Azinphos-methyl, Disulfoton, Esfenvalerate, Ethylene oxide, Fenvalerate, et al.; Tolerance Actions, 46689-46699 [E9-21895]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 175 (Friday, September 11, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46689-46699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21895]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0834; FRL-8426-2]


Azinphos-methyl, Disulfoton, Esfenvalerate, Ethylene oxide, 
Fenvalerate, et al.; Tolerance Actions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is revoking certain tolerances for the fungicides 
prothioconazole and thiabendazole; the herbicide primisulfuron-methyl; 
and the insecticides azinphos-methyl, disulfoton, esfenvalerate, 
fenvalerate, and phosalone; the plant growth regulator 1-
naphthaleneacetic acid; and the antimicrobial/insecticidal agent 
ethylene oxide. Also, EPA is modifying certain tolerances for the 
insecticides disulfoton, esfenvalerate, and phosmet; and the plant 
growth regulator 1-naphthaleneacetic. In addition, EPA is establishing 
new tolerances for the insecticides disulfoton, esfenvalerate, and 
phosmet; and the antimicrobial/insecticidal agent ethylene oxide and 
ethylene chlorohydrin (a reaction product formed during the fumigation/
sterilization process). The regulatory actions finalized 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: This regulation is effective September 11, 2009. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before November 10, 2009, 
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-2008-0834. All documents in the 
docket are listed in the docket index available at https://www.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.

[[Page 46690]]

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: 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:

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. 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 electronically available documents at 
https://www.regulations.gov, you may access this Federal Register 
document electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal 
Register'' listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access 
a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the 
Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 436a, any person may file 
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a 
hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations which 
govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings appear in 
40 CFR part 178. You must file your objection or request a hearing on 
this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR 
part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID 
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0834 in the subject line on the first page of 
your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or 
delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before November 10, 2009.
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the 
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of 
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public 
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked 
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA 
without prior notice. Submit your copies, identified by docket ID 
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0834, 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 Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30 
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). 
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed 
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    In the Federal Register of December 31, 2008 (73 FR 80317) (FRL-
8394-7), EPA issued a proposal to revoke, modify, and establish 
specific tolerances for residues of the fungicides prothioconazole and 
thiabendazole; the herbicide primisulfuron-methyl; and the insecticides 
azinphos-methyl, disulfoton, esfenvalerate, fenvalerate, phosalone, and 
phosmet; and the plant growth regulator 1-naphthaleneacetic acid; and 
the antimicrobial/insecticidal agent ethylene oxide and ethylene 
chlorohydrin (a reaction product formed during the fumigation/
sterilization process). Also, the proposal of December 31, 2008 (73 FR 
80317) provided a 60-day comment period which invited public comment 
for consideration and for support of tolerance retention under FFDCA 
standards.
    In this final rule, EPA is revoking, modifying, and establishing 
specific tolerances for residues of azinphos-methyl, disulfoton, 
esfenvalerate, ethylene oxide, ethylene chlorohydrin, fenvalerate, 1-
naphthaleneacetic acid, phosalone, phosmet, prothioconazole, 
primisulfuron-methyl, and thiabendazole in or on commodities listed in 
the regulatory text of this document.
    EPA is finalizing these tolerance actions in order to implement the 
tolerance recommendations made during the reregistration and 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 on FQPA Tolerance Reassessment 
Progress and Interim 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, to 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 at https://www.regulations.gov

[[Page 46691]]

