[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 21, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43548-43552]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-16214]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP-2004-0191; FRL-7365-5]


Pesticides: Tolerance Exemptions for Crustacea, Eggs, Fish, Milk, 
Peanuts, Soybeans, Tree Nuts, and Wheat

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to establish an exemption from the 
requirement of a tolerance for residues of peanuts, tree nuts, milk, 
soybeans, eggs, fish, crustacea, and/or wheat when used as inert or 
active ingredients in pesticide products, for certain use patterns, 
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Food 
Quality Protection Act of 1996.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket ID number OPP-2004-0191, must be 
received on or before September 20, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket ID number OPP-
2004-0191, by one of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the 
on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    Agency Website: http://www.epa.gov/edocket/. EDOCKET, EPA's 
electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method 
for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting 
comments.
    E-mail: Comments may be sent by e-mail to [email protected], 
Attention: Docket ID Number OPP-2004-0191.
    Mail: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) 
(7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection 
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001, 
Attention: Docket ID Number OPP-2004-0191.
    Hand delivery: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch 
(PIRIB), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection 
Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, 
VA, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP-2004-0191. Such deliveries are only 
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special 
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number OPP-2004-
0191. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in 
the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.epa.gov/edocket/, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, 
regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the regulations.gov 
websites are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not 
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the 
body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA 
without going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address 
will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that 
is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If 
you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your 
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with 
any disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public 
docket visit EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal Register of May 31, 
2002 (67 FR 38102) (FRL-7181-7).
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index 
at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard 
copy at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), 
Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This 
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is (703) 
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn Boyle, Registration Division 
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone 
number: (703) 305-6304; fax number: (703) 305-0599; e-mail address: 
[email protected].

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:
     Industry (NAICS 111), e.g., crop production.

[[Page 43549]]

     Industry (NAICS 32532), e.g., pesticide manufacturing.
    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 and Other 
Related Information?

    In addition to using EDOCKET (http://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may 
access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA 
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 
is available at E-CFR Beta Site Two at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.

C. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through 
EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of 
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk 
or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM 
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
    i. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying 
information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The agency may ask you to respond to 
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and 
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information 
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of 
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

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

    This proposed rule is issued under section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 
346a, as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) 
(Public Law 104-170). Section 408(e) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to 
establish, modify, or revoke tolerances, or exemptions from the 
requirement of a tolerance for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on 
raw agricultural commodities and processed foods.

III. Background

    In the Federal Register of May 24, 2002 (67 FR 36534) (FRL-6834-8), 
the Agency placed an expiration date of May 24, 2005, on the following 
tolerance exemptions for allergen-containing commodities:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  40 CFR                       Tolerance Exemption
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
180.910 formerly 180.1001(c)               Casein
------------------------------------------------------------------------
180.910 formerly 180.1001(c)               Fish meal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
180.910 formerly 180.1001(c)               Soy protein, isolated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
180.910 formerly 180.1001(c)               Soybean flour
------------------------------------------------------------------------
180.910 formerly 180.1001(c)               Wheat, including flour,
                                            bran, and starch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
180.920 formerly 180.1001(d)               Sodium caseinate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
180.930 formerly 180.1001(e)               Soy protein, isolated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
180.930 formerly 180.1001(e)               Wheat shorts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
180.1071                                   Egg solids (whole)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 3-year expiration date was added to give the Agency time to 
examine the use patterns of allergens used in pesticide products and 
notify affected registrants of any concerns this examination disclosed 
with use of these substances. (See the January 15, 2002, Federal 
Register (67 FR 1925) (FRL-6807-8) for additional information). 
Registrants would also have the same 3 years to consider their options 
and then carry-out the actions needed to maintain their registrations.

