[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 11, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2842-2848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-586]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 170

[OPP-250101; FRL-4930-4]


Exceptions to Worker Protection Standard Early Entry 
Restrictions; Limited Contact Activities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed exceptions to rule; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing an exception to the Worker Protection 
Standard for Agricultural Pesticides (WPS), that would allow, under 
specified conditions, workers to perform early entry limited contact 
tasks for up to 3 hours per day during a restricted entry interval 
(REI). Early entry is entry into a pesticide-treated area before the 
expiration of the REI.
DATES: Comments, data, or evidence should be submitted on or before 
February 27, 1995. EPA does not intend to extend this comment period.

ADDRESSES: Comments identified by the document control number OPP- 
250101 should be submitted in triplicate by mail 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. All written comments filed pursuant to this 
notice will be available for public inspection in Room 1132, Crystal 
Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA, (703) 305-5805, 
from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday thru Friday except legal holidays.
    Comments and data may also be submitted electronically by any of 
three different mechanisms: by sending electronic mail (e-mail) to: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a5e1cac6cec0d188eaf5f5f1f6e5c0d5c4c8c4ccc98bc0d5c48bc2cad3">[email protected]</a>; by sending a ``Subscribe'' message to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eb8782989f988e999d8e99ab9e858293868a8287c5999f9b8588c58e9b8ac58c849d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="224e4b515651475054475062574c4b5a4f434b4e0c5056524c410c4752430c454d54">[email protected]</span></a> and once subscribed, send your 
comments to RIN-2070-AC69; or through the EPA Electronic Bulletin Board 
by dialing 202-488-3671, enter selection ``DMAIL,'' user name ``BB--
USER'' or 919-541-4642, enter selection ``MAIL,'' user name ``BB--
USER.'' Comments and data will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 
in 5.1 file format or ASCII file format. Electronic comments must be 
submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and 
any form of encryption. All comments and data in electronic form must 
be identified by the docket number OPP-250101 since all five documents 
in this separate part provide the same electronic address. No CBI 
should be submitted through e-mail. Electronic comments on this 
proposed rule, but not the record, may be viewed or new comments filed 
online at many Federal Depository Libraries. Additional information on 
electronic submissions can be found in unit VI. of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathy Kronopolus, Certification, 
Training and Occupational Safety Branch (7506C), Environmental 
Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460, (703) 305-
7371.

[[Page 2843]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 I. Background

    Section 170.112(e) of the Worker Protection Standard for 
Agricultural Pesticides (WPS) (40 CFR part 170), published at 57 FR 
38102 (August 21, 1992), provides the procedure for considering 
exceptions to the WPS provision that limits early entry during a 
restricted entry interval (REI) to perform agricultural tasks. EPA has 
received a request for exception to the early entry limitations for 
performing limited contact tasks from the National Association of State 
Departments of Agriculture (NASDA). EPA is considering a national 
exception to the WPS early entry restrictions for performing limited 
contact tasks. The purpose of this Notice is to solicit further 
information and comment to assist EPA in determining whether the 
conditions of entry under the proposed exception would pose 
unreasonable risks to workers performing the permitted limited contact 
tasks during a restricted entry interval. In addition, EPA solicits 
further information about the economic impact of granting or not 
granting the proposed exception.
    This proposed WPS rule amendment is one of a series of Agency 
actions in response to concerns raised since publication of the final 
rule in August 1992 by those interested in and affected by the rule. In 
addition to this proposed amendment, EPA is publishing four other 
notices soliciting public comment on concerns raised by various 
affected parties. Other actions EPA is considering include: (1) 
modification to the worker training requirements; (2) exceptions to 
early entry restrictions for irrigation activities; (3) reduced 
restricted entry intervals (REIs) for low risk pesticides; and (4) 
requirements for crop advisors. The Agency is interested in receiving 
comments on all options and questions presented.

