethipin, Disulfoton, Diuron, et al.; Proposed Tolerance Actions, 31788-31807 [E8-12374]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 4, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31788-31807]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-12374]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0232; FRL-8363-9]


Aldicarb, Ametryn, 2,4-DB, Dicamba, Dimethipin, Disulfoton, 
Diuron, et al.; Proposed Tolerance Actions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to revoke certain tolerances for the 
insecticides/nematicides aldicarb, ethoprop, and oxamyl; the 
insecticides disulfoton, malathion, and methyl parathion; the miticide/
acaricide propargite; the fungicides o-phenylphenol and its sodium 
salt, triadimefon, triadimenol, and ziram; the herbicides ametryn, 
dicamba, diuron, oxyfluorfen, and paraquat; the growth regulator/
herbicide dimethipin; and the antimicrobial/insecticidal fumigant 
propylene oxide. Also, EPA is proposing to modify certain tolerances 
for the insecticide/nematicide oxamyl; the insecticide fenitrothion; 
the miticide/acaricide propargite; the molluscicide metaldehyde; the 
fungicides triadimefon and tridemorph; the herbicides ametryn, 2,4-DB, 
dicamba, and diuron; and the antimicrobial/insecticidal fumigant 
propylene oxide. In addition, EPA is proposing to establish tolerances 
for the insecticide/nematicide oxamyl; the molluscicide metaldehyde; 
the fungicides etridiazole and streptomycin; the herbicides 2,4-DB, 
dicamba, and diuron; and the antimicrobial/insecticidal fumigant 
propylene oxide and propylene chlorohydrin (a reaction product formed 
during the propylene oxide sterilization process). Finally, because 
tolerances expired in 2005, EPA is proposing to remove 40 CFR 180.167 
for nicotine-containing compounds. 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 August 4, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification 
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0232, 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-
2008-0232. 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 
website 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: Joseph Nevola, Special Review and 
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW., 
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8037; e-mail 
address: nevola.joseph@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 31789]]

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 timeframes 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, modify, and establish specific 
tolerances for residues of the insecticides/nematicides aldicarb, 
ethoprop, and oxamyl; the insecticides disulfoton, fenitrothion, 
malathion, and methyl parathion; the miticide/acaricide propargite; the 
molluscicide metaldehyde; the fungicides etridiazole, o-phenylphenol 
and its sodium salt, streptomycin, triadimefon, triadimenol, 
tridemorph, and ziram; the herbicides ametryn, 2,4-DB, dicamba, diuron, 
oxyfluorfen, and paraquat; the growth regulator/herbicide dimethipin; 
and the antimicrobial/insecticidal fumigant propylene oxide and its 
reaction product propylene chlorohydrin in or on commodities listed in 
the regulatory text. Also, because tolerances expired in 2005, the 
Agency is proposing to remove 40 CFR 180.167 for nicotine-containing 
compounds.
    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 number: 1-800-490-
9198; fax number: 1-513-489-8695; Internet at https://www.epa.gov/
ncepihom and from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), 
5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161, telephone number: 1-800-
553-6847 or (703) 605-6000; Internet at https://www.ntis.gov. Electronic 
copies of REDs and TREDs are available on the Internet in public 
dockets for aldicarb (EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0163), ametryn (EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-
0411), 2,4-DB (EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0220), dicamba (EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0479), 
dimethipin (EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0380), ethoprop (EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0269), 
malathion (EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0348), metaldehyde (EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0231), 
methyl parathion (EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0237), o-phenylphenol and its sodium 
salt (EPA-

[[Page 31790]]

HQ-OPP-2006-0154), oxyfluorfen (EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0255), propylene oxide 
(EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0253), triadimefon (EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0258), ziram (EPA-
HQ-OPP-2004-0194), and TREDs for diuron (EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0249), 
streptomycin (EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0493), triadimenol (EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-
0038), and tridemorph (EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0505) at https://
www.regulations.gov and REDs for disulfoton, diuron, etridiazole, 
fenitrothion, oxamyl, paraquat, and propargite 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 
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.
    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 electronic copies for aldicarb, ametryn, 2,4-DB, dimethipin, 
diuron, ethoprop, malathion, metaldehyde, methyl parathion, o-
phenyphenol and salts, propylene oxide, streptomycin, triadimefon, 
triadimenol, and tridemorph can be found under their respective public 
docket ID numbers, identified in Unit II.A. Electronic copies for 
etridiazole, paraquat, and propargite can be found under public docket 
ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0154, oxyfluorfen under EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0036, 
ziram under EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0459, and residue documents for dicamba, 
fenitrothion, and oxamyl, are available in the public docket for this 
proposed rule. 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 ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2008-0232, then click on that docket ID 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 legally treated domestic 
commodities.
    1. Aldicarb. Because sugarcane forage and sugarcane stover are no 
longer considered by the Agency to be significant livestock feed items 
as delineated in ``Table 1. -Raw Agricultural and Processed Commodities 
and Feedstuffs Derived from Crops,'' which is found in Residue 
Chemistry Test Guidelines OPPTS 860.1000 dated August 1996 (available 
at https://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/860_
Residue_Chemistry_Test_Guidelines/Series/), EPA determined that the 
tolerances are no longer needed, and therefore should be revoked. 
Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.269 for the combined residues of aldicarb and its cholinesterase-
inhibiting metabolites 2-methyl 2-(methylsulfinyl) propionaldehyde O-
(methylcarbamoyl) oxime and 2-methyl-2-(methylsulfonyl) propionaldehyde 
O-(methylcarbamoyl) oxime in or on sugarcane, forage and sugarcane, 
stover.
    EPA is not proposing other tolerance actions for aldicarb at this 
time because of public comments received by the Agency to the aldicarb 
RED notice of availability, published in the Federal Register on 
October 12, 2007 (72 FR 58082)(FRL-8152-3). The Agency will review the 
comments and propose any appropriate tolerance actions in a future 
publication in the Federal Register.
    2. Ametryn. Because pineapple, fodder; pineapple, forage; 
sugarcane, forage; and sugarcane, stover are no longer considered by 
the Agency to be significant livestock feed items as delineated in 
``Table 1.--Raw Agricultural and Processed Commodities and Feedstuffs 
Derived from Crops,'' which is found in Residue Chemistry Test 
Guidelines OPPTS 860.1000 dated August 1996 (available at https://
www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/860_Residue_
Chemistry_Test_Guidelines/Series), EPA determined that these 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.258 are no longer needed, and therefore should 
be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerances in 
40 CFR 180.258 for residues of ametryn in or on pineapple, fodder; 
pineapple, forage; sugarcane, forage; and sugarcane, stover.
    Because there are no active registrations for use of ametryn on 
taniers, yams, and cassava in the United States, EPA determined that 
the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.258(a) on tanier and yam, true, tuber and 
the regional tolerance in 40 CFR 180.258(c) on cassava, roots are no 
longer needed and therefore, should be revoked. Consequently, the 
Agency is proposing to revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.258(a) on 
tanier and yam, true, tuber and the regional tolerance in 40 CFR 
180.258(c) on cassava, roots; and reserve section (c).

