Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-301062; FRL-6747-9]
RIN 2070-AB78
 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
 ACTION: Final rule.
 SUMMARY: This regulation establishes permanent tolerances for residues of dimethomorph, (E,Z) 4-[3-(4-chlorophenyl)-3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-1-oxo-2- propenyl]morpholine in or on dried hops cones, grapes, raisins, tomato fruit, and tomato paste. American Cyanamid Company requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996.
 DATES: This regulation is effective September 29, 2000.  Objections and requests for hearings, identified by docket control number OPP-301062, must be received by EPA on or before November 28, 2000.
 ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests may be submitted by mail, in person, or by courier.  Please follow the detailed instructions for each method as provided in Unit VI. of the 
                        **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.**
                         To ensure proper receipt by EPA, your objections and hearing requests must identify docket control number OPP-301062 in the subject line on the first page of your response.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT By mail: Mary Waller, Registration Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (703) 308-9354; and e-mail address: waller.mary@epa.gov.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A.  Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.  Potentially affected categories and entities may include, but are not limited to: 
                    ( print page 58386) Categories
NAICS
Examples of Potentially Affected 
                             EntitiesIndustry
111
Crop production112
Animal production311
Food manufacturing32532
Pesticide manufacturing
 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 the table could also be affected.  The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether or not this action might apply to certain entities.  If you have 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 Additional Information, Including Copies of this Document and Other Related Documents? 1. 
                    *Electronically*.You may obtain electronic copies of this document, and certain other related documents that might be available electronically, from the EPA Internet Home Page at http://www.epa.gov/​.  To access this document, on the Home Page select “Laws and Regulations,” “Regulations and Proposed Rules,” and then look up the entry for this document under the “
                    **Federal Register**
                    —Environmental Documents.”  You can also go directly to the
                    **Federal Register**
                     listings at http://www.epa.gov/​fedrgstr/​. 2. 
                    *In person*. The Agency has established an official record for this action under docket control number OPP-301062.  The official record consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, and other information related to this action, including any information claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI).  This official record includes the documents that are physically located in the docket, as well as the documents that are referenced in those documents.  The public version of the official record does not include any information claimed as CBI.  The public version of the official record, which includes printed, paper versions of any electronic comments submitted during an applicable comment period is available for inspection in the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305-5805. II.  Background and Statutory Findings In the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     of March 26, 1997, 62 FR 14418 (FRL-5594-7) and March 8, 2000, 65 FR 12244 (FRL-6491-4), EPA issued notices pursuant to section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) (Public Law 104-170) announcing the filing of  pesticide petitions (7F4816 and 8F4946) for tolerances by American Cyanamid Company, P.O. Box 400, Princeton, NJ 08543-0400. These notices included  summaries of the petitions prepared by American Cyanamid Company, the registrant. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing. The petitions requested that 40 CFR 180.493 be amended by establishing  tolerances for residues of the fungicide dimethomorph, (E,Z) 4-[3-(4-chlorophenyl)-3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-1-oxo-2-propenyl]morpholine, in or on dried hops cones at 60 ppm, grapes at 3.5 ppm, raisins at 6.0 ppm, tomato fruit at 0.5 ppm, and tomato paste at 1.0 part per million (ppm). 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) 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) 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....” 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 and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see the final rule on Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances (62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997) (FRL-5754-7). III. 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. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section 408(b)(2), for a tolerance for residues of dimethomorph, (E,Z) 4-[3-(4-chlorophenyl)-3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-1-oxo-2-propenyl]morpholine on dried hops cones at 60 ppm, grapes at 3.5 ppm, raisins at 6.0 ppm, tomato fruit at 0.5 ppm, and tomato paste at 1.0 ppm.  EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerances are as follows. A. Toxicological Profile EPA has previously 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 considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.  The toxicological profile for dimethomorph was addressed in the risk assessment published in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     final rule of October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54587) (FRL-6036-7). B. Toxicological Endpoints The toxicological endpoints for dimethomorph were addressed in the risk assessment published in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     final rule of October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54587) (FRL-6036-7). C. Exposure Assessment 1. 
                    *Dietary exposure from food and feed uses.*
                     Tolerances have been established (40 CFR 180.493) for the residues of dimethomorph, (E,Z) 4-[3-(4-chlorophenyl)- 3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-1-oxo-2-propenyl]morpholine in or on potatoes at 0.05 ppm, potatoes, wet peel at 0.15 ppm and time-limited tolerances have been established for cantaloupe, cucumber, squash and watermelon at 1 ppm (expires September 30, 2001) and on the cereal grains group: fodder at 0.15 ppm, forage and grain at 0.05 ppm, hay at 0.10 ppm, and straw at 0.15 ppm. Risk assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from dimethomorph as follows: i. 
                    *Acute exposure*. Acute dietary risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a one day or single exposure. EPA did not 
                    ( print page 58387)
                    select a dose and endpoint for an acute dietary risk assessment because of the lack of toxicological effects attributable to a single exposure (dose) in either the rat or the rabbit developmental toxicity studies. ii. 