A. Worker Protection Standard

    The Worker Protection Standard (WPS) promulgated at 57 FR 38102, 
August 21, 1992, is intended to reduce the risk of pesticide exposure 
and related poisonings and injuries among agricultural workers and 
pesticide handlers. The WPS includes provisions to: (1) eliminate or 
reduce exposure to pesticides; (2) mitigate exposures that occur; and 
(3) inform employees about the hazards of pesticides. Provisions to 
reduce exposure include application restrictions, use of personal 
protective equipment (PPE), and entry restrictions.

B. Entry Restrictions

    Agricultural workers, in general, are prohibited from entering a 
pesticide-treated area during the restricted entry interval (REI) 
specified on the product labeling. REIs are the time period after the 
end of the pesticide application during which entry into the pesticide 
treated area is restricted. In the absence of pesticide-specific REIs, 
the WPS establishes a range of interim REIs, from 12 to 72 hours, 
depending upon the toxicity of the active ingredient(s) and other 
factors.

C. Exceptions to Entry Restrictions

    The WPS contains exceptions to the general prohibitions against 
workers entering a pesticide-treated area during the REI. The exception 
provisions of Sec. 170.112 permit entry into the treated area during 
the REI (i.e. early entry) under specified conditions to perform tasks 
that result in contact with treated surfaces:
    (1) Short term tasks. Section 170.112(c) permits exceptions to the 
general prohibition on work in treated areas during REIs for short-term 
tasks, with adequate PPE, decontamination, and exposure time limits.
    (2) Agricultural emergencies. Section 170.112(d) permits exceptions 
to the prohibition against entry into treated areas during REIs for 
agricultural emergencies. The WPS permits early entry by workers to 
perform tasks while wearing early-entry PPE, and without time limits, 
in response to an agricultural emergency.
    (3) EPA-approved exception. Section 170.112(e) permits exceptions 
to the prohibition on work in treated areas during REIs when EPA has 
approved a special exception. Case-by-case exceptions may be granted if 
affected persons or organizations persuade EPA that the benefits of the 
exception outweigh the risks associated with the exception.
    In addition, Sec. 170.112(b) establishes an exception for 
activities where no contact with treated surfaces will occur. Under 
this provision, often referred to as 'no contact' entry, workers are 
allowed unlimited entry into pesticide-treated areas before the 
expiration of the REI without personal protective equipment when no 
contact with pesticide residues on treated surfaces or in soil, water, 
or air will occur.

II. Request for Exception and Supporting Evidence

    In a July 8, 1994 petition for rulemaking, NASDA requested that EPA 
reduce WPS requirements for low contact work during the REI. In 
particular, NASDA asked for limited PPE for low contact activities, 
consisting of coveralls, chemical-resistant gloves, and footwear, and a 
``somewhat longer period than the one-hour in twenty-four hour period 
currently allowed by the exception for short-term activities.''
    In a subsequent meeting with EPA on low contact activities, NASDA 
suggested defining low contact as follows:
    Low contact means a task related to the production of 
agricultural plants that results in minimal body exposure. Personal 
protective equipment cannot be used to achieve low contact status 
for purposes of this definition, but rather the level of contact 
must be inherent in the nature of the task performed. The task must 
also meet one of the following:
    (1) Results in only incidental worker body contact with treated 
surfaces due to the stage of growth (seedlings) or nature of the 
crop (size of plants), the way the task is performed (use of long 
handled tools or operator placement on equipment), or the way the 
pesticide was applied (soil incorporated).
    (2) Is a very short-term task, involving worker body contact 
with treated surfaces that are of only a few minutes' duration and 
which occur at widely separated intervals.


    This proposed definition was developed with the help of the 
American Association of Pesticide Control Officials (AAPCO).
    NASDA also provided EPA with lists of tasks that they assert could 
require entry into treated areas during an REI, and proposed that 
allowance for the accomplishment of these tasks be covered under any 
definition of 'low contact'. The lists of proposed low or limited 
contact activities were provided to NASDA by state pesticide regulatory 
agencies. In reviewing the lists of tasks, EPA found: (1) many of the 
tasks may already be allowed under the exception for activities with no 
contact set out in Sec. 170.112(b), (2) other tasks were identified as 
clearly hand labor tasks or handler tasks that could result in 
substantial contact with pesticide treated surfaces, (3) many tasks 
were irrigation-related activities, which EPA is addressing in a 
separate exception proposal, and (4) some were non-hand labor tasks 
that could, in some circumstances, be accomplished with minimal contact 
with pesticide residues on treated plants, soil, and other surfaces, 
depending on how the task was performed.