IV. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    Since placing the May 24, 2005, expiration date on the food 
allergen tolerance exemptions, the Agency has completed its review of 
the various ways that chemical substances such as food allergens are 
used in pesticide products. In this proposed rule, the Agency is 
proposing to establish tolerance exemptions for certain specified uses 
of the raw and processed forms of crustacea, eggs, fish, milk, peanuts, 
soybeans, tree nuts, and wheat.
    The following types of uses are proposed:
     When used in seed treatment products.
     Nursery, potting and container uses.
     Pre-plant and at-transplant applications.
     Incorporation into seedling and planting beds.
     Applications to cuttings and bare roots.
     Applications that occur after the harvested crop has been 
removed.
     Soil-directed applications around and adjacent to all 
plants.
     Applications to rangelands, which is land, mostly 
grasslands, whose plants can provide food (i.e., forage) for grazing or 
browsing animals.
     When used in chemigation and irrigation via flood, drip, 
or furrow application.
     Application as part of a dry fertilizer on which an active 
ingredient is impregnated.
     Aerial and ground applications that occur when no above-
ground harvestable food commodities are present (usually pre-bloom).
     Application as part of an animal feed-through product.
     Applications as gel and solid (non-liquid/non-spray) crack 
and crevice treatments that place the gel or bait directly into or on 
top of the cracks and crevices via a mechanism such as a syringe.
     Applications to the same crop from which the food 
commodity is derived, e.g., applications of peanut meal when applied to 
peanut plants.

[[Page 43550]]

    EPA's intent is to establish exemptions from the requirement of a 
tolerance for these allergen-containing substances only for those uses 
which are unlikely to result in residues of an allergen-containing 
material mixed-in with other (different) food commodities as a result 
of a pesticide application. With the exception of the last three uses, 
the uses described above are soil-directed, or occur at a time that the 
crop is not present. If these allergens are placed directly in/on the 
soil (no matter the application method), then it could be expected that 
degradation via naturally-occurring mechanisms would occur.
    Animal feed-through products are used to control flies in manure. 
Most animal feed-through products contain an active ingredient that is 
coated on a small amount of an animal feed item. The animal feed item 
could be an allergen-containing material such as wheat. This coated 
animal feed item is then mixed in with the usual animal feed items. The 
animal's consumption of small amounts of allergens as a result of this 
tolerance exemption should not impact their production of meat, milk, 
poultry and eggs for human consumption, and should not result in 
residues of allergenic-materials in food commodities.
    Applications of gel and solid (non-liquid/non-spray) crack and 
crevice treatments that contain allergens are also not expected to 
result in residues in food. Food commodities can play a critical role 
in certain pesticide formulations used in food processing areas to 
control rodent populations. The rodents are attracted to and then 
consume the food which is coated with or contains within the active 
pesticide ingredient. The Agency believes that these solid gel and bait 
formulations that are not sprayed, but directly placed in cracks and 
crevices would not be inadvertently mixed-in with the near-by food 
commodities.
    The Agency believes that aerial and ground applications, that are 
not soil-directed, but take place when no above-ground harvestable food 
is present are unlikely to result in residues in food. It is assumed 
that some of the allergen could come in contact with the growing plant 
and in certain cases the developing edible crop. EPA generally believes 
that the allergenic material would not be taken up by the growing 
plant, due to such factors as the large size of the molecules and the 
difficulty of passing through the plant leaf cuticle layer, but no 
definitive information is available. While it can be hypothesized that 
the allergenic material would simply ``slide off'' certain developing 
crops that have smooth surfaces and semi-spherical exteriors (e.g., 
apple, orange, banana, grape or tomato), the allergen might also be 
enfolded in crops that do not have such characteristics such as lettuce 
or spinach. The Agency would welcome additional information on these 
issues during the comment period.
    The intent of these tolerance exemptions is to protect those with 
allergies from being unknowingly exposed to these most common allergens 
via consumed foods. However, there are those who are not allergic and 
willingly consume foods such as peanuts or wheat. Application of a 
pesticide product containing wheat to stored wheat commodities does not 
create concerns for those who are not allergic to wheat. Therefore, 
applications to the same crop from which the food commodity is derived, 
are proposed to be exempted because any residue from the allergen would 
not present a different allergenic risk than the underlying food 
commodity.
    Post-harvest applications of these allergen-containing materials to 
stored food commodities are not being proposed because those with 
allergies need assurance that the foods that they consume do not 
contain small amounts of allergen-containing materials that are 
introduced via the application of a registered pesticide product. The 
existing time-limited tolerance exemptions in 40 CFR 180.910, 180.920, 
and 180.930 will expire on May 24, 2005. There is no plan to extend 
these tolerance exemptions. Registrants of formulations with post-
harvest uses containing these eight allergens have been notified by 
certified mail of the upcoming expiration date by the Agency.

