51479
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
166
/
Wednesday,
August
27,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
the
FFDCA.
The
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
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
rule
has
been
exempted
from
review
under
Executive
Order
12866
due
to
its
lack
of
significance,
this
rule
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13211,
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
(
66
FR
28355,
May
22,
2001).
This
final
rule
does
not
contain
any
information
collections
subject
to
OMB
approval
under
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
PRA),
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.,
or
impose
any
enforceable
duty
or
contain
any
unfunded
mandate
as
described
under
Title
II
of
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
(
UMRA)
(
Public
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).
Since
tolerances
and
exemptions
that
are
established
on
the
basis
of
a
FIFRA
section
18
exemption
under
section
408
of
the
FFDCA,
such
as
the
[
tolerances]
in
this
final
rule,
do
not
require
the
issuance
of
a
proposed
rule,
the
requirements
of
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA)
(
5
U.
S.
C.
601
et
seq.)
do
not
apply.
In
addition,
the
Agency
has
determined
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
substantial
direct
effect
on
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
Federalism
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999).
Executive
Order
13132
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications.
``
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government.''
This
final
rule
directly
regulates
growers,
food
processors,
food
handlers,
and
food
retailers,
not
States.
This
action
does
not
alter
the
relationships
or
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
established
by
Congress
in
the
preemption
provisions
of
section
408(
n)(
4)
of
the
FFDCA.
For
these
same
reasons,
the
Agency
has
determined
that
this
rule
does
not
have
any
``
tribal
implications''
as
described
in
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments
(
65
FR
67249,
November
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
rule
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
tribal
governments,
on
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
this
rule.

IX.
Congressional
Review
Act
The
Congressional
Review
Act,
5
U.
S.
C.
801
et
seq.,
as
added
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996,
generally
provides
that
before
a
rule
may
take
effect,
the
agency
promulgating
the
rule
must
submit
a
rule
report,
which
includes
a
copy
of
the
rule,
to
each
House
of
the
Congress
and
to
the
Comptroller
General
of
the
United
States.
EPA
will
submit
a
report
containing
this
rule
and
other
required
information
to
the
U.
S.
Senate,
the
U.
S.
House
of
Representatives,
and
the
Comptroller
General
of
the
United
States
prior
to
publication
of
this
final
rule
in
the
Federal
Register.
This
final
rule
is
not
a
``
major
rule''
as
defined
by
5
U.
S.
C.
804(
2).

List
of
Subjects
in
40
CFR
Part
180
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Agricultural
commodities,
Pesticides
and
pests,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

Dated:
August
14,
2003.
Debra
Edwards,
Director,
Registration
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs.


Therefore,
40
CFR
chapter
I
is
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),
346(
a)
and
371.


2.
Section
180.565
is
amended
by
adding
text
to
paragraph
(
b)
to
read
as
follows:

§
180.565
Thiamethoxam;
tolerances
for
residues.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
Section
18
emergency
exemptions.
Time­
limited
tolerances
are
established
for
the
combined
residues
of
the
insecticide
thiamethoxam
[
3­[(
2­
chloro­
5­
thiazolyl)
methyl]
tetrahydro­
5­
methyl­
N­
nitro­
4H­
1,3,5­
oxadiazin­
4­
imine]
and
its
metabolite
CGA­
322704
in
connection
with
use
of
the
pesticide
under
section
18
emergency
exemptions
granted
by
EPA.
These
tolerances
will
expire
and
are
revoked
on
the
dates
specified
in
the
following
table:

Commodity
Parts
per
million
Expiration/
revocation
date
Bean,
dried
.......
0.02
12/
31/
06
Bean,
succulent
0.02
12/
31/
06
Hops
.................
0.10
12/
31/
06
*
*
*
*
*

[
FR
Doc.
03
 
21783
Filed
8
 
26
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
180
[
OPP
 
2003
 
0279;
FRL
 
7323
 
1]

Diflubenzuron;
Pesticide
Tolerances
for
Emergency
Exemptions
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Final
rule.

SUMMARY:
This
regulation
establishes
time­
limited
tolerances
for
combined
residues
of
diflubenzuron
in
or
on
wheat
and
barley
commodities.
This
action
is
in
response
to
treatment
of
these
crops
under
section
18
of
the
Federal
Insecticide,
Fungicide,
and
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
15:
54
Aug
26,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00051
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
27AUR1.
SGM
27AUR1
51480
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
166
/
Wednesday,
August
27,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
Rodenticide
Act
(
FIFRA).
This
regulation
establishes
maximum
permissible
levels
for
residues
of
diflubenzuron
in
these
food
commodities.
The
tolerances
will
expire
and
are
revoked
on
December
31,
2005.
DATES:
This
regulation
is
effective
August
27,
2003.
Objections
and
requests
for
hearings,
identified
by
docket
(
ID)
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0279,
must
be
received
on
or
before
October
27,
2003.
ADDRESSES:
Written
objections
and
hearing
requests
may
be
submitted
electronically,
by
mail,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
Follow
the
detailed
instructions
as
provided
in
Unit
VII.
of
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Andrea
Conrath,
Registration
Division
(
7505C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001;
telephone
number:
(
703)
308
 