III. EPA's Exception Proposal

 A. Background

    NASDA's membership includes state Departments of Agriculture, the 
state agencies that, in most instances, are responsible for enforcing 
the WPS. EPA

[[Page 2844]]

has seriously considered NASDA's request and acknowledges that there 
may be certain non-hand labor tasks that may be necessary while a 
treated area remains under an REI, such that the benefits resulting 
from the performance of these tasks outweigh the risks associated with 
the tasks as long as the workers can perform the early entry tasks with 
minimal contact. While the WPS does provide in Sec. 170.112 for 
exceptions for short-term tasks and 'no contact' tasks, EPA recognizes 
that there may be non-hand labor tasks that may not be able to be 
performed under the time limitations of the short-term (1 hour) 
exception, or may not completely fit under the provisions of the no 
contact or agricultural emergency exceptions.

B. Discussion of EPA's proposal

    EPA proposes an exception that would allow workers to perform 
limited contact tasks for up to 3 hours during the REI if: (1) the 
tasks must be performed during the REI, (2) the inhalation exposure 
level or ventilation criteria have been met (3) the tasks result in 
minimal contact with treated surfaces, (4) contact with pesticides is 
limited to forearms, hands, lower legs, and feet, and (5) the specified 
PPE requirements are met.
    There may be non-hand labor tasks that must be performed during the 
REI that are necessary for crop production. Examples of possible 
limited contact tasks include: (1) the operation and repair of weather 
monitoring equipment, and frost protection equipment, (2) repair of 
greenhouse heating, air conditioning, and ventilation equipment (3) 
repair of non-application field equipment, and (4) maintaining and 
moving beehives.
    The following scenarios provide examples of limited contact tasks:
    (1) The information collected from weather monitoring equipment is 
often critical for the successful implementation of integrated pest 
management and agricultural production (e.g., rainfall amounts, degree 
days). Weather information is used to schedule pesticide and irrigation 
applications, and it may be necessary to enter the treated area during 
an REI to collect the information. Weather equipment may be stationed 
in more than one location around a large treated area, and it may take 
longer than 1 hour for the worker to walk to each site to complete the 
information collection. The worker must walk through the treated area, 
but all of the treated plants are well below knee-height and/or are 
sufficiently spaced apart so that the task may be accomplished in a 
manner that results in minimal contact with treated surfaces, and such 
contact is only to lower arms, hands, lower legs, and feet.
    (2) On occasion, unanticipated repairs must be made to non-
application field equipment while in the treated area during an REI. 
The immediate repair of the non-application field equipment is 
necessary and important to crop production. The nature of the 
breakdown, and/or the size of the equipment may hinder the removal of 
the equipment from the treated field for repair, and the repair may not 
be able to be completed within an hour.
    The proposed exception specifically excludes pesticides whose 
labeling requires ``double notification'', i.e., the labeling requires 
both the posting of treated areas and oral notification to workers. EPA 
requires double notification for a pesticide when exposure -- for 
example, contact with treated surfaces -- has the potential to cause 
acute illness or injury. For pesticides that contain double 
notification requirements on their labeling, the short-term (1 hour per 
worker per day) exception at 40 CFR 170.112(c) and PPE requirements 
would still apply. For the convenience of commenters, the following 
Appendix A lists the active ingredients subject to WPS that may be 
subject to the double notification requirement.