[[Page 31791]]

    Based on available data showing ametryn residues as high as 0.10 
ppm on field corn forage and <0.02 ppm on field corn grain and stover, 
EPA determined that the tolerance on corn, forage at 0.5 ppm should be 
revised to corn, sweet, forage at 0.5 ppm and corn, field, forage 
decreased from 0.5 to 0.1 ppm; the tolerance on corn, grain at 0.25 ppm 
should be revised to corn, field, grain and corn, pop, grain, and each 
decreased from 0.25 to 0.05 ppm; and the tolerance on corn, stover at 
0.5 ppm should be revised to corn, sweet, stover at 0.5 ppm; corn, 
field, stover and corn, pop, stover, and both decreased from 0.5 to 
0.05 ppm. Therefore, the Agency is proposing to decrease the tolerances 
in 40 CFR 180.258(a) on corn, field, forage to 0.1 ppm, corn, field, 
grain to 0.05 ppm; corn, pop, grain to 0.05 ppm; corn, field, stover to 
0.05 ppm; and corn, pop, stover to 0.05 ppm, and maintain at 0.5 ppm 
the revised tolerances on corn, sweet, forage and corn, sweet, stover.
    Based on available data showing ametryn residues as high as 0.05 
ppm on pineapple and <0.02 ppm on sugarcane, EPA determined that the 
tolerances should each be decreased from 0.25 to 0.05 ppm. Therefore, 
the Agency is proposing to decrease the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.258(a) 
on pineapple and sugarcane, cane; each to 0.05 ppm.
    Because the registrant has requested voluntary cancellation of an 
active registration with the last uses of ametryn for bananas and sweet 
corn (72 FR 71898, December 19, 2007) (FRL-8343-9), EPA expects to 
address these tolerances in a future notice in the Federal Register.
    There are no Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) for ametryn.
    3. 2,4-DB. Currently, tolerances for 4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy) 
butyric acid, known as 2,4-DB, in 40 CFR 180.331 exist for the combined 
residues of 2,4-DB and its metabolite 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, 
known as 2,4-D. Based on plant and livestock metabolism data, the 
Agency determined (as described in the RED and Residue Chemistry 
Chapter) that residues of concern for plant and livestock commodities 
should be 2,4-DB per se because the metabolite 2,4-D is present only at 
low levels. Therefore, EPA is proposing to revise the introductory text 
containing the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 180.331 as follows:
    Tolerances are established for the residues of the herbicide 4-
(2,4-dichlorophenoxy) butyric acid (2,4-DB), both free and 
conjugated, determined as the acid, in or on food commodities as 
follows.

    Based on available field trial data that showed 2,4-DB residues as 
high as 0.49 ppm in or on alfalfa forage and 1.7 ppm on alfalfa hay, 
EPA determined that the tolerance on alfalfa at 0.2 ppm should be 
divided into alfalfa forage and hay, increased to 0.7 ppm and 2.0 ppm, 
respectively, and that since the data could be translated to birdsfoot 
trefoil, the tolerance on birdsfoot trefoil at 0.2 ppm should be 
divided into trefoil forage and hay, and increased to 0.7 ppm and 2.0 
ppm, respectively. Therefore, the Agency is proposing in 40 CFR 180.331 
to revise the tolerance on alfalfa to alfalfa, forage and alfalfa, hay, 
and increase the tolerance on alfalfa, forage to 0.7 ppm and alfalfa, 
hay to 2.0 ppm, and revise the tolerance on trefoil, birdsfoot to 
trefoil, forage and trefoil, hay, and increase the tolerance on 
trefoil, forage to 0.7 ppm and trefoil, hay to 2.0 ppm. The Agency 
determined that the increased tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a 
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure 
to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on ruminant feeding data and Maximum Theoretical Dietary 
Burden (MTDB) for cattle, EPA determined that there is no reasonable 
expectation of finite residues of 2,4-DB residues in the milk or in the 
meat and fat of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep resulting from 
the feeding of 2,4-DB treated commodities. Therefore, tolerances on 
milk, and the fat and meat of livestock are not needed under 40 CFR 
180.6(a)(3). However, based on that ruminant feeding data, which showed 
residues of 2,4-DB in or on kidney and liver were <0.05 ppm, the limit 
of quantitation (LOQ), the Agency determined that tolerances on the 
meat byproducts of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep should be 
established at 0.05 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to establish 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.331 on cattle, meat byproducts; goat, meat 
byproducts; hog, meat byproducts; horse, meat byproducts; and sheep, 
meat byproducts, each at 0.05 ppm.
    Based on available field trial data that showed 2,4-DB residues as 
high as 0.45 ppm in or on soybeans at a Preharvest Interval (PHI) of at 
least 60 days, and 0.64 ppm in or on soybean forage at a PGI (pre-
grazing interval) of at least 60 days, EPA determined that the 
tolerance on soybean should be increased from 0.2 to 0.5 ppm, and a 
tolerance on soybean forage should be established at 0.7 ppm. In 
addition, based on the tolerance recommended at 0.7 ppm for forage, 
feedstuff percent dry matter values of 35% and 85% for forage and hay, 
respectively, and a dry-down factor of 2.4X, EPA determined that the 
tolerance on soybean hay should be increased from 0.2 to 2.0 ppm. 
Therefore, the Agency is proposing in 40 CFR 180.331 to revise the 
tolerance on soybean to soybean, seed and increase the tolerance on 
soybean, seed to 0.5 ppm, increase the tolerance on soybean, hay to 2.0 
ppm, and establish a tolerance on soybean, forage at 0.7 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.
    Also, in 40 CFR 180.331, EPA is proposing to remove the ``(N)'' 
designation from all entries to conform to current Agency 
administrative practice, where the ``(N)'' designation means negligible 
residues. In addition, in 40 CFR 180.331, EPA is proposing to revise 
the commodity terminology for ``mint, hay'' to ``peppermint, tops'' and 
``spearmint, tops.
    In accordance with current Agency practice, EPA is proposing to 
revise 40 CFR 180.331 by adding separate paragraphs (b), (c), and (d), 
and reserving those sections for tolerances with section 18 emergency 
exemptions, regional registrations, and indirect or inadvertent 
residues, respectively.
    At this time, EPA is not taking action to decrease the tolerance 
for 2,4-DB on peanut pending verification that registration amendments 
that specify a minimum 60-day PHI for use on peanuts are available for 
Agency approval.
    There are no Codex MRLs for residues of 2,4-DB.
    4. Dicamba. The tolerances in 40 CFR 180.227 for combined dicamba 
residues of concern in or on sugarcane forage and sugarcane stover 
should be revoked because the Agency considers these commodities to no 
longer be significant livestock feed items, and therefore their 
tolerances are no longer needed. Consequently, EPA is proposing to 
revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.227(a)(1) for combined dicamba 
residues of concern in or on sugarcane, forage; and sugarcane, stover.
    Based on available field trial data that showed dicamba residues of 
concern as high as 0.015 ppm in or on corn grain, the Agency determined 
that the tolerance on corn grain should be decreased from 0.5 to 0.1 
ppm and revised to corn, field, grain and corn, pop, grain. Therefore, 
EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 180.227(a)(1) to decrease the tolerance on 
corn, grain to 0.1 ppm and revise the tolerance from corn grain to 
corn, field, grain and corn, pop, grain, each at 0.1 ppm.
    Based on the translation of available data from wheat grain and 
straw that

