![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Azinphos-Methyl; Proposed Revocation and Lowering of Certain Tolerances; Tolerance Actions
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: December 22, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 245)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 71708-71712]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22de99-44]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-300959; FRL-6399-6]
RIN 2070-AB78
Azinphos-Methyl; Proposed Revocation and Lowering of Certain
Tolerances; Tolerance Actions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes to revise the tolerances for azinphos-
methyl by revoking certain tolerances and modifying certain other
tolerances for residues of the insectide azinphos-methyl (40 CFR
180.154). This proposed revision is in compliance with a Memorandum of
Understanding between the EPA and registrants of azinphos-methyl. The
regulatory actions proposed in this document are part of the Agency's
reregistration program under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and the tolerance reassessment requirements of
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: Comments, identified by docket control number OPP-300959, must
be received on or February 22, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by mail, electronically, or in
person. Please follow the detailed instructions for each method as
provided in Unit I. of the ``SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION'' section of
this document. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that
you identify docket control number OPP-300959 in the subject line on
the first page of your response.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barry O'Keefe, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: 703-308-8035; fax number: 703-308-8041; e-mail
address: okeefe.barry@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 categories and entities may include, but are not
limited to the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of Potentially
Categories NAICS Affected Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry 111 Crop production
112 Animal production
311 Food manufacturing
32532 Pesticide manufacturing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This listing is not exhaustive, but is a guide to entities likely
to be regulated by this action. The North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes will assist you in determining
whether this action applies to you. If you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the ``FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT'' section.
B. How Can I Get Additional Information, Including Copies of this
Document and Other Related Documents?
1. Electronically. You may obtain electronic copies of this
document, and certain other related documents that might be available
electronically, from the EPA Internet Home Page at http://www.epa.gov/.
To access this document, on the Home Page select ``Laws and
Regulations'' and then look up the entry for this document under the
``Federal Register--Environmental Documents.'' You can also go directly
to the Federal Register listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
2. In person. The Agency has established an official record for
this action under docket control number OPP-300959. The official record
consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any
public comments received during an applicable comment period, and other
information related to this action, including any information claimed
as Confidential Business Information (CBI). This official record
includes the documents that are physically located in the docket, as
well as the documents that are referenced in those documents. The
public version of the official record does not include any information
claimed as CBI. The public version of the official record, which
includes printed, paper versions of any electronic comments submitted
during an applicable comment period, is available for inspection in the
Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119,
Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, from 8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?
You may submit comments through the mail, in person, or
electronically. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that
you identify docket control number OPP-300959 in the subject line on
the first page of your response.
1. By mail. Submit your comments to: Public Information and Records
Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information Resources and Services Division
(7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.
2. In person or by courier. Deliver your comments to: Public
Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information Resources
and Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921
Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB
telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
3. Electronically. You may submit your comments electronically by
e-mail to: ``opp-docket@epa.gov,'' or you can submit a computer disk as
described above. Do not submit any information electronically that you
consider to be CBI. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of
encryption. Electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect 6.1/
8.0 or ASCII file format. All comments in electronic form must be
identified by docket control number OPP-300959. Electronic comments may
also be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.
D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want to Submit to the Agency?
Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to
be
[[Page 71709]]
CBI. You may claim information that you submit to EPA in response to
this document as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as
CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance
with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete
version of the comment that includes any 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 version of the
official record. Information not marked confidential will be included
in the public version of the official record without prior notice. If
you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI,
please consult the person listed under ``FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.''
E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
6. Offer alternative ways to improve the proposed rule or
collection activity.
7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this
document.
8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
control number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first
page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.
II. Background
A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
In accordance with a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) of August 2,
1999, between registrants and EPA, the EPA is proposing to revoke and
to modify certain tolerances for residues of the insecticide azinphos-
methyl in 40 CFR 180.154. In particular, the EPA is proposing to revoke
the tolerance on sugarcane, with a revocation/expiration date of June
30, 2000, since by agreement this use has been deleted from active
labels, because of surface water vulnerability and to prevent
unreasonable risks to wildlife and contamination of water. EPA is
setting the revocation/expiration date of June 30, 2000, in order to
allow time for existing stocks in the hands of users to be used. The
Agency believes that once cancellation of this use occurs, residues of
azinphos-methyl will likely be nondetectable in all sugarcane
commodities shortly after harvest. The MOA states that azinphos-methyl
manufacturing-use products may not be reformulated for use on
sugarcane, and end-use product labels intended for use in the 2000
growing season shall not have sugarcane listed as a use site in the
directions for use section.