Appendix A

Worker Protection Standard ``Double Notification'' Active Ingredient 
List

    Please note that Appendix A (From PR Notice 93-7, Appendix 3-A) is 
incomplete in several respects: first, it does not contain the active 
ingredients in products already bearing mandatory posting requirements 
prior to adoption of the WPS and that must be retained under WPS; 
second, it may contain a few active ingredients that will be found to 
not require double notification upon further EPA review (such as 
reregistration), and third, active ingredients requiring double 
notification may be added during reregistration or other Agency action. 
Nonetheless, EPA believes that this list contains the bulk of the 
active ingredients subject to double notification. These listed 
pesticides contain an active ingredient categorized as highly toxic 
when absorbed through the skin (acute dermal toxicity), or as highly 
irritating (corrosive) when it contacts the skin, or otherwise is 
considered by EPA as high risk to workers. In addition, the exception 
excludes pesticides whose labels prohibit any person from entering 
during the REI. In other words, the label does not allow the use of the 
exceptions set out in Sec. 170.112.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            CHEMICAL                    
               COMMON NAME                    CODE         CAS NUMBER   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
aldicarb................................       098301           116-06-3
                                                                        
aldoxycarb..............................       110801          1646-88-4
                                                                        
arsenic acid............................       006801          7778-39-4
                                                                        
arsenic trioxide........................       007001          1327-53-3
                                                                        
carbofuran..............................       090601          1563-66-2
                                                                        
chlorflurenol...........................       098801          2536-31-4
                                                                        
chloropicrin............................       081501            76-06-2
                                                                        
cuprous oxide...........................       025601          1317-39-1
                                                                        
disulfoton..............................       032501           298-04-4
                                                                        
dodine..................................       044301          2439-10-3
                                                                        
endothall, dimethylcocoamine............       038905                   
                                                                        
endothall, disodium salt................       038903           129-67-9
                                                                        
ethephon................................       099801         16672-87-0
                                                                        

[[Page 2845]]

                                                                        
ethoprop................................       041101         13194-48-4
                                                                        
fonofos.................................       041701           944-22-9
                                                                        
(s)-(+)-lactic acid.....................       128929            79-33-4
                                                                        
metam-sodium............................       039003           137-42-8
                                                                        
methamidophos...........................       101201         10265-92-6
                                                                        
methyl bromide..........................       053201            74-83-9
                                                                        
methyl parathion........................       053501           298-00-0
                                                                        
mevinphos...............................       015801          7786-34-7
                                                                        
nicotine................................       056702            54-11-5
                                                                        
paraquat................................       061601          1910-42-5
                                                                        
parathion...............................       057501            56-38-2
                                                                        
phorate.................................       057201           298-02-2
                                                                        
profenofos..............................       111401         41198-08-7
                                                                        
propargite..............................       097601          2312-35-8
                                                                        
sabadilla alkaloids.....................       002201          8051-02-3
                                                                        
sulfotepp...............................       079501          3689-24-5
                                                                        
sulfuric acid...........................       078001          7664-93-9
                                                                        
sulprofos...............................       111501         35400-43-2
                                                                        
tefluthrin..............................       128912         79538-32-2
                                                                        
terbufos................................       105001         13071-79-9
                                                                        
TPTH....................................       083601            76-87-9
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    EPA is proposing to establish a reduced set of PPE for limited 
contact tasks, although the worker may wear the PPE specified on the 
label even if the early entry PPE specified on the label is less 
restrictive than the reduced set. Based on the limitations in the 
exception, EPA expects that contact will not be significant and a 
reduced set of PPE will be adequate.
    EPA is proposing to limit the exception to 24 months (2 years), and 
to review and revise the terms of the exception as appropriate based 
upon experience during that 2 years.

