[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 133 (Friday, July 11, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40043-40054]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16063]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0194; FRL-9910-45]
RIN 2070-ZA16


Amitraz, Carfentrazone-ethyl, Ethephon, Malathion, Mancozeb, et 
al.; Proposed Tolerance Actions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to revoke certain tolerances for the 
fungicides spiroxamine and triflumizole, the herbicides carfentrazone-
ethyl and quizalofop ethyl; the insecticides amitraz, oxamyl, 
propetamphos, and spinosad; and the plant growth regulators ethephon 
and mepiquat. In addition, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerance on 
rice straw for multiple active ingredients. Also, EPA is proposing to 
modify certain tolerances for the fungicides mancozeb, thiram, and 
triflumizole; and the insecticide malathion. In addition, EPA is 
proposing to establish new tolerances for the fungicide mancozeb. Also, 
in accordance with current Agency practice, EPA is proposing to make 
minor revisions to the tolerance expression for malathion, mepiquat, 
and thiram.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 9, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification 
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0194, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit 
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business 
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket 
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand 
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the 
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along 
with more information about dockets generally, is available at  http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Nevola, Pesticide Re-Evaluation 
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide

[[Page 40044]]

Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8037; email 
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. 
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System 
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. 
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

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

C. What can I do if I wish the agency to maintain a tolerance that the 
agency proposes to revoke?

    This proposed rule provides a comment period of 60 days for any 
person to state an interest in retaining a tolerance proposed for 
revocation. If EPA receives a comment within the 60-day period to that 
effect, EPA will not proceed to revoke the tolerance immediately. 
However, EPA will take steps to ensure the submission of any needed 
supporting data and will issue an order in the Federal Register under 
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 408(f), if 
needed. The order would specify data needed and the timeframes for its 
submission, and would require that within 90 days some person or 
persons notify EPA that they will submit the data. If the data are not 
submitted as required in the order, EPA will take appropriate action 
under FFDCA.
    EPA issues a final rule after considering comments that are 
submitted in response to this proposed rule. In addition to submitting 
comments in response to this proposal, you may also submit an objection 
at the time of the final rule. If you fail to file an objection to the 
final rule within the time period specified, you will have waived the 
right to raise any issues resolved in the final rule. After the 
specified time, issues resolved in the final rule cannot be raised 
again in any subsequent proceedings.

II. Background

A. What action is the agency taking?

    EPA is proposing to revoke, modify, and establish specific 
tolerances for residues of the fungicides mancozeb, spiroxamine, 
thiram, and triflumizole; the herbicides carfentrazone-ethyl and 
quizalofop ethyl; the insecticides amitraz, malathion, oxamyl, 
propetamphos, and spinosad; and the plant growth regulators ethephon 
and mepiquat in or on commodities listed in the regulatory text. In 
addition, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerances on rice straw for 
multiple active ingredients because it is no longer considered by the 
Agency to be a significant feed item.
    Also, EPA is proposing to make minor revisions to the tolerance 
expressions for malathion, mepiquat, and thiram in accordance with 
current Agency practice to describe more clearly the measurement of 
residues for tolerances and coverage of metabolites and degradates of a 
pesticide by the tolerances. The revisions to the tolerance expressions 
do not substantively change the tolerance or, in any way, modify the 
permissible level of residues permitted by the tolerances.
    EPA is proposing to revoke certain tolerances because they are no 
longer needed or are associated with food uses that are no longer 
registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 
Act (FIFRA).
    The proposed tolerance actions for mancozeb and malathion are 
consistent with the recommendations in their Reregistration Eligibility 
Decisions (REDs) of 2005 and 2009, respectively. As part of the 
tolerance reassessment process, EPA is required to determine whether 
each of the amended tolerances meets the safety standard of FFDCA. The 
safety finding determination of ``reasonable certainty of no harm'' is 
discussed in detail in each RED. REDs recommend the implementation of 
certain tolerance actions, including modifications to reflect current 
use patterns, meet safety findings, and change commodity names and 
groupings in accordance with new EPA policy. Printed copies of many 
REDs may be obtained from EPA's National Service Center for 
Environmental Publications (EPA/NSCEP), P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati, OH 
45242-2419; telephone number: 1-800-490-9198; fax number: 1-513-489-
8695; Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom and from the National 
Technical Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, 
VA 22161; telephone number: 1-800-553-6847 or (703) 605-6000; Internet 
at http://www.ntis.gov. Electronic copies are available on the Internet 
for the malathion and mancozeb REDs in dockets EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0348 and 
EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0176, respectively, at http://www.regulations.gov and 
at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/status.htm.
    In REDs, Chapter IV on risk management, reregistration, and 
tolerance reassessment typically describes the regulatory position, 
cumulative safety determination, determination of safety for U.S. 
general population, and safety for infants and children. In particular, 
the human

[[Page 40045]]