9356;
e­
mail
address:
conrath.
andrea@
epa.
gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

I.
General
Information
A.
Does
this
Action
Apply
to
Me?

You
may
be
potentially
affected
by
this
action
if
you
are
an
agricultural
producer,
food
manufacturer,
or
pesticide
manufacturer.
Potentially
affected
entities
may
include,
but
are
not
limited
to:
 
Crop
producers
(
NAICS
111)
 
Animal
producers
(
NAICS
112)
 
Food
manufacturing
(
NAICS
311)
 
Pesticide
manufacturing
(
NAICS
32532)
This
listing
is
not
intended
to
be
exhaustive,
but
rather
provides
a
guide
for
readers
regarding
entities
likely
to
be
affected
by
this
action.
Other
types
of
entities
not
listed
in
this
unit
could
also
be
affected.
The
North
American
Industrial
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
codes
have
been
provided
to
assist
you
and
others
in
determining
whether
this
action
might
apply
to
certain
entities.
If
you
have
any
questions
regarding
the
applicability
of
this
action
to
a
particular
entity,
consult
the
person
listed
under
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B.
How
Can
I
Get
Copies
of
this
Document
and
Other
Related
Information?

1.
Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
docket
identification
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0279.
The
official
public
docket
consists
of
the
documents
specifically
referenced
in
this
action,
any
public
comments
received,
and
other
information
related
to
this
action.
Although
a
part
of
the
official
docket,
the
public
docket
does
not
include
Confidential
Business
Information
(
CBI)
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
The
official
public
docket
is
the
collection
of
materials
that
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch
(
PIRIB),
Rm.
119,
Crystal
Mall
#
2,
1921
Jefferson
Davis
Hwy.,
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.
2.
Electronic
access.
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
http://
www.
access.
gpo.
gov/
nara/
cfr/
cfrhtml_
00/
Title_
40/
4
0cfr180_
00.
html,
a
beta
site
currently
under
development.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
and
comment
system,
EPA
Dockets.
You
may
use
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
official
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Although
not
all
docket
materials
may
be
available
electronically,
you
may
still
access
any
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
the
docket
facility
identified
in
Unit
I.
B.
1.
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search,''
then
key
in
the
appropriate
docket
ID
number.

II.
Background
and
Statutory
Findings
EPA,
on
its
own
initiative,
in
accordance
with
sections
408(
e)
and
408
(
l)(
6)
of
the
Federal
Food,
Drug,
and
Cosmetic
Act
(
FFDCA),
21
U.
S.
C.
346a,
is
establishing
tolerances
for
combined
residues
of
the
insecticide
diflubenzuron,
[
N­[[(
4­
chlorophenyl)
amino]
carbonyl]­
2,6­
difluorobenzamide
and
its
metabolites
4­
chlorophenlyurea
and
4­
chloroaniline
(
CPU)
and
(
PCA)],
in
or
on
wheat
and
barley
grain
at
0.05
parts
per
million
(
ppm),
wheat
and
barley
straw
at
0.50
ppm,
wheat
and
barley
hay
at
1.0
ppm,
wheat
milled
byproducts
at
0.10
ppm,
and
aspirated
grain
fractions
at
30
ppm.
These
tolerances
will
expire
and
are
revoked
on
December
31,
2005.
EPA
will
publish
a
document
in
the
Federal
Register
to
remove
the
revoked
tolerances
from
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations.
Section
408(
l)(
6)
of
the
FFDCA
requires
EPA
to
establish
a
time­
limited
tolerance
or
exemption
from
the
requirement
for
a
tolerance
for
pesticide
chemical
residues
in
food
that
will
result
from
the
use
of
a
pesticide
under
an
emergency
exemption
granted
by
EPA
under
section
18
of
FIFRA.
Such
tolerances
can
be
established
without
providing
notice
or
period
for
public
comment.
EPA
does
not
intend
for
its
actions
on
section
18
related
tolerances
to
set
binding
precedents
for
the
application
of
section
408
of
the
FFDCA
and
the
new
safety
standard
to
other
tolerances
and
exemptions.
Section
408(
e)
of
the
FFDCA
allows
EPA
to
establish
a
tolerance
or
an
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
on
its
own
initiative,
i.
e.,
without
having
received
any
petition
from
an
outside
party.
Section
408(
b)(
2)(
A)(
i)
of
the
FFDCA
allows
EPA
to
establish
a
tolerance
(
the
legal
limit
for
a
pesticide
chemical
residue
in
or
on
a
food)
only
if
EPA
determines
that
the
tolerance
is
``
safe.''
Section
408(
b)(
2)(
A)(
ii)
of
the
FFDCA
defines
``
safe''
to
mean
that
``
there
is
a
reasonable
certainty
that
no
harm
will
result
from
aggregate
exposure
to
the
pesticide
chemical
residue,
including
all
anticipated
dietary
exposures
and
all
other
exposures
for
which
there
is
reliable
information.''
This
includes
exposure
through
drinking
water
and
in
residential
settings,
but
does
not
include
occupational
exposure.
Section
408(
b)(
2)(
C)
of
the
FFDCA
requires
EPA
to
give
special
consideration
to
exposure
of
infants
and
children
to
the
pesticide
chemical
residue
in
establishing
a
tolerance
and
to
``
ensure
that
there
is
a
reasonable
certainty
that
no
harm
will
result
to
infants
and
children
from
aggregate
exposure
to
the
pesticide
chemical
residue.
.
.
.''
Section
18
of
the
FIFRA
authorizes
EPA
to
exempt
any
Federal
or
State
agency
from
any
provision
of
FIFRA,
if
EPA
determines
that
``
emergency
conditions
exist
which
require
such
exemption.''
This
provision
was
not
amended
by
the
Food
Quality
Protection
Act
of
(
FQPA)
1996.
EPA
has
established
regulations
governing
such
emergency
exemptions
in
40
CFR
part
166.