C. Proposed Terms of Exception

    EPA is proposing an exception to the early entry restriction for 
limited contact tasks, and is considering the following definition for 
'limited contact task':
    ``For the purposes of this exception, the term 'limited contact 
task' means a non-hand labor task that is performed by workers that 
results in minimal contact with treated surfaces (including but not 
limited to soil, water, air, surfaces of plants, and equipment), and 
where such contact with treated surfaces is limited to the forearms, 
hands, lower legs, and feet.''
    Under the proposed exception, a worker may enter a treated area 
during a restricted entry interval to perform a limited contact task if 
the agricultural employer ensures that the following requirements are 
met:
    (1) The pesticide product does not have a statement in the 
pesticide product labeling requiring both the posting of treated areas 
and oral notification to workers (``double notification''), or a 
restriction prohibiting any person, other than an appropriately trained 
and equipped handler, from entering during the restricted entry 
interval.
    (2) No hand labor activity is performed.
    (3) The time in a treated area under a restricted entry interval 
for any worker does not exceed 3 hours in any 24 hour period.
    (4) The personal protective equipment for early entry must be 
provided to the worker by the agricultural employer for all tasks. Such 
personal protective equipment shall either: (a) conform with the label 
requirements for early entry PPE; or (b) consist of coveralls, chemical 
resistant gloves, socks, and chemical resistant footwear. In either 
case, the PPE must conform to the standards set out in 
Sec. 170.112(c)(4)(i) through (x).
    (5) Workers are notified verbally, before such workers enter a 
treated area, that the establishment is relying on this exception to 
allow workers to enter treated areas to perform limited contact tasks.
    (6) The task cannot be delayed until after the expiration of the 
restricted entry interval, or the pesticide application could not be 
delayed until the task was completed.
    (7) For all limited contact tasks, the requirements of 
Sec. 170.112(c)(3) -(9) are met. These are WPS requirements for all 
early entry situations that involve contact with treated surfaces, and 
include (a) a prohibition against entry during the first 4 hours, and 
until applicable ventilation criteria have been met, and until any 
label specified inhalation exposure level has been reached, (b) 
informing workers of safety information on the product labeling, (c) 
provision, proper management, and care of personal protective 
equipment, (d) heat-related illness prevention, (e) requirements for 
decontamination facilities, and (f) prohibition on taking personal 
protective equipment home.

IV. Options Considered

    EPA considered including hand labor tasks in this exception, but 
determined that hand labor tasks could not be performed with limited 
contact. The WPS defines hand labor as any agricultural activity 
performed by hand or with hand tools that causes a worker to have 
substantial contact with surfaces (such as plants, plant parts, or 
soil) that may contain pesticide residues. These activities include, 
but are not limited to,

[[Page 2846]]

harvesting, detasseling, thinning, weeding, topping, planting, sucker 
removal, pruning, disbudding, roguing, and packing produce into 
containers in the field. Hand labor does not include operating, moving, 
or repairing irrigation or watering equipment or performing the tasks 
of crop advisors. Hand labor tasks involve substantial contact and are 
by nature high exposure scenarios and potentially high risk.
    EPA considered eliminating the PPE requirement for coveralls, but 
has several concerns about eliminating this requirement. Under 
Sec. 170.112(c), early entry workers are required to remove PPE before 
going home and may not take it home. If only long sleeved shirts and 
long pants are worn, it may not be possible for workers to remove their 
work clothes when they leave the treated area, enter their vehicles, 
and return home. This could result in contamination of the vehicles 
from their clothing, causing an increased exposure risk to potentially 
toxic pesticide residues for all vehicle occupants. Additionally, EPA 
believes that coveralls will assure greater risk reduction for workers 
since the WPS requires agricultural employers to assure proper 
handling, care and maintenance of these items. There is no such 
requirement for personal clothing.
    EPA considered requiring that protective eyewear be included in the 
minimum PPE requirement if required on the product labeling for early 
entry because of concern about workers rubbing or wiping residues into 
their eyes from hands, gloves, or sleeves. EPA decided not to propose a 
requirement for eyewear as part of the minimal set at this time because 
the performance of limited contact tasks should result in minimal 
worker contact with treated surfaces.
    EPA considered eliminating PPE requirements for tasks that must be 
performed when unanticipated repairs of non-application field equipment 
arise, but rejected this option because EPA believes that in some 
instances equipment repair could result in significant exposure. 
Unanticipated equipment repairs would be expected to occur 
infrequently, and some repairs may be able to be performed with almost 
no contact to treated surfaces. EPA continues to be concerned that some 
PPE is needed to provide adequate protection for all worker activities 
given the range and nature of equipment repair tasks and the potential 
for even limited exposure to highly toxic pesticides.