and https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/status.htm.
    In this final rule, EPA is revoking certain tolerances and/or 
tolerance exemptions because either they are no longer needed or are 
associated with food uses that are no longer registered under FIFRA in 
the United States. 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 active ingredient. The tolerances 
revoked by this final rule are no longer necessary to cover residues of 
the relevant pesticides in or on domestically treated commodities or 
commodities treated outside but imported into the United States. It is 
EPA's general practice to issue a final rule revoking those tolerances 
and tolerance exemptions for residues of pesticide active ingredients 
on crop uses for which there are no active registrations under FIFRA, 
unless any person in comments on the proposal indicates a need for the 
tolerance or tolerance exemption to cover residues in or on imported 
commodities or legally treated domestic commodities.
    EPA has historically been concerned that retention of tolerances 
that are not necessary to cover residues in or on legally treated foods 
may encourage misuse of pesticides within the United States.
    Generally, EPA will proceed with the revocation of these tolerances 
on the grounds discussed in Unit II.A. if one of the following 
conditions applies:
     Prior to EPA's issuance of a FFDCA section 408(f) order 
requesting additional data or issuance of a FFDCA section 408(d) or (e) 
order revoking the tolerances on other grounds, commenters retract the 
comment identifying a need for the tolerance to be retained.
     EPA independently verifies that the tolerance is no longer 
needed.
     The tolerance is not supported by data that demonstrate 
that the tolerance meets the requirements under FQPA.
    This final rule does not revoke those tolerances for which EPA 
received comments stating a need for the tolerance to be retained. In 
response to the proposal published in the Federal Register of December 
31, 2008 (73 FR 80317), EPA received comments during the 60-day public 
comment period, as follows:
    1. General--comment by private citizen. An anonymous comment was 
received which expressed concerns about pesticides on food and that 
only zero tolerance levels should be acceptable.
    Agency response. The commenter did not take issue with any of the 
Agency's specific conclusions to modify, revoke, or establish certain 
tolerances. Also, the commenter did not refer to any specific studies 
which pertained to those conclusions. EPA believes that the tolerance 
actions finalized herein meet the safety standard of FFDCA section 408, 
21 U.S.C. 346a. In developing REDs and TREDs, EPA worked with 
stakeholders, pesticide registrants, growers, and other pesticide 
users, environmental and public health interests, the States, the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, other Federal agencies, and others to 
develop voluntary measures or regulatory controls needed to effectively 
reduce risks of concern. Such options include voluntary cancellation of 
pesticide products or deletion of uses, declaring certain uses 
ineligible or not yet eligible, restricting use of products to 
certified applicators, limiting the amount or frequency of use, 
improving use directions and precautions, adding more protective 
clothing and equipment requirements, requiring special packaging or 
engineering controls, requiring no-treatment buffer zones, employing 
environmental and ecological safeguards, and other measures.
    2.  Azinphos-methyl--i. Comment by the Cranberry Institute. The 
Cranberry Institute requested that the tolerance on cranberry be 
maintained until the planned Canadian phase-out in 2012, and the 
commenter also requested that a channels of trade date be made as 2014. 
The commenter stated that much of the Canadian cranberry crop is 
imported into the United States.
    ii. Comments by Argentina's Secretary of Agriculture and multiple 
growers organizations in Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and Uruguay. The 
Secretary of Agriculture in Argentina requested that the U.S. 
tolerances for azinphos-methyl on apples, pears, and cherries not be 
revoked, but rather remain in place to maintain trade flows with the 
United States. The commenter stated that in 2008, Argentina exported 2 
and 37 million kilograms of apples and pears, respectively, to the 
United States and that a diminished supply of apples and pears may 
raise costs for U.S. consumers. Also, the Secretary of Agriculture in 
Argentina stated that the azinphos-methyl tolerance revocations were 
not associated with dietary risks. Multiple commenters from 
agricultural organizations in Argentina and one grower organization 
from Uruguay also requested that the U.S. tolerances for azinphos-
methyl on apples and pears not be revoked, but rather remain in place 
to maintain trade flows with the United States. Several of these 
commenters also stated that the azinphos-methyl tolerance revocations 
were not associated with dietary risks and that use of alternatives to 
azinphos-methyl would be costly to growers there and U.S. consumers.
    iii. Comment by Makhteshim Agan of North America, Inc. (MANA). The 
commenter, a manufacturer of azinphos-methyl, expressed concern that 
azinphos-methyl treated crops may be in channels of trade beyond last 
azinphos-methyl use dates. Also, MANA stated that the azinphos-methyl 
tolerance revocations were not associated with dietary risks. In 
addition, MANA stated that import tolerances may be necessary because 
in 2008, the United States imported 93 million kilograms of apples from 
Chile, 2 million kilograms of apples from Argentina, 25 million 
kilograms of pears from Chile, and 37 million kilograms of pears from 
Argentina, countries where azinphos-methyl is used to treat apples and 
pears. Furthermore, MANA stated that in 2006, the United States 
imported 40% of fruit, 15% of vegetables, and 18% of nuts and that a 
substantial number of crops have been treated with azinphos-methyl and 
expressed concern that tolerance revocation would discriminate against 
foreign food commodities for sale in the United States and 
internationally accepted scientific evidence in violation of the World 
Trade Organization's General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 
Articles III and III.3, against GATT Members in violation of GATT 
Articles II.2. and II.3, and Member standards in violation of GATT 
Article IV. Finally, MANA requested that the U.S. tolerances for 
azinphos-methyl on apples, almonds, almond hulls, blueberries, Brussels 
sprouts, cherries, crabapples, parsley leaves, parsley turnip roots, 
peaches, pistachios, and walnuts not be revoked, but rather remain in 
place to maintain trade flows with the United States.
    iv. Comment by the Association of Exporters of Chile (ASOEX). 
ASOEX, a non-governmental Chilean organization, stated that the 
Agency's proposal to revoke tolerances for azinphos-methyl on pome 
fruit, stone fruit, berries, and kiwifruit would be an unfair 
restriction on international trade, prohibited by GATT, and requested 
that the tolerances not be revoked.
    Agency response. According to the revised Canadian phase-out 
schedule for azinphos-methyl, the last date for use of azinphos-methyl 
by users in Canada on

[[Page 46692]]

