[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 21, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39049-39053]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-18611]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP-300898; FRL-6092-7]
RIN 2070-AB78


Biphenyl, Calcium cyanide, and Captafol, et al.; Final Tolerance 
Actions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule revokes specific tolerances and/or exemptions 
for residues of the herbicides chloramben, 2-chloro-N,N-
diallylacetamide, chloroxuron, diethatyl-ethyl, terbutryn, and 2,3,6-
trichlorophenylacetic acid; the fungicides biphenyl, captafol, 
chlorosulfamic acid, and sulfur dioxide; and the insecticides calcium 
cyanide, 2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate, 
chlorthiophos, and ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate [chlorobenzilate]; as 
listed in the regulatory text. The regulatory actions 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). By law, EPA is required to reassess 33% of the tolerances in 
existence on August 2, 1996, by August 1999, or about 3,200 tolerances. 
This document revokes 138 tolerances and/or exemptions which would be 
counted among reassessments made toward the August, 1999 review 
deadline of FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by the Food Quality 
Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
DATES: This final rule becomes effective October 19, 1999. Objections 
and requests for hearings, identified by docket control number [OPP-
300898] must be received by EPA on or before September 20, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Objections and hearing requests can be submitted by mail or 
in person. Please follow the detailed instructions provided in Unit V 
of the ``SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION'' section of this document. To 
ensure proper identification of your objection or hearing request, you 
must identify the docket control number [OPP-300898] in the subject 
line on the first page of your request.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  For technical information contact: 
Joseph Nevola, Special Review Branch, (7508C), Special Review and 
Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. 
Office location: Special Review Branch, CM#2, 6th floor, 1921 Jefferson 
Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. Telephone: (703) 308-8037; e-mail: 
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

 I. 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:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 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.

II. How Can I Get Additional Information or Copies of this or Other 
Support Documents?

A. Electronically

    You may obtain electronic copies of this document and various 
support documents from the EPA Internet Home Page at http://
www.epa.gov/. On the Home Page select ``Laws and Regulations'' and then 
look up the entry for this document under ``Federal Register - 
Environmental Documents.'' You can also go directly to the ``Federal 
Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/homepage/fedrgstr/.

B. In Person or by Phone

    If you have any questions or need additional information about this 
action, please contact the technical person identified in the ``FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT'' section. In addition, the official record 
for this final rule, including the public version, has been established 
under docket control number [OPP-300898], (including comments and data 
submitted electronically as described below). A public version of this 
record, including printed, paper versions of any electronic comments, 
which does not include any information claimed as Confidential Business 
Information (CBI), is available for inspection in Room 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 Public 
Information and Records Integrity Branch telephone number is (703) 305-
5805.

III. What Action is being Taken?

    This final rule revokes specific FFDCA tolerances and/or exemptions 
for residues of the herbicides chloramben, 2-chloro-N,N-
diallylacetamide, chloroxuron, diethatyl-ethyl, terbutryn, and 2,3,6-
trichlorophenylacetic acid; the fungicides biphenyl, captafol, 
chlorosulfamic acid, and sulfur dioxide; and the insecticides calcium 
cyanide, 2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate, 
chlorthiophos, and ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate [Chlorobenzilate] in or 
on certain specified commodities.
    EPA is revoking these tolerances because they are not necessary to 
cover residues of the relevant pesticides in or on domestically treated 
commodities or commodities treated outside but imported into the United 
States. These pesticides are no longer used on commodities within the 
United States and no person has provided comment identifying a need for 
EPA to retain the tolerances to cover residues in or on imported foods. 
EPA has historically expressed a concern that retention of tolerances 
that are not necessary to cover residues in or on legally treated foods 
has the potential to encourage misuse of pesticides within the United 
States. Thus, it is EPA's policy to issue a final rule revoking those 
tolerances for residues of pesticide chemicals 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 is not issuing today a final rule to revoke those tolerances 
for which EPA received comments demonstrating a need for the tolerance 
to be retained. Generally, EPA will proceed with the revocation of 
these tolerances on the grounds discussed above only if, (1)

