Skip to Content

Rule

Mandipropamid; Pesticide Tolerance

Document Details

Information about this document as published in the Federal Register.

Published Document

This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Start Preamble

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2-propynyloxy)-benzeneacetamide in or on Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A; Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9; vegetable, fruiting, group 8; okra; vegetable, leafy except brassica, group 4; vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C; grape; grape, raisin; onion, dry bulb; onion, green; and potato, wet peel. Syngenta Crop Protection Inc. requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES:

This regulation is effective January 16, 2008. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before March 17, 2008, 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:

EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0461. To access the electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, select “Advanced Search,” then “Docket Search.” Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the “Submit” button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov website to view the docket index or access available documents. All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index available in regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.

Start Further Info

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rose Mary Kearns, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 305-5611; e-mail address: kearns.rosemary@epa.gov.

End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information

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. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those engaged in the following activities:

  • Crop production (NAICS code 111), e.g., agricultural workers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
  • Animal production (NAICS code 112), e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
  • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311), e.g., agricultural workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators.
  • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532), e.g., agricultural workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; residential users.

This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document?

In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal Register document through the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, you may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the “Federal Register” listings at http://www.epa.gov/​fedrgstr. You may also access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR site at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/​ecfr.

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 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-2007-0461 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 as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or before March 17, 2008.

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 that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public docket that is described in Start Printed Page 2813 ADDRESSES. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit this copy, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0461, by one of the following methods:

  • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
  • Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
  • Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.

II. Petition for Tolerance

In the Federal Register of July 25, 2007 (72 FR 40877) (FRL-8137-1) and October 31, 2007 (72 FR 61637) (FRL 8154-8) EPA issued notices pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of pesticide petitions (PP7F7184 and 6F7057) by Syngenta Crop Protection Inc., P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419. The petition (6F7057) requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2-propynyloxy)-benzeneacetamide, in or on Brassica, head and stem, Subgroup 5A at 3 parts per million (ppm); Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 30 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at .3 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 1 ppm; vegetable, leafy except Brassica, group 4 at 20 ppm; vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.01 ppm; grape at 2 ppm; grape, raisin at 4 ppm; onion, dry bulb at 0.05 ppm; onion, green at 4 ppm; and tomato paste at 1.3 ppm. That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., the registrant, which is available to the public in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. Comments were received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments is discussed in Unit IV.B..

Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has recommended the inclusion of okra in Crop Group 8 (Vegetable, Fruiting). However, a separate tolerance for okra must be listed in the 40 CFR 180.637, until the new crop group regulation is published. A tolerance for tomato paste was requested. However, the maximum expected residue in tomato paste and puree resulting from the proposed use will be covered by the recommended tolerance for vegetable, fruiting, crop group 8. A separate tolerance is being established for potato, wet peel, even though it was not requested. The maximum expected residue in potato, wet peel resulting from the proposed use is 0.03 ppm which was calculated by multiplying the HAFT of <0.01 ppm by the observed concentration factor of >3x. Potatoes have a separate tolerance under the vegetable, tuberous and corm subgroup 1C.

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....” These provisions were added to FFDCA by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.

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 the petitioned-for tolerance for residues of mandipropamid on Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3 ppm; Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 25 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.6 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 1 ppm; okra at 1.0 ppm; vegetable, leafy except Brassica, group 4 at 20 ppm; vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.01 ppm; grape at 1.4 ppm; grape, raisin at 3 ppm; onion, dry bulb at 0.05 ppm; onion, green at 4 ppm; and okra at 1 ppm and potato, wet peel at 0.03 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerance follows.

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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by mandipropamid as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found in the docket established by this action, which is described under ADDRESSES, and is identified as “Mandipropamid: Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses” in that docket.

B. Toxicological Endpoints

For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the toxicological level of concern (LOC) is derived from the highest dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) in the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment. However, if a NOAEL cannot be determined, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs) are used in conjunction with the LOC to take into account uncertainties inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well as other unknowns. Safety is assessed for acute and chronic risks by comparing aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all applicable UFs. Short-, intermediate-, and long-term risks are evaluated by comparing aggregate exposure to the LOC to ensure that the margin of exposure (MOE) called for by the product of all applicable UFs is not exceeded.