[[Page 31792]]

showed dicamba residues of concern as high as 1.4 ppm and 26 ppm, 
respectively, EPA determined that the registrations for wheat, oat, 
millet proso, and rye should specify a maximum seasonal rate of 0.5 lb 
acid equivalents per acre (ae/A) for grain and straw, and a 7-day PHI 
for straw, and that the expected residues in or on the grains of oat, 
proso millet, and rye would each be as high as 1.4 ppm, and straws of 
oat, proso millet, and rye would each be as high as 26 ppm, and 
therefore the tolerances on oat grain and proso millet grain should 
each be increased from 0.5 to 2.0 ppm, tolerances on oat straw and 
proso millet straw should each be increased from 0.5 to 30.0 ppm, and 
tolerances on rye grain and rye straw should be established at 2.0 ppm 
and 30.0 ppm, respectively. Consequently, the Agency is proposing in 40 
CFR 180.227(a)(1) to increase the tolerances on oat, grain to 2.0 ppm; 
millet, proso, grain to 2.0 ppm; oat, straw to 30.0 ppm, millet, proso, 
straw to 30.0 ppm, and establish tolerances on rye, grain at 2.0 ppm 
and rye, straw at 30.0 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased 
tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm 
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available data from wheat forage and hay that showed 
dicamba residues of concern as high as 86 ppm (0-day PHI) and 34 ppm 
(14-day PHI), respectively, EPA determined that the registrations for 
wheat, oat, millet proso, and rye should specify a 14-day PHI for hay 
and tolerances on wheat forage and hay should be increased from 80.0 to 
90.0 ppm and from 20.0 to 40.0 ppm, respectively. Also, based on the 
translation of the wheat data to oats, proso millet, and rye, the 
Agency expected residues in or on the forage of oat, proso millet, and 
rye would each be as high as 86 ppm (0-day PHI), and hay of oat and 
proso millet would each be as high as 34 ppm (14-day PHI), and 
therefore the tolerance on oat forage should be increased from 80.0 to 
90.0 ppm and tolerances on the forage of proso millet and rye should 
each be established at 90.0 ppm, and the tolerance on oat hay should be 
increased from 20.0 to 40.0 ppm, and a tolerance on proso millet hay 
should be established at 40.0 ppm. Consequently, the Agency is 
proposing in 40 CFR 180.227(a)(1) to increase the tolerances on oat, 
forage and wheat, forage, each to 90.0 ppm; increase the tolerances on 
oat, hay and wheat, hay, each to 40.0 ppm; and establish tolerances on 
millet, proso, forage at 90.0 ppm, rye, forage at 90.0 ppm, and millet, 
proso, hay at 40.0 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased 
tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm 
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available field trial data that showed dicamba residues of 
concern in or on sorghum grain as high as 3.16 ppm (30-day PHI) and 
sorghum stover as high as 4.29 ppm (30-day PHI), EPA determined that 
the registrations for sorghum grain and stover should specify a 30-day 
PHI and the tolerances on sorghum grain and sorghum stover should be 
increased from 3.0 to 4.0 ppm and from 3.0 to 10.0 ppm. Therefore, the 
Agency is proposing in 40 CFR 180.227(a)(1) to increase the tolerances 
on sorghum, grain, grain to 4.0 ppm and sorghum, grain, stover to 10.0 
ppm. The Agency determined that the increased tolerances are safe; 
i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from 
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available field trial data that showed dicamba residues of 
concern as high as 0.05 ppm in or on cottonseed and a combined LOQ of 
0.1 ppm, the Agency determined that the tolerance on cottonseed should 
be decreased from 5.0 to 0.2 ppm. Also, the Agency calculated that the 
proposed tolerance level for cottonseed is greater than the highest 
average field trial (HAFT) multiplied by the concentration factor of 
1.9x in meal, and determined that a separate tolerance for cotton meal 
is no longer needed, and therefore should be revoked. Consequently, EPA 
is proposing in 40 CFR 180.227(a)(1) to decrease the tolerance on 
cotton, undelinted seed to 0.2 ppm and revoke the tolerance on cotton, 
meal.
    Based on available cattle exaggerated feeding data (about 2.1x 
MTDB) of dicamba that showed combined maximum dicamba residues of 
concern in fat at 0.511 ppm, 46.64 ppm in kidney, 5.06 ppm in liver, 
0.392 ppm in muscle, <0.01 ppm in whole milk, and 0.165 ppm in cream, 
EPA calculated that the maximum expected residues in fat, kidney, 
liver, muscle, whole milk and cream at 1x MTDB to be 0.24 ppm, 22.2 
ppm, 2.41 ppm, 0.19 ppm, <0.01 ppm and 0.09 ppm, respectively. 
Therefore, the Agency determined that the tolerances for the fat of 
cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep should be increased from 0.2 to 
0.3 ppm; the kidney of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep should be 
increased from 1.5 to 25.0 ppm; the liver of cattle, goats, hogs, 
horses, and sheep should be revoked because these separate tolerances 
are no longer needed since they will be covered by redefined meat 
byproduct tolerances of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep that 
should be increased from 0.2 to 3.0 ppm and revised to meat byproducts, 
except kidney; the meat of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep 
should be increased from 0.2 to 0.25 ppm; and the tolerance on milk 
should be decreased from 0.3 to 0.2 ppm. Consequently, EPA is proposing 
in 40 CFR 180.227(a)(2) to increase the tolerances on cattle, fat; 
goat, fat; hog, fat; horse, fat; and sheep, fat, each to 0.3 ppm; on 
cattle, kidney; goat, kidney; hog, kidney; horse, kidney; and sheep, 
kidney, each to 25.0 ppm; revise the terminology and increase the 
tolerances on cattle, meat byproducts, except kidney; goat, meat 
byproducts, except kidney; hog, meat byproducts, except kidney; horse, 
meat byproducts, except kidney; and sheep, meat byproducts, except 
kidney, each to 3.0 ppm; increase the tolerances on cattle, meat; goat, 
meat; hog, meat; horse, meat; and sheep, meat, each to 0.25 ppm; 
decrease the tolerance on milk to 0.2 ppm; and revoke the separate 
tolerances on cattle, liver; goat, liver; hog, liver; horse, liver; and 
sheep, liver. The Agency determined that the increased tolerances are 
safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result 
from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available processing data that showed combined dicamba 
residues of concern concentrated by a factor of 3.8x in soybean hulls 
(but did not concentrate in any of the other soybean processed 
fractions), and a HAFT combined residue level of 7.44 ppm, EPA expected 
residues of 28.3 ppm and determined that the tolerance on soybean, 
hulls should be increased from 13.0 to 30.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is 
proposing in 40 CFR 180.227(a)(3) to increase the tolerance on soybean, 
hulls to 30.0 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased tolerance 
is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result 
from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available data on the aspirated grain fractions (also 
known as grain dusts) of sorghum, soybean, and wheat, where the highest 
processing factor found was 670x in soybean seed aspirated grain 
fractions, and average dicamba residues of concern at 1.36 ppm in or on 
soybean seed, EPA expected residues as high as 941 ppm and determined 
that the tolerance on aspirated fractions of grain should be decreased 
from 5,100 to 1,000 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 
180.227(a)(3) to decrease the tolerance on grain, aspirated fractions 
to 1,000 ppm.