[[Page 39050]]

prior to EPA's issuance of a section 408(f) order requesting additional 
data or issuance of a 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, (2) EPA independently verifies 
that the tolerance is no longer needed, (3) the tolerance is not 
supported by data, or (4) the tolerance does not meet the requirements 
under FQPA. EPA had proposed these revocations since the registrations 
for these pesticide chemicals were canceled because the registrant 
failed to pay the required maintenance fee and/or the registrant 
voluntarily canceled all registered uses associated with the tolerance 
revocations for these pesticides.
    1. Captafol and ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate [chlorobenzilate]. In 
the Federal Register on June 9, 1993 (58 FR 32320) (FRL-4183-6) (OPP-
300273), EPA issued a document which proposed to revoke tolerances for 
captafol, ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate (chlorobenzilate) and 
monocrotophos. Monocrotophos was addressed in a final rule (64 FR 
19489, April 21, 1999) (FRL-6074-4).
    i. Captafol. EPA published a Registration Standard for captafol on 
September 30, 1984. In that document, the Agency's concerns about 
captafol's carcinogenic effects and hazard to fish are summarized. In 
the Federal Register of January 9, 1985 (50 FR 1103), EPA issued a 
notice initiating Special Review for captafol. This resulted in the 
voluntary cancellation of all captafol registrations, effective April 
30, 1987, with the exception of one intrastate registration that was 
canceled in March, 1991. The sale of existing stocks of captafol by 
registrants was permitted until December 31, 1987. Other persons were 
allowed to continue to distribute, sell, and use existing stocks until 
exhausted. Generally, a tolerance is not necessary for a pesticide 
chemical which is not registered for the particular food use. 
Therefore, in the Federal Register of June 9, 1993 (58 FR 32320), EPA 
proposed to revoke the tolerances listed in 40 CFR 180.267 for residues 
of captafol. The Agency revoked the tolerance for captafol residues in 
or on peanuts, hulls in the Federal Register of December 17, 1997 (62 
FR 66020) (FRL-5753-1).
    Today's document revokes the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.267 for 
captafol residues in or on apples; apricots; blueberries; cherries, 
sour; cherries, sweet; citrus fruits; corn, fresh (inc sweet K+CWHR); 
cranberries; cucumbers; macadamia nuts; melons; nectarines; peanuts, 
meats (hulls removed); peaches; pineapples; plums (fresh prunes); and 
taro (corm).
    ii. Ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate (chlorobenzilate). This document 
also revokes the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.109 for ethyl 4,4'-
dichlorobenzilate (chlorobenzilate) residues in or on cattle, fat; 
cattle, mbyp; cattle, meat; citrus fruits; sheep, fat; sheep, mbyp; and 
sheep, meat; by removing Sec. 180.109.
    2. Sulfur dioxide. The proposal to revoke the exemptions in 40 CFR 
180.1013 for sulfur dioxide was published in the Federal Register on 
June 22, 1994 (59 FR 32172) (FRL-4776-9) (OPP-300336). Today's document 
revokes the exemptions in 40 CFR 180.1013(a) for sulfur dioxide 
residues in or on barley; buckwheat; corn; oats; popcorn; rice; rye; 
sorghum, grain (milo); wheat; and in 40 CFR 180.1013(b) for sulfur 
dioxide residues in or on corn (for feed use), by removing 
Sec. 180.1013.
    3. 2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate and 
terbutryn. The proposal to revoke the tolerances for 2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-
trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate and terbutryn was published 
in the Federal Register on July 20, 1994 (59 FR 37019) (FRL-4868-7) 
(OPP-300346).
    i.  2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate. 