In the MOA, the registrants agreed to submit a petition requesting
specific tolerance modifications to be effective January 1, 2000. Such
a petition has been received by the Agency. Therefore, EPA is proposing
to lower tolerances found in 40 CFR 180.154 for residues of the
insecticide azinphos-methyl in or on apples, crabapples, pears, and
quinces, each from 2.0 parts per million (ppm) to 1.5 ppm, in or on
cranberries from 2.0 ppm to 0.5 ppm, and in or on grapes from 5.0 ppm
to 4.0 ppm. The Agency intends to make these modifications effective
upon publication of the final rule. These reductions in tolerances are
based on the most recent data that more accurately reflect recent label
changes and residue levels that are likely to be detected.
Additionally, monitoring data for the years 1993-1998 indicate that the
new lower tolerances are not likely to be exceeded. These data
represent residues resulting from the use pattern allowed under old
labels which allowed higher amounts of use than reflected in recent
label changes. Little use of the older labeled products should be
reflected in residues of commodities in the channels of trade.
In addition, this document also proposes to revoke tolerances found
in 40 CFR 180.154 for residues of azinphos-methyl in or on commodities
for which there are no registered uses; including: apricots;
artichokes; barley, grain; barley, straw; beans (dry); gooseberries;
grass, pasture (green); grass, pasture, hay; kiwifruit; oats, grain;
oats, straw; peas, black-eyed; rye, grain; rye, straw; soybeans; wheat,
grain; and wheat, straw. Additionally, in 40 CFR 180.154(b), the
tolerance for pomegranates is proposed to be revoked, because there is
no registered use. These revocations are for uses that have not been on
active labels since January 1999. Additionally, the Agency believes
that azinphos-methyl had not been used on these crops for some time.
Consequently, no treated commodities covered by these tolerances are
expected to be in the channels of trade. The Agency intends to make
these modifications effective upon publication of the final rule.
This document also proposes to remove 40 CFR 180.531, and to revoke
the three tolerances found in this section for residues of azinphos-
methyl; which are as follows:
(1) Sugarcane bagasse, since this commodity is not considered a
significant livestock feed item.
(2) Citrus pulp, dried, since an adequate orange processing study
did not show concentration in dried orange pulp (in accordance with
FFDCA section 408(a)(2), since residues in the processed food will not
exceed the raw food tolerance).
(3) Soybean oil, since there are no active registrations with
soybeans on the label.
Changes in commodity terminology and definitions are proposed to
conform to current Agency practice. These proposed changes are in
accordance with the revised Crop Group Regulation (40 CFR 180.41) and
the updated Table I ``Raw Agricultural and Processed Commodities and
Feedstuffs Derived from Crops'' (August, 1996) in the Residue Chemistry
Test Guidelines: OPPTS 860.1000 (EPA 721-C-96-169). Table I contains
data on both crops and livestock diets, and lists feed commodities
considered significant in livestock diets. Significant feedstuffs
account for more than 99 percent of the available annual tonnage (on a
dry-matter basis) of feedstuffs used in the domestic production of more
than 95 percent of beef and dairy cattle, poultry, swine, milk, and
eggs. The EPA has devised criteria to include or exclude feedstuffs
from Table I and set tolerances for significant feedstuffs. Tolerances
are not set for feedstuffs which are neither significant nor a human
food. Pesticide residues on such feedstuffs are governed by tolerances
on the commodity from which they are derived (62 FR 66020, December 17,
1997) (FRL-5753-1). These changes relate only to nomenclature and have
no effect on the scope of the tolerance. The specific commodity
terminology name changes proposed are listed in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Old Commodity Name New Commodity Name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almonds................................... Almond
Almonds, hulls............................ Almond, hulls
Apples.................................... Apple
Beans, snap............................... Bean, snap
Blackberries.............................. Blackberry
Blueberries............................... Blueberry
Boysenberries............................. Boysenberry
Cherries.................................. Cherry
[[Page 71710]]
Citrus fruits............................. Fruit, citrus, group
Crabapples................................ Crabapple
Cranberries............................... Cranberry
Cucumbers................................. Cucumber
Eggplants................................. Eggplant
Filberts.................................. Filbert
Grapes.................................... Grape
Loganberries.............................. Loganberry
Melons (honeydew, muskmelon, cantaloupe, Melon
watermelon, and other melons).