cranberries is December 31, 2012. In the Federal Register of December 
31, 2008 (73 FR 80317)(FRL-8394-7), EPA proposed tolerance actions for 
several active ingredients including a proposal to revoke the tolerance 
for residues of azinphos-methyl on cranberry in 40 CFR 180.154 and, as 
described in Unit II.C. of that document, the revocation would become 
effective on the date of publication of the final rule. Because the 
Cranberry Institute has expressed a need for maintenance of the 
tolerance until the end of 2012 for import purposes, EPA is revoking 
the U.S. tolerance for residues of azinphos-methyl in 40 CFR 180.154 on 
cranberry at 0.5 ppm with an expiration/revocation date of December 31, 
2012. Commodities treated with pesticides that are in the channels of 
trade following tolerance revocation are subject to FFDCA section 
408(l)(5). Under this section, any residues of pesticides in or on such 
food shall not render the food adulterated so long as it is shown to 
the satisfaction of the Food and Drug Administration that the residue 
is present as the result of an application or use of the pesticide at a 
time and in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA and the residue does 
not exceed the level that was authorized at the time of the application 
or use to be present on the food under a tolerance or exemption from a 
tolerance. Evidence to show that food was lawfully treated may include 
records that verify the dates that the pesticide was applied to such 
food.
    Currently, there is no tolerance for azinphos-methyl residues in or 
on kiwifruit and kiwifruit was not addressed in the proposal of 
December 31, 2008 (73 FR 80317). Based on comments which expressed a 
need to retain specific tolerances for importation purposes into the 
United States, EPA will not revoke tolerances for residues of azinphos-
methyl in or on almond; almond, hulls; apple; blackberry; blueberry; 
boysenberry; Brussels sprouts; cherry; crabapple; loganberry; parsley, 
leaves; parsley, turnip rooted, roots; peach; pear; pistachio; plum, 
prune; quince; raspberry; and walnut in 40 CFR 180.154 at this time. 
Therefore, any arguments regarding GATT are moot at this time. However, 
retaining these tolerances indefinitely will likely require submission 
of data to demonstrate their safety. EPA believes that residue data 
from foreign countries, and perhaps other data, will be needed to 
support import tolerances for azinphos-methyl. For example, domestic 
U.S. residue data are not likely to be representative of growing 
conditions and use patterns in other countries. EPA published guidances 
on pesticide import tolerances and residue data for imported food in 
the Federal Register notices of April 5, 2006 (71 FR 17099)(FRL-7772-1) 
and June 1, 2000 (65 FR 35069)(FRL-6559-3).
    The Agency is revoking the following azinphos-methyl tolerances in 
40 CFR 180.154, for which no commenter expressed a need: Alfalfa, 
forage; alfalfa, hay; bean, snap, succulent; broccoli; cabbage; 
cauliflower; celery; clover, forage; clover, hay; cotton, undelinted 
seed; cucumber; eggplant; fruit, citrus, group 10; grape; hazelnut; 
melon; onion; pecan; pepper; potato; spinach; strawberry; tomato, 
postharvest; trefoil, forage; and trefoil, hay. Also, the Agency is 
removing the expired tolerance in 40 CFR 180.154 on sugarcane, cane.
    3. Esfenvalerate--comment by DuPont Crop Protection. DuPont Crop 
Protection stated that a tolerance of 1.0 ppm on succulent peas is 
appropriate for esfenvalerate, that the regional tolerance for okra at 
0.1 ppm for esfenvalerate be retained because there is a pending IR-4 
request to set okra as a national tolerance at 0.5 ppm based on 
existing pepper data, that the kohlrabi and head lettuce tolerances not 
be made regional tolerances because kohlrabi is not geographically 
restricted and DuPont expects to submit a label amendment which removes 
the geographical restriction on head lettuce for esfenvalerate. Also, 
DuPont requested that a national tolerance be established on pistachios 
at 0.1 ppm and a regional tolerance be established on cardoon at 1.0 
ppm based on pending tolerance petitions (PP7F4859 and 
PP0E3912, respectively). In addition, DuPont notes that the 
Agency proposed revocation in 40 CFR 180.379(a)(3) for the tolerance on 
soybean hulls for fenvalerate and states that, using the conversion 
method, one should be established for esfenvalerate at 0.5 ppm.
    Agency response. In the Federal Register of December 31, 2008 (73 
FR 80317)(FRL-8394-7), EPA proposed to revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.379(a) for residues of fenvalerate in or on pea at 1.0 ppm and pea, 
dry, seed at 0.25 ppm with expiration/revocation dates of April 2, 
2010, and establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.533(a)(1) for residues of 
esfenvalerate, its non-racemic isomer, and its diastereomers in or on 
pea, succulent at 0.5 ppm and pea, dry, seed at 0.25 ppm. Esfenvalerate 
is an enriched isomer of fenvalerate and bridging studies (field trial 
data) indicate that esfenvalerate residues are lower than fenvalerate 
residues. The Agency agreed that bridging data could satisfy 
registration requirements and used the tiered approach originally 
proposed by DuPont in tolerance petition PP4F4329, which 
included that fenvalerate tolerances greater than or equal to 1.0 ppm 
but less than or equal to 2.0 ppm, should be divided by 2 in a 
conversion to esfenvalerate tolerances for certain crop commodities, 
including peas, where the Agency recommended a tolerance of 0.5 ppm in 
or on succulent pea. Therefore, because the Agency considers that to be 
the appropriate tolerance, EPA is establishing the tolerance on pea, 
succulent in 40 CFR 180.533(a)(1) at 0.5 ppm.
    The supporting data for the tolerance on kohlrabi comes from two 
field trials in Texas. However, in Table 1 of guideline 860.1500 for 
crop field trials, available at http:/www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/860_Residue_Chemistry_Test_Guidelines/Series/860-1500.pdf, the minimum number of crop field trials 
for kohlrabi is listed to be three. In addition, when the Agency 
reviewed the 1996 petition, it determined at that time that the labels 
should bear directions for kohlrabi grown in Texas only. Therefore, the 
available data do not support a national (non-geographically 
restricted) tolerance for esfenvalerate. Consequently, EPA is 
recodifying the tolerance for kohlrabi at 2.0 ppm from 40 CFR 
180.533(a) into 40 CFR 180.533(c) as a regional tolerance. If the 
commenter has any additional information to provide on this issue, it 
should submit it to the Agency for consideration.
    Because the available data that the Agency has reviewed and 
approved supports a regional tolerance for head lettuce, EPA is 
recodifying the tolerance for lettuce, head at 5.0 ppm from 40 CFR 
180.533(a) into 40 CFR 180.533(c) as a regional tolerance. Should the 
commenter submit additional information, the Agency will consider it 
and take any appropriate actions.
    Regarding tolerance petition PP6E7096, which proposed a 
tolerance on okra, the Agency notes that the petitioner needs to submit 
revised Sections B and F of the petition. See guidelines 860.1200 
(http:/www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/860_Residue_Chemistry_Test_Guidelines/Series/860-1200.pdf) and 860.1550 
(http:/www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/860_Residue_Chemistry_Test_Guidelines/Series/860-1550.pdf), 
respectively, available at http:/www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm. However, due to an existing regional tolerance for