V. What about Chemical Substances Whose Names Are Not Readily 
Identified as an Allergen-Containing Commodity?

    The relationship of the processed food commodity to the food 
commodity from which it is derived may not always be apparent by the 
name. For example, casein is milk protein. Currently, there are time-
limited exemptions for casein and sodium caseinate.
    To improve communication and to avoid repeated questions on the 
tolerance exemption status of the certain chemical substances, the 
Agency intends to create within 40 CFR 180.1071, a paragraph (b) to 
collect tolerance exemptions for food-commodity types of chemical 
substances derived fromcrustacea, eggs, fish, milk, peanuts, soybeans, 
tree nuts, or wheat that must also be avoided by those with certain 
food allergies, and present them using commonly-understood terms.
    As stated above, there are time-limited exemptions for casein and 
sodium caseinate. The tolerance exemption for sodium caseinate is 
easily understood to be the following chemical substance: Caseins, 
sodium complexes (CAS Reg. No. 9005-46-3). However, the tolerance 
exemption for casein has been used as a generalized term to hold 
several casein chemical substances, which includes the ammonium and 
potassium salts as well as the hydrolyzed form of casein. To provide 
specificity on the food-commodity types of chemical substances that 
could be termed casein, tolerance exemptions are proposed for: Caseins 
(CAS Reg. No. 9000-71-9); caseins, ammonium complexes (CAS Reg. No. 
9005-42-9); caseins, hydrolyzates (CAS Reg. No. 65072-00-6); and 
caseins, potassium complexes (CAS Reg. No. 68131-54-4).

VI. Cumulative Effects from Substances with a Common Mechanism of 
Toxicity

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA requires that, when 
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the 
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative 
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances 
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    The raw and processed forms of the eight most common food 
allergens:crustacea, eggs, fish, milk, peanuts, soybeans, tree nuts, 
and wheat do not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other 
substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA 
has not assumed that these chemical substances have a common mechanism 
of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's 
efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of 
toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see 
the policy statements released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs 
concerning common mechanism determinations and procedures for 
cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism on 
EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.

VII. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, Infants and Children

    The substances considered in this proposed rule are the food 
commodities that most commonly can invoke an allergenic response. The 
intent of these tolerance exemptions is to protect those with allergies 
from being unknowingly

[[Page 43551]]

exposed to these most common allergens via consumed foods. The Agency 
has selected for this proposal only those uses that are unlikely to 
result in residues of an allergen-containing material mixed-in with 
other (different) food commodities as a result of a pesticide 
application. Those who are allergic to the eight most common food 
allergens (crustacea, eggs, fish, milk, peanuts, soybeans, tree nuts, 
and wheat) benefit by having greater surety that these substances will 
not be present in the foods that they do consume. The amendments and 
revisions to the existing tolerance exemptions will be beneficial to 
the regulated community by providing detailed information on how these 
allergenic food substances can be used in pesticide products.
    As noted, the Agency is proposing only those uses which are 
unlikely to result in residues of an allergen-containing material 
mixed-in with other (different) food commodities as a result of a 
pesticide application. Given this fact, EPA believes that the proposed 
tolerance exemption will be safe for humans including infants and 
children. Because these exemptions are not expected to contribute to 
allergic individuals' exposure to allergens, EPA has not assessed the 
risk of these substances using a safety factor approach. Accordingly, 
application of an additional l0X safety factor analysis or quantitative 
risk assessment is not necessary to protect infants and children.