Today's document revokes the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.252 for residues 
2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate in or on 
apples; cherries; corn, field, fodder; corn, field, forage; corn, fresh 
(inc. sweet K+CWHR); corn, grain; corn, pop, fodder; corn, pop, forage; 
corn, sweet, fodder; corn, sweet, forage; cranberries; peaches; pears; 
and tomatoes. EPA will revise commodity terminology to conform to 
current practice.
    ii.  Terbutryn. This document also revokes the tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.265 for terbutryn residues in or on barley, fodder; barley, grain; 
barley, green; barley, straw; sorghum, grain; wheat, fodder; wheat, 
grain; wheat, green; and wheat, straw, by removing Sec. 180.265.
    4. Biphenyl; calcium cyanide; 2-chloro-N,N-diallylacetamide; 
chlorosulfamic acid; chlorthiophos; 2,3,6-trichlorophenylacetic acid; 
chloramben; chloroxuron; and diethatyl-ethyl. The proposal to revoke 
the tolerances for the herbicides 2-chloro-N,N-diallylacetamide, 
chloramben, chloroxuron, 2,3,6-trichlorophenylacetic acid, and 
diethatyl-ethyl; the fungicides biphenyl and chlorosulfamic acid; and 
the insecticides calcium cyanide and chlorthiophos was published in the 
Federal Register on April 3, 1996 (61 FR 14694) (FRL-4971-1) (OPP-
300396).
    i.  Biphenyl.  In this document, EPA is revoking the tolerance in 
40 CFR 180.141 for biphenyl residues in or on fruits, citrus (and 
hybrids thereof), by removing Sec. 180.141.
    ii. Calcium cyanide. In this document, EPA is revoking the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.125 for calcium cyanide residues in or on 
barley, grain (POST-H); buckwheat, grain (POST-H); corn, grain (POST-
H); cucumbers; lettuce; oats, grain (POST-H); radishes; rice, grain 
(POST-H); rye, grain (POST-H); sorghum, grain (POST-H); tomatoes; and 
wheat, grain (POST-H), by removing Sec. 180.125.
    iii. 2-Chloro-N,N-diallylacetamide. In this document, EPA is 
revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.282 for 2-Chloro-N,N-
diallylacetamide residues in or on beans, dried; beans, lima; beans, 
lima, forage; beans, snap; beans, snap, forage; cabbage; castor beans; 
celery; corn, field, fodder; corn, field, forage; corn, fresh (inc 
sweet K+ CWHR); corn, grain (inc popcorn); corn, pop, fodder; corn, 
pop, forage; corn, sweet, fodder; corn, sweet, forage; onions; peas; 
peas, forage; potatoes; sorghum, forage; sorghum, grain; soybeans; 
soybeans, forage; sugarcane; sweet potatoes; and tomatoes; by removing 
Sec. 180.282.
    iv. Chlorosulfamic acid. In this document, EPA is revoking the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.201 for chlorosulfamic acid residues in or on 
asparagus (POST-H); carrots (POST-H); cauliflower (POST-H); celery 
(POST-H); potatoes (POST-H); and radishes (POST-H); by removing 
Sec. 180.201.
    v. Chlorthiophos. In this document, EPA is revoking the tolerance 
in 40 CFR 180.398 for chlorthiophos residues in or on tomatoes, by 
removing Sec. 180.398.
    vi.  2,3,6-Trichlorophenylacetic acid. In this document, EPA is 
revoking the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.283 for 2,3,6-
Trichlorophenylacetic acid residues in or on sugarcane, by removing 
Sec. 180.283.
    vii. Chloramben; Chloroxuron; and Diethatyl-ethyl. Since 
chloramben, chloroxuron, and diethatyl-ethyl still had usages on 
certain crops as late as 1994 and 1995, EPA proposed to delay the 
revocation of chloramben, chloroxuron, and diethatyl-ethyl until March 
1, 1999, to allow domestic growers, who may have had stocks, to use up 
their supplies and to permit any treated raw commodities and products 
processed from such commodities to move through marketing channels. The 
time-limited tolerances for chloramben, chloroxuron, and diethatyl-
ethyl, which were proposed in the Federal Register of April 3, 1996 (61 
FR 14694), are no longer needed because the proposed

