SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this action apply to me?

You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer or food 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).

II. Background

A. What action is the Agency taking?

This final rule revises EPA's regulations governing crop group tolerances for pesticides. Specifically, this rule creates five new crop groups, three new and two revised commodity definitions, and revises the regulations on the interaction of crop group tolerances with processed food, meat, milk, and egg tolerances. This final rule is the fourth in a series of crop group updates expected to be promulgated in the next several years.

B. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

This rule is issued under the authority of section 408(e)(1)(C) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), which authorizes EPA to establish “general procedures and requirements to implement (section 408).” 21 U.S.C. 346a(e)(1)(C). Under FFDCA section 408, EPA establishes tolerances for pesticide chemical residues in or on food, where there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. A tolerance is the maximum permissible residue level established for a pesticide in raw agricultural produce and processed foods. The crop group regulations currently in 40 CFR 180.40 and 180.41 enable the establishment of tolerances for a crop group based on residue data for certain crops that are representative of the group.

III. The Proposed Rule

EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register on November 14, 2014 (79 FR 68153) (FRL-9918-40). Written comments were received from seven parties in response to the proposal: Three private citizens, the University of Hawaii, the Hawaii Farm Bureau Federation, the Minor Crop Farmer Alliance, and the Interregional Research Project Number (IR-4).

IV. Response to Comments

In this unit, EPA describes the major provisions of the proposed rule, the comments received on each provision, EPA's responses to those comments, and ( printed page 26472) EPA's determination regarding the final rule.

A. Crop Group 4-16: Leafy Vegetable Group

1. Revise the proposed crop group name. EPA is adopting its proposal to expand “Crop Group 4: Leafy Vegetables (Except Brassica Vegetables) Group” to both add and remove commodities and to restructure the group. EPA revises the name of the new crop group to “Crop Group 4-16: Leafy Vegetable Group.” Although the new crop group was proposed as “Crop Group 4-14: Leafy Vegetable Group”, this change is needed in order to reflect the correct year of establishment, which is 2016. The final rule retains the pre-existing Crop Group 4 as described in Unit VI.

2. Add new commodities. The final rule expands the leafy vegetable crop group from the existing 27 commodities to 62 commodities in Crop Group 4-16: Leafy Vegetable Group.

3. Revise representative commodities for new crop group. The final rule retains the proposed four representative commodities for Crop Group 4-16: Head lettuce, leaf lettuce, mustard greens, and spinach.

EPA received an anonymous comment to make lettuce a separate subgroup under Crop Group 4-16 and adopt other crops as representative crops for Crop Group 4-16. The commenter indicated that lettuce is intolerant of most herbicides and proposed that lettuce be established as a separate subgroup and other crops be adopted as better representative commodities for the crop group. However, the commenter did not provide any additional information or suggest what alternative crop would be more appropriate as the representative crop. To address this comment, EPA reviewed data for all commodities included in the proposed Crop Group 4-16, including the commodities that would be appropriate for inclusion in Leafy Green subgroup 4-16A and Brassica Leafy Greens subgroup 4-16B. EPA has determined that lettuce would continue to be appropriately included in Crop Group 4 with the other vegetables based on similarities in the plant morphology; cultural practices; similar pest problems; the similar edible food portions and lack of livestock feed portions; potential to result in similar dietary exposure to pesticide residues; similarities in geographical locations and processing techniques; and the established tolerances for commodities currently within subgroup 4A (Ref. 1). Similarly, the Agency is including lettuce in subgroup 4-16A based on similarities in plant morphology; cultural practices; pest problems; the edible food portions and lack of livestock feed portions; potential to result in similar dietary exposure to pesticide residues; and similarities in geographical locations and processing techniques; and the established tolerances for commodities currently within subgroup 4A (Ref. 1). EPA expects that all proposed members of the crop subgroup 4-16A will generally have similar residue levels based on these similarities and has determined that it is appropriate to include the proposed commodities, including lettuce, in Crop Group 4-16 and subgroup 4-16A.

In determining the appropriate representative commodities for this crop group and subgroup, the Agency considered which commodities are most likely to contain the highest residues; to be the highest produced and/or consumed; and to be similar in morphology, growth habit, pest problems, and edible portion to the related commodities within a group or subgroup. EPA determined that head lettuce, leaf lettuce, mustard greens, and spinach are the appropriate representatives for the crop group, because these commodities account for >95% of the total leafy vegetable harvested acres reported in the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Census of Agriculture and are also the highest consumed commodities on a per capita basis in the group. These commodities have a long regulatory history as being representative commodities for Crop Groups 4 and 5 (Ref. 1).

4. New subgroups. The final rule retains the proposed addition of two subgroups to the revised Crop Group 4-16.

i. Leafy greens subgroup 4-16A. (Representative commodities- Head lettuce, Leaf lettuce, and Spinach). Forty-two commodities are included in this subgroup.

ii. Brassica leafy greens subgroup 4-16B. (Representative commodity- Mustard greens). Twenty commodities are included in this subgroup.