III.
Emergency
Exemptions
for
Diflubenzuron
on
Wheat
and
Barley
and
FFDCA
Tolerances
The
requesting
States
(
Idaho,
Montana,
and
Washington)
are
experiencing
severe
outbreaks
of
grasshoppers
in
their
wheat
and
barley
fields
this
year.
In
most
areas,
densities
of
grasshoppers
have
reached
40
or
more
per
square
yard,
and
without
the
use
of
diflubenzuron,
the
Applicants
estimate
that
yield
could
drop
by
50%,

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
15:
54
Aug
26,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00052
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
27AUR1.
SGM
27AUR1
51481
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
166
/
Wednesday,
August
27,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
resulting
in
severe
crop
devastation
and
significant
economic
impact
to
wheat
and
barley
producers
in
these
States.
It
is
believed
that
the
mild
winters
over
the
last
several
years
have
allowed
grasshopper
nymphs
to
survive
the
winter
and
multiply
more
rapidly
in
the
spring,
leading
to
population
explosions
of
grasshoppers
to
levels
of
up
to
60
grasshoppers
per
square
foot
in
some
cases.
The
Applicants
state
that
materials
registered
for
grasshopper
control
either
are
not
effective
with
populations
at
the
current
levels,
are
toxic
to
beneficial
insects,
or
provide
insufficient
residual
control,
given
the
outbreak
levels
of
grasshopper
infestation.
Under
the
crisis
provisions
(
40
CFR
166.40)
of
section
18
of
FIFRA
the
Applicants
used
diflubenzuron
on
wheat
and
barley
for
control
of
grasshoppers.
As
part
of
its
assessment
of
this
emergency
exemption,
EPA
assessed
the
potential
risks
presented
by
residues
of
diflubenzuron
in
or
on
barley
and
wheat
commodities.
In
doing
so,
EPA
considered
the
safety
standard
in
section
408(
b)(
2)
of
the
FFDCA,
and
EPA
decided
that
the
necessary
tolerance
under
section
408(
l)(
6)
of
the
FFDCA
would
be
consistent
with
the
safety
standard
and
with
FIFRA
section
18.
Consistent
with
the
need
to
move
quickly
on
the
emergency
exemption
in
order
to
address
an
urgent
non­
routine
situation
and
to
ensure
that
the
resulting
food
is
safe
and
lawful,
EPA
is
issuing
this
tolerance
without
notice
and
opportunity
for
public
comment
as
provided
in
section
408(
l)(
6)
of
the
FFDCA.
Although
this
tolerance
will
expire
and
is
revoked
on
December
31,
2005,
under
section
408(
l)(
5)
of
the
FFDCA,
residues
of
the
pesticide
not
in
excess
of
the
amounts
specified
in
the
tolerances
remaining
in
or
on
barley
and
wheat
commodities
after
that
date
will
not
be
unlawful,
provided
it
is
demonstrated
pursuant
to
section
408(
l)(
5)
that
the
residues
are
the
result
of
the
application
or
the
use
of
a
pesticide
at
a
time
and
in
a
manner
that
was
lawful
under
FIFRA,
and
the
residues
do
not
exceed
levels
that
were
authorized
by
these
tolerances
at
the
time
of
that
application
or
use.
EPA
will
take
action
to
revoke
these
tolerances
earlier
if
any
experience
with,
scientific
data
on,
or
other
relevant
information
on
this
pesticide
indicate
that
the
residues
they
allow
are
not
safe.
Because
these
tolerances
are
being
approved
under
emergency
conditions,
EPA
has
not
made
any
decisions
about
whether
diflubenzuron
meets
EPA's
registration
requirements
for
use
on
barley
and
wheat
or
whether
permanent
tolerances
for
these
uses
would
be
appropriate.
Under
these
circumstances,
EPA
does
not
believe
that
these
tolerances
serve
as
a
basis
for
registration
of
diflubenzuron
by
a
State
for
special
local
needs
under
FIFRA
section
24(
c).
Nor
does
this
tolerance
serve
as
the
basis
for
any
States
other
than
Montana,
Washington,
and
Idaho
to
use
this
pesticide
on
this
crop
under
section
18
of
FIFRA
without
following
all
provisions
of
EPA's
regulations
implementing
FIFRA
section
18
as
identified
in
40
CFR
part
166.
For
additional
information
regarding
the
emergency
exemption
for
diflubenzuron,
contact
the
Agency's
Registration
Division
at
the
address
provided
under
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT.