[[Page 39051]]

expiration date of March 1, 1999 has passed.
    In this document, EPA is revoking the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.266 
for chloramben residues in or on beans, dried; beans, lima; beans, 
snap; beans, vines; cantaloupes; corn, field, fodder; corn, field, 
forage; corn, field, grain; cucumbers; peanuts; peanuts, forage; peas, 
pigeon; peas, pigeon, forage; peppers; pumpkins; soybeans; soybeans, 
forage; squash, summer; squash, winter; sunflower seed; sweet potatoes; 
and tomatoes; by removing Sec. 180.266. The Agency revokes the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.216 for chloroxuron residues in or on carrots; 
celery; onions (dry bulb); soybeans; soybeans, forage; and 
strawberries; by removing Sec. 180.216. Also, the Agency revokes the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.402 for diethatyl-ethyl residues in or on red 
beet, roots; red beet, tops; spinach; sugar beets, roots; and sugar 
beets, tops; by removing Sec. 180.402.
    Response to comments. EPA issued proposed rules for the specific 
pesticides mentioned herein announcing the proposed revocation of 
certain tolerances and/or exemptions and invited public comment for 
consideration and for support of tolerance retention under FFDCA 
standards. With the exception of captafol, no comments were received by 
the Agency concerning the pesticides mentioned in this final rule.
    In response to the proposed rule published in the Federal Register 
of June 9, 1993 (58 FR 32320), the following comments were received 
regarding captafol:
    1. Comments from Citrus Grower Groups, Citrus Growers, and the 
Florida Cooperative Extension Service at the University of Florida. In 
general, comments requested that the revocation of the tolerance for 
captafol residues on citrus fruits be postponed for 1 to 2 years (until 
June, 1994 or June, 1995) to allow growers enough time to exhaust 
existing stocks of captafol for use on citrus.
    2. Comment from Maberry Enfield Maberry Berry Associates (MEMBA). A 
comment was received by the Agency from MEMBA, which cited the 
occasional use of captafol to control Godronia canker in blueberries. 
MEMBA acknowledged that they have not needed captafol for several years 
and that little material remains in the hands of growers and pesticide 
brokers.
    3. Comment from Nestle Peru S.A. A comment was received by the 
Agency from Nestle Peru S.A. which stated that captafol was used in 
combination with other active materials such as thiophanate-methyl 
(Cercobin-M) and triadimefon (Bayleton).
    4. Comment from Ministry of Agriculture, Republic of Indonesia. A 
comment received by the Agency from the Embassy of the Republic of 
Indonesia mentioned that the captafol tolerances on commodities, 
including onions, potatoes, and tomatoes were too small in comparison 
with Codex Alimentarius Commission/Food and Agriculture Organization of 
the United Nations (CAC/FAO) MRLs. The Ministry of Agriculture of the 
Republic of Indonesia claimed that capatafol was being reevaluated due 
to its potential negative impact on man or the environment. Also, the 
Ministry stated there is a possibility of phasing out captafol in the 
future.
    Agency response. EPA will not revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.267 for captafol use on onions, potatoes, and tomatoes at this 
time. EPA will follow-up with the Republic of Indonesia to see if 
Indonesia has taken further actions on captafol and whether the 
proposed U.S. tolerance revocation for onions, potatoes, and tomatoes 
should be finalized. If Indonesia desires any import tolerances, then 
certain data requirements need to be met. EPA has developed guidance on 
import tolerances that is available to interested persons. The Agency 
will revise commodity terminology for onions; potatoes; and tomatoes; 
to conform to current practice; i.e., change to onion, potato, and 
tomato, respectively. In addition, EPA is removing the ``(N)'' 
designation to conform to current Agency administrative practice (``N'' 
designation means negligible residues).
    Regarding the comments on citrus fruits and blueberries, 6 years 
have passed since the proposed revocation of all captafol tolerances in 
the Federal Register of June 9, 1993 (58 FR 32320). EPA now believes 
that more than enough time has transpired for existing stocks to be 
used and/or legally treated agricultural commodities to have gone 
through the channels of trade. Therefore, EPA is revoking the other 
tolerances for captafol listed in 40 CFR 180.267 for residues on 
apples; apricots; blueberries; cherries, sour; cherries, sweet; citrus 
fruits; corn, fresh (inc sweet K+CWHR); cranberries; cucumbers; 
macadamia nuts; melons; nectarines; peanuts, meats (hulls removed); 
peaches; pineapples; plums (fresh prunes); and taro (corm).