                    *Chronic exposure*
                    .  In conducting this chronic dietary risk assessment the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEMDM
                    ) analysis evaluated the individual food consumption as reported by respondents in the USDA 1989-1992 nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII) and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. The following very conservative assumptions were made for the chronic exposure assessments: that all commodities having dimethomorph tolerances will contain residues of dimethomorph and those residues will be at the level of the tolerance.  These assumptions result in an overestimate of human dietary exposure.  All Section 18 tolerances (cantaloupes, watermelons, cucumbers, and squash) are included in this dietary risk assessment. Using the assumptions and data parameters described above, the DEEM-89 exposure analysis results in a theoretical maximum residue contribution (TMRC) that is equivalent to the following percentages of the PAD/RfD. The following Table 1 summarizes the estimated food exposures for the U.S. population, all infants (
                    <
                    1 year old),  the population subgroups that include children, and the most highly exposed female and male subgroups. **Table 1.—Summary of Food Exposure to Dimethomorph**
Population Subgroup
Exposure (mg/kg body wt/day)
%PAD/RfDU.S. Population (total)
0.002547
3All Infants (
                            <
                            1 year
0.005947
6Children 1-6 years
0.007407
7Children 7-12 years
0.002939
3Females 13-50 years
0.001936
2Males (20+years)
0.001840
2
 2. 
                    *From drinking water*. EPA used SCI-GROW (Screening Concentration In Ground Water) and GENEEC (Generic Estimated Environmental Concentration) models to determine the estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) of dimethomorph residues in ground and surface  water. The EEC reported for dimethomorph residues in ground water is 0.26 parts per billion (ppb). The EEC for surface water is 28 ppb for acute and 24 ppb for chronic (56-day). i. 
                    *Acute exposure and risk*. Because no acute dietary endpoint was determined, no acute risks are posed by exposure to dimethomorph. ii. 
                    *Chronic exposure and risk*. EPA conducts the drinking water risk assessment by using the worst case scenario of estimated environmental concentration (EEC) found from either ground or surface water. The EEC reported for dimethomorph residues in ground water using SCI-GROW is 0.26 ppb. This is much less than the surface water EEC (24 ppb for 56 days) generated using GENEEC. Therefore, only the surface water EEC will be used in conducting the aggregate dietary (food + water) risk assessment. Based on the chronic food exposure and using default body weights and water consumption figures, chronic drinking water levels of comparison (DWLOCs) for drinking water were calculated. To calculate the chronic DWLOC, the chronic food exposure (from DEEM analysis) is subtracted from the chronic PAD/RfD. DWLOCs are then calculated using the default body weights and drinking water consumption figures. EPA's surface drinking water levels of comparison from chronic exposure to dimethomorph using modeling data are 3,400 ppb for U.S. population and for males (20+ years), 2,900 ppb for females 13-50, 970 ppb for children 7-12 years, 940 ppb for infants 
                    <
                    1 year and 930 ppb for children 1-6 years. These levels are all greater than the GENEEC concentration level (24 ppb for 56 days). Therefore, EPA does not expect exposure to dimethomorph in drinking water to be above the level of concern. 3. 
                    *From non-dietary exposure*. The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).  Dimethomorph is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure. 4. 
                    *Cumulative exposure to substances with a common mechanism of toxicity*. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider “available information” concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and “other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.” EPA does not have, at this time, available data to determine whether dimethomorph has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances or how to include this pesticide in a cumulative risk assessment. Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, dimethomorph does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that dimethomorph has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the final rule for Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances (62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997). D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children 1. 
                    *In general*. FFDCA section 408 provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the data base on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a margin of exposure (MOE) analysis or through using uncertainty (safety) factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans. 2. 
                    *Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity*. EPA assessed the potential for additional sensitivity of infants and children to residues of dimethomorph in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     final rule of 
                    ( print page 58388)
                    October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54587)(FRL-6036-7). 3. 
                    *Conclusion*.  There is a complete toxicity database for dimethomorph and exposure data are complete or are estimated based on data that reasonably account for potential exposures. EPA determined that the 10x factor to protect infants and children be removed. E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety To estimate total aggregate exposure to a pesticide from food, drinking water, and residential uses, the Agency calculates DWLOCs which are used as a point of comparison against the model estimates of a pesticide's concentration in water (EECs). DWLOC values are not regulatory standards for drinking water. DWLOCs are theoretical upper limits on a pesticide's concentration in drinking water in light of total aggregate exposure to a pesticide in food and residential uses. In calculating a DWLOC, the Agency determines how much of the acceptable exposure (i.e., the PAD) is available for exposure through drinking water e.g., allowable chronic water exposure (mg/kg/day)= cPAD − (average food + residential exposure).  This allowable exposure through drinking water is used to calculate a DWLOC. A DWLOC will vary depending on the toxic endpoint, drinking water consumption, and body weights. Default body weights and consumption values as used by the USEPA Office of Water are used to calculate DWLOCs: 2L/70 kg (adult male), 2L/60 kg (adult female), and 1L/10 kg (child). Default body weights and drinking water consumption values vary on an individual basis. This variation will be taken into account in more refined screening level and quantitative drinking water exposure assessments.  Different populations will have different DWLOCs.  Generally, a DWLOC is calculated for each type of risk assessment used: acute, short-term, intermediate-term, chronic, and cancer. When EECs for surface water and groundwater are less than the calculated DWLOCs, OPP concludes with reasonable certainty that exposures to the pesticide in drinking water (when considered along with other sources of exposure for which OPP has reliable data) would not result in unacceptable levels of aggregate human health risk at this time. Because OPP considers the aggregate risk resulting from multiple exposure pathways associated with a pesticide's uses, levels of comparison in drinking water may vary as those uses change. If new uses are added in the future, OPP will reassess the potential impacts of residues of the pesticide in drinking water as a part of the aggregate risk assessment process. 1. 