[[Page 46693]]

fenvalerate on okra and EPA's proposed establishment of tolerances in 
40 CFR 180.533(a) for esfenvalerate residues of concern in or on pepper 
and tomato (whose bridging data the Agency determined can be translated 
to okra) at 0.5 ppm, the Agency agrees that the tolerance on okra 
should be established for esfenvalerate at this time. This is 
consistent with the Agency's proposal published on December 31, 2008 
(73 FR 80317) to convert tolerances for fenvalerate to esfenvalerate. 
Therefore, EPA is establishing a permanent tolerance in 40 CFR 
180.533(a)(1) for esfenvalerate residues of concern in or on okra at 
0.5 ppm. Also, the Agency notes that label revisions are required to 
specify a maximum seasonal application rate of 0.5 lb active 
ingredient/Acre (ai/A) for okra. Petition PP0E3912, which 
proposed a tolerance for cardoon, proposed the tolerance in terms of 
fenvalerate and the petitioner needs to submit a revised Section F to 
request a tolerance for esfenvalerate. Regarding tolerance petition 
PP7F4859, which proposed a tolerance on pistachio, the 
petitioner needs to submit a revised Section F to correct the tolerance 
expression and the commodity name. Consequently, after the Agency 
receives each revised Section F, the Agency expects to address cardoon 
and pistachio in a future publication in the Federal Register.
    The April 2006, Residue Chemistry Chapter for esfenvalerate, posted 
in the docket of the proposed rule of December 31, 2008 (73 FR 80317), 
noted that the Agency would allow conversion of the established 
fenvalerate tolerance on soybean (seed) to esfenvalerate. However, it 
did not mention establishing an esfenvalerate tolerance for soybean 
hulls. Instead, it inadvertently recommended retaining the fenvalerate 
tolerance on soybean hulls for import purposes instead of revocation 
concomitant with the establishment of that tolerance for esfenvalerate 
based on available bridging data. Typically, the Agency provides for 
public comment, including requests to maintain tolerances for import 
purposes, in its publication in the Federal Register of a proposed 
tolerance revocation. No public comments were received by the Agency 
during the 60-day comment period provided by the proposed rule of 
December 31, 2008 (73 FR 80317) regarding a request to maintain any 
fenvalerate tolerances for import purposes. The Agency agrees with 
DuPont that bridging residue comparison data on soybean hulls are 
available. According to the April 2006 Residue Chemistry Chapter, 
fenvalerate residues concentrated approximately 20X in soybean hulls, 
and with a soybean seed tolerance of 0.05 ppm an appropriate 
fenvalerate tolerance on soybean hulls is calculated by the Agency to 
be 1.0 ppm. An expected fenvalerate tolerance level of 1.0 ppm should 
be divided by 2 for esfenvalerate conversion, so that the Agency 
believes that a tolerance on soybean, hulls at 0.5 ppm should be 
established for esfenvalerate at this time. This is consistent with the 
Agency's proposal published on December 31, 2008 (73 FR 80317) to 
convert tolerances for fenvalerate to esfenvalerate. Therefore, EPA is 
establishing a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.533(a)(1) on soybean, hulls at 
0.5 ppm.
    EPA did not propose in a notice for comment to revise the tolerance 
nomenclature for esfenvalerate in 40 CFR 180.533(a)(1) from sorghum, 
forage to sorghum, grain, forage, and turnip, tops to turnip, greens is 
current Agency practice. However, section 553(b)(3)(B) of the 
Administrative Procedure Act provides that notice and comment is not 
necessary ``when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the 
finding and a brief statement of reasons therefore in the rules issued) 
that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, 
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' Consequently, for 
good cause, EPA is revising the tolerance terminology in 40 CFR 
180.533(a)(1) from sorghum, forage to sorghum, grain, forage, and 
turnip, tops to turnip, greens. The reason for taking this action is 
because such action has no practical impact on the use of or exposure 
to the pesticide active ingredient, esfenvalerate, in or on that 
commodity and is made such that the tolerance terminology will conform 
to current Agency practice.
    Consequently, in addition to the establishment of tolerances on 
okra and soybean, hulls, and the revising of the tolerance nomenclature 
for sorghum, forage to sorghum, grain, forage, the Agency is finalizing 
all other amendments proposed concerning esfenvalerate in the Federal 
Register of December 31, 2008 (73 FR 80317).
    4. Ethylene oxide (ETO)--comments by the American Spice Trade 
Association (ASTA) and Cosmed Group, Inc.. The commenters, McDermott, 
Will, and Emery on behalf of ASTA, and the Cosmed Group, Inc., 
expressed concern that while they are not objecting to the exclusion of 
basil, the replacement of ethylene oxide tolerances for ``whole 
spices'' and ``ground spices'' in 40 CFR 180.151(a) with ``herb and 
spice, group 19, dried, except basil'' and ``vegetable, dried'' may not 
be as comprehensive as the existing tolerances. Also, the commenters 
provided a list of spices. In addition, McDermott, Will, and Emery on 
behalf of ASTA, stated that there has been some difficulty in meeting 
the proposed tolerance value for the reaction product, 2-chloroethanol, 
commonly referred to as ethylene chlorohydrin (ECH), and that some of 
ASTA's members need additional time to address application steps to 
help assure that the tolerance proposal for ECH tolerances can be met. 
Therefore, ASTA is requesting that the finalization of the ECH 
tolerances not be made effective before August 31, 2009.
    Agency response. Certain spices depicted in ASTA's list (Capsicums, 
ginger, horseradish, paprika, garlic, onion, turmeric, and arrowroot) 
are covered by the proposed tolerances on ``vegetable, dried.'' 
Camomile (German or Hungarian) is covered by camomile; oregano is 
covered by the preferred term marjoram, and pink peppercorns is covered 
by black pepper within the proposed tolerance on ``herb and spice, 
group 19, dried, except basil.'' However, there are four commodities 
(licorice roots, peppermint and spearmint leaves, and sesame seeds) 
cited by ASTA and Cosmed that are not currently covered by proposed 
tolerances for ``vegetable, dried'' or ``herb and spice, group 19, 
dried, except basil.'' In the future, the Agency may revise crop 
groupings (e.g., the Agency may consider the addition of licorice roots 
into vegetable, root and tuber, group 1, which would then cover 
licorice roots as a spice under vegetable, dried). At this time, the 
Agency determined that addition of individual tolerances for these four 
commodities at 7 ppm for ethylene oxide residues and 940 ppm for 
ethylene chlorohydrin residues does not significantly affect the 
dietary risk assessment. Therefore, EPA is establishing tolerances in 
40 CFR 180.151(a)(1) for residues of the antimicrobial agent and 
insecticide ethylene oxide, when used as a postharvest fumigant, in or 
on licorice, roots; peppermint, tops, dried; spearmint, tops, dried; 
and sesame, seed; each at 7 ppm and in 40 CFR 180.151(a)(2) for 
residues of the ethylene oxide reaction product, 2-chloroethanol, 
commonly referred to as ethylene chlorohydrin, when ethylene oxide is 
used as a postharvest fumigant, in or on licorice, roots; peppermint, 
tops, dried; spearmint, tops, dried; and sesame, seed; each at 940 ppm. 
Also, the Agency expects to publish this final rule in September 2009, 
which is consistent with ASTA's request that tolerances for