IV.
Aggregate
Risk
Assessment
and
Determination
of
Safety
EPA
performs
a
number
of
analyses
to
determine
the
risks
from
aggregate
exposure
to
pesticide
residues.
For
further
discussion
of
the
regulatory
requirements
of
section
408
of
the
FFDCA
and
a
complete
description
of
the
risk
assessment
process,
see
the
final
rule
on
Bifenthrin
Pesticide
Tolerances
November
26,
1997
(
62
FR
62961)
(
FRL
 
5754
 
7).
Consistent
with
section
408(
b)(
2)(
D)
of
the
FFDCA
,
EPA
has
reviewed
the
available
scientific
data
and
other
relevant
information
in
support
of
this
action.
EPA
has
sufficient
data
to
assess
the
hazards
of
diflubenzuron
and
to
make
a
determination
on
aggregate
exposure,
consistent
with
section
408(
b)(
2)
of
the
FFDCA,
for
time­
limited
tolerances
for
combined
residues
of
diflubenzuron
in
or
on
wheat
and
barley
grain
at
0.05
ppm,
wheat
and
barley
straw
at
0.50
ppm,
wheat
and
barley
hay
at
1.0
ppm,
wheat
milled
byproducts
at
0.10
ppm,
and
aspirated
grain
fractions
at
30
ppm.
EPA
has
received
objections
to
a
separate
tolerance­
setting
involving
the
use
of
diflubenzuron
on
pears.
These
objections
were
filed
by
the
Natural
Resources
Defense
Council
(
NRDC)
and
raised
several
issues
regarding
aggregate
exposure
estimates
and
the
additional
safety
factor
for
the
protection
of
infants
and
children.
Although
that
proceeding
remains
ongoing,
EPA
has
considered
whether
it
is
appropriate
to
establish
the
emergency
exemption
tolerances
for
diflubenzuron
on
wheat
and
barley
commodities
while
the
objections
are
still
pending.
Factors
taken
into
account
by
EPA
included
how
close
the
Agency
is
to
concluding
the
proceedings
on
the
objections,
the
nature
of
the
current
action,
whether
NRDC's
objections
raised
non­
frivolous
issues,
and
the
extent
to
which
the
issues
raised
by
NRDC
had
already
been
considered
by
EPA.
Although
NRDC's
objections
are
not
frivolous,
the
other
factors
all
support
establishing
these
tolerances
at
this
time.
First,
the
objections
proceeding
is
unlikely
to
conclude
prior
to
when
action
is
necessary
on
this
petition.
[
NRDC's
objections
raise
complex
legal,
scientific,
policy,
and
factual
matters
and
EPA
initiated
a
60
day
public
comment
period
on
them
in
the
Federal
Register
on
June
19,
2002
(
67
FR
41628)
(
FRL
 
7167
 
7).
That
comment
period
was
extended
until
October
16,
2002
in
the
Federal
Register
of
September
17,
2002
(
67
FR
58536)
(
FRL
 
7275
 
3),]
and
EPA
is
now
examining
the
extensive
comments
received.
Moreover,
NRDC
itself
submitted
further
information
to
the
Agency
in
June
2003,
and
the
Agency
is
in
the
process
of
evaluating
that
information
as
well.
Second,
the
nature
of
the
current
actions
are
extremely
time­
sensitive
as
they
address
emergency
situations.
Third,
the
issues
raised
by
NRDC
are
not
new
matters
but
questions
that
already
have
been
the
subject
of
considerable
evaluation
by
EPA
and
comment
by
stakeholders.
Accordingly,
EPA
is
proceeding
with
establishing
these
tolerances
for
diflubenzuron.
EPA
has
determined
at
this
time
that
these
tolerances
rest
on
a
reasonable
certainty
that
no
harm
will
result
from
aggregate
exposure
to
the
pesticide
chemical
residues
involved.
As
suggested
above,
if
during
the
life
of
these
tolerances
EPA
determines
that
any
experience
with,
scientific
data
on,
or
other
relevant
information
on
this
pesticide
indicates
that
the
residues
these
tolerances
allow
are
not
safe,
EPA
will
take
action
to
revoke
the
tolerances
prior
to
their
otherwise
applicable
expiration
date.
The
action
EPA
is
taking
at
this
time
should
not
be
construed
to
constitute
action
on
NRDC's
aforesaid
objections.
The
Agency
continues
to
consider
those
objections
and
information
concerning
them,
including
the
new
information
which
NRDC
submitted
in
June
2003.
The
most
recent
estimated
aggregate
risks
resulting
from
the
use
of
diflubenzuron,
are
discussed
in
the
Federal
Register
of
September
19,
2002
(
67
FR
59017)
(
FRL
 
