15488 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: March 10, 1995.

Daniel M. Barolo,

Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is

amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.

2. In subpart D, by adding new

§ 180.1146, to read as follows:

§ 180.1146 Beauveria bassiana Strain GHA;

exemption from the requirement of a

tolerance.

Beauveria bassiana Strain GHA is

exempted from the requirement of a

tolerance in or on alfalfa, corn, cotton,

potatoes, rapeseed, safflower, small

grain crops, soybeans, sugarbeets,

sunflower, rangeland, and improved

pastures and in meat, milk, or other

animal products from livestock grazed

on treated rangeland or improved

pastures when applied to growing crops

according to good agricultural practices.

[FR Doc. 95–7452 Filed 3–22–95; 12:28 pm]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

40 CFR Part 180

[PP 5F4427/R2118; FRL–4942–8]

RIN 2070–AB78

Chlorpyrifos; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document establishes a

time-limited tolerance for residues of

the insecticide chlorpyrifos [O,O-diethyl

O-(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridyl)

phosphorothioate] in or on the raw

agricultural commodities oats and

barley when blended together in a

mixture containing not more than 97%

oats and not less than 3% barley.

General Mills requested this regulation

to establish the maximum permissible

level for residues of the insecticide in or

on the commodities.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation

becomes effective March 24, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written objections,

identified by the document control

number, [PP 5F4427/R2118], may be

submitted to: Hearing Clerk (1900),

Environmental Protection Agency, Rm.

M3708, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC

20460. A copy of any objections and

hearing requests filed with the Hearing

Clerk should be identified by the

document control number and

submitted to: Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring

copy of objections and hearing requests

to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson

Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202. Fees

accompanying objections shall be

labeled ‘‘Tolerance Petition Fees’’ and

forwarded to: EPA Headquarters

Accounting Operations Branch, OPP

(Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box 360277M,

Pittsburgh, PA 15251.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Dennis H. Edwards, Product

Manager (PM) 19, Registration Division

(7505C), Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington,

DC 20460. Office location and telephone

number: Rm. 207, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, (703)–305–

6386; e-mail:

Edwards.Dennis@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

Federal Register of February 8, 1995 (60

FR 7509), EPA issued a proposed rule

that gave notice that the General Mills

Co. had submitted pesticide petition

(PP) 5F4427 to EPA requesting that the

Administrator, pursuant to section

408(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a,

amend 40 CFR 180.342 by establishing

a tolerance for residues of the

insecticide chlorpyrifos in or on the raw

agricultural commodity oats at 15 ppm,

provided that such tolerance applies

only to oats that were treated postharvest with chlorpyrifos on or before

June 15, 1994; that such tolerance

applies only to oats to be used as animal

feed or as a constituent of animal feed;

that, notwithstanding any other

provision of law or regulation, this

tolerance does not authorize the

presence of residues of chlorpyrifos in

any human food item made from such

treated oats, other than residues

resulting from the use of the oats for

animal feed purposes; and that such

tolerance expires on December 31, 1996.

To ensure that the oats would be

unacceptable for human food

production, General Mills stated that

they would be blended to include not

less than 3% barley and 97% oats.

Accordingly, the definition of the raw

agricultural commodity in the petition

was amended to ‘‘oats and barley when

blended together in a mixture

containing 97% oats and 3% barley.’’

There were two comments received in

response to the proposed rule. General

Mills requested that the tolerance

expression be changed to specify a

minimum barley content and a

maximum oat content. EPA has

determined that the purpose of the

blending would continue to be served

by this change and has no objection to

the request. The definition of the raw

agricultural commodity in the rule is

amended to ‘‘oats and barley when

blended together in a mixture

containing not more than 97% oats and

not less than 3% barley.’’

The second comment was received

from Michael A. Mentuck, president of

Michael A. Mentuck & Associates, Inc.,

as an interested party and on behalf of

one of the interested insurance

companies to the circumstances of the

petition. He suggested that there is the

possibility that the oats containing

chlorpyrifos would be acceptable in

some foreign countries having

appropriate tolerances that would allow

the oats to be used as human food, and

that the potential for export should be

investigated. Alternatively, he suggested

that the oats could be limited to use as

animal feed in this country by spraying

the oats with a dye, thus eliminating the

additional expense of blending them

with barley.

EPA has decided not to modify the

proposed tolerances as suggested by Mr.

Mentuck because of enforcement

concerns with his suggestions. As to his

export proposal, EPA believes it would

be difficult to ensure that the

adulterated oats, while still in shipment

in this country, would not be diverted

to domestic, human food use. Blending

the oats with barley is a straightforward

and effective way of ensuring that the

oats will not be used as human food.