health risk assessment document which supports the RED describes risk 
exposure estimates and whether the Agency has concerns. EPA also seeks 
to harmonize tolerances with international standards set by the Codex 
Alimentarius Commission, as described in Unit III.
    Explanations for proposed modifications in tolerances can be found 
in the RED document and in more detail in the Residue Chemistry Chapter 
document which supports the RED. Copies of the Residue Chemistry 
Chapter documents are found in the Administrative Record and electronic 
copies for malathion and mancozeb can be found under their respective 
docket ID numbers, identified in Unit II.A. Electronic copies of other 
support documents (including explanations for proposed modifications in 
triflumizole tolerances) are available through EPA's electronic docket 
and comment system, regulations.gov at http://www.regulations.gov. You 
may search for this proposed rule under docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2014-0194, then click on that docket ID number to view its contents.
    EPA had determined at the time of the RED that the aggregate 
exposures and risks are not of concern for the above mentioned 
pesticide active ingredients based upon the data identified in the RED 
which lists the submitted studies that the Agency found acceptable.
    EPA has found that the tolerances that are proposed in this 
document to be modified, are safe; i.e., that there is a reasonable 
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from 
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residues, in accordance 
with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C). (Note that changes to tolerance 
nomenclature do not constitute modifications of tolerances). These 
findings are discussed in detail in each RED. The references are 
available for inspection as described in this document under 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    In addition, it is EPA's general practice to propose revocation of 
those tolerances for residues of pesticide active ingredients on crop 
uses for which there are no active registrations under FIFRA, unless 
any person in comments on the proposal indicates a need for the 
tolerance to cover residues in or on imported commodities or legally 
treated domestic commodities.
    EPA is proposing to revoke specific tolerances for residues of 
mepiquat and triflumizole because the Agency has concluded that there 
is no reasonable expectation of finite residues in or on the 
commodities associated with the tolerances, and therefore these 
tolerances are no longer needed.
    The determinations that there are no reasonable expectations of 
finite residues for the tolerances listed in this document were made 
based on feeding studies submitted since the time that the tolerances 
were originally established. These feeding studies used exaggerated 
amounts of the compound and did not show measurable residues of the 
pesticide active ingredient tested. The Agency made the determination 
that there is no reasonable expectation of finite residues for the 
pesticides active ingredient/commodity combinations listed in this 
proposal in memoranda of July 30, 2001 for mepiquat and October 1, 2008 
for triflumizole. Copies of these memoranda can be found in the docket 
for this proposed rule. Because EPA determined that there is no 
reasonable expectation of finite residues, under 40 CFR 180.6 the 
tolerances are no longer needed under FFDCA and can be proposed for 
revocation.
    1. Multiple active ingredients. EPA has determined that rice straw 
is no longer a significant feed item in the United States, and 
therefore the tolerance is no longer needed and should be revoked. (The 
document entitled ``OPPTS Test Guideline 860.1000 Supplement: Guidance 
on Constructing Maximum Reasonably Balanced Diets (MRBD)'' is available 
at http://www.regulations.gov under docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-
0155). Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerances for 
rice, straw in 40 CFR 180.142(a) for 2,4-D; 180.169(a)(1) for carbaryl; 
180.205(a) for paraquat; 180.274(a) for propanil; 180.288(a) for 2-
(thiocyanomethylthio)benzothiazole; 180.293(a)(1) for endothall; 
180.301(a) for carboxin; 180.355(a)(1) for bentazon; 180.361(a) for 
pendimethalin; 180.377(a)(2) for diflubenzuron; 180.383(a) for sodium 
salt of acifluorfen; 180.399(a)(1) for iprodione; 180.401(a) for 
thiobencarb; 180.417(a)(1) for triclopyr; 180.418(a)(2) for zeta-
cypermethrin; 180.425(a) for clomazone; 180.434(a) for propiconazole; 
180.438(a)(1) for lambda-cyhalothrin; 180.438(a)(2) for gamma-
cyhalothrin and its epimer; 180.439(a) for thifensulfuron methyl; 
180.445(a) for bensulfuron methyl; 180.447(a)(2) for imazethapyr; 
180.451(a) for tribenuron methyl; 180.463(a)(1) for quinclorac; 
180.473(a) for glufosinate ammonium; 180.479(a)(2) for halosulfuron-
methyl; 180.484(a) for flutolanil; 180.507(a)(1) for azoxystrobin; 
180.517(a) for fipronil; 180.555(a) for trifloxystrobin; 180.570(a)(2) 
for isoxadifen-ethyl; 180.577(a) for bispyribac-sodium; 180.605(a) for 
penoxsulam; and 180.625(a) for orthosulfamuron.
    2. Amitraz. There have been no active U.S. registrations for use of 
amitraz on cotton since May 3, 2006 and the manufacturer, Arysta Life 
Sciences, notified EPA in July 2011 that it no longer is interested in 
supporting the tolerance for amitraz use on cotton, undelinted seed for 
import purposes. The tolerance is no longer needed and therefore should 
be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerance for 
amitraz in 40 CFR 180.287(a) on cotton, undelinted seed.
    3. Carfentrazone-ethyl. Because the first cotton processing study 
submitted by the registrant was conducted at 1.0x the seasonal 
application rate and resulted in residues less than the Limit of 
Quantitation (LOQ) of 0.05 ppm, EPA requested that a processing study 
be conducted at an application rate sufficient to generate residues in/
on cottonseed and set tolerances for cotton hulls, meal, and oil using 
theoretical processing factors and the highest average cottonseed field 
trial residue. Based on an available second processing study conducted 
at 2.0x the seasonal application rate, which showed that carfentrazone-
ethyl residues of concern in or on cottonseed were detected (Limit of 
Detection 0.015-0.020 ppm) but were less than the LOQ of 0.05 ppm, EPA 
determined that the tolerances for carfentrazone-ethyl residues of 
concern are no longer needed on cottonseed hull, meal, and oil and 
therefore should be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke 
the tolerances for carfentrazone-ethyl in 40 CFR 180.515(a) on cotton, 
hulls; cotton, meal; and cotton, refined oil.
    Because uses supported by the carfentrazone-ethyl tolerance for 
caneberry subgroup 13A at 0.1 ppm are covered by the tolerance for 
berry group 13 at 0.10 ppm, there is no longer any need for the 
separate subgroup tolerance and therefore it should be revoked. In 
addition, because EPA no longer considers rice straw to be a 
significant feed item, the tolerance is no longer needed and should be 
revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerances for 
carfentrazone-ethyl in 40 CFR 180.515(a) on caneberry subgroup 13A and 
rice, straw.
    4. Ethephon. Because the last product label amendment has been 
completed which limits the use of ethephon to cucumbers grown for seed 
production only and restricts the harvesting of treated cucumbers for 
human or animal consumption, a food tolerance for ethephon is no longer 
needed and therefore should be revoked.

[[Page 40046]]

Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerance for ethephon in 
40 CFR 180.300(a) on cucumber.
    5. Malathion. EPA is proposing to modify the plant tolerance 
commodity levels for certain existing malathion tolerances in 40 CFR 
180.111(a)(1) based on available field trial data and product label 
changes. Currently, those tolerances are established for residues of 
malathion. However, as stated in the 2009 amended RED for malathion, 
based on available plant metabolism data, EPA determined that the 
residues of concern in plants consist of malathion and its metabolite, 
malaoxon, and therefore the tolerance expression for plant commodities 
should be revised. Because EPA is not proposing to modify all of the 
plant commodity tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) at this time, EPA is 
proposing that those specific tolerances which it is proposing to 
modify herein be redesignated from 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) to 40 CFR 
180.111(a)(2), where tolerances are currently established for malathion 
and its metabolite malaoxon. Also, in accordance with current Agency 
practice to describe more clearly the measurement and scope or coverage 
of the tolerances, EPA is proposing to revise the introductory text 
containing the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2) to read as 
set out in the proposed regulatory text at the end of this document.
    Based on product label changes to their use patterns and available 
field trial data that showed malathion residues of concern in or on 
apricot as high as <0.65 ppm, avocado as high as <0.08 ppm, fig as high 
as <0.41 ppm, grape as high as 2.78 ppm, macadamia nut as high as <0.10 
ppm, melon as high as <0.85 ppm, mushroom as high as <0.10 ppm, okra as 
high as <2.23 ppm, bulb onion as high as <0.60 ppm, green onion as high 
as 4.88 ppm, peach as high as <3.64 ppm, pear as high as 2.23 ppm, 
peppermint and spearmint tops as high as 1.43 ppm, EPA determined that 
the tolerances should be decreased from 8 to 1.0 ppm, 8 to 0.2 ppm, 8 
to 1.0 ppm, 8 to 4.0, 1 to 0.2 ppm, 8 to 1.0 ppm, 8 to 0.2 ppm, 8 to 
3.0 ppm, 8 to 1.0, 8 to 6.0, 8 to 6.0 ppm, 8 to 3.0 ppm, 8 to 2.0 ppm, 
and 8 to 2.0 ppm, respectively. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease 
the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for apricot, fig, melon, and 
onion, bulb to 1.0 ppm, avocado, mushroom, and nut, macadamia to 0.2 
ppm, grape to 4.0 ppm, okra and pear to 3.0 ppm, onion, green and peach 
to 6.0 ppm, peppermint, tops and spearmint, tops to 2.0 ppm, and 
redesignate them to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Available residue data may be translated by the Agency from one 
commodity to another related commodity where appropriate (e.g., have 
similar use patterns). Based on their use patterns and the translation 
of apricot data to nectarine, bulb onion data to garlic, and green 
onion data to leek and shallot (data previously mentioned herein), EPA 
determined that the tolerances for nectarine, bulb garlic, leek, and 
bulb shallot should be decreased from 8 to 1.0 ppm, 8 to 1.0 ppm, 8 to 
6 ppm, and 8 to 6 ppm, respectively. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 
decrease the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for nectarine and 
garlic, bulb to 1.0 ppm, and leek and shallot, bulb to 6.0 ppm, and 
redesignate them to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and the translation of melon data (data 
previously mentioned herein) to pumpkin and winter squash, EPA 
determined that the tolerances for pumpkin and winter squash should 
each be decreased from 8 to 1.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 
decrease the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for pumpkin; and 
squash, winter; each to 1.0 ppm, and redesignate them to 40 CFR 
180.111(a)(2).
    Based on its use pattern and available field trial data that showed 
malathion residues of concern in or on asparagus were as high as 1.38 
ppm, EPA determined that the tolerance should be decreased from 8 to 
2.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerance in 40 
CFR 180.111(a)(1) for asparagus to 2.0 ppm, and redesignate it to 40 
CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and available field trial data that 
showed malathion residues of concern in or on blackberry as high as 
3.99 ppm and raspberry as high as 4.96 ppm, EPA determined that the 
tolerances should be decreased from 8 to 6 ppm and 8 to 6 ppm, 
respectively. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerances in 
40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for blackberry and raspberry to 6 ppm, and 
redesignate them to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and the translation of blackberry and/
or raspberry data (data previously mentioned herein) to boysenberry, 
dewberry, gooseberry, and loganberry, EPA determined that the 
tolerances for boysenberry, dewberry, gooseberry, and loganberry should 
each be decreased from 8 to 6 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 
decrease the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for boysenberry, 
dewberry, gooseberry, and loganberry, each to 6 ppm, and redesignate 
them to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and available field trial data that 
showed malathion residues of concern in or on turnip greens as high as 
3.40 ppm and turnip roots as high as <0.18 ppm, EPA determined that the 
tolerances should be decreased from 8 to 4.0 ppm and 8 to 0.5 ppm, 
respectively. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerances in 
40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for turnip, greens to 4.0 ppm and turnip, roots to 
0.5 ppm, and redesignate them to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and the translation of turnip greens 
data (data previously mentioned herein) to garden beet tops and salsify 
tops, EPA determined that the tolerances for beet, garden, tops and 
salsify, tops; should each be decreased from 8 to 4.0 ppm. Therefore, 
EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for 
beet, garden, tops; and salsify, tops; each to 4.0 ppm, and redesignate 
them to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and the translation of the turnip root 
data (data previously mentioned herein) to garden beet roots, 
horseradish, parsnip, radish, rutabaga, and salsify roots, EPA 
determined that the tolerances for beet, garden, roots; horseradish; 
parsnip; radish; rutabaga; and salsify, roots; should each be decreased 
from 8 to 0.5 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for beet, garden, roots, 
horseradish; parsnip; radish; rutabaga; and salsify, roots; each to 0.5 
ppm, and redesignate them to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and available field trial data that 
showed malathion residues of concern in or on potatoes as high as 0.05 
ppm, and translation of that data to chayote roots and sweet potato 
roots, EPA determined that the tolerances should be decreased from 8 to 
0.1 ppm for potato; chayote, roots; and sweet potato, roots. Therefore, 
EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for 
potato; chayote, roots; and sweet potato, roots; each to 0.1 ppm, and 
redesignate them to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and cucumber data which showed 
malathion residues of concern as high as <0.11 ppm, and translation of 
that data to chayote fruit and summer squash, EPA determined that the 
tolerances for chayote fruit and summer squash should be decreased from 
8 to 0.2 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerances in 
40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for chayote, fruit; and squash, summer; each to 
0.2 ppm, and redesignate them to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).

[[Page 40047]]