7200
 
4),
final
rule
establishing
tolerances
for
residues
of
diflubenzuron
in/
on
grass
forage,
fodder,
and
hay;
peppers;
stone
fruits;
and
tree
nuts.
In
that
prior
action,
risk
was
estimated
using
anticipated
residue
(
AR)
information
based
on
field
trial
data
and
percent
crop
treated
(
PCT)
information
for
some
commodities.
Available
residue
data
indicate
that
the
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
15:
54
Aug
26,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00053
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
27AUR1.
SGM
27AUR1
51482
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
166
/
Wednesday,
August
27,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
use
pattern
for
these
emergency
exemptions
will
not
result
in
residues
of
diflubenzuron
in
excess
of
the
following
levels:
Wheat
and
barley
grain
at
0.05
ppm,
wheat
and
barley
straw
at
0.50
ppm,
wheat
and
barley
hay
at
1.0
ppm,
wheat
milled
byproducts
at
0.10
ppm,
and
aspirated
grain
fractions
at
30
ppm.
Therefore,
tolerances
are
being
established
for
these
commodities
at
these
levels.
The
risk
assessment
related
to
incremental
addition
of
these
items
at
this
level
to
dietary
exposure
is
discussed
below.
Refer
also
to
the
September
19,
2002
Federal
Register
document
for
a
detailed
discussion
of
the
aggregate
risk
assessments
and
determination
of
safety.
EPA
relies
in
part
upon
that
risk
assessment
and
the
findings
made
in
that
Federal
Register
document
in
support
of
this
action.
Below
is
a
brief
summary
of
the
aggregate
risk
assessment.
EPA
has
evaluated
the
available
toxicity
data
and
considered
its
validity,
completeness,
and
reliability
as
well
as
the
relationship
of
the
results
of
the
studies
to
human
risk.
EPA
has
also
considered
available
information
concerning
the
variability
of
the
sensitivities
of
major
identifiable
subgroups
of
consumers,
including
infants
and
children.
A
summary
of
the
toxicological
dose
and
endpoints
for
diflubenzuron
for
use
in
human
risk
assessment
is
discussed
in
the
final
rule
mentioned
above,
published
in
the
Federal
Register
of
September
19,
2002
(
67
FR
59017)
(
FRL
 
7200
 
4).
EPA
assessed
risk
scenarios
for
diflubenzuron
under
chronic
exposures
only.
Chronic
risk
estimates
were
calculated
for
the
residues
of
toxicological
concern,
the
parent
compound
of
the
insecticide
diflubenzuron
(
N­[[
4­
chlorophenyl)
amino]­
carbonyl]­
2,6­
difluorobenzamide)
and
its
metabolites,
CPU
and
PCA.
For
the
chronic
analysis,
ARs
and
PCT
information
for
some
commodities
were
also
used.
An
acute
dietary
exposure
analysis
was
not
performed,
because
there
were
no
acute
toxicological
endpoints
identified
(
no
effects
of
concern
occurring
as
a
result
of
a
1
day
or
single
exposure).
Shortterm
aggregate
exposure,
which
takes
into
account
residential
exposure
plus
chronic
exposure,
was
not
assessed
since
diflubenzuron
is
not
registered
for
use
on
any
sites
that
would
result
in
substantial
residential
exposure.
Intermediate­
term
aggregate
exposure,
which
takes
into
account
residential
exposure
plus
chronic
exposure
to
food
and
water
was
not
assessed,
because
intermediate­
term
exposure
to
diflubenzuron
would
not
be
expected
from
the
registered
and
proposed
use
patterns.
Aggregate
cancer
risk
for
the
U.
S.
population
was
assessed,
since
the
metabolite,
CPU,
is
of
concern
for
aggregate
cancer
risk
and
could
be
found
in
drinking
water.
A
refined,
chronic
dietary
exposure
assessment
was
conducted
for
the
general
U.
S.
population
and
various
population
subgroups
using
the
Dietary
Exposure
Evaluation
Model
(
DEEMTM)
Version
1.3.
software
with
the
Food
Commodity
Intake
Database
(
FCID).
The
chronic
analysis
was
performed
using
ARs
and
PCT
information
for
several
registered
plant
and
livestock
commodities,
and
recommended
tolerance­
level
residues
and
100%
CT
information
for
all
proposed
commodities.
The
chronic
dietary
exposure
estimates
are
below
levels
of
concern
(<
100%
of
the
chronic
population
adjusted
dose
(
cPAD))
for
that
general
U.
S.
population
and
all
population
subgroups.
The
most
highly
exposed
population
subgroups
are
all
infants
<
1
year
old
and
children
1
 