V. Comments Solicited

    EPA is interested in a full range of comments and information on 
the proposed exception and on the exception options presented, and is 
providing 45 days for the submission of comments.
    1. Need for an exception. EPA solicits comment on whether early 
entry for limited contact activities is necessary. Specifically, EPA 
requests comments on why specific limited contact tasks could not 
normally be delayed until the expiration of the REI, or why the 
application could not be delayed until the tasks are completed. EPA 
requests comments on why alternative practices would not be technically 
or financially viable (such as placing beehives and weather monitoring 
stations outside areas normally treated with pesticides). EPA also 
requests comments on the economic impacts on agricultural employers if 
they cannot enter the treated area during the REI for limited contact 
activities. Commenters should be task specific in their response.
    EPA requests information on the expected costs in terms of 
decreased yield, grade or quality or other economic cost as a result of 
being unable to perform some tasks during an REI. In addition, EPA 
requests information on the frequency of tasks that must be done during 
an REI and the amount of time required to complete those tasks per 
occurrence and per agricultural establishment for a typical growing 
season.
    2. Definition of ``limited contact''. EPA requests specific 
comments on the proposed definition of 'limited contact tasks'. EPA is 
particularly concerned about defining limited contact activities in a 
way that may inadvertently result in unnecessary routine early entry, 
which may increase risk to workers. Does the proposed definition 
encompass tasks or activities that are inherently high risk? Are there 
non-hand labor activities that should be covered by the exception but 
do not fall under the definition as proposed? EPA also requests 
information on whether worker exposures for the tasks that fall within 
the proposed exception could reasonably be limited to lower legs and 
feet, hands and forearms, or if greater exposure would result due to 
the nature of the activity.
    EPA also solicits comments on whether there are hand labor tasks 
that must be done during the REI, and whether these tasks can be 
accomplished without subjecting workers to substantial contact.
    3. Safety and feasibility factors. EPA requests information on the 
safety and feasibility of a limited contact exception. Information 
should include, at minimum, the feasibility of performing the limited 
contact activity while wearing PPE; means of mitigating heat stress 
concerns; the cumulative amount of time required, per worker, per day 
for necessary limited contact activities; any suggested methods of 
reducing the worker's exposure for a given task; and any other 
alternative practices, such as mechanical devices that reduce workers' 
exposure to treated surfaces. The information should describe the costs 
(time and materials) of providing the protective measures in the terms 
of the proposed exception.
    4. Duration of exposure. Because exposure is determined both by the 
amount and the duration of contact with pesticides, EPA proposes to 
limit the total amount of time in treated areas to perform limited 
contact tasks to 3 hours per worker per day. EPA believes most limited 
contact activities can be completed in significantly less than 3 hours, 
but certain circumstances may exist that would necessitate more than 3 
cumulative hours of early entry. EPA requests comment on whether 3 
hours is adequate, or if some amount of time less than 3 hours would be 
sufficient.
    5. Exclusion of ``double notification''. EPA requests comments on 
the exclusion of double notification pesticides from this proposed 
exception. What impact, if any, on agricultural growers might result if 
double notification pesticides were to be excluded from the limited 
contact exception? Will the exclusion of double notification pesticides 
from the exception sufficiently reduce risk to workers? EPA also 
requests information on pesticide-related worker injuries or illnesses 
as a result of performing the types of tasks that would fall under this 
proposed limited contact exception.
    6. PPE requirements. EPA solicits comments on the risks and 
benefits for the PPE options under a limited contact exception. Is PPE 
feasible for workers performing limited contact tasks, and to what 
extent is PPE necessary to reduce worker risk for different tasks?
    EPA specifically requests information on whether protective eyewear 
should be included in the minimum PPE requirement if required on the 
product labeling for early entry because of concern about workers 
rubbing or wiping residues into their eyes from hands, gloves, or 
sleeves.
    EPA is interested in any information concerning whether there are 
certain limited contact tasks (such as repair of non-application 
equipment and frost protection tasks) and early entry situations (such 
as entry into fields that

[[Page 2847]]

have been treated with toxicity category IV pesticides) that may not 
require the use of PPE, or may allow the use of a reduced set of PPE ( 
e.g., only waterproof gloves and chemical resistant boots).
    7. Duration of exception. EPA requests comments on whether the 
proposed 24 month (2-year) limit is appropriate for this exception, or 
why a longer or shorter period may be more practical.