                    *Acute risk*. No acute dietary endpoint was identified; therefore, EPA concludes that dimethomorph poses no appreciable acute risk. 2. 
                    *Chronic risk*. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to dimethomorph from food will utilize 3% of the cPAD for the U.S. population, 6 % of the cPAD for infants (
                    <
                    1 year) and 7% of the cPAD for children (16 years).  There are no residential uses for dimethomorph that result in chronic residential exposure to dimethomorph.  The aggregate risk assessment for chronic (non-cancer) exposure to dimethomorph is shown in the following Table 2: **Table 2.—Aggregate Risk Assessment for Chronic (Non-Cancer) Exposure to Dimethomorph**
Population Subgroup
cPAD mg/kg/day
% cPAD (Food)
Surface Water EEC (ppb)
Chronic DWLOC (ppb)U.S. Population
0.1
3
8
3,400All infants (
                            <
                            1 year)
0.1
6
8
940Children 16 years
0.1
7
8
930Children 7-12 years
0.1
3
8
970Females 13-50 years
0.1
2
8
2,900
 3. 
                    *Short-term risk*. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Dimethomorph is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure.  Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water, which do not exceed the Agency's level of concern. 4. 
                    *Intermediate-term risk*. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Dimethomorph is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water, which do not exceed the Agency's level of concern. 5. 
                    *Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population*. Dimethomorph was classified as ``not likely'' to be a human carcinogen. 6. 
                    *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, and to infants and children from aggregate exposure to dimethomorph residues. IV. Other Considerations A.  Analytical Enforcement Methodology Method FAMS 002-04 high performance liquid chromatography using ultra-violet detection (HPLC, UV detection) is adequate for determining residues of dimethomorph in tomatoes, grapes or hops.  Confirmatory methods are available for tomatoes, raisins, and hops.  Cyanamid Method 2577 can be used for tomatoes, FAMS 076-01 can be used for raisins, and FAMS 073-03 can be used for hops. The method may be requested from: Calvin Furlow, PRRIB, IRSD (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (703) 305-5229; e-mail address: furlow.calvin@epa.gov. B. International Residue Limits There are no Canadian, Mexican, or Codex MRLs established for dimethomorph for the commodities associated with this request; consequently, a discussion of international harmonization is not relevant. 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 on dried hops cones at 60 ppm, grapes at 3.5 ppm, raisins at 6.0 ppm, tomato fruit at 0.5 ppm, and tomato paste at 1.0 ppm. 
                    ( print page 58389) VI. 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 of 1996, EPA will continue to use those procedures, with appropriate adjustments, until the necessary modifications can be made.  The new section 408(g) 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), as was provided in the old FFDCA sections 408 and 409. 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 control number OPP-301062 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 November 28, 2000. 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 (1900), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.  You may also deliver your request to the Office of the Hearing Clerk in Rm. C400, Waterside Mall, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.  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 (202) 260-4865. 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 email 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. 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. 3. 
                    *Copies for the Docket*.  In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit VI.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.2. Mail your copies, identified by docket control number OPP-301062, 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.  In person or by courier, bring a copy to the location of the PIRIB described in Unit I.B.2.  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 file format 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). VII.  Regulatory Assessment Requirements This final rule establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition 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).  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 prior consultation as specified by Executive Order 13084, entitled 
                    *Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments*
                     (63 FR 27655, May 19, 1998); special considerations as required by Executive Order 12898, entitled 
                    *Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome Populations*
                     (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or require 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 petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory 
                    ( print page 58390)
                    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 FFDCA section 408(n)(4). VIII.  Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General 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: September 21, 2000. James Jones, 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), (346a) and 371. 2.Section 180.493 is amended by alphabetically adding commodities to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 180.493
  (a) * * * Commodity
Parts per millionGrapes1
3.5Hops, cones, dried1
60*   *   *    *    *Raisins1
6.0Tomatoes, fruit
0.5Tomatoes, paste
1.01
                             There are no U.S. registrations as of August 25, 2000, for the use of dimethomorph on the growing crops, grapes, hops, and raisins.


[FR Doc. 00-25053 Filed 9-28-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S