IV. When Do these Actions Become Effective?

    These actions become effective 90 days after publication in the 
Federal Register. EPA has delayed the effectiveness of these 
revocations for 90 days following publication to ensure that all 
affected parties receive notice of EPA's action. Consequently, the 
effective date is October 19, 1999. For this particular final rule, the 
actions will affect uses which have been canceled for more than a year. 
Therefore, commodities should have cleared 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 the FQPA. 
Under this section, any residue of these pesticides in or on such food 
shall not render the food adulterated so long as it is shown to the 
satisfaction of FDA that, (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, and (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.

V. Can I Submit Objections or Hearing Requests?

    Yes. Any person can file written objections to any aspect of this 
regulation and can also request a hearing on those objections. 
Objections and hearing requests are currently governed by the 
procedures in 40 CFR part 178, modified as needed to reflect the 
requirements of FFDCA section 408(g).

A. When and Where to Submit

    Objections and hearing requests must be mailed or delivered to the 
Hearing Clerk no later than September 20, 1999. The address of the 
Hearing Clerk is Hearing Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection Agency, 
Rm. M3708, 401 M St. SW, Washington, DC 20460.

B. Fees for Submission

    1. Each objection must be accompanied by a fee of $3,275 or a 
request for waiver of fees. Fees accompanying objections and hearing 
requests must be labeled ``Tolerance Petition Fees'' and forwarded to 
EPA Headquarters Accounting Operations Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), 
P.O. Box 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251.
    2. EPA may waive any fee when a waiver or refund is equitable and 
not contrary to the purposes of the Act. A request for a waiver of 
objection fees

[[Page 39052]]

should be submitted to James Hollins, Information Resources and 
Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental 
Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460. The request for 
a waiver must be accompanied by a fee of $1,650, unless the objector 
has no financial interest in the matter. The fee, if required, must be 
submitted to the address in Unit V.B.1 of this document. For additional 
information on tolerance objection fee waivers, contact James Tompkins, 
Registration Division (7505C), at the same mailing address, or by phone 
at 703-305-5697 or e-mail at [email protected].

C. Information to be Submitted

    Objections must specify the provisions of the regulation considered 
objectionable and the grounds for the objections. If a hearing is 
requested, the objections must include a statement of the factual 
issue(s) on which a hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions 
on such issues, and a summary of any evidence relied upon by the 
objector. You may claim information that you submit in response to this 
document as confidential 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.

D. Granting a Hearing Request

    A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator 
determines that the material submitted shows the following:
    1. There is a genuine and substantial issue of fact.
    2. There is a reasonable possibility that available evidence 
identified by the requestor would, if established, resolve one or more 
of such issues in favor of the requestor, taking into account 
uncontested claims or facts to the contrary.
    3. Resolution of the factual issue(s) in the manner sought by the 
requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested.

VI. How Do the Regulatory Assessment Requirements Apply to this 
Final Action?

A. Is this a ``Significant Regulatory Action''? 

    No. Under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this final action is not a 
``significant regulatory action.'' The Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) has determined that tolerance actions, in general, are not 
``significant'' unless the action involves the revocation of a 
tolerance that may result in a substantial adverse and material affect 
on the economy. In addition, this final action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 
1997), because this final action is not an economically significant 
regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866. Nonetheless, 
environmental health and safety risks to children are considered by the 
Agency when determining appropriate tolerances. Under FQPA, EPA is 
required to apply an additional 10-fold safety factor to risk 
assessments, in order to ensure the protection of infants and children, 
unless reliable data support a different safety factor.

B. Does this Final Action Contain Any Reporting or Recordkeeping 
Requirements? 

    No. This final action does not impose any information collection 
requirements subject to OMB review or approval pursuant to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

C. Does this Final Action Involve Any ``Unfunded Mandates''? 

    No. This final action does not impose any enforceable duty, or 
contain any ``unfunded mandates'' as described in Title II of the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).

D. Do Executive Orders 12875 and 13084 Require EPA to Consult with 
States and Indian Tribal Governments Prior to Taking the Final Action 
in this Document?