2
years
old
(
both
at
3%
of
the
cPAD).
A
cancer
dietary
exposure
assessment
from
consumption
of
PCA
and
CPU
was
conducted
in
the
previous
risk
assessment.
Based
on
the
submitted
metabolism
studies,
there
are
two
possible
sources
for
dietary
exposure
to
PCA
and
CPU:
Residues
in
fungi
(
mushrooms),
and
residues
in
animal
commodities
(
milk
and
liver).
As
the
wheat
and
barley
uses
will
not
result
in
additional
dietary
exposure
to
PCA
and
CPU,
an
updated
cancer
dietary
exposure
assessment
was
not
needed
to
support
the
current
section
18
request.
The
results
of
the
previous
cancer
analysis
indicated
that
the
estimated
cancer
dietary
risk
associated
with
the
use
of
diflubenzuron
is
below
the
Agency's
level
of
concern
Dietary
exposure
from
drinking
water.
For
the
current
use
on
wheat
and
barley,
a
chronic
aggregate
exposure
(
food
+
drinking
water)
assessment
was
performed.
Acute,
short­
term
and
intermediate­
term
aggregate
risk
assessments
were
not
performed
because
an
acute
dietary
endpoint
was
not
selected
and
there
are
no
registered
or
proposed
non­
food
uses
resulting
in
significant
residential
exposure,
respectively.
A
cancer
aggregate
exposure
(
food
+
drinking
water)
assessment
was
not
conducted
because,
as
mentioned
above,
the
current
uses
will
not
result
in
additional
dietary
exposure
to
CPU.
Since
EPA
does
not
have
ground
water
and
surface
water
monitoring
data
to
calculate
a
quantitative
aggregate
exposure,
Drinking
Water
Levels
of
Concern
(
DWLOCs)
were
calculated.
A
DWLOC
is
a
theoretical
upper
limit
on
a
pesticide's
concentration
in
drinking
water
in
light
of
total
aggregate
exposure
to
a
pesticide
in
food,
drinking
water,
and
through
residential
uses.
A
DWLOC
will
vary
depending
on
the
toxic
endpoint,
drinking
water
consumption,
body
weights,
and
pesticide
uses.
Different
populations
will
have
different
DWLOCs.
EPA
uses
DWLOCs
in
the
risk
assessment
process
to
assess
potential
concern
for
exposure
associated
with
pesticides
in
drinking
water.
DWLOC
values
are
not
regulatory
standards
for
drinking
water.
To
calculate
DWLOCs,
the
dietary
food
estimates
(
from
DEEMTM­
FCID)
were
subtracted
from
the
population
adjusted
dose
(
PAD)
value
to
obtain
the
maximum
water
exposure
level.
DWLOCs
were
then
calculated
using
the
standard
body
weights
and
drinking
water
consumption
figures:
70kg/
2L
(
U.
S.
population
and
adult
male),
60
kg/
2L
(
adult
female
and
youth),
and
10kg/
1L
(
infants
and
children).
For
chronic
dietary
exposure,
EPA's
level
of
concern
is
exceeded
when
estimated
dietary
risk
exceeds
100%
of
the
cPAD.
The
chronic
drinking
water
assessment
resulted
in
chronic
DWLOCs
for
the
overall
U.
S.
population
of
690
parts
per
billion
(
ppb),
and
for
all
infants
(<
1
year
old)
and
children
(
1
 
2
years)
of
190
ppb
(
the
population
subgroups
with
the
lowest
DWLOC).
All
chronic
DWLOCs
were
well
above
the
chronic
estimated
environmental
concentration
(
EEC)
for
ground
water
of
0.067
ppb.
The
chronic
DWLOCs
were
also
above
the
chronic
EEC
for
surface
water
of
0.32
ppb.
Thus,
results
of
the
chronic
analysis
indicate
that
the
estimated
chronic
dietary
risk
associated
with
the
proposed
use
of
diflubenzuron
is
below
levels
of
concern,
and
chronic
aggregate
risk
estimates
are
also
below
the
level
of
concern.
Based
on
these
risk
assessments,
EPA
concludes
that
there
is
a
reasonable
certainty
that
no
harm
will
result
to
the
general
population,
and
to
infants
and
children
from
aggregate
exposure
to
diflubenzuron
residues.

V.
Other
Considerations
A.
Analytical
Enforcement
Methodology
Adequate
methods
are
available
for
the
analysis
of
diflubenzuron,
PCA,
and
CPU
in
crops.
Three
enforcement
methods
for
diflubenzuron
are
published
in
the
Pesticide
Analytical
Method
Volume
II
(
PAM
II)
as
Methods
I,
II,
and
III.

B.
International
Residue
Limits
There
are
no
Codex
proposals,
Canadian,
or
Mexican
limits
for
residues
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
15:
54
Aug
26,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00054
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
27AUR1.
SGM
27AUR1
51483
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
166
/
Wednesday,
August
27,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
of
diflubenzuron
on
wheat
and
barley
commodities.
Therefore
there
are
no
compatibility
issues
associated
with
the
proposed
tolerances.

C.
Conditions
One
application
per
growing
season
may
be
made
of
the
pesticide,
diflubenzuron,
to
wheat
and
barley,
at
a
rate
of
2.0
fl.
oz.
product
(
0.44
fl.
oz.
of
active
ingredient)
per
acre.
Applications
may
be
made
by
ground
or
aerial
equipment.
A
preharvest
interval
of
45
days
must
be
observed,
and
all
label
directions
on
the
federally
registered
label,
as
well
as
the
section
18
use
directions
must
be
followed.

VI.
Conclusion
Therefore,
the
tolerance
is
established
for
combined
residues
of
diflubenzuron,
and
its
metabolites
CPU
and
PCA,
in
or
on
wheat
and
barley
grain
at
0.05
ppm,
wheat
and
barley
straw
at
0.50
ppm,
wheat
and
barley
hay
at
1.0
ppm,
wheat
milled
byproducts
at
0.10
ppm,
and
aspirated
grain
fractions
at
30
ppm.