[[Page 31793]]

    At this time, EPA is not taking the following actions for dicamba 
residues of concern: to increase tolerances on grass forage and hay 
pending verification of the status of one registration whose maximum 
rate may be above the 2.0 lb ae/A rate associated with the field trial 
data, to decrease the tolerance on sorghum forage pending verification 
that registration amendments that specify a maximum single/seasonal 
rate of 0.25 lb ae/A and 20-day PHI for sorghum forage are available 
for Agency approval, and to increase sugarcane molasses pending the 
Agency's receipt and approval of storage stability data. The Agency 
will take any appropriate tolerance actions for these commodities in a 
future publication in the Federal Register.
    In addition, in 40 CFR 180.227(a)(1), EPA is proposing to revise 
the commodity terminology ``sorghum, forage'' to ``sorghum, grain, 
forage'' and revise the crop group 17 tolerance terminologies for 
``grass, forage'' and ``grass, hay'' to ``grass, forage, fodder and 
hay, group 17, forage'' and ``grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17, 
hay.''
    There are no Codex MRLs for dicamba.
    5. Dimethipin. On April 11, 2007, EPA published a notice in the 
Federal Register (72 FR 18238) (FRL-8123-6) that announced the Agency's 
receipt of requests from the registrant to voluntarily cancel all 
dimethipin registrations and therefore terminate the last dimethipin 
uses in or on cotton. EPA approved cancellation of the registrations by 
issuing a letter as the final cancellation order with the close of the 
30-day comment period, made them effective on May 31, 2007, and 
permitted the registrants for the canceled registrations to sell and 
distribute existing stocks for 24 months; i.e., until May 31, 2009. 
Also, EPA permitted persons other than the registrant to sell, 
distribute, and conforming to the EPA-approved label and labeling of 
the products, use existing dimethipin pesticide stocks on cotton until 
exhaustion. The Agency believes that end users will have had sufficient 
time to exhaust those existing stocks and for treated cotton 
commodities to have cleared the channels of trade by May 31, 2010. 
While dimethipin-treated cotton seed, meal, and gin-byproducts may be 
part of the diet of livestock, termination of dimethipin uses on cotton 
means that remaining livestock tolerances are no longer needed and 
should be revoked. In addition, while the Agency previously retained 
meat and meat byproducts tolerances to harmonize with Codex MRLs (72 FR 
52013, September 12, 2007)(FRL-8142-2), it had already determined from 
feeding data that there is no expectation of finite residues of 
dimethipin in the fat, meat, or meat byproducts of cattle, goats, 
horses, hogs, and sheep. Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.406 on cotton, undelinted seed; cattle, meat; 
cattle, meat byproducts; goat, meat; goat, meat byproducts; hog, meat; 
hog, meat byproducts; horse, meat; horse, meat byproducts; sheep, meat; 
and sheep, meat byproducts, each with an expiration/revocation date of 
May 31, 2010.
    6. Disulfoton. Because there have been no active registrations for 
disulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl] phosphorodithioate, use 
on dry beans, sorghum, and soybeans since February 2002, and on 
sugarcane since 1991, EPA determined that the tolerances on dry beans, 
sorghum, soybeans, and sugarcane are no longer needed and should be 
revoked. Consequently, the Agency is proposing to revoke the tolerances 
in 40 CFR 180.183(a) on bean, dry, seed; sorghum, forage; sorghum, 
grain, grain; sorghum, grain, stover; soybean; soybean, forage; 
soybean, hay; and sugarcane, cane.
    Also, because the tolerances expired on December 9, 2003, EPA is 
proposing to remove the entries for corn, field, forage; corn, field, 
grain; corn, field, stover; corn, pop, forage; corn, pop, grain; corn, 
pop, stover; corn, sweet, forage; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with 
husks removed; corn, sweet, stover; oat, grain; oat, hay; oat, straw; 
and pecan from 40 CFR 180.183(a).
    In addition, EPA is proposing to revise commodity terminology to 
conform to current Agency practice as follows: in 40 CFR 180.183(a), 
``pea'' to ``pea, dry, seed,'' and ``pea, succulent.''
    There are Codex MRLs for combined residues of disulfoton, demeton-
S, and their sulphoxides and sulphones on a number of commodities, 
including MRLs on dry beans, oats, oat straw, and pecans.
    7. Diuron. Currently, tolerances for diuron, 3-(3,4-
dichlorophenyl)-1,1-dimethylurea, in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) are 
established for residues of diuron per se and in Sec.  180.106(a)(2) 
are established for combined residues of diuron and its metabolites 
convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline. Based on plant and animal 
metabolism data, the Agency had determined that residues of concern for 
plant and livestock commodities should include metabolites hydrolysable 
to 3,4-dichloroaniline. Therefore, EPA is proposing to remove Sec.  
180.106(a)(2) and combine the tolerances there with those in Sec.  
180.106(a)(1), under newly recodified Sec.  180.106(a), and revise the 
introductory text containing the tolerance expression in newly 
recodified 40 CFR 180.106(a), as follows:
    Tolerances are established for the combined residues of the 
herbicide diuron, 3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1,1-dimethylurea, and its 
metabolites convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline in or on food 
commodities as follows.