    Based on their use patterns and tomato data, which showed malathion 
residues of concern as high as 1.54 ppm, and translation of that data 
to eggplant, EPA determined that the tolerance for eggplant should be 
decreased from 8 to 2.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease 
the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for eggplant to 2.0 ppm, and 
redesignate it to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and available field trial data that 
showed malathion residues of concern in or on alfalfa and clover forage 
as high as 110.12 ppm and 120.14 ppm, respectively, and translation of 
that data to trefoil forage, EPA determined that the tolerances should 
be decreased from 135 to 125 ppm for alfalfa, clover, and trefoil 
forage. Also, based on its use pattern and available field trial data 
that showed malathion residues of concern in or on clover hay as high 
as 120.50 ppm, EPA determined that the tolerance should be decreased 
from 135 to 125 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease the 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for alfalfa, forage; clover, forage; 
trefoil, forage; and clover, hay; each to 125 ppm; and redesignate them 
to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on its use pattern and available storage stability data that 
showed malathion residues of concern in or on carrots were as high as 
0.54 ppm, EPA determined that the tolerance should be decreased from 8 
to 1 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerance in 40 
CFR 180.111(a)(1) for carrot, roots to 1 ppm, and redesignate it to 40 
CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and available field trial data that 
showed malathion residues of concern in or on mango were as high as 
<0.12 ppm, passionfruit were as high as <0.12 ppm, pineapple were as 
high as 0.17 ppm, and walnuts were non-detectable (<0.10 ppm), EPA 
determined that the tolerances should each be decreased from 8 to 0.2 
ppm. Also, based on their use patterns and the translation of walnut 
data to pecan, EPA determined that the pecan tolerance should be 
decreased from 8 to 0.2 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease 
the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for mango, passionfruit, pecan, 
pineapple, and walnut, each to 0.2 ppm, and redesignate them to 40 CFR 
180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and available field trial data that 
showed malathion residues of concern in or on oranges as high as 1.91 
ppm, and translation of that data to grapefruit, kumquat, lemon, lime, 
and tangerine, EPA determined that the tolerances should be decreased 
from 8 to 4.0 ppm for orange, grapefruit, kumquat, lemon, lime, and 
tangerine. Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerances in 40 
CFR 180.111(a)(1) for orange, grapefruit, kumquat, lemon, lime, and 
tangerine; each to 4.0 ppm, and redesignate them to 40 CFR 
180.111(a)(2).
    Based on their use patterns and dry bean data, which showed 
malathion residues of concern as high as 0.74 ppm, and translation of 
that data to lupin seed, EPA determined that the tolerance for lupin 
seed should be decreased from 8 to 2.0 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing 
to decrease the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) for lupin, seed to 
2.0 ppm, and redesignate it to 40 CFR 180.111(a)(2).
    Based on its use pattern and available field trial data that showed 
malathion residues of concern in or on peppers as high as 0.09 ppm, EPA 
determined that the tolerance should be decreased from 8 to 0.5 ppm. 
Therefore, EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerance in 40 CFR 
180.111(a)(1) for pepper to 0.5 ppm, and redesignate it to 40 CFR 
180.111(a)(2).
    6. Mancozeb. Based on label revisions and available field trial 
data that showed mancozeb residues as high as 0.738 ppm in or on wheat 
grain and 27.1 ppm in or on wheat straw, the Agency determined that the 
tolerances should be set at 1 ppm for wheat grain and 30 ppm for wheat 
straw, which when converted to carbon disulfide equivalents using a 
rounded conversion factor of 0.6X (based on relative molecular weights) 
is calculated as 0.6 ppm for grain and 18 ppm for straw. The Agency 
determined that data for wheat should be translated to barley, oat, and 
rye because of similar use patterns. In order to harmonize with Codex, 
EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 180.176(a) to decrease the tolerances on 
barley, grain; oat, grain; rye, grain; and wheat, grain; each to 1 ppm 
and to maintain the tolerance for wheat, straw at 25 ppm (as 
recommended in the RED) and therefore, also maintain the straw 
tolerances at 25 ppm for barley, oat, and rye.
    Based on available processing data that showed mancozeb residues 
concentrated 2X in flour and 4X in wheat bran and shorts, and a highest 
average field trial (HAFT) of <0.748 ppm on the raw agricultural 
commodity (RAC), the Agency expected residues as high as 1.5 ppm for 
flour and 2.99 ppm for bran, and the Agency determined that the 
tolerances should be set at 2.0 ppm for flour and 3.0 ppm for bran and 
shorts, which when converted to carbon disulfide equivalents using a 
rounded conversion factor of 0.6X is calculated as 1.2 ppm for flour 
and 2 ppm for bran and shorts. The Agency determined that data for 
wheat should be translated to barley, oat, and rye because of similar 
use patterns. Therefore, EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 180.176(a) to 
decrease the tolerances on wheat, flour; barley, flour; and oat, flour; 
each to 1.2 ppm and also to establish a tolerance on rye, flour at 1.2 
ppm; and decrease the tolerances on wheat, bran; barley, bran; rye, 
bran; and wheat, shorts; each to 2 ppm.
    Based on sufficient data for wheat hay, where the field trial data 
showed mancozeb residues as high as 46.4 ppm, the Agency determined 
that the tolerance, in carbon disulfide equivalents, should be set at 
30 ppm. No additional data for wheat hay have been received since the 
RED that would change that conclusion. (Although the Mancozeb RED 
stated that additional data for wheat hay were needed to establish a 
tolerance value, the Agency had received sufficient data prior to the 
RED to establish a tolerance value and no additional data are needed). 
The Agency determined that data for wheat hay should be translated to 
barley and oats because of similar use patterns. Therefore, EPA is 
proposing to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.176(a) on wheat, hay; 
barley hay; and oat, hay at 30 ppm.
    Based on label revision and available field trial data that showed 
mancozeb residues were as high as 12.6 ppm in or on papaya, the Agency 
determined that the tolerance should be set at 15 ppm, which when 
converted to carbon disulfide equivalents using a rounded conversion 
factor of 0.6X is calculated as 9 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 
decrease the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.176(a) on papaya to 9 ppm.
    Based on available field trial data that showed mancozeb residues 
were not detectable (<0.05 ppm) in or on field corn grain, the Agency 
determined that the tolerance should be set at 0.1 ppm, which when 
converted to carbon disulfide equivalents using a rounded conversion 
factor of 0.6X is calculated as 0.06 ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing 
to decrease the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.176(a) on corn, field, grain to 
0.06 ppm.
    7. Mepiquat. Based on available data at an exaggerated feeding 
level of 7X the Maximum Theoretical Dietary Burden (MTDB) which showed 
mepiquat residues of concern in cattle meat, fat, and milk were below 
the limit of detection (<0.05 ppm), EPA determined that there is no 
reasonable expectation of finite mepiquat residues of concern in 
livestock meat and fat. The tolerances

[[Page 40048]]

are no longer needed under 40 CFR 180.6(a)(3) and therefore should be 
revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerances for 
mepiquat chloride in 40 CFR 180.384(a)(2) on cattle, fat; cattle, meat; 
goat, fat; goat, meat; hog, fat; hog, meat; horse, fat; horse, meat; 
sheep, fat; and sheep, meat.
    In addition, EPA is proposing to combine the tolerance expressions 
for mepiquat in 40 CFR 180.384(a)(1) and mepiquat chloride in 40 CFR 
180.384(a)(2) by measuring only mepiquat in newly designated 40 CFR 
180.384(a). Also, in order to describe more clearly the measurement of 
residues for tolerances and coverage of metabolites and degradates of a 
pesticide by the tolerances, EPA is proposing to revise the 
introductory text in newly designated 40 CFR 180.384(a) to read as set 
out in the proposed regulatory text at the end of this document.
    8. Oxamyl. In the Federal Register of January 11, 2012 (77 FR 1684) 
(FRL-9328-2), EPA announced its receipt of voluntary requests by 
registrants to amend certain pesticide registrations, including 
amendments to terminate the last oxamyl registrations for soybean use. 
In the Federal Register of April 11, 2012 (77 FR 21767) (FRL-9342-2), 
EPA published a cancellation order in follow-up to the January 11, 2012 
notice and granted the requested amendments to terminate use of oxamyl 
on soybeans. Because the soybean use has not been included on oxamyl 
product labels since 2006, no existing stocks period is needed. 
Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerance for oxamyl in 40 
CFR 180.303(a) on soybean, seed.
    9. Propetamphos. In the Federal Register of August 18, 2010 (75 FR 
51053) (FRL-8840-3), EPA announced its receipt of voluntary requests by 
the registrant to cancel certain propetamphos registrations, which 
would terminate the last propetamphos products registered for use in 
the United States. In the Federal Register of December 30, 2010 (75 FR 
82387) (FRL-8854-8), EPA published a cancellation order in follow-up to 
the August 18, 2010 notice which granted the requested product 
cancellations and prohibited the registrant from selling or 
distributing its propetamphos technical product after March 30, 2012 
and end-use product until stocks are exhausted as described. Persons 
other than the registrant are allowed to sell, distribute, and use 
existing stocks of the end-use product until supplies are exhausted. 
EPA believes that existing stocks have been exhausted. Therefore, EPA 
is proposing to revoke the sole tolerance for propetamphos in 40 CFR 
180.541, on food and feed commodities, and remove that section in its 
entirety.
    10. Quizalofop ethyl. Because EPA no longer considers soybean 
soapstock to be a significant livestock feed item, the tolerance for 
quizalofop ethyl residues of concern is no longer needed and therefore 
should be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the 
tolerance for quizalofop ethyl in 40 CFR 180.441(a)(1) on soybean, 
soapstock.
    11. Spinosad. The existing tolerance for spinosad on coriander 
leaves was translated from the tolerance for vegetable, leafy, except 
brassica, group 4 at 8.0 ppm. The 2009 Calendar Year Pesticide Data 
Program (PDP) summary, available at http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/science, reported that spinosad residues were detected in two cilantro 
samples out of 184 samples. Residues ranged from 0.016 to 0.030 ppm. 
Because fresh coriander leaves are included in herb subgroup 19A, fresh 
and residues on coriander leaves do not exceed the herb subgroup 19A, 
fresh tolerance of 3.0 ppm, there is no longer any need for the 
separate tolerance on coriander leaves at 8.0 and therefore it should 
be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerance for 
spinosad in 40 CFR 180.495(a) on coriander, leaves.
    12. Spiroxamine. In the Federal Register of September 7, 2011 (76 
FR 55385) (FRL-8887-1), EPA announced its receipt of voluntary requests 
by registrants to cancel certain pesticide registrations, including the 
last registrations for use of spiroxamine on hops. In the Federal 
Register of May 23, 2012 (77 FR 30526) (FRL-9347-3), EPA published a 
cancellation order in follow-up to the September 7, 2011 notice and 
granted the requested product cancellations, including ones which 
terminated use of spiroxamine on hops. The cancellation order allowed 
registrants to sell and distribute existing stocks until May 23, 2013. 
EPA believes that existing stocks (with hops use) will be exhausted 1 
year after May 23, 2013; i.e., by May 23, 2014. Therefore, EPA is 
proposing to revoke the tolerance for spiroxamine in 40 CFR 180.602(a) 
on hop, dried cones.
    13. Thiram. Currently, tolerances for thiram are established in 40 
CFR 180.132(a) for residues of the fungicide thiram (tetramethyl 
thiuram disulfide). Thiram is a member of the class of 
dithiocarbamates, whose decomposition releases a common moiety, carbon 
disulfide. In order to allow harmonization of U.S. tolerances with 
Codex MRLs, the Agency determined that for the purpose of tolerance 
enforcement, residues of thiram should be calculated as carbon 
disulfide. Therefore, EPA is proposing to revise the introductory text 
containing the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 180.132(a) to thiram 
residues convertible to and expressed in terms of the degradate carbon 
disulfide and also revise the tolerance expression in accordance with 
current Agency practice to describe more clearly the measurement and 
scope or coverage of the tolerances, to read as set out in the proposed 
regulatory text at the end of this document. Based on the revising of 
the tolerance expression to carbon disulfide, EPA determined that the 
thiram tolerances for apple and strawberry should be decreased from 7.0 
to 5 ppm and 20 to 13 ppm, respectively, and the tolerance for banana 
should be increased from 0.80 to 2.0 ppm in order to harmonize with 
Codex. Also, in order to harmonize with Codex, EPA is maintaining the 
tolerance for peach at 7.0 ppm. (The Agency's determination is 
available in the docket of this proposed rule). Therefore, EPA is 
proposing in 40 CFR 180.132(a) to decrease the tolerances for apple to 
5 ppm and strawberry to 13 ppm, and increase the tolerance for banana 
to 2.0 ppm. The Agency determined that the increased tolerance is safe; 
i.e., there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from 
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.
    14. Triflumizole. Because EPA no longer considers dry apple pomace, 
grape pomace, and grape raisin waste to be significant livestock feed 
items, the associated tolerances for triflumizole residues of concern 
are no longer needed and therefore should be revoked. Also, based on 
apple processing data that showed triflumizole residues of concern do 
not concentrate in wet apple pomace, the tolerance is no longer needed 
and should be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke the 
tolerances for triflumizole in 40 CFR 180.476(a)(1) on apple, dry 
pomace; apple, wet pomace; grape, dried pomace; grape, raisin, waste; 
and grape, wet pomace.
    Also, because there are no longer any registered triflumizole uses 
associated with feed items for poultry and swine, tolerances for 
triflumizole residues of concern on swine and poultry are no longer 
needed and therefore should be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing 
to revoke the tolerances for triflumizole in 40 CFR 180.476(a)(2) on 
hog, fat; hog, meat; hog, meat byproducts; poultry, fat; poultry, meat; 
poultry, meat byproducts; and egg.
    Based on available data at an exaggerated feeding level of 6X the