[[Page 46694]]

ethylene chlorohydrin not be made effective before August 31, 2009.
    Consequently, in addition to the establishment of tolerances for 
both ethylene oxide and ethylene chlorohydrin on licorice, roots; 
peppermint, tops, dried; spearmint, tops, dried; and sesame, seed, the 
Agency is finalizing all other amendments proposed concerning ethylene 
oxide and ethylene chlorohydrin in the Federal Register of December 31, 
2008 (73 FR 80317).
    5. 1-Naphthaleneacetic acid, salts, ethyl ester, and acetamide--
comments by the Northwest Horticultural Council (NHC) and AMVAC 
Chemical Corporation. The NHC expressed a concern about the proposed 
tolerance decreases on apple, pear, and quince from 1.0 to 0.1 ppm 
(revised into fruit, pome, group 11) because the registrant suggested 
that when conducting field trials using two applications at 50 g per 
acre, residues of up to 0.094 ppm resulted, and stated that residues 
may be dependent on time of year and variety of apple or pear being 
treated. Also, the NHC stated that, in the 2007 revised RED, the 
modified label language for potassium salt formulation and the number 
of applications allowed each year is not clear; i.e., it appears to 
limit use to one or two applications. AMVAC stated that residues on 
apples and pears in one study were as high as 0.093 ppm and 0.086 ppm, 
respectively, and requested that the tolerances on apples and pears be 
maintained at 1.0 ppm.
    Agency response. NHC's and AMVAC's citation of residues on apples 
as high as 0.093 ppm (MRID 45283601) represented samples from one of 
four site locations with a 2-day pre-harvest interval (PHI). AMVAC's 
citation of residues on pears as high as 0.086 ppm (MRID 45283602) 
represented samples with a 1-day PHI. Half-life for 1-naphthaleneacetic 
acid (NAA) residues on apples and pears under field conditions from 
these studies were determined to be 4.8 days and 1.9 days, 
respectively. Residues at a PHI of 2 days were as high as 0.0455 ppm on 
pears. The recommendation in the RED for a group tolerance of 0.1 ppm 
on pome fruit cited detectable residues for apple and pear that were 
below 0.1 ppm following sequential treatments at rates approximating 
the maximum label use patterns. The March 2004 Residue Chemistry 
Chapter for NAA cited residues at 5 days following the last sequential 
treatment as high as 0.06 ppm for apples (MRID 40884401) and 0.03 ppm 
for pears (MRID 40884402) and at 2-day PHIs as 0.093 ppm for apples 
(MRID 45283601) and 0.075 ppm for pears (MRID 45283602). The Agency 
notes that the degradation of NAA may result in variable residue levels 
with environmental variables such as seasonality and temperature as 
well as with early/late season apple/pear varieties. If such data are 
submitted, EPA will further evaluate appropriate tolerance levels. 
Currently, in response to comments from NHC and AMVAC, the Agency put 
residue levels for apples and pears, representing the 2-day PHI, into 
the NAFTA MRL Calculator, a statistical procedure for tolerance 
assessment, and determined that based on the variability of the residue 
data and a 99% confidence limit, a tolerance level of 0.15 ppm is 
appropriate; i.e., the tolerance on pome fruit should be increased 
above the proposed level of 0.1 ppm to 0.15 ppm. Consequently, the 
Agency is decreasing the tolerances on apple, pear, and quince to 0.15 
ppm and revising them into a crop group tolerance in 40 CFR 180.155(a) 
on fruit, pome, group 11 at 0.15 ppm. EPA has determined that this 
tolerance is safe.
    The Agency agrees that Appendix A in the RED summarizes use 
patterns at the time of the RED that were eligible for registration for 
potassium 1-naphthaleneacetate, whose labels needed to be changed as 
per the RED, with amended language to specify a maximum single 
application rate as 0.11 pound of acid equivalents per acre (lb ae/A), 
(except for olive trees only at 0.33 lb ae/A), a maximum rate for all 
uses per year or crop cycle as 0.33 lb ae/A, a minimum re-treatment 
interval between applications of 5 days and re-entry intervals (REIs) 
of 12 hours for the ethyl ester and 48 hours for the acid, potassium 
salt, ammonium salt, sodium salt and acetamide forms. Any discrepancies 
in the use profile will be evaluated by the Agency and, if needed, 
corrected.
    In addition to the establishment of the tolerance on fruit, pome, 
group 11 at 0.15 ppm, the Agency is finalizing all other amendments 
proposed concerning 1-naphthaleneacetic acid, salts, ethyl ester, and 
acetamide in the Federal Register of December 31, 2008 (73 FR 80317).
    In addition, the Agency is making the following revision in this 
final rule.
    6. Disulfoton. EPA did not propose in a notice for comment to 
revise the tolerance nomenclature for disulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-[2-
(ethylthio)ethyl] phosphorodithioate, in 40 CFR 180.183(a) from coffee, 
bean to coffee, green bean, as is current Agency practice. However, 
section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act provides that 
notice and comment is not necessary ``when the agency for good cause 
finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons 
therefore in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon 
are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' 
Consequently, for good cause, EPA is revising the tolerance terminology 
in 40 CFR 180.183(a) from coffee, bean to coffee, green bean. The 
reason for taking this action is because such action has no practical 
impact on the use of or exposure to the pesticide active ingredient, 
disulfoton, in or on that commodity and is made such that the tolerance 
terminology will conform to current Agency practice.
    The Agency did not receive any specific comments on the following 
pesticide active ingredients: Disulfoton, fenvalerate, phosalone, 
phosmet, primisulfuron-methyl, prothioconazole, and thiabendazole. 
Therefore, in addition to revising the tolerance nomenclature for 
coffee, bean to coffee, green bean for disulfoton, EPA is finalizing 
the amendments proposed concerning these active ingredients in the 
Federal Register of December 31, 2008 (73 FR 80317). For a detailed 
discussion of the Agency's rationale for the establishments, 
revocations, and modifications to the tolerances, refer to the proposed 
rule of December 31, 2008.