EPA has further concern about the use

of a dye. Dyes are required for use on

seed that is treated with a pesticide, the

dye being an indicator that the seed is

only to be used for growing crops, not

for food or feed. To allow the use of a

dye in the present situation could cloud

the distinction between seed use and

food or feed use. EPA has no supporting

information that the dyed oats would be

considered acceptable for feed use only

and would not be used as human food.

The data submitted on the proposal

and other relevant material have been

evaluated and discussed in the

proposed rule. Based on the data and

information considered, the Agency

concludes that the tolerance will protect

the public health. Therefore, the

tolerance is established as set forth

below.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 15489

Any person adversely affected by this

regulation may, within 30 days after

publication of this document in the

Federal Register, file written objections

and/or request a hearing with the

Hearing Clerk, at the address given

above (40 CFR 178.20). A copy of the

objections and/or hearing requests filed

with the Hearing Clerk should be

submitted to the OPP docket for this

rulemaking. The objections submitted

must specify the provisions of the

regulation deemed objectionable and the

grounds for the objections (40 CFR

178.25). Each objection must be

accompanied by the fee prescribed by

40 CFR 180.33(i). If a hearing is

requested, the objections must include a

statement of the factual issue(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). 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

issue(s) in the manner sought by the

requestor would be adequate to justify

the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency must

determine whether the regulatory action

is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to

review by the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) and the requirements of

the Executive Order. Under section 3(f),

the order defines a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ as an action that is

likely to result in a rule (1) having an

annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more, or adversely and

materially affecting a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition,

jobs, the environment, public health or

safety, or State, local, or tribal

governments or communities (also

referred to as ‘‘economically

significant’’); (2) creating serious

inconsistency or otherwise interfering

with an action taken or planned by

another agency; (3) materially altering

the budgetary impacts of entitlement,

grants, user fees, or loan programs or the

rights and obligations of recipients

thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or

policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President’s priorities, or

the principles set forth in this Executive

Order.

Pursuant to the terms of the Executive

Order, EPA has determined that this

rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and is therefore

not subject to OMB review.

Pursuant to the requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-

354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612),

the Administrator has determined that

regulations establishing new tolerances

or raising tolerance levels or

establishing exemptions from tolerance

requirements do not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. A certification

statement to this effect was published in

the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46

FR 24950).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: March 16, 1995.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is

amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.

2. In § 180.342, by adding new

paragraph (f), to read as follows:

§ 180.342 Chlorpyrifos; tolerances for

residues.

* * * * *

(f) A tolerance of 15 parts per million

is established for residues of the

pesticide chlorpyrifos [O,O-diethyl O-

(3,5,6-trichloro-2-

pyridyl)phosphorothioate] in or on the

raw agricultural commodities oats and

barley when blended together as a

mixture containing not more than 97%

oats and not less than 3% barley.

(1) Such tolerance applies only to oats

that were treated post-harvest with

chlorpyrifos on or before June 15, 1994.

(2) Such tolerance applies only to oats

to be used as animal feed or as a

constituent of animal feed.

(3) Notwithstanding any other

provision of law or regulation, this

tolerance does not authorize the

presence of residues of chlorpyrifos in

any human food item made from such

treated oats, other than residues

resulting from the use of the oats for

animal feed purposes.

(4) Such tolerance expires on

December 31, 1996.

[FR Doc. 95–7451 Filed 3–22-95; 12:28 pm]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL–5172–7]

National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency

Plan; National Priorities List Update

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of Deletion of the

Radium Chemical Company site from

the National Priorities List.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) Region II announces the

deletion of the Radium Chemical

Company site from the National

Priorities List (NPL). The NPL is

Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which

is the National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency Plan

(NCP), which EPA promulgated

pursuant to Section 105 of the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act (CERCLA), as amended. EPA and

the State of New York have determined

that all appropriate Hazardous

Substance Response Trust Fund (Fund)-

financed responses under CERCLA have

been implemented and that no further

cleanup is appropriate. Moreover, EPA

and the State of New York have

determined that remedial actions

conducted at the site to date have been

protective of public health, welfare, and

the environment.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 24, 1995.

ADDRESSES: For further information

contact: Janet Cappelli, Remedial Project

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region II, 290 Broadway, 20th

Floor, New York, NY 10007–1866, (212)

637–4270.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The site to

be deleted from the NPL is: Radium

Chemical Company site, Woodside,

Queens County, New York.

The closing date for comments on the

Notice of Intent to Delete was December

9, 1994. EPA received no verbal or

written comments.

EPA identifies sites which appear to

present a significant risk to public

health, welfare, or the environment and

it maintains the NPL as the list of those

sites. Sites on the NPL may be the

subject of Fund-financed remedial

actions. Any site deleted from the NPL

remains eligible for Fund-financed

remedial actions in the unlikely event

that conditions at the site warrant such

action. Section 300.66(c)(8) of the NCP

states that Fund-financed actions may

be taken at sites deleted from the NPL.

Deletion of a site from the NPL does not

affect responsible party liability or