For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk and estimates risk in terms of the probability Start Printed Page 2814of occurrence of additional adverse cases. Generally, cancer risks are considered non-threshold. For more information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/​pesticides/​factsheets/​riskassess.htm.

A summary of the toxicological endpoints for mandipropamid used for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

Table 1.—Summary of Toxicological Dose and Endpoints for Mandipropamid for Use in Dietary Human Risk Assessment

Exposure/ScenarioPoint of DepartureUncertainty/FQPA Safety FactorsRfD, PAD, Level of Concern for Risk AssessmentStudy and Toxicological Effects
Acute Dietary (General Population, including Infants and Children)N/AN/AN/ANo appropriate endpoint was identified.
Acute Dietary(Females 13-49 years of age)N/AN/AN/ANo appropriate endpoint was identified.
Chronic Dietary (All Populations)NOAEL = 5 mg/kg/dayUFA = 10X UFH = 10X FQPA SF = 1XChronic RfD = 0.05 mg/kg/day cPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/dayChronic toxicity - dogs LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day, based on evidence of liver toxicity (increased incidence and severity of microscopic pigment in the liver and increased alkaline phosphatase activity in both sexes as well as increased alanine aminotransferase activity in males).
Cancer“Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.”
No treatment-related tumors observed in carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice. A cancer risk assessment is not needed.
NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. N/A = not applicable.

C. Exposure Assessment

1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to mandipropamid, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances. EPA assessed dietary exposures from mandipropamid in food as follows:

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.

No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for mandipropamid; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.

ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996, or 1998; CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA relied upon tolerance level residues and percent crop treated (PCT) information for all commodities A unrefined chronic exposure assessment that assumes 100% crop treated was conducted for the proposed Section 3 uses of mandipropamid. The DEEM analysis incorporates estimates of drinking water concentrations from the Environmental Fate and Effects Division directly into the analysis. The chronic dietary exposure analysis for mandipropamid results in dietary risk estimates for food and water that are below the Agency's level of concern for chronic dietary exposure.

iii. Cancer. There were no treatment-related tumors observed in carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice. Mandipropamid is classified as not likely to be a human carcinogen. Therefore, a cancer dietary exposure assessment was not performed.

2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks sufficient monitoring data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for mandipropamid in drinking water. Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data, drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on simulation or modeling taking into account data on the environmental fate characteristics of mandipropamid. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/​oppefed1/​models/​water/​index.htm.

Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST), and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models, the estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) of mandipropamid for acute exposures are estimated to be 25.2 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.05 ppb for ground water. The EECs for the aquatic degradates SYN500003 and SYN504851 are estimated to be 2.32 and 8.99 ppb for surface water and 0.6 and 1.7 ppb for ground water. The combined level of mandipropamid and the degradates in surface water is 36.5 ppb.

Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the acute water concentration of value 36.5 ppb was used to conservatively assess the contribution to drinking water.

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).

Mandipropamid is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure.

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 Start Printed Page 2815tolerance, 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 mandipropamid and any other substances and mandipropamid 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 mandipropamid 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 EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/​pesticides/​cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional (“10X”) 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 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 FQPA safety factor. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X when reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or, if reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional FQPA safety factor value based on the use of traditional UFs and/or special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.

2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence (quantitative or qualitative) of increased susceptibility and no residual uncertainties with regard to prenatal toxicity following in utero exposure to rats or rabbits (developmental studies) and pre and/or post-natal exposures to rats (reproduction study).

3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show that it would be safe for infants and children to reduce the FQPA safety factor to 1X. That decision is based on the following findings:

i. The toxicological database for mandipropamid is complete.

ii. The toxicity data showed no increase in qualitative or quantitative susceptibility in fetuses and pups with in utero and post-natal exposure.

iii. The toxicity data indicates that there are no neurotoxic effects.

iv. The dietary food exposure assessment is based on tolerance-level residues and assumes 100% crop treated for all commodities, which results in very high-end estimates of dietary exposure.

v. The dietary drinking water assessment is based on values generated by model and associated modeling parameters which are designed to provide conservative, health protective, high-end estimates of water concentrations.

vi. No residential uses are proposed at this time.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

Safety is assessed for acute and chronic risks by comparing aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the aPAD and cPAD. The aPAD and cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all applicable UFs. For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the probability of additional cancer cases given aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and long-term risks are evaluated by comparing aggregate exposure to the LOC to ensure that the MOE called for by the product of all applicable UFs is not exceeded.