[[Page 40049]]

MTDB which showed triflumizole residues of concern to be below the 
limit of quantitation (<0.05 ppm) and projected residues at 1X the MTDB 
in cattle meat and milk to be well below the limit of quantitation 
(<0.05 ppm), EPA determined that there is no reasonable expectation of 
finite triflumizole residues of concern in livestock meat and milk. 
These tolerances are no longer needed under 40 CFR 180.6(a)(3) and 
therefore should be revoked. Consequently, EPA is proposing to revoke 
the tolerances for triflumizole in 40 CFR 180.476(a)(2) on cattle, 
meat; goat, meat; horse, meat; sheep, meat; and milk.
    In addition, based on available data at an exaggerated feeding 
level at 6X the MTDB which projected residues at 1X the MTDB in cattle 
fat, kidney, and liver to be <0.05 ppm, <0.10 ppm, and <0.10 ppm, 
respectively, EPA determined that the existing tolerances should be 
decreased. Consequently, EPA is proposing to decrease the tolerances 
for triflumizole in 40 CFR 180.476(a)(2) from 0.5 to 0.10 ppm on 
cattle, fat; goat, fat; horse, fat; and sheep, fat; and from 0.5 to 
0.20 ppm on cattle, meat byproducts; goat, meat byproducts; horse, meat 
byproducts; and sheep, meat byproducts.

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. 346a, 
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. Without a tolerance or exemption, food 
containing pesticide residues is considered to be unsafe and therefore 
``adulterated'' under FFDCA section 402(a), 21 U.S.C. 342(a). Such food 
may not be distributed in interstate commerce, 21 U.S.C. 331(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 FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. Food-use pesticides not 
registered in the United States must have tolerances in order for 
commodities treated with those pesticides to be imported into the 
United States.
    EPA is proposing certain specific tolerance actions to implement 
the tolerance recommendations made during the reregistration and 
tolerance reassessment processes (including follow-up on canceled or 
additional uses of pesticides). As part of these processes, EPA is 
required to determine whether each of the amended tolerances meets the 
safety standard of FFDCA. The safety finding determination is discussed 
in detail in each RED for the active ingredient. REDs recommend the 
implementation of certain tolerance actions, including modifications to 
reflect current use patterns, to meet safety findings, and change 
commodity names and groupings in accordance with new EPA policy. 
Printed and electronic copies of the REDs are available as provided in 
Unit II.A.
    EPA has issued REDs for malathion and mancozeb. REDs contain the 
Agency's evaluation of the database for these pesticides, including 
requirements for additional data on the active ingredients to confirm 
the potential human health and environmental risk assessments 
associated with current product uses, and in REDs state conditions 
under which these uses and products will be eligible for 
reregistration. The REDs recommended the establishment, modification, 
and/or revocation of specific tolerances. RED and TRED recommendations 
such as establishing or modifying tolerances, and in some cases 
revoking tolerances, are the result of assessment under the FFDCA 
standard of ``reasonable certainty of no harm.'' However, tolerance 
revocations recommended in REDs that are proposed in this document do 
not need such assessment when the tolerances are no longer necessary.
    EPA's general practice is to propose revocation of tolerances for 
residues of pesticide active ingredients on crops for which FIFRA 
registrations no longer exist and on which the pesticide may therefore 
no longer be used in the United States. EPA has historically been 
concerned that retention of tolerances that are not necessary to cover 
residues in or on legally treated foods may encourage misuse of 
pesticides within the United States. Nonetheless, EPA will establish 
and maintain tolerances even when corresponding domestic uses are 
canceled if the tolerances, which EPA refers to as ``import 
tolerances,'' are necessary to allow importation into the United States 
of food containing such pesticide residues. However, where there are no 
imported commodities that require these import tolerances, the Agency 
believes it is appropriate to revoke tolerances for unregistered 
pesticides in order to prevent potential misuse.
    Furthermore, as a general matter, the Agency believes that 
retention of import tolerances not needed to cover any imported food 
may result in unnecessary restriction on trade of pesticides and foods. 
Under FFDCA section 408, 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 an assessment 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 potential trade 
restrictions, the Agency is proposing to revoke tolerances for residues 
on crops uses 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 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 tolerance at issue.
    When EPA establishes tolerances for pesticide residues in or on raw 
agricultural commodities, consideration must be given to the possible 
residues of those chemicals in meat, milk, poultry, and/or eggs 
produced by animals that are fed agricultural products (for example, 
grain or hay) containing pesticides residues (40 CFR 180.6). When 
considering this possibility, EPA can conclude that:
    1. Finite residues will exist in meat, milk, poultry, and/or eggs.
    2. There is a reasonable expectation that finite residues will 
exist.
    3. There is a reasonable expectation that finite residues will not 
exist. If there is no reasonable expectation of finite pesticide 
residues in or on meat,

