Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 213 / Monday, November 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 87509 

CTG document No. Title 

Adopted: 

10/14/2020 

Submitted: 

12/29/2020 

SIP approved: 

6/29/2022 

Adopted: 

10/14/2020 

Submitted: 

12/29/2020 

SIP approved: 

11/4/2024 

(A) EPA–450/2–78–029 ..... Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Synthesized 

Pharmaceutical Products.

X 

(B) EPA–453/R–08–003 ..... Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 

Coatings Tables 3–6.

X 

(C) EPA–453/R–08–004 ..... Control Techniques Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials X 

(D) EPA–453/B–16–001) .... Control Techniques Guidelines for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry ........... ............................ X 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2024–25560 Filed 11–1–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0397; FRL–12201–01– 

OCSPP] 

Mefenoxam; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for residues of mefenoxam in 

or on Palm, oil. Syngenta Crop 

Protection, LLC requested these 

tolerances under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

November 4, 2024. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before January 3, 2025, and must 

be filed in accordance with the 

instructions provided in 40 CFR part 

178 (see also Unit I.C. of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0397, is 

available at https://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William 

Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001. The Public Reading Room 

is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room and for the OPP 

Docket is (202) 566–1744. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

at https://www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Smith, Registration Division 

(7505T), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001; main telephone number: 

(202) 566–1030; email address: 

RDFRNotices@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. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of EPA’s tolerance 

regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through 

the Office of the Federal Register’s eCFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/ 

current/title-40. 

C. How can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 

objection to any aspect of this regulation 

and may also request a hearing on those 

objections. You must file your objection 

or request a hearing on this regulation 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, you must 

identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2023–0397 in the subject line on 

the first page of your submission. All 

objections and requests for a hearing 

must be in writing and must be received 

by the Hearing Clerk on or before 

January 3, 2025. Addresses for mail and 

hand delivery of objections and hearing 

requests are provided in 40 CFR 

178.25(b). 

In addition to filing an objection or 

hearing request with the Hearing Clerk 

as described in 40 CFR part 178, please 

submit a copy of the filing (excluding 

any Confidential Business Information 

(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. 

Information not marked confidential 

pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be 

disclosed publicly by EPA without prior 

notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your 

objection or hearing request, identified 

by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2023–0397, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Do not submit electronically 

any information you consider to be CBI 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 

NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at https://

www.epa.gov/dockets/where-sendcomments-epa-dockets. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

II. Summary of Petitioned-For 

Tolerance 

In the Federal Register of September 

12, 2023 (88 FR 62499) (FRL–10579–07– 

OCSPP), EPA issued a document 

pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 

U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing 

of a pesticide petition (PP 3E9048) by 

Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. 

Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419. The 

petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 

be amended by establishing tolerances 

for residues of the fungicide 

mefenoxam, in or on palm oil at 0.02 

parts per million (ppm). That document 

referenced a summary of the petition 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
87510 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 213 / Monday, November 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection, 

LLC., the registrant, which is available 

in the docket, https://

www.regulations.gov. Comments were 

received on the notice of filing. EPA’s 

response to these comments is 

discussed in Unit IV.C. 

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and 

Determination of Safety 

Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of 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 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 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 . . . .’’ 

Consistent with FFDCA section 

408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in 

FFDCA 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 for mefenoxam 

including exposure resulting from the 

tolerances established by this action. 

EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with mefenoxam follows. 

In an effort to streamline its 

publications in the Federal Register, 

EPA is not reprinting sections of the 

rule that repeat what has been 

previously published in tolerance 

rulemakings for the same pesticide 

chemical. Where scientific information 

concerning a particular chemical 

remains unchanged, the content of those 

sections would not vary between 

tolerance rulemakings, and EPA 

considers referral back to those sections 

as sufficient to provide an explanation 

of the information EPA considered in 

making its safety determination for the 

new rulemaking. 

EPA has previously published a 

tolerance rulemaking for mefenoxam in 

which EPA concluded, based on the 

available information, that there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm would 

result from aggregate exposure to 

mefenoxam and established tolerances 

for residues of that chemical. EPA is 

incorporating previously published 

sections from that rulemaking as 

described further in this rule, as they 

remain unchanged. 

