WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/N/USA/1601 
18 June 2007  
 (07-2531) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   English 
 
 
NOTIFICATION  
 
1. Member to Agreement notifying:  UNITED STATES  
If applicable, name of local government involved:    
2. Agency responsible:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
3. Products covered (provide tariff item number(s) as specified in national schedules 
deposited with the WTO; ICS numbers should be provided in addition, where 
applicable):  Cotton, potato, bean, brussels sprouts,  celery, cranberry, lettuce, pepper, 
peppermint, spearmint, tomato, broccoli, cabbage, cucumber, eggplant, and melon 
4. Regions or countries likely to be affected , to the extent relevant or practicable :  Any 
US trade partners  
5. Title, language and number of pages of the notified document:  PROPOSED RULE.  
Methamidophos, Oxydemeton-methyl, Profenofos , and Trichlorfon; Proposed Tolerance 
Actions, (available in English , 9 pages) 
6. Description of content:  Methamidophos. Because metham idophos is a metabolite of 
acephate, EPA determined that residues of methamidophos resulting from the application 
of acephate should be included under the to lerance regulations for methamidophos as a 
pesticide. Therefore, EPA is proposing to r ecodify the tolerances for methamidophos from 
permanent tolerances for residues of meth amidophos (O,S-dimethyl phosphoramidothioate) 
in or on food commodities as a result of the application of the insecticide methamidophos 
and (a)(2) for residues of methamidophos (O,S -dimethyl phosphoramidothioate) in or on 
food commodities as a result of the application of the insecticide acephate. 
Currently tolerances for related pesticide chemicals, states that where tolerances are 
established for residues of O,S-dimethyl phos phoramidothioate, resulting from the use of 
acephate (O,S-dimethyl acetylphos-phoramidothioate) and/or O,S-dimethylphosphoramidothioate on the same agricultural commodity, the total amount of 
O,S-dimethyl- phosphoramidothioate shall not yield more residue than that permitted by 
the higher of the two tolerances. However, with  the proposed change to include tolerances 
for methamidophos that result from the appli cation of acephate under the methamidophos 
tolerance regulations, there is no longer a need for the related pesticide chemical 
regulation; and therefore, EPA is pr oposing to remove this stipulation. 
Because there are no registered uses on brocco li, cabbage, cucumber, eggplant, and melon, 
EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerances on broccoli, cabbage, cucumber, eggplant, and 
melon. Also, on July 31, 2002, EPA published a final rule in the Federal Register in which 
it responded to the Canadian Horticultura l Council's comment asking that certain 
tolerances, including those on broccoli and cabba ge, not be revoked. At that time, the 
Agency responded that it would not revoke the tolerances on broccoli and cabbage, but 
would follow-up to see that data requirements we re met should an interested party support 
those tolerances for import purposes. However, in the interim period, no interested party G/SPS/N/USA/1601 
Page 2  
 