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

    EPA may issue a regulation establishing, modifying, or revoking a 
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(e). In this final rule, EPA is 
establishing, modifying, and revoking tolerances to implement the 
tolerance recommendations made during the reregistration and tolerance 
reassessment processes, and as follow-up on canceled uses of 
pesticides. As part of these processes, EPA is required to determine 
whether each of the amended tolerances meets the safety standards under 
FFDCA. The safety finding determination is found in detail in each 
post-FQPA RED and TRED for the active ingredient. REDs and TREDs 
recommend the implementation of certain tolerance actions, including 
modifications to reflect current use patterns, to meet safety findings, 
and change commodity names and groupings in accordance with new EPA 
policy. Printed and electronic copies of the REDs and TREDs are 
available as provided in Unit II.A.
    EPA has issued REDs for azinphos-methyl, disulfoton, 1-
naphthaleneacetic acid, phosmet, and thiabendazole and TREDs for 
ethylene oxide and primisulfuron methyl. REDs and TREDs contain the 
Agency's evaluation of the

[[Page 46695]]

database for these pesticides, including statements regarding 
additional data on the active ingredients that may be needed to confirm 
the potential human health and environmental risk assessments 
associated with current product uses, and REDs state conditions under 
which these uses and products will be eligible for reregistration. The 
REDs and TREDs recommended the establishment, modification, and/or 
revocation of specific tolerances. RED and TRED recommendations such as 
establishing or modifying tolerances, and in some cases revoking 
tolerances, are the result of assessment under the FFDCA standard of 
``reasonable certainty of no harm.'' However, tolerance revocations 
recommended in REDs and TREDs that are made final in this document do 
not need such assessment when the tolerances are no longer necessary.
    EPA's general practice is to revoke tolerances for residues of 
pesticide active ingredients on crops for which FIFRA registrations no 
longer exist and on which the pesticide may therefore no longer be used 
in the United States. EPA has historically been concerned that 
retention of tolerances that are not necessary to cover residues in or 
on legally treated foods may encourage misuse of pesticides within the 
United States. Nonetheless, EPA will establish and maintain tolerances 
even when corresponding domestic uses are canceled if the tolerances, 
which EPA refers to as ``import tolerances,'' are necessary to allow 
importation into the United States of food containing such pesticide 
residues. However, where there are no imported commodities that require 
these import tolerances, the Agency believes it is appropriate to 
revoke tolerances for unregistered pesticides in order to prevent 
potential misuse.
    When EPA establishes tolerances for pesticide residues in or on raw 
agricultural commodities, the Agency gives consideration to possible 
pesticide residues in meat, milk, poultry, and/or eggs produced by 
animals that are fed agricultural products (for example, grain or hay) 
containing pesticides residues (40 CFR 180.6). If there is no 
reasonable expectation of finite pesticide residues in or on meat, 
milk, poultry, or eggs, then tolerances do not need to be established 
for these commodities (40 CFR 180.6(b) and 180.6(c)).