A. Toxicological Profile 

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. 

Mefenoxam (metalaxyl-m) is a 

systemic phenylamine fungicide which 

inhibits protein synthesis in fungi. 

Mefenoxam is an R-isomer enriched 

formulation. Metalaxyl is the racemic R/ 

S isomer formulation. The Agency 

compared the available chemistry and 

toxicity data for mefenoxam and 

metalaxyl and concluded that metalaxyl 

data may be used in support of 

mefenoxam regulatory actions because 

the two chemicals have similar toxicity. 

Specific information on the studies 

received and the nature of the adverse 

effects caused by mefenoxam as well as 

the no-observed-adverse-effect-level 

(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the 

toxicity studies are discussed in Unit 

III.A. of the final rule published in the 

Federal Register of December 21, 2018 

(83 FR 65541) (FRL–9985–52). 

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/ 

Levels of Concern 

Once a pesticide’s toxicological 

profile is determined, EPA identifies 

toxicological points of departure (POD) 

and levels of concern to use in 

evaluating the risk posed by human 

exposure to the pesticide. For hazards 

that have a threshold below which there 

is no appreciable risk, the toxicological 

POD is used as the basis for derivation 

of reference values for risk assessment. 

PODs are developed based on a careful 

analysis of the doses in each 

toxicological study to determine the 

dose at which the NOAEL and the 

LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are 

used in conjunction with the POD to 

calculate a safe exposure level— 

generally referred to as a populationadjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose 

(RfD)—and a safe margin of exposure 

(MOE). For non-threshold risks, the 

Agency assumes that any amount of 

exposure will lead to some degree of 

risk. Thus, the Agency estimates risk in 

terms of the probability of an occurrence 

of the adverse effect expected in a 

lifetime. For more information on the 

general principles EPA uses in risk 

characterization and a complete 

description of the risk assessment 

process, see https://www.epa.gov/ 

pesticide-science-and-assessingpesticide-risks/assessing-human-healthrisk-pesticides. 

A summary of the toxicological 

endpoints for mefenoxam used for 

human risk assessment is discussed in 

Unit III.B. of the final rule published in 

the Federal Register of December 21, 

2018 (83 FR 65541) (FRL–9985–52). 

C. Exposure Assessment 

Much of the exposure assessment 

remains the same although updates have 

occurred to accommodate exposures 

from petitioned-for tolerances. These 

updates are discussed in this section; for 

a description of the rest of the EPA 

approach to and assumptions for the 

exposure assessment, please reference 

Unit III.C. of the December 2018, 

rulemaking. 

1. Dietary exposure from food and 

feed uses. EPA’s dietary exposure 

assessments have been updated to 

include the additional exposure from 

the petitioned-for tolerances of 

mefenoxam on the crops requested in 

this action. In evaluating dietary 

exposure to mefenoxam, EPA 

considered exposure under the 

petitioned-for tolerances as well as all 

existing mefenoxam and metalaxyl 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.546 and 

180.408, respectively. 

i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute 

dietary exposure and 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 1-day or single 

exposure. The acute dietary assessment 

is based on tolerance levels adjusted to 

account for all of the residues of 

concern and assumes 100 percent crop 

treated (PCT). The assessment was 

conducted using the Dietary Exposure 

Evaluation Model software with the 

Food Commodity Intake Database 

(DEEM–FCID) Version 4.02, EPA with 

2005–2010 food consumption 

information from the United States 

Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) 

National Health and Nutrition 

Examination Survey, What We Eat in 

America, (NHANES/WWEIA). Empirical 

processing factors were included where 

available. Otherwise, DEEM–FCID 

default processing factors were used. 

ii. Chronic exposure. There is no 

increase in hazard from repeat 

exposures to mefenoxam. Therefore, a 

chronic dietary POD was not selected. 

The acute endpoint and acute dietary 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 213 / Monday, November 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 87511 

exposure assessment are protective of 

potential effects from chronic duration 

dietary exposures. 

iii. Cancer. EPA has concluded that 

mefenoxam does not pose a cancer risk 

to humans based on no evidence of 

carcinogenicity observed in the relevant 

studies. Therefore, a dietary exposure 

assessment for the purpose of assessing 

cancer risk is unnecessary. 