VIII. Conclusion

    Accordingly, EPA is proposing to establish an exemption from the 
requirement for tolerance for peanuts, tree nuts, milk (including 
caseins), soybeans, eggs, fish, crustacea, and/or wheat when used 
according to those uses (as specified above) which are unlikely to 
result in residues of an allergen-containing material mixed-in with 
other (different) food commodities as a result of a pesticide 
application.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    The Agency is acting on its own initiative under FFDCA section 
408(e) in establishing a tolerance exemption for the allergen-
containing commodities. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 
12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 
1993). Because this proposed rule has been exempted from review under 
Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this proposed 
rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed 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 Law 104-4). Nor 
does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, 
entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); 
or 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).
    This proposed rule establishes new tolerance exemptions in 40 CFR 
180.1071. Establishing a new tolerance exemption permits expanded use 
of pesticide products and thus has a positive economic impact. Under 
section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.), the Agency hereby certifies that the proposed action to 
establish a new tolerance exemption for allergen-containing materials 
will not have significant negative economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.
    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 proposed 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 the FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency 
has determined that this proposed 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 6, 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 proposed 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 proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: July 6, 2004.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as 
follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

    2. Section 180.1071 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  180.1071  Crustacea, Eggs, Fish, Milk, Peanuts, Soybeans, Tree 
Nuts, and Wheat; exemption from the requirement of a tolerance.

    (a) Residues resulting from the following uses of the food 
commodity forms of crustacea, eggs, fish, milk,

[[Page 43552]]

peanuts, soybeans, tree nuts, and wheat are exempted from the 
requirement of a tolerance under FFDCA section 408 (when used as either 
an inert or an active ingredient in a pesticide formulation), if such 
use is in accordance with good agricultural practices:
    (1) Use in pesticide products intended to treat seeds.
    (2) Use in nursery and greenhouse operations, as defined in 40 CFR 
170.3, which includes seeding, potting and transplanting activities.
    (3) Pre-plant and at-transplant applications.
    (4) Incorporation into seedling and planting beds.
    (5) Applications to cuttings and bare roots.
    (6) Applications to the field that occur after the harvested crop 
has been removed.
    (7) Soil-directed applications around and adjacent to all plants.
    (8) Applications to rangelands, which is land, mostly grasslands, 
whose plants can provide food (i.e., forage) for grazing or browsing 
animals.
    (9) Use in chemigation and irrigation via flood, drip, or furrow 
application.
    (10) Application as part of a dry fertilizer on which an active 
ingredient is impregnated.
    (11) Aerial and ground applications that occur when no above-ground 
harvestable food commodities are present (usually pre-bloom).
    (12) Application as part of an animal feed-through product.
    (13) Applications as gel and solid (non-liquid/non-spray) crack and 
crevice treatments that place the gel or bait directly into or on top 
of the cracks and crevices via a mechanism such as a syringe.
    (14) Applications to the same crop from which the food commodity is 
derived, e.g., applications of peanut meal when applied to peanut 
plants.
    (b) Specific chemical substances. Residues resulting from the use 
of the following substances as either an inert or an active ingredient 
in a pesticide formulation are exempted from the requirement of a 
tolerance under FFDCA section 408, if such use is in accordance with 
good agricultural practices and such use is included in paragraph (a) 
of this section:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Chemical Substance                        CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caseins........................................                9000-71-9
Caseins, ammonium complexes....................                9005-42-9
Caseins, hydrolyzates..........................               65072-00-6
Caseins, potassium complexes...................               68131-54-4
Caseins, sodium complexes......................                9005-46-3
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[FR Doc. 04-16214 Filed 7-20-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S