VII.
Objections
and
Hearing
Requests
Under
section
408(
g)
of
the
FFDCA,
as
amended
by
the
FQPA,
any
person
may
file
an
objection
to
any
aspect
of
this
regulation
and
may
also
request
a
hearing
on
those
objections.
The
EPA
procedural
regulations
which
govern
the
submission
of
objections
and
requests
for
hearings
appear
in
40
CFR
part
178.
Although
the
procedures
in
those
regulations
require
some
modification
to
reflect
the
amendments
made
to
the
FFDCA
by
the
FQPA,
EPA
will
continue
to
use
those
procedures,
with
appropriate
adjustments,
until
the
necessary
modifications
can
be
made.
The
new
section
408(
g)
of
the
FFDCA
provides
essentially
the
same
process
for
persons
to
``
object''
to
a
regulation
for
an
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
issued
by
EPA
under
new
section
408(
d)
of
the
FFDCA,
as
was
provided
in
the
old
sections
408
and
409
of
the
FFDCA.
However,
the
period
for
filing
objections
is
now
60
days,
rather
than
30
days.

A.
What
Do
I
Need
To
Do
To
File
an
Objection
or
Request
a
Hearing?

You
must
file
your
objection
or
request
a
hearing
on
this
regulation
in
accordance
with
the
instructions
provided
in
this
unit
and
in
40
CFR
part
178.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
you
must
identify
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0279
in
the
subject
line
on
the
first
page
of
your
submission.
All
requests
must
be
in
writing,
and
must
be
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
Hearing
Clerk
on
or
before
October
27,
2003.
1.
Filing
the
request.
Your
objection
must
specify
the
specific
provisions
in
the
regulation
that
you
object
to,
and
the
grounds
for
the
objections
(
40
CFR
178.25).
If
a
hearing
is
requested,
the
objections
must
include
a
statement
of
the
factual
issues(
s)
on
which
a
hearing
is
requested,
the
requestor's
contentions
on
such
issues,
and
a
summary
of
any
evidence
relied
upon
by
the
objector
(
40
CFR
178.27).
Information
submitted
in
connection
with
an
objection
or
hearing
request
may
be
claimed
confidential
by
marking
any
part
or
all
of
that
information
as
CBI.
Information
so
marked
will
not
be
disclosed
except
in
accordance
with
procedures
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
2.
A
copy
of
the
information
that
does
not
contain
CBI
must
be
submitted
for
inclusion
in
the
public
record.
Information
not
marked
confidential
may
be
disclosed
publicly
by
EPA
without
prior
notice.
Mail
your
written
request
to:
Office
of
the
Hearing
Clerk
(
1900C),
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001.
You
may
also
deliver
your
request
to
the
Office
of
the
Hearing
Clerk
in
Rm.
104,
Crystal
Mall
#
2,
1921
Jefferson
Davis
Hwy.,
Arlington,
VA.
The
Office
of
the
Hearing
Clerk
is
open
from
8
a.
m.
to
4
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
telephone
number
for
the
Office
of
the
Hearing
Clerk
is
(
703)
603
 
0061.
2.
Tolerance
fee
payment.
If
you
file
an
objection
or
request
a
hearing,
you
must
also
pay
the
fee
prescribed
by
40
CFR
180.33(
i)
or
request
a
waiver
of
that
fee
pursuant
to
40
CFR
180.33(
m).
You
must
mail
the
fee
to:
EPA
Headquarters
Accounting
Operations
Branch,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
P.
O.
Box
360277M,
Pittsburgh,
PA
15251.
Please
identify
the
fee
submission
by
labeling
it
``
Tolerance
Petition
Fees.''
EPA
is
authorized
to
waive
any
fee
requirement
``
when
in
the
judgement
of
the
Administrator
such
a
waiver
or
refund
is
equitable
and
not
contrary
to
the
purpose
of
this
subsection.''
For
additional
information
regarding
the
waiver
of
these
fees,
you
may
contact
James
Tompkins
by
phone
at
(
703)
305
 
5697,
by
e­
mail
at
tompkins.
jim@
epa.
gov,
or
by
mailing
a
request
for
information
to
Mr.
Tompkins
at
Registration
Division
(
7505C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001.
If
you
would
like
to
request
a
waiver
of
the
tolerance
objection
fees,
you
must
mail
your
request
for
such
a
waiver
to:
James
Hollins,
Information
Resources
and
Services
Division
(
7502C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001.
3.
Copies
for
the
Docket.
In
addition
to
filing
an
objection
or
hearing
request
with
the
Hearing
Clerk
as
described
in
Unit
VII.
A.,
you
should
also
send
a
copy
of
your
request
to
the
PIRIB
for
its
inclusion
in
the
official
record
that
is
described
in
Unit
I.
B.
1.
Mail
your
copies,
identified
by
the
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0279,
to:
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch,
Information
Resources
and
Services
Division
(
7502C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001.
In
person
or
by
courier,
bring
a
copy
to
the
location
of
the
PIRIB
described
in
Unit
I.
B.
1.
You
may
also
send
an
electronic
copy
of
your
request
via
e­
mail
to:
opp­
docket@
epa.
gov.
Please
use
an
ASCII
file
format
and
avoid
the
use
of
special
characters
and
any
form
of
encryption.
Copies
of
electronic
objections
and
hearing
requests
will
also
be
accepted
on
disks
in
WordPerfect
6.1/
8.0
or
ASCII
file
format.
Do
not
include
any
CBI
in
your
electronic
copy.
You
may
also
submit
an
electronic
copy
of
your
request
at
many
Federal
Depository
Libraries.