2. Dietary exposure from drinking 

water. Drinking water exposure 

modeling for mefenoxam is not 

necessary because exposure estimates 

for metalaxyl are expected to exceed 

those for mefenoxam and are therefore 

protective. Maximum annual 

application rates for metalaxyl, up to 

12.3 lb ai/A, were modeled. These rates 

are approximately twice those of 

mefenoxam. The maximum estimated 

drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) 

based on metalaxyl are 350 mg/L for 

acute exposure (which is based on 

surface water sources) and 135 mg/L for 

chronic exposure (which is based on 

groundwater sources). 

3. From non-dietary exposure. The 

term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in 

this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure 

(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, 

indoor pest control, termiticides, and 

flea and tick control on pets). There are 

no residential uses for mefenoxam being 

proposed as part of this action or that 

have been added since the most recent 

risk assessment that would impact the 

residential (non-occupational) or 

residential post-application exposure 

and risk estimates found in the most 

recent risk assessment of mefenoxam; 

therefore, EPA relied on the previously 

assessed residential exposure for 

assessing aggregate risk. 

4. Cumulative effects from substances 

with a common mechanism of toxicity. 

Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA 

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.’’ 

Unlike other pesticides for which EPA 

has followed a cumulative risk approach 

based on a common mechanism of 

toxicity, EPA has not made a common 

mechanism of toxicity finding as to 

mefenoxam and metalaxyl with any 

other substances and mefenoxam and 

metalaxyl do not appear to produce a 

toxic metabolite produced by other 

substances. For the purposes of this 

action, therefore, EPA has not assumed 

that mefenoxam and metalaxyl have 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 EPA’s website at https:// 

www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-risk-pesticides. 

D. Safety Factor for Infants and 

Children 

1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of 

FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply 

an additional tenfold (10X) 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 database on toxicity 

and exposure unless EPA determines 

based on reliable data that a different 

margin of safety will be safe for infants 

and children. This additional margin of 

safety is commonly referred to as the 

Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) 

Safety Factor (SF). In applying this 

provision, EPA either retains the default 

value of 10X, or uses a different 

additional safety factor when reliable 

data available to EPA support the choice 

of a different factor. 

EPA continues to conclude that there 

are reliable data to support the 

reduction of the (FQPA) (SF) to 1X. See 

Unit III.D. of the December 2018, 

rulemaking for a discussion of the 

Agency’s rationale for that 

determination. 

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of 

Safety 

EPA determines whether acute and 

chronic dietary pesticide exposures are 

safe by comparing dietary exposure 

estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and 

chronic PAD (cPAD). Short-, 

intermediate-, and chronic-term 

aggregate risks are evaluated by 

comparing the estimated total food, 

water, and residential exposure to the 

appropriate PODs to ensure that an 

adequate MOE exists. 

1. Acute risk. The acute aggregate risk 

assessment takes into account acute 

exposure estimates from dietary 

consumption of food and drinking 

water. Using the exposure assumptions 

discussed in this unit for acute 

exposure, the acute dietary exposure 

from food and water is 27% of the acute 

population-adjusted dose (aPAD) for the 

general U.S. population, and 55% of the 

aPAD for the highest exposed 

population group, all infants. Because 

there are no acute residential exposures 

from mefenoxam, the acute aggregate 

exposure and risk is equal to the acute 

dietary exposure and risk. As these 

levels are below the Agency’s level of 

concern (LOC) of 100% of the aPAD, the 

Agency concludes that aggregate 

exposure to mefenoxam will not pose an 

acute risk. 

2. Chronic risk. No hazard endpoint 

was selected for chronic dietary 

exposure for mefenoxam; therefore, a 

chronic dietary analysis was not 

warranted. However, chronic dietary 

exposure was estimated for inclusion in 

the short-term aggregate analysis. 

3. Short-term risk. Short-term 

aggregate exposure takes into account 

short-term residential exposure plus 

average chronic exposure to food and 

water (considered to be a background 

exposure level). Mefenoxam is currently 

registered for uses that could result in 

short-term residential exposure, and the 

Agency has determined that it is 

appropriate to aggregate chronic 

exposure through food and water with 

short-term residential exposures to 

mefenoxam. 

