PMEP Home Page --> Pesticide Active Ingredient Information --> Insecticides and Miticides --> Insecticides, R to Z --> Tebufenozide --> Tebufenozide - Pesticide Tolerances 11/96

Tebufenozide - Pesticide Tolerances for Emergency Exemptions—Final Rule 11/96

[Federal Register: November 29, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 231)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 60628-60632]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-300446; FRL-5574-9]
RIN 2070-AC78
Tebufenozide; Pesticide Tolerances for Emergency Exemptions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a time-limited tolerance for
residues of the insecticide tebufenozide in or on the raw agricultural
commodity peppers in connection with EPA's granting of emergency
exemptions under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act authorizing use of tebufenozide on peppers in Georgia
and New Mexico. This regulation establishes maximum permissible levels
for residues of tebufenozide on peppers pursuant to section 408(l)(6)
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Food
Quality Protection Act of 1996. This tolerance will expire and be
revoked automatically without further action by EPA on November 30,
1997.
DATES: This regulation becomes effective November 29, 1996. This
regulation expires and is revoked automatically without further action
by EPA on November 30, 1997. Objections and requests for hearings must
be received by EPA on January 28, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests, identified by the
docket control number, [OPP-300446], must be submitted to: Hearing
Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St.,
SW., Washington, DC 20460. Fees accompanying objections and hearing
requests shall be labeled "Tolerance Petition Fees" and forwarded to:
EPA Headquarters Accounting Operations Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees),
P.O. Box 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251.
    A copy of any objections and hearing requests filed with the
Hearing Clerk identified by the docket control number, [OPP-300446],
should be submitted to: Public Response and Program Resources Branch,
Field Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.
In person, bring a copy of objections and hearing requests to Rm. 1132,
CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. A copy of objections
and hearing requests filed with the Hearing Clerk may also be submitted
electronically by sending electronic mail (e-mail) to: opp-
docket@epamail.epa.gov. Copies of objections and hearing requests must
be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption. Copies of objections and hearing requests
will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 file format or ASCII
file format. All copies of objections and hearing requests in
electronic form must be identified by the docket number [OPP-300446].
No Confidential Business Information (CBI) should be submitted through
e-mail. Electronic copies of objections and hearing requests on this
rule may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Margarita Collantes,
Registration Division (7505W), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. Office location, telephone number, and
e-mail: Sixth Floor, Crystal Station #1, 2800 Jefferson Davis Highway,
Arlington, VA 22202. (703) 308-8347, e-mail:
collantes.margarita@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA, on its own initiative, pursuant to
section 408(e) and (l)(6) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(e) and (l)(6), is establishing a tolerance for
residues of the insecticide tebufenozide (benzoic acid, 3,5-dimethyl-1-
(1,1-dimethylethyl)-2(4-ethylbenzoyl)hydrazide) in or on peppers at 0.5
part per million (ppm). This tolerance will expire and be revoked
automatically without further action by EPA on November 30, 1997.

I. Background and Statutory Authority

    The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) (Pub. L. 104170) was
signed into law August 3, 1996. FQPA amends both the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq., and the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et
seq. The FQPA amendments went into effect immediately. Among other
things, FQPA amends FFDCA to bring all EPA pesticide tolerance-setting
activities under a new section 408 with a new safety standard and new
procedures.
    New section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) 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) 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, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) 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 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 FQPA. EPA has established regulations governing such
emergency exemptions in 40 CFR part 166.
    Section 408(l)(6) 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. Section 408(l)(6) also requires EPA to promulgate regulations
by August 3, 1997, governing the establishment of tolerances and
exemptions under section 408(l)(6) and requires that the regulations be
consistent with section 408(b)(2) and (c)(2) and FIFRA section 18.
    Section 408(l)(6) allows EPA to establish tolerances or exemptions
from the requirement for a tolerance, in connection with EPA's granting
of FIFRA section 18 emergency exemptions, without providing notice or a
period for public comment. Thus, consistent with the need to act
expeditiously on requests for emergency exemptions under FIFRA, EPA can
establish such tolerances or exemptions under the authority of section
408(e) and (l)(6) without notice and comment rulemaking.
    In establishing section 18-related tolerances and exemptions during
this interim period before EPA issues the section 408(l)(6) procedural
regulation and before EPA makes its broad policy decisions concerning
the interpretation and implementation of the new section 408, EPA does
not intend to set precedents for the application of section 408 and the
new safety standard to other tolerances and exemptions. Rather, these
early section 18 tolerance and exemption decisions will be made on a
case-by-case basis and will not bind

---- page 60629 ----

EPA as it proceeds with further rulemaking and policy development. EPA
intends to act on section 18-related tolerances and exemptions that
clearly qualify under the new law.