C. When Do These Actions Become Effective?

    With the exception of certain tolerances for azinphos-methyl, 
disulfoton, fenvalerate, phosalone, and thiabendazole for which EPA is 
revoking with specific expiration/revocation dates, the Agency is 
revoking, modifying, and establishing specific tolerances, and revising 
specific commodity terminologies effective on the date of publication 
of this final rule in the Federal Register. With the exception of the 
specific tolerances for azinphos-methyl, disulfoton, fenvalerate, 
phosalone, and thiabendazole, the Agency believes that existing stocks 
of pesticide products labeled for the uses associated with the revoked 
tolerances have been completely exhausted and that treated commodities 
have had sufficient time for passage through the channels of trade. EPA 
is revoking certain specific tolerances with expiration/revocation 
dates of December 31, 2012 for the azinphos-methyl tolerance on 
cranberry; October 14, 2009 for disulfoton tolerances on spinach and 
tomato; January 30, 2010 for disulfoton tolerances on barley, grain; 
barley, straw; grain, aspirated fractions; peanut; pepper; potato; 
wheat, hay; wheat, grain; wheat, straw; milk; and the fat, meat, and 
meat byproducts of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep; April 2, 
2010 for most of the fenvalerate tolerances; September 30, 2013 for 
phosalone tolerances on apple; cherry; grape; peach; pear; and plum, 
prune, fresh; and December 25, 2010 for thiabendazole tolerances on 
beet, sugar, dried pulp; beet, sugar, roots; and beet, sugar, tops. The 
Agency believes that these revocation dates allow users to exhaust 
stocks and allow sufficient time for passage of treated commodities 
through the channels of trade.
    Any commodities listed in the regulatory text of this document that 
are treated with the pesticides subject to this final rule, and that 
are in the channels of trade following the tolerance revocations, shall 
be subject to FFDCA section 408(l)(5), as established by FQPA. Under 
this unit, any residues of these pesticides in or on such food shall 
not render the food adulterated so long as it is shown to the 
satisfaction of the Food and Drug Administration that:
    1. The residue is present as the result of an application or use of 
the pesticide at a time and in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA.
    2. The residue does not exceed the level that was authorized at the 
time of the application or use to be present on the food under a 
tolerance or exemption from tolerance. Evidence to show that food was 
lawfully treated may include records that verify the dates that the 
pesticide was applied to such food.

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

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. 
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent 
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA 
considers the international Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) established 
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, as required by section 408(b)(4) 
of FFDCA. The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and Agriculture 
Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it 
is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting 
organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. 
EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; 
however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons 
for departing from the Codex level in a notice published for public 
comment. EPA's effort to harmonize with Codex MRLs is summarized in the 
tolerance reassessment section of individual REDs and TREDs, and in the 
Residue Chemistry document which supports the RED and TRED, as 
mentioned in the proposed rule cited in Unit II.A. Specific tolerance 
actions in this rule and how they compare to Codex MRLs (if any) is 
discussed in Unit II.A.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    In this final rule, EPA establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 
408(e), and also modifies and revokes specific tolerances established 
under FFDCA section 408. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted these types of actions (i.e., establishment and modification 
of a tolerance and tolerance revocation for which extraordinary 
circumstances do not exist) from review under Executive Order 12866, 
entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). 
Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 
12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject to 
Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, 
May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information 
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or 
contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public

[[Page 46696]]

Law 104-4). Nor does it require any special considerations as required 
by Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any other 
Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of 
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, 
April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards 
that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus 
standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer 
and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-13, section 12(d) 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency previously assessed whether 
establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerances, raising of 
tolerance levels, expansion of exemptions, or revocations might 
significantly impact a substantial number of small entities and 
concluded that, as a general matter, these actions do not impose a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
These analyses for tolerance establishments and modifications, and for 
tolerance revocations were published on May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950) and 
on December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020) (FRL-5753-1), respectively, and were 
provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration. Taking into account this analysis, and available 
information concerning the pesticides listed in this rule, the Agency 
hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In a 
memorandum dated May 25, 2001, EPA determined that eight conditions 
must all be satisfied in order for an import tolerance or tolerance 
exemption revocation to adversely affect a significant number of small 
entity importers, and that there is a negligible joint probability of 
all eight conditions holding simultaneously with respect to any 
particular revocation. (This Agency document is available in the docket 
of the proposed rule, as mentioned in Unit II.A.). Furthermore, for the 
pesticides named in this final rule, the Agency knows of no 
extraordinary circumstances that exist as to the present revocations 
that would change EPA's previous analysis. In addition, the Agency has 
determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect 
on States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, 
entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 
13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This final 
rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and 
food retailers, not States. This action does not alter the 
relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established 
by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. 
For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does 
not have any ``tribal implications'' as described in Executive Order 
13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Executive Order 13175, 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' This rule will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

V. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to 
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report 
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, 
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the 
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal 
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 27, 2009.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.


Sec.  180.3  [Amended]

0
2. Section 180.3 is amended by removing paragraph (d)(7) and 
redesignating paragraphs (d)(8) through (d)(13) as paragraphs (d)(7) 
through (d)(12), respectively.