  has declared an interest and committed in writing to do the required data to support the 
broccoli and cabbage tolerances for import purposes. 
However, because there are registered acepha te uses on Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, 
celery, and head lettuce, EPA is proposing to r ecodify the tolerances for Brussels sprouts, 
cauliflower, and lettuce. Also, in order to refl ect active registered use of acephate on head 
lettuce, EPA is proposing to revise ``lettuce'' to  ``lettuce, head.'' In addition, because there 
is an existing tolerance for acephate use on cau liflower, which has been reassessed in the 
acephate RED at the same level, such that residues from metabolism to methamidophos are 
expected to be no greater than 0.5 parts pe r million (ppm), EPA is proposing to decrease 
the tolerance on cauliflower in from 1.0 to to 0.5 ppm. Also, this proposed level will 
harmonize with the Codex MRL of 0.5 mg/kg on cauliflower. 
At the time of the completion of the me thamidophos IRED, a registrant submitted an 
import tolerance petition for peppers, strawberri es, and squash. This petition has not been 
reviewed. Because there is an existing tolera nce for acephate use on peppers, which in the 
acephate RED has been reassessed at the same le vel, such that residues from metabolism to 
methamidophos are expected to be no greater than 1.0 ppm, EPA is proposing to recodify 
the tolerance on pepper at 1.0 ppm. Also, th is proposed level will harmonize with the 
Codex MRL of 1.0 mg/kg on sweet peppers. 
Because there are registered methamidophos uses on potato, EPA is pr oposing to recodify 
the tolerance at 0.1 ppm on potato. 
Based on available data that showed meth amidophos residues as high as 0.191 ppm on 
cottonseed, the Agency is proposing to recodi fy the tolerance on cotton, undelinted seed 
and increase the tolerance to 0.2 ppm. The Agen cy determined that the increased tolerance 
is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable certainty th at no harm will result from aggregate exposure 
to the pesticide chemical residue. Also, this  proposed level will harmonize with the Codex 
MRL of 0.2 mg/kg on cottonseed. 
Based on available data that showed me thamidophos residues as high as 8.03 ppm on 
cotton gin byproducts, the Agency is proposing to establish a tolerance on cotton, gin byproducts at 10.0 ppm. 
Based on available data that showed me thamidophos residues as high as 1.4 ppm on 
tomatoes, EPA determined that the tolerance on tomato should be increased from 1.0 to 2.0 
ppm. Because there are only active FIFRA section 24(c) registrations for use of 
methamidophos on tomatoes and no active registra tions for use of acephate on tomatoes, 
the Agency has determined that  the tolerance should be recodified as a regional tolerance. 
Therefore, the Agency is proposing to recodi fy regulations and the tolerance on tomato, 
increasing that tolerance 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. Also, EPA is  proposing to revise the tolerance expression, 
as follows: 
Tolerances with regional registration are est ablished for residues of methamidophos (O,S-
dimethyl phosphoramidothioate) in or on th e following food commodities as a result of the 
application of the insecticide methamidophos. 
Because there are existing tolerances for use of acephate on dry and succulent beans and 
cranberries, which in the acephate RED have been  reassessed at the same level, such that 
residues from metabolism to methamidophos are expected to be no greater than 1.0 ppm 
and 0.1 ppm, respectively, EPA is proposin g to establish tolerances for residues of 
methamidophos as a result from the application of acephate on bean, dry, seed at 1.0 ppm, 
bean, succulent at 1.0 ppm, and cranberry at 0.1 ppm.  G/SPS/N/USA/1601 
 Page 3 
 
 
  Because there is an existing tolerance for use of acephate on mint hay, which in the 
acephate RED has been reassessed to be in creased from 15.0 to 27.0 ppm, such that 
residues from metabolism to methamidophos are expected to be increased from no greater 
than 1.0 to 2.0 ppm, EPA is proposing to  establish a tolerance for residues of 
methamidophos as a result from the applicati on of acephate on mint, hay at 2.0 ppm and 
revise it to "peppermint, tops '' and "spearmint, tops". 
7. Objective and rationale:  [ X ] food safety, [ ] animal health, [ X ] plant protection, 
[ X ] protect humans from animal/plant pest  or disease, [ ] protect territory from 
other damage from pests    
8. International standard, guideline or recommendation:  
[ X ] Codex Alimentarius Commission, [ ] World Organization for Animal Health 
(OIE), [ ] International Plant Protection Convention, [ ] None  
If an international standard, guideline or recommendation exists, give the 
appropriate reference and briefly identify deviations:   There is a Codex MRL of 0.05 
ppm on potato, but harmonization is not possible because of differences in agricultural practices. 
9. Relevant documents and language(s) in which these are available:  Federal Register: 23 
May 2007 (Volume 72, Number 99) Proposed Rules Page 28912-28920; 
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2007/May/Day-23/p2561.htm 
10. Proposed date of adoption:  N/A 
11. Proposed date of entry into force:  23 July 2007 
12. Final date for comments:  Comments must be received on or before 23 July 2007, and 
may be identified by docket number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0261. 
Agency or authority designated to handl e comments:  [ ] National notification 
authority, [ X ] National enquiry point, or address, fax number and E-mail address (if 
available) of other body:   Registration Division, (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001 
13. Texts available from:  [ X ] National notification authority, [ ] National enquiry point, 
or address, fax number and E-mail add ress (if available) of other body:   United States 
SPS National Notification Authority, USDA Fore ign Agricultural Service, International 
Regulations and Standards Division (IRSD), St op 1027, Washington D.C. 20250;  Tel.:+(1 
202) 720-1301;  Fax: +(1 202) 69 0-0677;  E-mail: fstsd@fas.usda.gov