II. Emergency Exemptions for Tebufenozide on Peppers and FFDCA
Tolerances

    On September 4, 1996, the Georgia Department of Agriculture availed
of itself the authority to declare the existence of a crisis situation
within the state, thereby authorizing use under FIFRA section 18 of
tebufenozide on peppers to control the beet armyworm (BAW). The state
of New Mexico has also requested a specific exemption for use of this
chemical to control beet armyworm. Emergency conditions are determined
to exist due to the BAW populations demonstrating resistance to
registered insecticides. The available data indicate that tebufenozide
effectively controls BAW larvae, small and large, and will be used only
after the registered alternatives, methomyl and chlorpyrifos, have
failed.
    As part of its assessment of these applications for emergency
exemption, EPA assessed the potential risks presented by residues of
tebufenozide on peppers. In doing so, EPA considered the new safety
standard in FFDCA section 408(b)(2), and EPA decided to grant the
section 18 exemptions only after concluding that the necessary
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(l)(6) would clearly be consistent
with the new safety standard and with FIFRA section 18. This tolerance
for tebufenozide will permit the marketing of peppers treated in
accordance with the provisions of the section 18 emergency exemptions.
Consistent with the need to move quickly on the emergency exemptions
and to ensure that the resulting food is safe and lawful, EPA is
issuing this tolerance without notice and opportunity for public
comment under section 408(e) as provided in section 408(l)(6). Although
this tolerance will expire and be revoked automatically without further
action by EPA on November 30, 1997, under FFDCA section 408(l)(5),
residues of tebufenozide not in excess of the amount specified in the
tolerance remaining in or on peppers after that date will not be
unlawful, provided the pesticide is applied during the term of, and in
accordance with all the conditions of, the emergency exemptions. EPA
will take action to revoke this tolerance earlier if any experience
with, scientific data on, or other relevant information on this
pesticide indicate that the residues are not safe.
    EPA has not made any decisions about whether tebufenozide meets the
requirements for registration under FIFRA section 3 for use on peppers
or whether a permanent tolerance for tebufenozide for peppers would be
appropriate. This action by EPA does not serve as a basis for
registration of tebufenozide by a State for special local needs under
FIFRA section 24(c). Nor does this action serve as the basis for any
State other than Georgia or New Mexico to use this product on this crop
under section 18 of FIFRA without following all provisions of section
18 as identified in 40 CFR part 180.166. For additional information
regarding the emergency exemptions for tebufenozide, contact the
Agency's Registration Division at the address provided above.

III. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings

    EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the
toxicity of pesticides based primarily on toxicological studies using
laboratory animals. These studies address many adverse health effects,
including (but not limited to) reproductive effects, developmental
toxicity, toxicity to the nervous system, and carcinogenicity. For many
of these studies, a dose response relationship can be determined, which
provides a dose that causes adverse effects (threshold effects) and
doses causing no observed effects (the "no-observed effect level" or
"NOEL").
    Once a study has been evaluated and the observed effects have been
determined to be threshold effects, EPA generally divides the NOEL from
the study with the lowest NOEL by an uncertainty factor (usually 100 or
more) to determine the Reference Dose (RfD). The RfD is a level at or
below which daily aggregate exposure over a lifetime will not pose
appreciable risks to human health. An uncertainty factor (sometimes
called a "safety factor") of 100 is commonly used since it is assumed
that people may be up to 10 times more sensitive to pesticides than the
test animals, and that one person or subgroup of the population (such
as infants and children) could be up to 10 times more sensitive to a
pesticide than another. In addition, EPA assesses the potential risks
to infants and children based on the weight of the evidence of the
toxicology studies and determines whether an additional uncertainty
factor is warranted. Thus, an aggregate daily exposure to a pesticide
residue at or below the RfD (expressed as 100 percent or less of the
RfD) is generally considered acceptable by EPA.
    Lifetime feeding studies in two species of laboratory animals are
conducted to screen pesticides for cancer effects. When evidence of
increased cancer is noted in these studies, the Agency conducts a
weight of the evidence review of all relevant toxicological data
including short-term and mutagenicity studies and structure activity
relationship. Once a pesticide has been classified as a potential human
carcinogen, different types of risk assessments (e.g., linear low dose
extrapolations or margin of exposure calculation based on the
appropriate NOEL) will be carried out based on the nature of the
carcinogenic response and the Agency's knowledge of its mode of action.
    In examining aggregate exposure, FFDCA section 408 requires that
EPA take into account available and reliable information concerning
exposure from the pesticide residue in the food in question, residues
in other foods for which there are tolerances, and other non-
occupational exposures, such as where residues leach into groundwater
or surface water that is consumed as drinking water. Dietary exposure
to residues of a pesticide in a food commodity are estimated by
multiplying the average daily consumption of the food forms of that
commodity by the tolerance level or the anticipated pesticide residue
level. The Theoretical Maximum Residue Contribution (TMRC) is an
estimate of the level of residues consumed daily if each food item
contained pesticide residues equal to the tolerance. The TMRC is a
"worst case" estimate since it is based on the assumptions that food
contains pesticide residues at the tolerance level and that 100 percent
of the crop is treated by pesticides that have established tolerances.
If the TMRC exceeds the RfD or poses a lifetime cancer risk that is
greater than approximately one in a million, EPA attempts to derive a
more accurate exposure estimate for the pesticide by evaluating
additional types of information (anticipated residue data and/or
percent of crop treated data) which show, generally, that pesticide
residues in most foods when they are eaten are well below established
tolerances.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. Tebufenozide is not registered by EPA

---- page 60630 ----

for indoor or outdoor residential use. Existing food and feed use
tolerances for tebufenozide are listed in 40 CFR 180.482. EPA has also
assessed the toxicology data base for tebufenozide in its evaluation of
applications for registration on peppers. Thus, EPA has sufficient data
to assess the hazards of tebufenozide and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure, consistent with section 408(b)(2), for the time-
limited tolerances for residues of tebufenozide on peppers at 0.5 ppm.
EPA's assessment of the dietary exposures and risks associated with
establishing these tolerances follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    1. Chronic toxicity. Based on the available chronic toxicity data,
the Agency has established the RfD for tebufenozide at 0.018
milligrams(mg)/kilogram(kg)/day. The RfD is based on a 1 year feeding
study in dogs with a NOEL of 1.8 mg/kg/day and an uncertainty factor of
100. Decreased red blood cells, hematocrit, and hemoglobin and
increased heinz bodies, reticulocytes, and platelets were observed at
the Lowest Observed Effect Level (LOEL) of 8.7 mg/kg/day.
    2. Acute toxicity. No appropriate acute dietary endpoint was
identified by the Agency. This risk assessment is not required.
    3. Carcinogenicity. Using its Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk
Assessment published September 24, 1986 (51 FR 33992), OPP has
classified tebufenozide as a Group "E" chemical (no evidence of
carcinogenicity) based on the results of carcinogenicity studies in two
species. There was no evidence of carcinogenicity in a 2-year rat study
and an 18-month mouse study.