Nuts, pistachio........................... Pistachio
Onions.................................... Onion
Parsley, leaves........................... Parsley, leaf
Parsley, roots............................ Parsley, root
Peaches................................... Peach
Pears..................................... Pear
Pecans.................................... Pecan
Peppers................................... Pepper
Plums (fresh prunes)...................... Plum, prune
Potatoes.................................. Potato
Quinces................................... Quince
Raspberries............................... Raspberry
Strawberries.............................. Strawberry
Tomatoes (PRE- and POST-H)................ Tomato
Walnuts................................... Walnut
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the available data indicate that finite residues of azinphos-
methyl are not expected in animal tissues or milk, in accordance with
40 CFR 180.6(a)(3) EPA is proposing to revoke tolerances found in 40
CFR 180.154 for cattle, fat; cattle, mbyp; cattle, meat; goat, fat;
goat, mbyp; goat, meat; horse, fat; horse, mbyp; horse, meat; sheep,
fat; sheep, mbyp; and sheep, meat; and in 40 CFR 180.154a, the
tolerance for milk. This proposal to revoke these 13 meat, milk,
poultry and egg (MMPE) tolerances implements the Agency findings
announced in the August 2, 1999 FR Notice (64 FR 41933) (FRL-6097-3)
that, under 40 CFR 180.6 there is no reasonable expectation of finite
residues for azinphos-methyl on the MMPE commodities and, therefore,
these tolerances were considered reassessed and could be revoked,
because they are not needed. These findings are based on feeding
studies that used exaggerated amounts of azinphos-methyl (up to 11
times the dietary burden) and measurable residues still were not found.
These studies were submitted after the tolerances were originally
established.
This document also proposes to revoke the tolerance found in 40 CFR
180.154 for residues of azinphos-methyl in or on nectarines, in
accordance with 40 CFR 180.1(h), since the tolerance on peaches covers
nectarines.
This document also proposes to lower tolerances found in 40 CFR
180.154 for residues of azinphos-methyl in or on almond and potato,
each from 0.3 to 0.2 ppm, and in or on almond hulls from 10.3 to 5.0
ppm, since the available data indicate that these tolerances can be
lowered to achieve compatibility with the corresponding Codex maximum
residue limits (MRLs). These reductions in tolerances are based on the
most recent data that more accurately reflect residue levels that are
likely to be detected.
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 demonstrates a need for the
tolerance to cover residues in or on imported commodities or domestic
commodities legally treated. EPA expects to determine whether any
individuals or groups want to comment on these tolerance modifications.
The regulatory actions proposed in this document are part of the
Agency's reregistration program under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and the tolerance reassessment
requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?
A ``tolerance'' represents the maximum level for residues of
pesticide chemicals legally allowed in or on raw agricultural
commodities and processed foods. Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 301 et
seq., as amended by the FQPA of 1996, Public Law 104-170, authorizes
the establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerance
requirements, modifications in tolerances, and revocation of tolerances
for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural
commodities and processed foods. 21 U.S.C. 346(a). Without a tolerance
or exemption, food containing pesticide residues is considered to be
unsafe and therefore ``adulterated'' under section 402(a) of the FFDCA.
If food containing pesticide residues is considered to be
``adulterated,'' you may not distribute the product in interstate
commerce (21 U.S.C. 331(a) and 342(a). For a food-use pesticide to be
sold and distributed, the pesticide must not only have appropriate
tolerances under the FFDCA, but also must be registered under section
3, section 5, or section 18 of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. et seq.). Food-use
pesticides not registered in the United States have tolerances for
residues of pesticides in or on commodities imported into the United
States.