    Also, as a result of combining tolerances in Sec.  180.106(a)(1) 
and (a)(2) under newly recodified Sec.  180.106(a), there will be two 
tolerances on peppermint tops, one at 1.5 ppm and the other at 2 ppm. 
Based on available field trial data that showed diuron residues of 
concern as high as 1.3 ppm in or on peppermint tops, the Agency 
determined that the appropriate tolerance is 1.5 ppm, and the tolerance 
on peppermint tops at 2 ppm is no longer needed, and therefore should 
be revoked. Consequently, while EPA is proposing to revoke the 
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) on peppermint, tops at 2 ppm, it will 
maintain the tolerance on peppermint, tops at 1.5 ppm.
    Because vetch seed is no longer considered by the Agency to be a 
significant livestock feed item as delineated in ``Table 1.--Raw 
Agricultural and Processed Commodities and Feedstuffs Derived from 
Crops,'' which is found in Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines OPPTS 
860.1000 dated August 1996 (available at https://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/
publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/860_Residue_Chemistry_Test_
Guidelines/Series/), EPA determined that the tolerance is no longer 
needed, and therefore should be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing 
to revoke the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) on vetch, seed.
    Because there are no active registrations for diuron use on 
potatoes and rye, the Agency determined that the tolerances on potato; 
rye, forage; rye, grain; and rye, straw are no longer needed and should 
be revoked. Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerances in 40 
CFR 180.106(a)(1) on potato; rye, forage; rye, grain; and rye, straw.
    Because there are no active registrations for diuron use on sweet 
corn, the Agency determined that the tolerances on sweet corn forage 
and stover are no longer needed and should be revoked. Therefore, EPA 
is proposing to revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) on corn, 
sweet, forage and corn, sweet, stover. Also, the tolerance on corn in 
grain or ear form (including sweet corn, field corn, popcorn) should be 
revised to corn, field, grain and corn,

[[Page 31794]]