B. Aggregate Exposure

    Tolerances for residues of tebufenozide are currently expressed as
benzoic acid, 3,5-dimethyl-1-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-2(4-
ethylbenzoyl)hydrazide. Tolerances currently exist for residues on
apples and walnuts (see 40 CFR 180.482).
    For purposes of assessing the potential dietary exposure under this
tolerance, EPA assumed tolerance level residues and 100 percent of crop
treated to estimate the TMRC from all established food uses for
tebufenozide as well as the proposed use on peppers. Peppers and pepper
products are not considered livestock feed items; thus, there is no
reasonable expectation that measurable residues of tebufenozide will
occur in meat, milk, poultry, or eggs under the terms of these
emergency exemptions.
    Other potential sources of exposure of the general population to
residues of pesticides are residues in drinking water and exposure from
non-occupational sources. Review of environmental fate data by the
Environmental Fate and Effects Division suggests that tebufenozide is
moderately persistent to persistent and mobile, and could potentially
leach to groundwater and runoff to surface water under certain
environmental conditions. There is no established Maximum Concentration
Level for residues of tebufenozide in drinking water. No drinking water
health advisory levels have been established for tebufenozide.
    The Agency does not have available data to perform a quantitative
drinking water risk assessment for tebufenozide at this time. However,
in order to mitigate the potential for tebufenozide to leach into
groundwater or runoff to surface water, precautionary language has been
incorporated into the product label. Also, previous experience with
more persistent and mobile pesticides for which there have been
available data to perform quantitative risk assessments have
demonstrated that drinking water exposure is typically a small
percentage of the total exposure when compared to the total dietary
exposure. This observation holds even for pesticides detected in wells
and drinking water at levels nearing or exceeding established MCLs.
Considering the precautionary language on the label and based on
previous experience with persistent chemicals, EPA does not anticipate
significant exposure from residues of tebufenozide in drinking water.
    Tebufenozide is not registered for either indoor or outdoor
residential use. Non-occupational exposure to the general population is
therefore not expected and not considered in aggregate exposure
estimates.
    At this time, the Agency has not made a determination that
tebufenozide and other substances that may have a common mode of
toxicity would have cumulative effects. For purposes of this tolerance
only, the Agency is considering only the potential risks of
tebufenozide in its aggregate exposure.

C. Safety Determinations for U.S. Population

    Using the conservative exposure assumptions described above and
taking into account the completeness and reliability of the toxicity
data, EPA has concluded that dietary exposure to tebufenozide will
utilize 4.5 percent of the RfD for the U.S. population. EPA generally
has no concern for exposures below 100 percent of the RfD because the
RfD represents the level at or below which daily aggregate dietary
exposure over a lifetime will not pose appreciable risks to human
health. EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to tebufenozide residues.

D. Determination of Safety for Infants and Children

    In assessing the potential for additional sensitivity of infants
and children to residues of tebufenozide, EPA considered data from
developmental toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit and a 2-generation
reproduction study in the rat. The developmental toxicity studies are
designed to evaluate adverse effects on the developing organism
resulting from pesticide exposure during prenatal development to one or
both parents. Reproduction studies provide information relating to
effects from exposure to the pesticide on the reproductive capability
of mating animals and data on systemic toxicity.
    Developmental toxicity was not observed in developmental studies
using rats and rabbits. The NOEL for developmental effects in both rats
and rabbits was 1000 mg/kg/day (HDT), which is the limit dose for
testing in developmental studies.
    In the two-generation reproductive toxicity study in the rat, the
reproductive/developmental toxicity NOEL of 12.1 mg/kg/day was 14-fold
higher than the parental (systemic) toxicity NOEL (0.85 mg/kg/day). The
reproductive (pup) LOEL of 171.1 mg/kg/day was based on a slight
increase in both generations in the number of pregnant females that
either did not deliver or had difficulty and had to be sacrificed. In
addition, the length of gestation increased and implantation sites
decreased significantly in F1 dams Because these reproductive effects
occurred in the presence of parental (systemic) toxicity, these data do
not suggest an increased post-natal sensitivity to children and infants
(that infants and children might be more sensitive than adults) to
tebufenozide exposure.
    FFDCA section 408 provides that EPA shall apply an additional
safety factor for infants and children in the case of threshold effects
to account for pre- and post-natal toxicity and the completeness of the
data base unless EPA concludes that a different margin of safety is
appropriate. Based on current toxicological data discussed above, EPA
concludes that an additional uncertainty factor is not warranted and
that the RfD at 0.018 mg/kg/day is appropriate for assessing aggregate
risk to infants and children.

---- page 60631 ----

    Using the conservative exposure assumptions described above, EPA
has concluded that the percent of the RfD that will be utilized by
aggregate exposure to residues of tebufenozide ranges from 6.0 percent
for children 7-12 years old, up to 44.7 percent for non-nursing
infants. Therefore, taking into account the completeness and
reliability of the toxicity data and the conservative exposure
assessment, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to
tebufenozide residues.