It is EPA's general practice to propose revocation of tolerances
for residues of pesticide active ingredients on crop uses for which
FIFRA registrations no longer exist. EPA has historically been
concerned that retention of tolerances that are not necessary to cover
residues in or on legally treated foods may encourage misuse of
pesticides within the United States. Nonetheless, EPA will establish
and maintain tolerances even when corresponding domestic uses are
canceled if the tolerances, which EPA refers to as ``import
tolerances,'' are necessary to allow importation into the United States
of food containing such pesticide residues. However, where there are no
imported commodities that require these import tolerances, the Agency
believes it is appropriate to revoke tolerances for unregistered
pesticides in order to prevent potential misuse.
Furthermore, as a general matter, the Agency believes that
retention of tolerances not needed to cover any imported food may
result in unnecessary restriction on trade of pesticides and foods.
Under section 408 of the FFDCA, a tolerance may only be established or
maintained if EPA determines that the tolerance is safe based on a
number of factors, including an assessment of the aggregate exposure to
the pesticide and of the cumulative effects of such pesticide and other
substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity. In doing so, EPA
must consider potential contributions to such exposure from all
tolerances. If the cumulative risk is such that the tolerances in
aggregate are not safe, then every one of these tolerances is
potentially vulnerable to revocation. Furthermore, if unneeded
tolerances are included in the aggregate and cumulative risk
assessments, the estimated exposure to the pesticide would be inflated.
Consequently, it may be more difficult for others to obtain needed
tolerances or to register needed new uses. To avoid these trade-
restricting situations, the Agency is proposing to revoke tolerances
for residues on crops for which FIFRA registrations no longer exist,
unless someone expresses a need for such tolerances. Through this
proposed rule, the Agency is inviting individuals who need these import
tolerances to identify themselves and the tolerances that are needed to
cover imported commodities.
Parties interested in retention of the tolerances should be aware
that additional data may be needed to support retention. These parties
should be aware that, under FFDCA section 408(f), if the Agency
determines that additional information is reasonably
[[Page 71711]]
required to support the continuation of a tolerance, EPA may require
that parties interested in maintaining the tolerances provide the
necessary information. If the requisite information is not submitted,
EPA may issue an order revoking the tolerances at issue.
Under section 408(d) of the FFDCA, the Agency may issue a final or
proposed regulation establishing, modifying, or revoking a tolerance in
response to a petition filed with the Agency that proposes the issuance
of such regulation. On August 2, 1999, EPA and the registrants holding
Section 3 registrations for azinphos-methyl signed a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA), which specifically states that the registrants shall
submit to EPA a petition requesting many of the tolerance modifications
detailed in this proposal; i.e. lowering tolerances on apples,
crabapples, cranberries, grapes, pears, and quinces, and revoking the
tolerance on sugarcane. Such a petition has been received by the
Agency, dated September 22, 1999. Thus, the Agency is authorized by
section 408(d) of the FFDCA to issue a proposed regulation in response
to that petition. The MOA was made to help mitigate acute dietary,
agricultural worker, and environmental risks. During phase five of the
Tolerance Reassessment Advisory Committee (TRAC) process, the Agency
invited the registrants, and any other affected or interested parties,
to submit to the Agency additional risk mitigation thoughts or
measures, since the acute dietary risk estimates from the revised human
health risk assessment remained above the Agency's level of concern.
The revised human health risk assessment may be found at http://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/op. In addition to the MOA, EPA is also
proposing the revocation or lowering of other tolerances, as well as
changes in commodity nomenclature for various reasons as described in
Unit II of this document.
F. What Is the Contribution to Tolerance Reassessment?
By law, EPA is required to reassess 66%, or about 6,400, of the
tolerances in existence on August 2, 1996, by August 2002. EPA is also
required to assess the remaining tolerances by August 2006. As of
November 1, 1999, EPA has assessed over 3,400 tolerances. This document
proposes to revoke 35 tolerances. Since 13 tolerances were previously
counted as reassessed, 22 of the 35 revocations will be counted when
the final rule is published. The 22 reassessments will be counted
toward the August, 2002 review deadline of FFDCA section 408(q), as
amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
III. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
This proposed rule will revoke tolerances established under FFDCA
section 408. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted
this type of action, i.e., a 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). This action does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor
does it require any prior consultation as specified by Executive Order
13084, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments (63 FR 27655, May 19,1998); 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 require OMB review or
any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards
that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus
standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d)
(15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency previously assessed whether
revocations of tolerances 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. The factual basis and the Agency's
certification under section 605(b) for tolerance revocations published
on December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020), and was provided to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. Since no
extraordinary circumstances exist as to the present revocation that
would change EPA's previous analysis, the Agency is able to reference
the general certification. Any comments about the Agency's
determination should be submitted to EPA along with comments on the
proposal, and will be addressed prior to issuing a final rule.
