Federal Register, Volume 74, Number 41, March 4, 2009, Pages 9343-9564 Page: 9,355
vii, 9564, ii p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 41/Wednesday, March 4, 2009/Rules and Regulations
as "not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans." Therefore, dimethomorph is
not expected to pose a cancer risk to
humans.
5. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to
dimethomorph residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(High-Performance Liquid
Chromatography using Ultraviolet
detection (HPLC/UV) Method, (FAMS)
002-04) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression. The method may
be requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental
Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone
number: (410) 305-2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no Canadian or Mexican
maximum residue limits (MRLs)
established for residues of
dimethomorph in crops associated with
this review. Codex MRLs have been
finalized in grapes and grape, raisins at
2 and 5 ppm, respectively. However, the
proposed tolerances in grape and grape,
raisin (3.5 and 6.0 ppm, respectively)
cannot be harmonized with the Codex
MRLs on these commodities because
field trial data shows residue levels for
grape that are higher than 2 ppm.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA revised the
proposed tolerance for ginseng, from
0.85 ppm to 0.90 ppm. EPA revised the
proposed tolerance based on analysis of
the residue field trial data using the
Agency's Tolerance Spreadsheet in
accordance with the Agency's Guidance
for Setting Pesticide Tolerances Based
on Field Trial Data. EPA also changed
the commodity term from "bean, lima"
to "bean, lima, succulent" because field
trial data for dry lima beans was not
submitted. Use on lima beans is
restricted to those varieties intended for
harvest as succulent seed. Use on lima
beans is also restricted to areas east of
the Rocky Mountains, and will therefore
be established as a regional tolerance
under paragraph (c) Tolerances with
regional registrations in 180.493. The
proposed tolerance for grape will also be
restricted to a regional tolerance under180.493(c), since data were submitted
to support use of dimethomorph on
grapes grown east of the Rocky
Mountains. Since grapes processed for
raisin production are only grown west
of the Rock Mountains, the import
tolerance for raisins will remain, and a
tolerance for raisin under 180.493(c)
will not be established.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of dimethomorph (E,Z) 4-[3-
(4-chlorophenyl)-3-(3,4-
dimethoxyphenyl)-1-oxo-2-
propenyl]morpholine, in or on ginseng
at 0.90 ppm and turnip, greens at 20.0
ppm. Tolerances with regional
registrations are established in or on
bean, lima, succulent at 0.6 ppm and
grape at 3.5 ppm. This regulation also
deletes the existing tolerance for use in
or on grape, as the regional tolerance
supersedes it. Finally, it increases the
existing import tolerance level for
potato, wet peel from 0.15 to 0.20 ppm
and re-establishes the tolerance for
potato at 0.05 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to petitions submitted to the
Agency. 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 final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final 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) or Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
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., 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).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of 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 etseq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not 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).
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).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report 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.9355
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
United States. Office of the Federal Register. Federal Register, Volume 74, Number 41, March 4, 2009, Pages 9343-9564, periodical, March 4, 2009; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc132903/m1/20/: accessed March 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.