V. Other Considerations

    The metabolism of tebufenozide in plants is adequately understood
for the purposes of this tolerance. There is no Codex maximum residue
level established for residues of tebufenozide of peppers. There is a
practical analytical method (liquid chromatography with ultraviolet
detection) for detecting and measuring levels of tebufenozide in or on
food with a limit of detection that allows monitoring of food with
residues at or above the level set by the tebufenozide tolerance. EPA
has provided information on this method to FDA. The method is available
to anyone who is interested in pesticide residue enforcement from: By
mail, Calvin Furlow, Public Response and Program Resources Branch,
Field Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St. SW., Washington, DC 20460.
Office location and telephone number: Crystal Mall #2, Rm 1128, 1921
Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, 703-305-5805.

VI. Conclusion

    Therefore, a tolerance in connection with the FIFRA section 18
emergency exemptions is established for residues of tebufenozide in
peppers at 0.5 ppm. This tolerance will expire and be automatically
revoked without further action by EPA on November 30, 1997.

VII. Objections and Hearing Requests

    The new FFDCA section 408(g) provides essentially the same process
for persons to "object" to a tolerance regulation issued by EPA under
new section 408(e) and (l)(6) as was provided in the old section 408
and in section 409. However, the period for filing objections is 60
days, rather than 30 days. EPA currently has procedural regulations
which govern the submission of objections and hearing requests. These
regulations will require some modification to reflect the new law.
However, until those modifications can be made, EPA will continue to
use those procedural regulations with appropriate adjustments to
reflect the new law.
    Any person may, by January 28, 1997, file written objections to any
aspect of this regulation (including the automatic revocation
provision) and may also request a hearing on those objections.
Objections and hearing requests must be filed with the Hearing Clerk,
at the address given above (40 CFR 178.20). A copy of the objections
and/or hearing requests filed with the Hearing Clerk should be
submitted to the OPP docket for this rulemaking. The objections
submitted must specify the provisions of the regulation deemed
objectionable and the grounds for the objections (40 CFR 178.25). Each
objection must be accompanied by the fee prescribed by 40 CFR
180.33(i). If a hearing is requested, the objections must include a
statement of the factual issues on which a hearing is requested, the
requestor's contentions on such issues, and a summary of any evidence
relied upon by the requestor (40 CFR 178.27). A request for a hearing
will be granted if the Administrator determines that the material
submitted shows the following: There is 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 in the manner sought by the requestor would be adequate
to justify the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).
    Information submitted in connection with an objection or hearing
request may be claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that
information as Confidential Business Information (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.

VIII. Public Docket

    A record has been established for this rulemaking under docket
number [OPP-300446]. A public version of this record, which does not
include any information claimed as CBI, is available for inspection
from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The public record is located in Room 1132 of the Public
Response and Program Resources Branch, Field Operations Division
(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA.
    The official record for this rulemaking, as well as the public
version, as described above, is kept in paper form. Accordingly, in the
event there are objections and hearing requests, EPA will transfer any
copies of objections and hearing requests received electronically into
printed, paper form as they are received and will place the paper
copies in the official rulemaking record. The official rulemaking
record is the paper record maintained at the address in "ADDRESSES"
at the beginning of this document.

IX. Regulatory Assessment Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a "significant regulatory action" and, since this
action does not impose any information collection requirements as
defined by the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., it is
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. In
addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain
any unfunded mandate as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4), or require prior consultation with State
officials as specified by Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093, October
28, 1993), or special considerations as required by Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Because FFDCA section 408(l)(6) permits establishment of this
regulation without a notice of proposed rulemaking, the regulatory
flexibility analysis requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 604(a), do not apply.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 (Title II of Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847), EPA submitted
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 General Accounting Office prior to publication of the
rule in today's Federal Register. This rule is not a "major rule" as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2) of the APA as amended.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

---- page 60632 ----

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 20, 1996.
Daniel M. Barolo,
Director, 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. 346a and 371.

    2. In 180.482, by redesignating the existing section as paragraph
(a) and adding a new paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec. 180.482   Benzoic acid, tolerances for resdues  .

    *    *    *    *    *
    (b) A time-limited tolerance is established for residues of the
insecticide benzoic acid, 3,5-dimethyl-1-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-2(4-
ethylbenzoyl)hydrazide, in connection with use of the pesticide under
section 18 emergency exemptions granted by EPA. The tolerance is
specified in the following table. This tolerance expires and is
automatically revoked on the date specified in the table without
further action by EPA.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Expiration/
            Commodity              Parts per million    Revocation Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peppers.........................  0.5                 November 30, 1997
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 96-30475 Filed 11-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F