pop, grain. Based on available field trial data that showed diuron 
residues of concern as high as <0.1 ppm in or on field corn grain and 
translating that data to support use of diuron on popcorn grain, the 
Agency determined that the tolerances on field corn and popcorn grain 
should each be set at 0.1 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke 
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) on corn in grain or ear form 
(including sweet corn, field corn, popcorn) and establish separate 
tolerances on corn, field, grain; and corn, pop, grain; each at 0.1 
ppm.
    Based on available field trial data that showed diuron residues of 
concern as high as 2.58 ppm in or on alfalfa forage, EPA determined 
that the tolerance on alfalfa should be divided into alfalfa forage and 
alfalfa hay and the tolerance on alfalfa forage should be increased 
from 2.0 to 3.0 ppm. Therefore, the Agency is proposing in recodified 
40 CFR 180.106(a) to revise the nomenclature for alfalfa to read 
alfalfa, forage and alfalfa, hay and to increase the tolerance on 
alfalfa, forage to 3.0 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased 
tolerance is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm 
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    Based on available field trial data that showed diuron residues of 
concern as high as 0.07 ppm in or on apple, 0.18 ppm in or on 
cottonseed, <0.03 ppm in or on grapes, 0.065 ppm in or on pineapple, 
0.1 ppm in or on field pea seed, 0.33 ppm in or on grain sorghum, 0.20 
ppm in or on sugarcane, 0.29 ppm in or on wheat grain, and 1.17 ppm in 
or on wheat straw, EPA determined that the tolerances on apple, 
cottonseed, grape, pineapple, field pea seed, grain sorghum, sugarcane, 
wheat grain, and wheat straw should be decreased from 1.0 to 0.1 ppm, 
1.0 to 0.2 ppm, 1.0 to 0.05 ppm, 1.0 to 0.1 ppm, 1.0 to 0.1 ppm, 1.0 to 
0.5 ppm, 1.0 to 0.2 ppm, 1.0 to 0.5 ppm, and 2.0 to 1.5 ppm, 
respectively. Therefore, the Agency is proposing in recodified 40 CFR 
180.106(a) to decrease the tolerances on apple to 0.1 ppm, cotton, 
undelinted seed to 0.2 ppm, grape to 0.05 ppm, pineapple to 0.1 ppm, 
pea to 0.1 ppm and revise the tolerance nomenclature for pea to pea, 
field, seed; sorghum, grain, grain to 0.5 ppm; sugarcane, cane to 0.2 
ppm, wheat, grain to 0.5 ppm, and wheat, straw to 1.5 ppm.
    Based on active registrations for use of diuron on barley 
restricted to western OR and western WA and available field trial data 
that showed diuron residues of concern as high as 0.15 ppm in or on 
barley grain and the translation of wheat straw data to barley straw, 
EPA determined that the tolerances on barley grain and hay should be 
recodified from 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to 40 CFR 180.106(c) as regional 
tolerances and the tolerance on barley grain be decreased from 1.0 to 
0.2 ppm, and a tolerance should be established for barley straw at 1.5 
ppm. Therefore, the Agency is proposingto recodify the tolerances on 
barley, grain and barley, hay currently in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to 40 
CFR 180.106(c) and decrease the tolerance on barley, grain to 0.2 ppm, 
and establish a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.106(c) on barley, straw at 1.5 
ppm.
    Based on available processing data that showed an average 
concentration factor of 17x for wheat grain aspirated grain fractions 
and 2.3x for wheat bran, a HAFT value of 0.29 ppm for wheat, and 
translation of wheat bran data to support barley bran, EPA determined 
that the expected combined diuron residues of concern in wheat grain 
aspirated fractions are 4.9 ppm and wheat bran are 0.67 ppm, which are 
both greater than the reassessed tolerance for wheat grain of 0.5 ppm, 
and barley, grain of 0.2 ppm and therefore tolerances should be 
established for aspirated grain fractions at 5.0 ppm, wheat bran at 0.7 
ppm, and barley bran at 0.7 ppm. Consequently, EPA is proposing to 
establish tolerances in recodified 40 CFR 180.106(a) for grain, 
aspirated fractions at 5.0 ppm and wheat, bran at 0.7 ppm, and in 40 
CFR 180.106(c) for barley, bran at 0.7 ppm.
    Based on active registrations for use of diuron on clover 
restricted to western OR and available field trial data that showed 
diuron residues of concern as high as 0.07 ppm in or on clover forage 
and 0.7 ppm in or on clover hay, EPA determined that the tolerances on 
clover forage and hay should be recodified from 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to 
40 CFR 180.106(c) as regional tolerances and the tolerances on clover 
forage and hay be decreased from 2.0 to 0.1 ppm and 1.0 ppm, 
respectively. Therefore, the Agency is proposing in 40 CFR 
180.106(a)(1) to recodify the tolerances on clover, forage and clover, 
hay to 40 CFR 180.106(c) and decrease the tolerance on clover, forage 
to 0.1 ppm and clover, hay to 1.0 ppm.
    Based on active registrations for use of diuron on oats restricted 
to ID, OR and WA and available field trial data that showed diuron 
residues of concern as high as <0.1 ppm in or on oat grain and 
translation of wheat straw data (residues as high as 1.17 ppm) to oat 
straw, EPA determined that the tolerances on oat forage, grain, hay, 
and straw should be recodified from 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to 40 CFR 
180.106(c) as regional tolerances and the tolerances on oat grain and 
straw be decreased from 1.0 to 0.1 ppm and 2.0 to 1.5 ppm, 
respectively. Therefore, the Agency is proposing in 40 CFR 
180.106(a)(1) to recodify the tolerances on oat, forage; oat, grain; 
oat, hay; and oat, straw to 40 CFR 180.106(c) and decrease the 
tolerances on oat, grain to 0.1 ppm and oat, straw to 1.5 ppm.
    Based on active registrations for use of diuron on trefoil 
restricted to western OR, available field trial data that showed diuron 
residues of concern as high as 1.3 ppm in or on trefoil hay, and 
translation of clover forage (residues as high as 0.07 ppm) data to 
support trefoil forage, EPA determined that the tolerances on trefoil 
forage and hay should be recodified from 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to 40 CFR 
180.106(c) as regional tolerances and decreased from 2.0 to 0.1 ppm for 
forage and 2.0 to 1.5 ppm for hay. Therefore, the Agency is proposing 
in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to recodify the tolerances on trefoil, forage 
and trefoil, hay to 40 CFR 180.106(c) and decrease them to 0.1 ppm and 
1.5 ppm, respectively.
    Based on active registrations for use of diuron on vetch restricted 
to ID, OR and WA and translation of clover forage and hay data 
(residues as high as 0.07 ppm and 0.7 ppm, respectively) to vetch 
forage and hay, EPA determined that the tolerances on vetch forage and 
hay should be recodified from 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to 40 CFR 180.106(c) 
as regional tolerances and the tolerances on vetch forage and hay be 
decreased from 2.0 to 0.1 ppm and 2.0 to 1.5 ppm, respectively. 
Therefore, the Agency is proposing in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to recodify 
the tolerances on vetch, forage and vetch, hay to 40 CFR 180.106(c) and 
decrease them to 0.1 ppm and 1.5 ppm, respectively.
    Because acceptable field trial data are available for the 
representative commodities of the berry crop group (blackberry, 
blueberry, and raspberry), and data for blackberries and raspberries 
may be translated to support use on loganberries, and data for 
blueberries may be translated to support use on gooseberries, EPA 
determined that a crop group tolerance should be established 
concomitant with the removal of individual berry tolerances. Also, 
based on data that showed diuron residues of concern as high as <0.1 
ppm on blackberries and raspberries, the Agency determined that the 
group tolerance should be decreased from the level of the individual 
tolerances; i.e., from 1.0 to 0.1 ppm. Therefore, the Agency is 
proposing to revoke the individual tolerances on blackberry, blueberry, 
boysenberry, currant, dewberry, gooseberry, huckleberry, loganberry, 
and raspberry in 40 CFR