1. Acute risk. No acute dietary endpoint based on effects attributable to a single dose could be identified based on the toxicology data currently available for mandipropamid. Therefore, mandipropamid is not expected to pose an acute risk.

2. Chronic risk. There are no residential uses proposed or registered for mandipropamid, and therefore aggregate risk is equal to that from consumption of food and water. Chronic aggregate risk estimates associated with exposure to mandipropamid residues in food and water do not exceed the Agency's level of concern. For mandipropamid, the chronic dietary exposure estimate was 22% of the cPAD for the U.S. population and was 30% of the cPAD for the highest exposed population subgroup, children 1-2 years of age.

3. Short-term and intermediate-term risk. Short and intermediate-term dermal exposures and risks were not assessed for mandipropamid, since mandipropamid is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure.

4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Aggregate cancer risk was not assessed because mandipropamid is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans.

5. 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 mandipropamid residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

Adequate enforcement methodology Analytical Method RAM 415/01 Residue Analytical Method for the Determination of Mandipropamid in Crop Samples. Final Determination by LC/MS/MS and the Analytical Method Development and Validation (German S-19) for the determination of residues of MA Mandipropamid in or on Plant Matrices is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; e-mail address: residuemethods@epa.gov.

B. International Residue Limits

There are no specific CODEX, Canadian or Mexican maximum residue limits (MRLs) for mandipropamid.

C. General Response to Comments

Several comments were received from a private citizen objecting to establishment of tolerances. The agency has received similar comments from this commenter on numerous previous occasions. Refer to Federal Register 70 FR 37686 (June 30, 2005), 70 FR 1354 (January 7, 2005), 69 FR 63096-63098 (October 29, 2004) for the Agency's response to these objections. In addition, the commenter noted several adverse effects seen in animal toxicology studies with mandipropamid and claims because of these effects no tolerance should be approved. EPA has found, however, that there is reasonable certainty of no harm to humans after considering these toxicological studies and the exposure levels of humans to mandipropamid.

V. Conclusion

Therefore, the tolerances are established for residues of mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2-propynyloxy)-benzeneacetamide, in or on Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3 ppm; Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 25 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.6 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 1.0 ppm; okra at 1.0 ppm; vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4 at 20 ppm; vegetable, tuberous Start Printed Page 2816and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.01 ppm; grape at 1.4 ppm; grape, raisin at 3.0 ppm; onion, dry bulb at 0.05 ppm; onion, green at 4 ppm; and potato, wet peel at 0.03 ppm. A tolerance for tomato paste is not being established because residue expected will be covered by the vegetable, fruiting crop group 8.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of FFDCA 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 rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, 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 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., 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 section 408(d) of FFDCA, 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 final rule 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 section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. 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 6, 2000) do not apply to this rule. In addition, This rule does not 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).

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).

VII. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report 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).

Start List of Subjects

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

End List of Subjects Start Signature

Dated: January 8, 2008.

Debra Edwards,

Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

End Signature Start Amendment Part

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

End Amendment Part Start Part

PART 180—[AMENDED]

End Part Start Amendment Part

1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

End Amendment Part Start Authority

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

End Authority Start Amendment Part

2. Section 180.637 is added to read as follows:

End Amendment Part
Mandipropamid; tolerances for residues.

(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the fungicide mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N-[2-(3-methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2-propynyloxy)-benzeneacetamide in or on the following commodities.

CommodityParts per million
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A3
Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B25
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 90.6
Vegetable, fruiting, group 81.0
Vegetable, leafy except Brassica, group 420
Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C0.01
Grape1.4
Grape, raisin3.0
Okra1.0
Onion, dry bulb0.05
Onion, green4
Potato, wet peel0.03

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]

(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]

(d) Indirect or inadvertent tolerances. [Reserved]

End Supplemental Information

[FR Doc. E8-677 Filed 1-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S