VI. Public Docket and Electronic Comments

    A record has been established for this rulemaking under docket 
number ``OPP-250101'' (including comments and data submitted 
electronically as described below). A public version of this record, 
including printed, paper versions of electronic comments, which does 
not include any information claimed as confidential business 
information (CBI), is available for inspection from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The public record is 
located in Room1132 of the Public Response and Program Resources 
Branch, Field Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide 
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis 
Highway, Arlington, VA. Written comments should be mailed 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.
    EPA is interested in a full range of comments and information on 
these proposed revisions and particularly welcomes comments supported 
by data. Comments are requested on: (1) general worker and handler 
hiring and employment practices, such as the rate of turnover and 
employment among agricultural workers and handlers, (2) the 
practicality and effectiveness of the proposed elimination of the grace 
period, including how the frequency of hiring would affect the 
frequency of training sessions, situations where training before entry 
would not be possible, mechanisms that are available or will be 
available to provide training on short notice and the estimated costs 
of reducing or eliminating the grace period or providing a weekly 
training regimen, (3) the proposal to eliminate the phase-in period for 
the training grace period and (4) the retraining interval, including 
the impacts of a retraining interval of less than 5 years, worker and 
handler retention of safety training information over time, whether 
agricultural workers and handlers have a greater need for retraining 
than workers in other occupations, the effectiveness of the pesticide 
poster in reinforcing previous training and the burdens the various 
retraining options might place on agricultural employers or other 
entities that may perform worker or handler training. Comments should 
be distinguished as applying to workers, handlers, or both, as 
applicable.
    As part of an interagency ``streamlining'' initiative, EPA is 
experimenting with submission of public comments on selected Federal 
Register actions electronically through the Internet in addition to 
accepting comments in traditional written form. This Notice is one of 
the actions selected by EPA for this experiment. From the experiment, 
EPA will learn how electronic commenting works, and any problems that 
arise can be addressed before EPA adopts electronic commenting more 
broadly in its rulemaking activities. Electronic commenting through 
posting to the EPA Bulletin Board or through the Internet using the 
ListServe function raise some novel issues that are discussed below in 
this Unit.
    To submit electronic comments, persons can either ``subscribe'' to 
the Internet ListServe application or ``post'' comments to the EPA 
Bulletin Board. To ``Subscribe'' to the Internet ListServe application 
for this Notice, send an e-mail message to: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ed81849e999e889f9b889fad98838495808c8481c39f999d838ec3889d8cc38a829b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f09c998384839582869582b0859e99889d91999cde8284809e93de958091de979f86">[email protected]</span></a> that says ``Subscribe RIN-2070-AC69 
<first name> <last name>.'' Once you are subscribed to the ListServe, 
comments should be sent to: RIN-2070-AC<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#57616e1722393e2f3a363e3b7925232739347932273679303821"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a7919ee7d2c9cedfcac6cecb89d5d3d7c9c489c2d7c689c0c8d1">[email protected]</span></a>. 
Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use 
of special characters and any form of encryption. All comments and data 
in electronic form should be identified by the docket number OPP-250101 
since all five documents in this separate part provide the same 
electronic address.
    For online viewing of submissions and posting of comments, the 
public access EPA Bulletin Board is also available by dialing 202-488-
3671, enter selection ``DMAIL,'' user name ``BB--USER'' or 919-541-
4642, enter selection ``MAIL,'' user name ``BB--USER.'' When dialing 
the EPA Bulletin Board type <Return> at the opening message. When the 
``Notes'' prompt appears, type ``open RIN- 2070-AC69'' to access the 
posted messages for this document. To get a listing of all files, type 
``dir/all'' at the prompt line. Electronic comments can also be sent 
directly to EPA at:
    <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="04406b676f6170294b545450574461746569656d682a6174652a636b722a">[email protected]</a>