[[Page 31795]]

180.106(a)(1) and establish a tolerance on berry group 13 at 0.1 ppm in 
recodified 40 CFR 180.106(a).
    Based on available field trial data that showed diuron residues of 
concern in or on grapefruit and oranges below the limit of quantitation 
(LOQ) of 0.0345 ppm and in or on lemons as high as 0.33 ppm, EPA 
determined that the citrus fruit tolerance should be revised to fruit, 
citrus, group 10, except lemon and decreased from 1.0 to 0.05 ppm, and 
a separate tolerance on lemon should be established at 0.5 ppm. 
Therefore, the Agency is proposing in recodified 40 CFR 180.106(a) to 
revise the tolerance on fruit, citrus to fruit, citrus, group 10, 
except lemon and decrease it to 0.05 ppm, and establish a tolerance on 
lemon at 0.5 ppm.
    In addition, based on available processing data that showed average 
concentration factors of 1.9x for citrus dried pulp and 10.5x for 
citrus oil, and the HAFT value for lemons (0.27 ppm), EPA determined 
that the expected combined diuron residues of concern in citrus dried 
pulp and citrus oil are 0.51 ppm and 2.8 ppm, respectively. Because the 
expected residues in citrus dried pulp are approximately the same as 
the reassessed tolerance for lemons, the Agency determined that a 
tolerance for citrus dried pulp is no longer needed and therefore 
should be revoked, and a tolerance for citrus oil should be established 
at 3.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to 
revoke the tolerance on citrus, dried pulp and establish a tolerance on 
citrus, oil at 3.0 ppm in recodified 40 CFR 180.106(a).
    Based on available processing data that showed an average 
concentration factor of 4.7x for pineapple pulp, and a HAFT value of 
0.065 ppm for pineapple, EPA determined that the expected combined 
diuron residues of concern in pineapple process residue are 0.31 ppm, 
which is greater than the reassessed tolerance for pineapple of 0.1 
ppm, and therefore a tolerance should be established for pineapple 
process residue at 0.4 ppm. Consequently, EPA is proposing to establish 
a tolerance in recodified 40 CFR 180.106(a) for pineapple, process 
residue at 0.4 ppm.
    Based on available processing data that showed an average 
concentration factor of 3.27x for blackstrap molasses, and a HAFT value 
of 0.2 ppm for sugarcane, EPA determined that the expected combined 
diuron residues of concern in sugarcane molasses are 0.654 ppm, which 
is greater than the reassessed tolerance for sugarcane of 0.20 ppm, and 
therefore a tolerance should be established for sugarcane molasses at 
0.7 ppm. Consequently, EPA is proposing to establish a tolerance in 
recodified 40 CFR 180.106(a) for sugarcane, molasses at 0.7 ppm.
    Because adequate field trial data are not available for almonds, 
which is a representative commodity of the nut, tree, group 14, and 
based on available field trial data that showed diuron residues of 
concern in or on macadamia nuts, pecans, and walnuts were each <0.05 
ppm, EPA determined that the nut group tolerance at 0.1 ppm should be 
revoked concomitant with the establishment of separate tolerances for 
hazelnuts (filberts) at 0.1 ppm, and macadamia nuts, pecans, and 
walnuts, each at 0.05 ppm. Consequently, after the nut group tolerance 
is revoked, diuron use on almonds, beech nuts, butternuts, Brazil nuts, 
cashews, chestnuts, and hickory nuts will no longer be covered. In the 
near future, the Agency is expecting to receive data, including crop 
field trial data on hazelnuts (filberts), from the registrants based on 
their responses to a Data Call-In, and if needed will address the 
hazelnut tolerance again in a future notice in the Federal Register. 
Therefore, the Agency is proposing in 40 CFR 180.106(a)(1) to revoke 
the tolerance on nut and establish tolerances on hazelnut at 0.1 ppm, 
and nut, macadamia; pecan; and walnut; each at 0.05 ppm in recodified 
40 CFR 180.106(a).
    In addition, EPA is proposing to revise commodity terminology to 
conform to current Agency practice in recodified 40 CFR 180.106(a) as 
follows: ``grass crops (other than Bermuda grass)'' to ``grass, forage, 
except bermudagrass;'' ``grass, hay (other than Bermuda grass)'' to 
``grass, hay, except bermudagrass;'' and ``sorghum, forage'' to 
``sorghum, grain, forage.''
    After active registrations are amended to restrict use of diuron on 
bananas to those grown in Hawaii, EPA expects to make it a regional 
tolerance and decrease the tolerance based on available field trial 
data. However, EPA is still in the process of addressing those active 
registrations. Therefore, the Agency will not propose to take action on 
the tolerance for diuron residues of concern on banana in 40 CFR 
180.106 at this time, but will address it in a future publication in 
the Federal Register.
    There are no Codex MRLs for diuron.
    8. Ethoprop. Because there have been no active registrations for 
ethoprop use on peanuts since April 2002, EPA determined that the 
tolerances on peanut and peanut hay are no longer needed and should be 
revoked. Consequently, the Agency is proposing to revoke the tolerances 
in 40 CFR 180.262(a) on peanut and peanut, hay.
    9. Etridiazole. Etridiazole, 5-ethoxy-3-(trichloromethyl)-1,2,4-
thiadiazole, is registered for use on peanuts as a seed treatment. In a 
final rule published in the Federal Register on August 1, 2007 (72 FR 
41913) (FRL-8139-5), the Agency announced that a tolerance should be 
established on peanut hay for etridiazole. Based on available 
metabolism data that showed residues of etridiazole per se were non-
detectable and the monoacid metabolite showed residues as high as 0.033 
ppm in or on cotton, soybean, and wheat grown from seed, the Agency 
determined that the combined residues of concern for etridiazole in or 
on commodities grown from etridiazole treated seed would not be 
expected to exceed 0.04 ppm, and therefore a tolerance on peanut hay 
should be established at the combined LOQ (0.1 ppm). Consequently, EPA 
is proposing to establish a tolerance for residues of etridiazole and 
its monoacid metabolite, 3-carboxy-5-ethoxy-1,2,4-thiadiazole, in 40 
CFR 180.370(a) on peanut, hay at 0.1 ppm. For a detailed discussion of 
the Agency's rationale on the establishment of the peanut hay 
tolerance, refer to the final rule published in the Federal Register of 
August 1, 2007.
    There are no Codex MRLs for etridiazole.
    10. Fenitrothion. Currently, a tolerance for fenitrothion in 40 CFR 
180.540(a) is established for combined residues of fenitrothion, O,O-
dimethyl O-(4-nitrom-tolyl) phosphorothioate and its metabolites, O,O-
dimethyl O-(4-nitro-m-tolyl) phosphate and 3-methyl-4-nitrophenol. 
Based on available field trial data, EPA determined that finite 
residues of the metabolite O,O-dimethyl O-(4-nitro-m-tolyl) phosphate 
are not expected in or on wheat grain or in wheat gluten resulting from 
the postharvest use of fenitrothion on stored wheat in Australia, and 
therefore that metabolite no longer needs to be included in the 
tolerance expression. Also, because the metabolite 3-methyl-4-
nitrophenol is not determined to be a cholinesterase-inhibiting 
metabolite, the Agency determined that the metabolite 3-methyl-4-
nitrophenol no longer needs to be included in the tolerance expression. 
Consequently, the Agency determined that residues of concern for 
enforcement purposes should include only the parent compound. 
Therefore, EPA is proposing to revise the tolerance expression in 40 
CFR 180.540(a) as follows:
    A tolerance is established for residues of the insecticide 
fenitrothion, O,O-dimethyl O-(4-nitro-m-tolyl)