[[Page 40050]]

milk, poultry, or eggs, tolerances do not need to be established for 
these commodities (40 CFR 180.6(b) and (c)).
    EPA has evaluated certain specific meat, milk, poultry, and egg 
tolerances proposed for revocation in this document and has concluded 
that there is no reasonable expectation of finite pesticide residues of 
concern in or on those commodities.

C. When do these actions become effective?

    EPA is proposing that the actions herein become effective 6 months 
after the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal 
Register. EPA is proposing this effective date for these actions to 
allow a reasonable interval for producers in exporting members of the 
World Trade Organization's (WTO's) Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) 
Measures Agreement to adapt to the requirements of a final rule. EPA 
believes that treated commodities will have sufficient time for passage 
through the channels of trade. If you have comments regarding existing 
stocks and whether the effective date allows sufficient time for 
treated commodities to clear the channels of trade, please submit 
comments as described under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Any commodities listed in this proposal treated with the pesticides 
subject to this proposal, and in the channels of trade following the 
tolerance revocations, shall be subject to FFDCA section 408(1)(5), as 
established by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). Under this unit, 
any residues of these pesticides in or on such food shall not render 
the food adulterated so long as it is shown to the satisfaction of the 
Food and Drug Administration that:
    1. The residue is present as the result of an application or use of 
the pesticide at a time and in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA, 
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 when the 
pesticide was applied to such food.

III. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. 
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent 
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA 
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established 
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA 
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations 
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food 
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety 
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United 
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from 
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain 
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established a MRL for carfentrazone-ethyl, 
mepiquat, propetamphos, quizalofop ethyl, spiroxamine, triflumizole, 
ethephon in or on cucumber, oxamyl in or on soybean seed, spinosad in 
or on coriander leaves, or total dithiocarbamates in or on barley bran, 
barley flour, field corn grain, oat flour, oat grain, rye bran, rye 
grain, wheat bran, wheat flour, and wheat, shorts.
    The Codex has established MRLs for total dithiocarbamates 
determined as carbon disulfide in or on various commodities, including 
barley and wheat, each at 1 milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg). These MRLs are 
the same as the tolerances proposed for mancozeb in the United States.
    The Codex has established MRLs for total dithiocarbamates 
determined as carbon disulfide in or on various commodities, including 
papaya at 5 mg/kg. This MRL is covered by a proposed U.S. tolerance at 
a higher level than the MRL. The MRL is different than the proposed 
U.S. tolerance for mancozeb in the United States because of differences 
in residue definition, use patterns, and/or good agricultural 
practices.
    The Codex has established MRLs for malathion in or on various 
commodities, including onion, bulb at 1 milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg). 
This MRL is the same as the tolerance proposed for malathion in the 
United States.
    The Codex has established MRLs for malathion in or on various 
commodities, including asparagus at 1 mg/kg and peppers at 0.1 mg/kg. 
These MRLs are covered by proposed U.S. tolerances at higher levels 
than the MRLs. These MRLs are different than the tolerances established 
for malathion in the United States because of differences in residue 
definition, use patterns, and/or good agricultural practices.
    The Codex has established MRLs for malathion in or on citrus fruits 
at 7 mg/kg, grapes at 5 mg/kg, and turnip greens at 5 mg/kg. These MRLs 
are different than the tolerances proposed for malathion in the United 
States because of differences in residue definition, use patterns, and/
or good agricultural practices.
    The Codex has established a MRL for amitraz in or on various 
commodities, including cotton seed at 0.5 mg/kg. This MRL is covered by 
the current U.S. tolerance at a higher level than the MRL, but would no 
longer be covered due to the proposed revocation of the U.S. tolerance.
    The Codex has established MRLs for total dithiocarbamates 
determined as carbon disulfide in or on various commodities, including 
banana at 2 mg/kg, peach at 7 mg/kg, and strawberry at 5 mg/kg. The 
MRLs for banana and peach are the same as the U.S. tolerances proposed 
for thiram in the United States. The MRL for strawberry is covered by a 
proposed U.S. tolerance at a higher level than the MRL. The MRL for 
strawberry is different than the tolerance proposed for thiram in the 
United States because of differences in use patterns, and/or good 
agricultural practices.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to establish tolerances 
under FFDCA section 408(e), and also modify and revoke specific 
tolerances established under FFDCA section 408. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions (e.g., 
establishment and modification of a tolerance and tolerance revocation 
for which extraordinary circumstances do not exist) from review under 
Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this 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, entitled ``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) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.). Nor does it require 
any special considerations as required by Executive Order 12898, 
entitled ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 
Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 
1994); or OMB review or any other Agency action under Executive Order

[[Page 40051]]

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) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency previously assessed 
whether establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerances, 
raising of tolerance levels, expansion of exemptions, or revocations 
might significantly impact a substantial number of small entities and 
concluded that, as a general matter, these actions do not impose a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
These analyses for tolerance establishments and modifications, and for 
tolerance revocations were published on May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950) and 
on December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020) (FRL-5753-1), respectively, and were 
provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration. Taking into account this analysis, and available 
information concerning the pesticides listed in this proposed rule, the 
Agency hereby certifies that this proposed rule will not have a 
significant negative economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. In a memorandum dated May 25, 2001, EPA determined that eight 
conditions must all be satisfied in order for an import tolerance or 
tolerance exemption revocation to adversely affect a significant number 
of small entity importers, and that there is a negligible joint 
probability of all eight conditions holding simultaneously with respect 
to any particular revocation. (This Agency document is available in the 
docket of this proposed rule). Furthermore, for the pesticide named in 
this proposed rule, the Agency knows of no extraordinary circumstances 
that exist as to the present proposal that would change the EPA's 
previous analysis. Any comments about the Agency's determination should 
be submitted to the 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 
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 FFDCA section 
408(n)(4). 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 9, 2000). Executive 
Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of 
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that 
have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include 
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' This 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: June 24, 2014.
Jack Housenger,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

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

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.111, revise the table in paragraph (a)(1) and revise 
paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  180.111  Malathion; tolerances for residues.