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 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 FFDCA section
408(n)(4).
IV. Consistency with International Obligations
The tolerance revocations in this proposal are not discriminatory
and are designed to ensure that both domestically-produced and imported
foods meet the food safety standards established by the FFDCA. The same
food safety standards apply to domestically produced and imported
foods.
EPA is working to ensure that the U.S. tolerance reassessment
program under FQPA does not disrupt international trade. EPA considers
Codex MRLs in setting U.S. tolerances and in reassessing them. MRLs are
established by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, a committee
within the Codex Alimentarius Commission, an international organization
formed to promote the coordination of international food standards. It
is EPA's policy to harmonize U.S. tolerances with Codex MRLs to the
extent possible, provided that the MRLs achieve the level of protection
required under FFDCA. EPA's effort to harmonize with Codex MRLs is
summarized in the tolerance reassessment section of individual
Reregistration Eligibility Decision documents. EPA is developing
guidance concerning submissions for import tolerance support. This
guidance
[[Page 71712]]
will be made available to interested parties.
Codex MRLs exist for the following tolerances proposed for
revocation in this document, i.e. apricot at 2.0 ppm, cereal grains at
0.2 ppm, kiwifruit at 4.0 ppm, and soy bean at 0.2 ppm. Notwithstanding
the existence of these MRLs, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerances
because retention would increase the chances of misuse and may result
in unnecessary restriction on trade of pesticides and foods as well as
inhibiting the retention and approval of tolerances, as discussed in
greater detail in Unit II.B., of this document.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 16, 1999.
Jack E. Housenger,
Acting Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR part 180 be amended as
follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180 would continue to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. By revising Sec. 180.154 to read as follows:
Sec. 180.154 O-Dimethyl S-[(4-oxo-1,2,3-benzotriazin-3(4H)-
yl)methyl]phosphorodithioate; tolerances for residues.
(a) Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide O,O-
dimethyl S-[(4-oxo-1,2,3-benzotriazin-3(4H)-yl)
methyl]phosphorodithioate in or on the following food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expiration/
Commodity Parts per Revocation
million Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alfalfa....................................... 2.0
Alfalfa, hay.................................. 5.0
Almond........................................ 0.2
Almond, hulls................................. 5.0
Apple......................................... 1.5
Bean, snap.................................... 2.0
Birdfoot trefoil.............................. 2.0
Birdfoot trefoil hay.......................... 5.0
Blackberry.................................... 2.0
Blueberry..................................... 5.0
Boysenberry................................... 2.0
Broccoli...................................... 2.0
Brussels sprout............................... 2.0
Cabbage....................................... 2.0
Cauliflower................................... 2.0
Celery........................................ 2.0
Cherry........................................ 2.0
Fruit, citrus, group.......................... 2.0
Clover........................................ 2.0
Clover, hay................................... 5.0
Cottonseed.................................... 0.5
Crabapple..................................... 2.0
Cranberry..................................... 0.5
Cucumber...................................... 2.0
Eggplant...................................... 0.3
Filbert....................................... 0.3
Grape......................................... 4.0
Loganberry.................................... 2.0
Melon......................................... 2.0
Onion......................................... 2.0
Parsley, leaf................................. 5.0
Parsley, root................................. 2.0
Peach......................................... 2.0
Pear.......................................... 1.5
Pecan......................................... 0.3
Pepper........................................ 0.3
Pistachio..................................... 0.3
Plum, prune................................... 2.0
Potato........................................ 0.2
Quince........................................ 1.5
Raspberry..................................... 2.0
Spinach....................................... 2.0
Strawberry.................................... 2.0
Sugarcane..................................... 0.3 6/30/00
Tomato........................................ 2.0
Walnut........................................ 0.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
Secs. 180.154a and 180.531 [REMOVED]
3. By removing Sec. 180.154a and Sec. 180.531.
[FR Doc. 99-33161 Filed 12-21-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F