    To obtain further information on the electronic comment process, or 
on submitting comments on this Notice electronically through the EPA 
Bulletin Board or the Internet ListServe, please contact John A. 
Richards (Telephone: 202-260-2253; FAX: 202-260-3884; Internet: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1f6d767c777e6d7b6c31757077715f7a6f7e727e7673317a6f7e31787069"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="beccd7ddd6dfccdacd90d4d1d6d0fedbcedfd3dfd7d290dbcedf90d9d1c8">[email protected]</span></a>).
    Persons who comment on this Proposed Rule, and those who view 
comments electronically, should be aware that this experimental 
electronic commenting is administered on a completely public system. 
Therefore, any personal information included in comments and the 
electronic mail addresses of those who make comments electronically are 
automatically available to anyone else who views the comments. 
Similarly, since all electronic comments are available to all users, 
commenters should not submit electronically any information which they 
believe to be CBI. Such information should be submitted only directly 
to EPA in writing as described earlier in this Unit.
    Commenters and others outside EPA may choose to comment on the 
comments submitted by others using the RIN-2070-AC69 ListServe or the 
EPA Bulletin Board. If they do so, those comments as well will become 
part of EPA's record for this rulemaking. Persons outside EPA wishing 
to discuss comments with commenters or otherwise communicate with 
commenters but not have those discussions or communications sent to EPA 
and included in the EPA rulemaking record should conduct those 
discussions and communications outside the RIN-2070-AC69 ListServe or 
the EPA Bulletin Board.
    The official record for this rulemaking, as well as the public 
version, as described above will be kept in paper form. Accordingly, 
EPA will transfer all comments received electronically in the RIN-2070-
AC69 ListServe or the EPA Bulletin Board, in accordance with the 
instructions for electronic submission, into printed, paper form as 
they are received and will place the paper copies in the official 
rulemaking record which will also include all comments submitted 
directly in writing. All the electronic comments will be available to 
everyone who obtains access to the RIN-2070-AC69 ListServe or the EPA 
Bulletin Board; however, the official rulemaking record is the paper 
record maintained at the address in ``ADDRESSES'' at the beginning of 
this document. (Comments submitted only in written form will not be 
transferred into electronic form and thus may be accessed only by 
reviewing

[[Page 2848]]

them in the Public Response and Program Resources Branch as described 
above.)
    Because the electronic comment process is still experimental, EPA 
cannot guarantee that all electronic comments will be accurately 
converted to printed, paper form. If EPA becomes aware, in transferring 
an electronic comment to printed, paper form, of a problem or error 
that results in an obviously garbled comment, EPA will attempt to 
contact the comment submitter and advise the submitter to resubmit the 
comment either in electronic or written form. Some commenters may 
choose to submit identical comments in both electronic and written form 
to ensure accuracy. In that case, EPA requests that commenters clearly 
note in both the electronic and written submissions that the comments 
are duplicated in the other medium. This will assist EPA in processing 
and filing the comments in the rulemaking record.
    As with ordinary written comments, at the time of receipt, EPA will 
not attempt to verify the identities of electronic commenters nor to 
review the accuracy of electronic comments. Electronic and written 
comments will be placed in the rulemaking record without any editing or 
change by EPA except to the extent changes occur in the process of 
converting electronic comments to printed, paper form.
    If it chooses to respond officially to electronic comments on this 
Proposed Rule, EPA will do so either in a notice in the Federal 
Register or in a response to comments document placed in the rulemaking 
record for this Proposed Rule. EPA will not respond to commenters 
electronically other than to seek clarification of electronic comments 
that may be garbled in transmission or conversion to printed, paper 
form as discussed above. Any communications from EPA employees to 
electronic commenters, other than those described in this paragraph, 
either through Internet or otherwise are not official responses from 
EPA.

VII. EPA Decision on Proposed Exception

    EPA will publish in the Federal Register its final decision on 
whether to grant the request for a national exception. EPA will base 
its decision on whether the benefits of the exceptions outweigh the 
costs. An exception may be withdrawn by EPA at any time if EPA receives 
poisoning information or other data that indicate that the health risks 
imposed by the early entry exception are unacceptable or if EPA 
receives other information that indicates that the exception is no 
longer necessary or prudent.

    Dated: January 3, 1995.

Lynn R. Goldman,

Assistant Administrator for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic 
Substances.

[FR Doc. 95-586 Filed 1-6-95; 12:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>