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alfalfa, hay..............................................         135
Almond, hulls.............................................          50
Almond, postharvest.......................................           8
Apple.....................................................           8
Barley, grain, postharvest................................           8
Bean, dry, seed...........................................           8
Bean, succulent...........................................           8
Beet, sugar, roots........................................           1
Beet, sugar, tops.........................................           8
Blueberry.................................................           8
Cherry....................................................           8
Chestnut..................................................           1
Corn, field, forage.......................................           8
Corn, field, grain, postharvest...........................           8
Corn, pop, grain, postharvest.............................           8
Corn, sweet, forage.......................................           8
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed...........           2
Cowpea, forage............................................         135
Cowpea, hay...............................................         135
Cranberry.................................................           8
Cucumber..................................................           8
Currant...................................................           8
Date, dried fruit.........................................           8
Flax, seed................................................           0.1
Guava.....................................................           8
Hazelnut..................................................           1
Hop, dried cones..........................................           1
Lentil, seed..............................................           8
Lespedeza, hay............................................         135
Oat, grain, postharvest...................................           8
Papaya....................................................           1
Pea.......................................................           8
Pea, field, hay...........................................           8
Pea, field, vines.........................................           8
Peanut, hay...............................................         135
Peanut, postharvest.......................................           8
Plum......................................................           8
Plum, prune...............................................           8
Quince....................................................           8
Rice, grain, postharvest..................................           8
Rice, wild................................................           8
Rye, grain, postharvest...................................           8
Safflower, seed...........................................           0.2
Sorghum, grain, forage....................................           8
Sorghum, grain, grain, postharvest........................           8
Soybean, forage...........................................         135
Soybean, hay..............................................         135
Soybean, seed.............................................           8
Soybean, vegetable, succulent.............................           8
Strawberry................................................           8
Sunflower, seed, postharvest..............................           8
Tomato....................................................           8
Trefoil, hay..............................................         135
Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 5.......................           8

[[Page 40052]]

 
Vegetable, leafy, except brassica, group 4................           8
Vetch, hay................................................         135
Wheat, grain, postharvest.................................           8
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide 
malathion, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the 
commodities in the table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 
tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is to be determined by 
measuring only the sum of malathion (O,O-dimethyl dithiophosphate of 
diethyl mercaptosuccinate), and its metabolite malaoxon (O,O-dimethyl 
thiophosphate of diethyl mercaptosuccinate), in or on the commodity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alfalfa, forage...........................................         125
Apricot...................................................           1.0
Asparagus.................................................           2.0
Avocado...................................................           0.2
Barley, straw.............................................          50
Beet, garden, roots.......................................           0.5
Beet, garden, tops........................................           4.0
Blackberry................................................           6
Boysenberry...............................................           6
Carrot, roots.............................................           1
Chayote, fruit............................................           0.2
Chayote, roots............................................           0.1
Clover, forage............................................         125
Clover, hay...............................................         125
Corn, field, stover.......................................          30.0
Cotton, undelinted seed...................................          20.0
Dewberry..................................................           6
Eggplant..................................................           2.0
Fig.......................................................           1.0
Garlic, bulb..............................................           1.0
Gooseberry................................................           6
Grape.....................................................           4.0
Grapefruit................................................           4.0
Grass, forage.............................................         200
Grass, hay................................................         270
Horseradish...............................................           0.5
Kumquat...................................................           4.0
Leek......................................................           6.0
Lemon.....................................................           4.0
Lime......................................................           4.0
Loganberry................................................           6
Lupin, seed...............................................           2.0
Mango.....................................................           0.2
Melon.....................................................           1.0
Mushroom..................................................           0.2
Nectarine.................................................           1.0
Nut, macadamia............................................           0.2
Oat, forage...............................................           4.0
Oat, straw................................................          50
Okra......................................................           3.0
Onion, bulb...............................................           1.0
Onion, green..............................................           6.0
Orange....................................................           4.0
Parsnip...................................................           0.5
Passionfruit..............................................           0.2
Peach.....................................................           6.0
Pear......................................................           3.0
Pecan.....................................................           0.2
Pepper....................................................           0.5
Peppermint, tops..........................................           2.0
Pineapple.................................................           0.2
Potato....................................................           0.1
Pumpkin...................................................           1.0
Radish....................................................           0.5
Raspberry.................................................           6
Rutabaga..................................................           0.5
Rye, forage...............................................           4.0
Rye, straw................................................          50
Salsify, roots............................................           0.5
Salsify, tops.............................................           4.0
Shallot, bulb.............................................           6.0
Spearmint, tops...........................................           2.0
Squash, summer............................................           0.2
Squash, winter............................................           1.0
Sweet potato, roots.......................................           0.1
Tangerine.................................................           4.0
Trefoil, forage...........................................         125
Turnip, greens............................................           4.0
Turnip, roots.............................................           0.5
Walnut....................................................           0.2
Watercress................................................           0.2
Wheat, forage.............................................           4.0
Wheat, straw..............................................          50
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
0
3. In Sec.  180.132, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  180.132  Thiram; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the 
fungicide thiram, tetramethyl thiuram disulfide, including its 
metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table in 
this paragraph. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified in this 
paragraph is to be determined by measuring only those thiram residues 
convertible to and expressed in terms of the degradate carbon 
disulfide, in or on the commodity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Expiration/
                   Commodity                     Parts per    revocation
                                                  million        date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apple.........................................            5         None
Banana \1\....................................          2.0      3/31/15
Peach.........................................          7.0         None
Strawberry....................................           13         None
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations as of September 23, 2009.

* * * * *


Sec.  180.142  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  180.142, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.169  [Amended]

0
5. In Sec.  180.169, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(1).
0
6. In Sec.  180.176, revise the table in paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  180.176  Mancozeb; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond....................................................          0.1
Almond, hulls.............................................          4
Apple.....................................................          0.6
Asparagus.................................................          0.1
Atemoya...................................................          3.0
Banana....................................................          2
Barley, bran..............................................          2
Barley, flour.............................................          1.2
Barley, grain.............................................          1
Barley, hay...............................................         30
Barley, pearled barley....................................         20
Barley, straw.............................................         25
Beet, sugar, dried pulp...................................          3.0
Beet, sugar, roots........................................          1.2
Beet, sugar, tops.........................................         60
Broccoli..................................................          7
Cabbage...................................................          9
Canistel..................................................         15.0
Cattle, kidney............................................          0.5
Cattle, liver.............................................          0.5
Cherimoya.................................................          3.0
Corn, field, forage.......................................         40
Corn, field, grain........................................          0.06
Corn, field, stover.......................................         15
Corn, pop, grain..........................................          0.1
Corn, pop, stover.........................................         40
Corn, sweet, forage.......................................         70
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed...........          0.1
Corn, sweet, stover.......................................         40
Cotton, undelinted seed...................................          0.5
Crabapple.................................................          0.6
Cranberry.................................................          5
Custard apple.............................................          3.0
Fennel....................................................          2.5
Flax, seed................................................          0.15
Ginseng...................................................          1.2
Goat, kidney..............................................          0.5
Goat, liver...............................................          0.5
Grape.....................................................          1.5
Hog, kidney...............................................          0.5
Hog, liver................................................          0.5
Horse, kidney.............................................          0.5
Horse, liver..............................................          0.5
Lettuce, head.............................................          3.5
Lettuce, leaf.............................................         18
Mango.....................................................         15.0
Oat, flour................................................          1.2
Oat, grain................................................          1
Oat, groats/rolled oats...................................         20
Oat, hay..................................................         30
Oat, straw................................................         25
Onion, bulb...............................................          1.5
Papaya....................................................          9
Peanut....................................................          0.1
Peanut, hay...............................................         65
Pear......................................................          0.6
Pepper....................................................         12
Potato....................................................          0.2
Poultry, kidney...........................................          0.5
Poultry, liver............................................          0.5
Quince....................................................          0.6
Rice, grain...............................................          0.06
Rye, bran.................................................          2
Rye, flour................................................          1.2
Rye, grain................................................          1
Rye, straw................................................         25
Sapodilla.................................................         15.0
Sapote, mamey.............................................         15.0
Sapote, white.............................................         15.0
Sheep, kidney.............................................          0.5
Sheep, liver..............................................          0.5
Sorghum, grain, forage....................................          0.15