0
3. Section 180.151 is amended by revising the table in paragraph (a)(1) 
and by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:


Sec. 180.151  Ethylene oxide; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * * (1) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Herb and spice, group 19, dried, except basil..............            7
Licorice, roots............................................            7
Peppermint, tops, dried....................................            7
Sesame, seed...............................................            7
Spearmint, tops, dried.....................................            7
Vegetable, dried...........................................            7
Walnut.....................................................           50
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Tolerances are established for residues of the ethylene oxide 
reaction product, 2-chloroethanol, commonly referred to as ethylene 
chlorohydrin, when ethylene oxide is used as a postharvest fumigant in 
or on food commodities as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Herb and spice, group 19, dried, except basil..............          940
Licorice, roots............................................          940
Peppermint, tops, dried....................................          940
Sesame, seed...............................................          940
Spearmint, tops, dried.....................................          940

[[Page 46697]]

 
Vegetable, dried...........................................          940
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

0
4. Section 180.154 is amended by revising the section heading and the 
table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec. 180.154  Azinphos-methyl; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Expiration/
                  Commodity                    Parts per    Revocation
                                                million        Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond\1\....................................        0.2            None
Almond, hulls\1\.............................        5.0            None
Apple\2\.....................................        1.5            None
Blackberry\3\................................        2.0            None
Blueberry\2\.................................        5.0            None
Boysenberry\3\...............................        2.0            None
Brussels sprouts\4\..........................        2.0            None
Cherry\2\....................................        2.0            None
Crabapple\2\.................................        1.5            None
Cranberry\3\.................................        0.5        12/31/12
Loganberry\3\................................        2.0            None
Parsley, leaves\2\...........................        5.0            None
Parsley, turnip rooted, roots\2\.............        2.0            None
Peach\3\.....................................        2.0            None
Pear\2\......................................        1.5            None
Pistachio\1\.................................        0.3            None
Plum, prune\5\...............................        2.0            None
Quince\5\....................................        1.5            None
Raspberry\3\.................................        2.0            None
Walnut\1\....................................        0.3            None
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\There are no U.S. registrations as of October 30, 2009.
    \2\There are no U.S. registrations as of September 30, 2012.
    \3\There are no U.S. registrations since September 30, 2006.
    \4\There are no U.S. registrations since September 30, 2008.
    \5\There are no U.S. registrations since December 28, 2005.
* * * * *

0
5. Section 180.155 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  180.155  1-Naphthaleneacetic acid; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for the combined residues 
of the plant growth regulator 1-naphthaleneacetic acid and its 
conjugates calculated as 1-naphthaleneacetic acid from the application 
of 1-naphthaleneacetic acid, its ammonium, sodium, or potassium salts, 
ethyl ester, and acetamide in or on food commodities as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cherry, sweet..............................................          0.1
Fruit, pome, group 11......................................         0.15
Olive......................................................          0.7
Orange.....................................................          0.1
Pineapple\1\...............................................         0.05
Tangerine..................................................          0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ There are no U.S. registrations since 1988.
    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
    (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
    (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]

0
6. Section 180.183 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and paragraph 
(c) to read as follows:


Sec. 180.183  O,O-Diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl] phosphorodithioate; 
tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for the combined residues 
of the insecticide disulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl] 
phosphorodithioate; demeton-S, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl] 
phosphorothioate; disulfoton sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-[2-
(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl] phosphorodithioate; disulfoton oxygen analog 
sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl] phosphorothioate; 
disulfoton sulfone, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl] 
phosphorodithioate; and disulfoton oxygen analog sulfone, O,O-diethyl 
S-[2-(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl] phosphorothioate; calculated as disulfoton, 
in or on food commodities as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Expiration/
                    Commodity                     Parts per   Revocation
                                                   million       Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barley, grain...................................        0.2      1/30/10
Barley, straw...................................        5.0      1/30/10
Bean, lima......................................       0.75         None
Bean, snap, succulent...........................       0.75         None
Broccoli........................................       0.75         None
Brussels sprouts................................       0.75         None
Cabbage.........................................       0.75         None
Cattle, fat.....................................       0.05      1/30/10
Cattle, meat....................................       0.05      1/30/10
Cattle, meat byproducts.........................       0.05      1/30/10
Cauliflower.....................................       0.75         None
Coffee, green bean..............................        0.2         None
Cotton, undelinted seed.........................       0.75         None
Goat, fat.......................................       0.05      1/30/10
Goat, meat......................................       0.05      1/30/10
Goat, meat byproducts...........................       0.05      1/30/10
Grain, aspirated fractions......................        0.3      1/30/10
Hog, fat........................................       0.05      1/30/10
Hog, meat.......................................       0.05      1/30/10
Hog, meat byproducts............................       0.05      1/30/10
Horse, fat......................................       0.05      1/30/10
Horse, meat.....................................       0.05      1/30/10
Horse, meat byproducts..........................       0.05      1/30/10
Lettuce, head...................................       0.75         None
Lettuce, leaf...................................          2         None
Milk............................................       0.01      1/30/10
Peanut..........................................        0.1      1/30/10
Pepper..........................................        0.1      1/30/10
Potato..........................................        0.5      1/30/10
Sheep, fat......................................       0.05      1/30/10
Sheep, meat.....................................       0.05      1/30/10
Sheep, meat byproducts..........................       0.05      1/30/10
Spinach.........................................       0.75     10/14/09
Tomato..........................................       0.75     10/14/09
Wheat, grain....................................        0.2      1/30/10
Wheat, hay......................................        5.0      1/30/10
Wheat, straw....................................        5.0      1/30/10
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. Tolerances with 
regional registration are established for the combined residues of the 
insecticide disulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl] 
phosphorodithioate; demeton-S, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl] 
phosphorothioate; disulfoton sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-[2-
(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl] phosphorodithioate; disulfoton oxygen analog 
sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl] phosphorothioate; 
disulfoton sulfone, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl] 
phosphorodithioate; and disulfoton oxygen analog sulfone, O,O-diethyl 
S-[2-(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl] phosphorothioate; calculated as disulfoton, 
in or on food commodities as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asparagus..........