Using the exposure assumptions 

described in this unit for short-term 

exposures, EPA has concluded the 

combined short-term food, water, and 

residential exposures result in aggregate 

MOEs of 270 for children 1 to 2 years 

old, the most highly exposed group. 

Because EPA’s level of concern for 

mefenoxam is 100, which means any 

MOE below 100 may indicate risks of 

concern, this MOE is not of concern. 

4. Intermediate-term risk. There are 

no intermediate-term residential 

exposures for mefenoxam, and therefore 

an intermediate-term aggregate exposure 

assessment was not warranted. 

5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. 

population. Mefenoxam is classified as 

‘‘not likely to be carcinogenic to 

humans’’, therefore, EPA concludes that 

exposure to mefenoxam will not pose an 

aggregate cancer risk. 

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, or to infants and children 

from aggregate exposure to mefenoxam 

residues. 

More detailed information on this 

action can be found in the document 

titled ‘‘Metalaxyl-M (Mefenoxam)’’. 

Human Health Risk Assessment for 

Establishment of a Tolerance without 

U.S. Registration for use on Palm Oil.’’ 

in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2023–0397. 

IV. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

For a discussion of the available 

enforcement analytical methods, see 

Unit IV.A. of the December 21, 2018, 

rulemaking. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
87512 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 213 / Monday, November 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

B. International Residue Limits 

In making its tolerance decisions, EPA 

seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with 

international standards whenever 

possible, consistent with U.S. food 

safety standards and agricultural 

practices. EPA considers the 

international maximum residue limits 

(MRLs) established by the Codex 

Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as 

required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). 

The Codex Alimentarius is a joint 

United Nations Food and Agriculture 

Organization/World Health 

Organization food standards program, 

and it is recognized as an international 

food safety standards-setting 

organization in trade agreements to 

which the United States is a party. EPA 

may establish a tolerance that is 

different from a Codex MRL; however, 

FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that 

EPA explain the reasons for departing 

from the Codex level. Tolerances/ 

maximum residue limits (MRLs) to 

support uses of mefenoxam in Canada 

are established for residues of 

metalaxyl, including metabolites that 

can be converted to the 2,6–DMA 

moiety, each expressed as metalaxyl 

equivalents. However, no MRLs are 

established for palm fruit in Codex and 

Canada; thus, harmonization is not an 

issue for this commodity. 

C. Response to Comments 

Three comments were received in 

response to the notice of filing. One 

comment was received from an 

anonymous commenter applauding the 

government’s process to petition for 

new uses. The other two comments 

were criticizing chemicals that are not 

relevant to this action. 

V. Conclusion 

Therefore, tolerances are established 

for residues of mefenoxam [methyl N- 

(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N- 

(methoxyacetyl)-D-alaninate], in or on 

palm, oil at 0.02 ppm. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action establishes tolerances 

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). Because this action 

has been exempted from review under 

Executive Order 12866, this action 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 action 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 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 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.), do not apply. 

This action 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 FFDCA 

section 408(n)(4). 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 action. In addition, this action 

does not impose any enforceable duty or 

contain any unfunded mandate as 

described under title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 

1501 et seq.). 

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 

(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

VII. Congressional Review Act 

Pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 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 the rule in the Federal 

Register. This action 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: October 23, 2024. 

Charles Smith, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the 

preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR 

chapter I as follows: 

PART 180—TOLERANCES AND 

EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE 

CHEMICAL RESIDUES IN FOOD 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. In § 180.546, amend table 1 to 

paragraph (a) by adding, in alphabetical 

order, an entry for ‘‘Palm, oil’’ to read 

as follows: 

§ 180.546 Mefenoxam; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a) 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Palm, oil 1 .................................... 0.02 

* * * * * 

1There is no U.S. registration as of November 4, 2024. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2024–25564 Filed 11–1–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R04–RCRA–2024–0116; FRL–11972– 

04–R4] 

North Carolina: Final Authorization of 

State Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final action. 

SUMMARY: On June 26, 2023, North 

Carolina submitted to the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1