[[Page 40053]]

 
Sorghum, grain, grain.....................................          0.25
Sorghum, grain, stover....................................          0.15
Star apple................................................         15.0
Sugar apple...............................................          3.0
Tangerine \1\.............................................         10
Tomato....................................................          2.5
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9..............................          2.0
Walnut....................................................          0.70
Wheat, bran...............................................          2
Wheat, flour..............................................          1.2
Wheat, germ...............................................         20
Wheat, grain..............................................          1
Wheat, hay................................................         30
Wheat, middlings..........................................         20
Wheat, shorts.............................................          2
Wheat, straw..............................................         25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations for use of mancozeb on tangerine.

* * * * *


Sec.  180.205  [Amended]

0
7. In Sec.  180.205, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.274  [Amended]

0
8. In Sec.  180.274, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.287  [Amended]

0
9. In Sec.  180.287, remove the entry for ``Cotton, undelinted seed 
\1\'' and the footnote from the table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.288  [Amended]

0
10. In Sec.  180.288, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.293  [Amended]

0
11. In Sec.  180.293, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(1).


Sec.  180.300  [Amended]

0
12. In Sec.  180.300, remove the entry for ``Cucumber'' from the table 
in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.301  [Amended]

0
13. In Sec.  180.301, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.303  [Amended]

0
14. In Sec.  180.303, remove the entry for ``Soybean, seed'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.355  [Amended]

0
15. In Sec.  180.355, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(1).


Sec.  180.361  [Amended]

0
16. In Sec.  180.361, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.377  [Amended]

0
17. In Sec.  180.377, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(2).


Sec.  180.383  [Amended]

0
18. In Sec.  180.383, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).
0
19. In Sec.  180.384, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  180.384  Mepiquat (N,N-dimethylpiperidinium); tolerances for 
residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the plant 
growth regulator mepiquat, including its metabolites and degradates, in 
or on the commodities in the table in this paragraph. Compliance with 
the tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is to be determined by 
measuring only mepiquat, N,N-dimethylpiperidinium, in or on the 
commodity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, meat byproducts....................................          0.1
Cotton, gin byproducts.....................................          6.0
Cotton, undelinted seed....................................          2.0
Goat, meat byproducts......................................          0.1
Grape......................................................          1.0
Grape, raisin..............................................          5.0
Hog, meat byproducts.......................................          0.1
Horse, meat byproducts.....................................          0.1
Sheep, meat byproducts.....................................          0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *


Sec.  180.399  [Amended]

0
20. In Sec.  180.399, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(1).


Sec.  180.401  [Amended]

0
21. In Sec.  180.401, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.417  [Amended]

0
22. In Sec.  180.417, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(1).


Sec.  180.418  [Amended]

0
23. In Sec.  180.418, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(2).


Sec.  180.425  [Amended]

0
24. In Sec.  180.425, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.434  [Amended]

0
25. In Sec.  180.434, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.438  [Amended]

0
26. In Sec.  180.438, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(1) and from the table in paragraph (a)(2).


Sec.  180.439  [Amended]

0
27. In Sec.  180.439, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.441  [Amended]

0
28. In Sec.  180.441, remove the entry for ``Soybean, soapstock'' from 
the table in paragraph (a)(1).


Sec.  180.445  [Amended]

0
29. In Sec.  180.445, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.447  [Amended]

0
30. In Sec.  180.447, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(2).


Sec.  180.451  [Amended]

0
31. In Sec.  180.451, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.463  [Amended]

0
32. In Sec.  180.463, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(1).


Sec.  180.473  [Amended]

0
33. In Sec.  180.473, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).
0
34. In Sec.  180.476, revise the table in paragraph (a)(1) and revise 
the table in paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  180.476  Triflumizole; tolerances for residues.

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G, except cranberry.....          2.0
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A......................          8.0
Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B.......................         40
Canistel..................................................          2.5
Cherry, sweet.............................................          1.5
Cherry, tart..............................................          1.5
Cilantro, leaves..........................................         35
Fruit, pome, group 11-10..................................          0.50
Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit,                2.5
 subgroup 13-07F..........................................
Hazelnut..................................................          0.05
Hop, dried cones..........................................         50
Leafy greens subgroup 4A, except spinach..................         35
Mango.....................................................          2.5
Papaya....................................................          2.5
Pineapple.................................................          4.0

[[Page 40054]]

 
Sapodilla.................................................          2.5
Sapote, black.............................................          2.5
Sapote, mamey.............................................          2.5
Star apple................................................          2.5
Swiss chard...............................................         18
Tomato....................................................          1.5
Turnip, greens............................................         40
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9..............................          0.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, fat...............................................          0.10
Cattle, meat byproducts...................................          0.20
Goat, fat.................................................          0.10
Goat, meat byproducts.....................................          0.20
Horse, fat................................................          0.10
Horse, meat byproducts....................................          0.20
Sheep, fat................................................          0.10
Sheep, meat byproducts....................................          0.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *


Sec.  180.479  [Amended]

0
35. In Sec.  180.479, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(2).


Sec.  180.484  [Amended]

0
36. In Sec.  180.484, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.495  [Amended]

0
37. In Sec.  180.495, remove the entry for ``Coriander, leaves'' from 
the table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.507  [Amended]

0
38. In Sec.  180.507, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(1).


Sec.  180.515  [Amended]

0
39. In Sec.  180.515, remove the entries for ``Caneberry subgroup 
13A,'' ``Cotton, hulls,'' ``Cotton, meal,'' ``Cotton, refined oil'' and 
``Rice, straw'' from the table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.517  [Amended]

0
40. In Sec.  180.517, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.541  [Removed]

0
41. Remove Sec.  180.541.


Sec.  180.555  [Amended]

0
42. In Sec.  180.555, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.570  [Amended]

0
43. In Sec.  180.570, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a)(2).


Sec.  180.577  [Amended]

0
44. In Sec.  180.577, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.602  [Amended]

0
45. In Sec.  180.602, remove the entry for ``Hop, dried cones'' from 
the table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.605  [Amended]

0
46. In Sec.  180.605, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).


Sec.  180.625  [Amended]

0
47. In Sec.  180.625, remove the entry for ``Rice, straw'' from the 
table in paragraph (a).

[FR Doc. 2014-16063 Filed 7-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P