    No. Under Executive Order 12875, entitled ``Enhancing the 
Intergovernmental Partnership'' (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993), EPA 
may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute and that 
creates a mandate upon a State, local or tribal government, unless the 
Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by those governments. If the mandate is 
unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected State, local, and tribal governments, the 
nature of their concerns, copies of any written communications from the 
governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of State, local, and tribal governments ``to provide 
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals 
containing significant unfunded mandates.''
    Today's final rule does not create an unfunded Federal mandate on 
State, local, or tribal governments. The rule does not impose any 
enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements of 
section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.
    Under Executive Order 13084, entitled ``Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (63 FR 27655, May 19, 
1998), EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute, 
that significantly or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal 
governments, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on 
those communities, unless the Federal government provides the funds 
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal 
governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide OMB, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected and other representatives of 
Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in 
the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or 
uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments. This final rule does not 
involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. 
Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 
do not apply to this rule.

E. Does this Final Action Involve Any Environmental Justice Issues? 

    No. This action does not involve special considerations of 
environmental-justice related issues pursuant to Executive Order 12898, 
entitled ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 
Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 
1994).

F. Does this Final Action Have a Potentially Significant Impact on a 
Substantial Number of Small Entities?

    No. The Agency has certified that tolerance actions, including the

[[Page 39053]]

tolerance final actions in this document, are not likely to result in a 
significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The factual basis for the Agency's determination, along with 
its generic certification under section 605(b) of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), appears at 63 FR 55565, 
October 16, 1998 (FRL-6035-7). This generic certification has been 
provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.

G. Does this Final Action Involve Technical Standards?

    No. This tolerance final 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). Section 12(d) directs EPA 
to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities 
unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards 
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, 
business practices, etc.) that are developed or adopted by voluntary 
consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA requires EPA to provide Congress, 
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available 
and applicable voluntary consensus standards.

H. Are there Any International Trade Issues Raised by this Final 
Action?

    EPA is working to ensure that the U.S. tolerance reassessment 
program under FQPA does not disrupt international trade. EPA considers 
Codex Maximum Residue Limits (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. When possible, EPA seeks 
to harmonize U.S. tolerances with Codex MRLs. EPA may establish a 
tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 
408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain in a Federal Register document the 
reasons for departing from the Codex level. EPA's effort to harmonize 
with Codex MRLs is summarized in the tolerance reassessment section of 
individual Reregistration Eligibility Decisions. The U.S. EPA has 
developed guidance concerning submissions for import tolerance support. 
This guidance will be made available to interested persons.

I. Is this Final Action Subject to Review under the Congressional 
Review Act?

    Yes. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801 et seq., as 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, 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 the rule in the Federal Register. This action 
is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: July 13, 1999.

Jack E. Housenger,

Acting Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of 
Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is amended to read as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

    1. In part 180:
    a. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as 
follows:
    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

Secs. 180.109, 180.125, 180.141, 180.201, and 180.216 [Removed]

    b. By removing Secs. 180.109, 180.125, 180.141, 180.201, and 
180.216.
    c. By revising Sec. 180.252 to read as follows:


Sec. 180.252   2-Chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl 
phosphate; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the 
insecticide 2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate 
in or on the following food commodities:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alfalfa....................................................          110
Cattle, fat................................................          1.5
Egg........................................................          0.1
Goat, fat..................................................          0.5
Hog, fat...................................................          1.5
Horse, fat.................................................          0.5
Milk, fat (reflecting negligible residues in whole milk)...          0.5
Poultry, fat...............................................         0.75
Sheep, fat.................................................          0.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
    (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
    (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]

Secs. 180.265 and 180.266 [Removed]

    d. By removing Secs. 180.265 and 180.266.
    e. By revising Sec. 180.267 to read as follows:


Sec. 180.267  Captafol; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the 
fungicide captafol (cis-N-[(1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethyl)thio]-4-
cyclohexene-1,2-dicarboximide) in or on the following food commodities:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onion......................................................          0.1
Potato.....................................................          0.5
Tomato.....................................................           15
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
    (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
    (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]

Secs. 180.282, 180.283, 180.398, 180.402, and 180.1013 [Removed]

    f. By removing Secs. 180.282, 180.283, 180.398, 180.402, and 
180.1013.

[FR Doc. 99-18611 Filed 7-20-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F