[[Page 31796]]

phosphorothioate, from the postharvest application of the insecticide 
to stored wheat in Australia, in or on the following food commodity.
    Based on available Australian field trial data that showed 
fenitrothion residues as high as 2.5 ppm in or on wheat gluten, EPA 
determined that the tolerance on wheat gluten should be decreased from 
30 to 3 ppm. Therefore, the Agency is proposing in 40 CFR 180.540(a) to 
decrease the tolerance on wheat gluten to 3.0 ppm.
    11. Malathion. Flax straw, lespedeza seed and straw, and vetch seed 
and straw are no longer considered by the Agency to be significant 
animal feed items as delineated in ``Table 1.--Raw Agricultural and 
Processed Commodities and Feedstuffs Derived from Crops,'' which is 
found in Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines OPPTS 860.1000 dated August 
1996, available at https://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS_
Harmonized/860_Residue_Chemistry_Test_Guidelines/Series, EPA 
determined that the tolerances are no longer needed and therefore 
should be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) on flax, straw; lespedeza, seed; 
lespedeza, straw; vetch, seed; and vetch, straw.
    There are no Codex MRLs for malathion on the commodities mentioned 
above.
    12. Metaldehyde. The Agency has conducted human health and 
ecological risk assessments based on its review of the database 
supporting the uses of metaldehyde. The toxicological profile and 
endpoints, exposure assessment, FQPA Safety Factor, aggregate exposure 
and risk, and cumulative risk are discussed in the metaldehyde RED and 
HED Chapter of the RED, which are both available, along with related 
supporting documents, in the docket associated with metaldehyde as 
identified in Unit II.A. The dietary exposure assessment for 
metaldehyde is available in the docket of this proposed rule.
    The dietary risk assessment is a function of both exposure and 
toxicity. In the case of metaldehydye, dietary risk is expressed as a 
percentage of a level of concern. The level of concern is the dose 
predicted to result in no unreasonable adverse health effects to any 
human population subgroup, including sensitive members of such 
population subgroups. This level of concern is referred to as the 
population adjusted dose (PAD). Risk estimates less than 100% of the 
PAD are below EPA's level of concern. The acute PAD (aPAD) is the 
highest predicted dose to which a person could be exposed on any given 
day with no adverse health effect expected. The chronic PAD (cPAD) is 
the highest predicted dose to which a person could be exposed over the 
course of a lifetime with no adverse health effects expected. There are 
no dietary risks of concern for metaldehyde. For the general population 
and all subpopulations, acute dietary risk estimates are below 100% of 
the aPAD and chronic dietary risk estimates are below 100% of the cPAD. 
Dietary risk estimates are provided for the general U.S. population and 
various population subgroups. This assessment showed that at the 95th 
percentile of exposure, the acute risk estimates are below the Agency's 
level of concern (<100% of the aPAD) for the general U.S. population 
(11% of the aPAD) and all population subgroups (<25% of the aPAD). The 
highest exposed population subgroup was children 1 to 2 years old. 
Tolerance level residues and 100% crop treated (PCT) were also used to 
determine the chronic dietary exposure and risk estimates. This 
assessment showed that for all included commodities, the chronic risk 
estimates were below the Agency's level of concern (<100% of the cPAD) 
for the general U.S. population (22% of the cPAD) and all population 
subgroups (<49% cPAD). The highest exposed population subgroup was 
children 1 to 2 years old. Aggregated risks from dietary and 
residential exposures are below the Agency's levels of concern.
    The Agency has reassessed the one existing tolerance for 
metaldehyde, and found a reasonable certainty of no harm to the U.S. 
population and all population subgroups from the use of metaldehyde. 
Prior to the RED, in the Federal Register of April 26, 2006 (71 FR 
24692)(FRL-8062-5), EPA published a notice of filing of a pesticide 
petition submitted by a registrant for the establishment of a 
regulation for residues of metaldehyde in or on various food 
commodities, including representatives for the brassica (cole) leafy 
crop group, citrus crop group, lettuce, tomato, and strawberries. In 
the July 2006 RED and April 2006 HED Chapter of the RED, the Agency 
identified new tolerances (whose uses as well as strawberry were 
included in the dietary risk assessment) that are needed for 
metaldehyde, including ones for commodities mentioned in the notice of 
April 2006. The Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) program 
of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which develops residue data for 
minor and specialty crops, has done research on a number of additional 
uses for metaldehyde. In the