B.
When
Will
the
Agency
Grant
a
Request
for
a
Hearing?
A
request
for
a
hearing
will
be
granted
if
the
Administrator
determines
that
the
material
submitted
shows
the
following:
There
is
a
genuine
and
substantial
issue
of
fact;
there
is
a
reasonable
possibility
that
available
evidence
identified
by
the
requestor
would,
if
established
resolve
one
or
more
of
such
issues
in
favor
of
the
requestor,
taking
into
account
uncontested
claims
or
facts
to
the
contrary;
and
resolution
of
the
factual
issues(
s)
in
the
manner
sought
by
the
requestor
would
be
adequate
to
justify
the
action
requested
(
40
CFR
178.32).

VIII.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
This
final
rule
establishes
timelimited
tolerances
under
section
408
of
the
FFDCA.
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
rule
has
been
exempted
from
review
under
Executive
Order
12866
due
to
its
lack
of
significance,
this
rule
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13211,
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
(
66
FR
28355,
May
22,
2001).
This
final
rule
does
not
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
15:
54
Aug
26,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00055
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
27AUR1.
SGM
27AUR1
51484
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
166
/
Wednesday,
August
27,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
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).
Since
tolerances
and
exemptions
that
are
established
on
the
basis
of
a
FIFRA
section
18
exemption
under
section
408
of
the
FFDCA,
such
as
the
tolerances
in
this
final
rule,
do
not
require
the
issuance
of
a
proposed
rule,
the
requirements
of
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA)
(
5
U.
S.
C.
601
et
seq.)
do
not
apply.
In
addition,
the
Agency
has
determined
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
substantial
direct
effect
on
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
Federalism
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999).
Executive
Order
13132
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government.''
This
final
rule
directly
regulates
growers,
food
processors,
food
handlers,
and
food
retailers,
not
States.
This
action
does
not
alter
the
relationships
or
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
established
by
Congress
in
the
preemption
provisions
of
section
408(
n)(
4)
of
the
FFDCA.
For
these
same
reasons,
the
Agency
has
determined
that
this
rule
does
not
have
any
``
tribal
implications''
as
described
in
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments
(
65
FR
67249,
November
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
rule
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
tribal
governments,
on
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
this
rule.

IX.
Congressional
Review
Act
The
Congressional
Review
Act,
5
U.
S.
C.
801
et
seq.,
as
added
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996,
generally
provides
that
before
a
rule
may
take
effect,
the
agency
promulgating
the
rule
must
submit
a
rule
report,
which
includes
a
copy
of
the
rule,
to
each
House
of
the
Congress
and
to
the
Comptroller
General
of
the
United
States.
EPA
will
submit
a
report
containing
this
rule
and
other
required
information
to
the
U.
S.
Senate,
the
U.
S.
House
of
Representatives,
and
the
Comptroller
General
of
the
United
States
prior
to
publication
of
this
final
rule
in
the
Federal
Register.
This
final
rule
is
not
a
``
major
rule''
as
defined
by
5
U.
S.
C.
804(
2).

List
of
Subjects
in
40
CFR
Part
180
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Agricultural
commodities,
Pesticides
and
pests,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

Dated:
August
18,
2003.

Debra
Edwards,

Director,
Registration
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs.


Therefore,
40
CFR
chapter
I
is
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),
346(
a)
and
371.


2.
Section
180.377
is
amended
by
revising
the
table
in
paragraph
(
b)
to
read
as
follows:

§
180.377
Diflubenzuron;
tolerances
for
residues.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
*
*
*

Commodity
Parts
per
million
Expiration/
revocation
date
Alfalfa,
forage
...
6.0
6/
30/
04
Alfalfa,
hay
........
6.0
6/
30/
04
Barley,
grain
.....
0.05
12/
31/
05
Barley,
hay
........
1.0
12/
31/
05
Barley,
straw
.....
0.50
12/
31/
05
Wheat,
aspirated
grain
fractions
30
12/
31/
05
Wheat,
grain
.....
0.05
12/
31/
05
Wheat,
hay
.......
1.0
12/
31/
05
Wheat,
milled
byproducts
.....
0.10
12/
31/
05
Wheat,
straw
.....
0.50
12/
31/
05
*
*
*
*
*

[
FR
Doc.
03
 
21935
Filed
8
 
26
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
272
[
FRL
 
7479
 
5]

New
Mexico:
Incorporation
by
Reference
of
Approved
State
Hazardous
Waste
Management
Program
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Immediate
final
rule.

SUMMARY:
The
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA),
allows
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
to
authorize
States
to
operate
their
hazardous
waste
management
programs
in
lieu
of
the
Federal
program.
EPA
uses
the
regulations
entitled
``
Approved
State
Hazardous
Waste
Management
Programs''
to
provide
notice
of
the
authorization
status
of
State
programs
and
to
incorporate
by
reference
those
provisions
of
the
State
statutes
and
regulations
that
will
be
subject
to
EPA's
inspection
and
enforcement.
The
rule
codifies
in
the
regulations
the
prior
approval
of
New
Mexico's
hazardous
waste
management
program
and
incorporates
by
reference
authorized
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
15:
54
Aug
26,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00056
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
27AUR1.
SGM
27AUR1