B. Crop Group 5-16: Head and Stem Brassica Vegetable Group

EPA proposed to remove commodities and to restructure existing Crop Group 5, as Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables Crop Group 5-16. EPA received no comments on this proposal and therefore is adopting the proposed changes as final with one minor modification. EPA is revising the name of the new crop group to “Crop Group 5-16: Head and Stem Brassica Vegetable Group.” Although the new crop group was proposed as “Crop Group 5-14: Head and Stem Brassica Vegetable Group”, this change is needed to reflect the correct year of establishment, which is 2016.

1. Revise existing commodities. The final rule revises Crop Group 5-16 to include five commodities.

2. Revise representative commodities. The final rule revises the representative commodities for Crop Group 5-16 by designating Broccoli or Cauliflower, and Cabbage as the representative commodities.

3. Remove subgroups. The final rule adopts the proposal not to include subgroups in Crop Group 5-16.

EPA received no comments on this provision and adopts its proposal without change.

C. New Crop Group 22: Stalk, Stem and Leaf Petiole Group

EPA received no comments on the addition of this new Crop Group and adopts its proposal without change.

1. Commodities. The final rule adopts 19 commodities to the new Crop Group 22.

2. Representative Commodities. The final rule adopts the proposed Asparagus and Celery as representative commodities.

3. New Subgroups. The final rule adopts the proposed two subgroups to the new Crop Group 22.

i. Stalk and stem vegetable subgroup 22A. (Representative commodity-Asparagus). Twelve commodities are included in this subgroup.

ii. Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B. (Representative commodity- Celery). Seven commodities are included in this subgroup.

4. Amendment to Definitions and Interpretations. In conjunction with new Crop Group 22, EPA is adopting two new commodity definitions that were proposed for Fern, edible and Palm hearts to be added to § 180.1(g), as specified in this final rule.

No comments were submitted on this provision, and EPA adopts its proposal without change.

D. New Crop Group 23: Tropical and Subtropical Fruit, Edible Peel Group

EPA received three comments to the proposed Crop Group 23. The Agency received one comment about the proposed representative commodity for Crop subgroup 23A, which is addressed in Unit IV D.2, and another comment about a commodity definition for guava, which is addressed in Unit IV D.4. Additionally, EPA received a comment from IR-4 requesting that Achachairú ( Garcinia gardneriana (Planch. & Triana) Zappi) be added to the proposed ( printed page 26473) Crop subgroup 24B. After reviewing the comment and considering available information, EPA determined that it would be appropriate to include Achachairú in Subtropical Fruit, medium to large fruit, edible peel subgroup 23B; this is addressed in Unit IV D.3.

The Agency also received a comment on the name “Tropical and Subtropical” being removed from the proposed subgroups titled “small fruit, edible peel subgroup 23A”, ” medium to large fruit, edible peel subgroup 23B”, and “palm fruit, edible peel subgroup 23C”. According to the commenter, these names could result in misunderstanding of what commodities are included in the adopted Crop Group 23.

EPA agrees with the commenter that removal of the names “Tropical and Subtropical” from the adopted subgroups could result in misunderstandings and has changed the subgroup names as follows: “Tropical and Subtropical, small fruit, edible peel subgroup 23A”; “Tropical and Subtropical, medium to large fruit, edible peel subgroup 23B”; and “Tropical and Subtropical, palm fruit, edible peel subgroup 23C”. EPA is adopting its proposal with these changes to the subgroup names.

1. Commodities. The final rule adopts 109 commodities to the new Crop Group 23.

2. Representative Commodities. The final rule adopts the proposed Olive, Fig, Guava, and Date as representative commodities after consideration of one comment received concerning the representative commodity for Crop subgroup 23A, Olive.

An anonymous commenter provided, in part, the following comment: “Having only a cool, subtropical fruit crop, i.e., olive, as the representative for numerous tropical fruit crops . . . will make conducting residue trials for these crops unlikely since these crops are not adapted to nor grown in cool, Mediterranean-like climates but in tropical regions.” The commenter recommended that the EPA find a different representative commodity for subgroup 23A and suggested that wax jambu or perhaps Costa Rican guava would be good choices. In response, EPA notes that there should not be a need to conduct residue trials for the other crops in the subgroup because the basis for crop grouping is that data for the representative commodity can be used to establish tolerances for the other commodities in the subgroup. Additionally, representative commodities are selected based on commodities most likely to contain the highest residues; to be the highest produced and/or consumed; to be similar in morphology, growth habit, pest problems and edible portion to the related commodities within a group or subgroup; and to have production in the United States. EPA determined olive is the appropriate representative for subgroup 23A for several reasons. First, in general, the smaller the fruit, the larger the ratio of surface area to weight; therefore, pesticide deposits on olives are expected to be higher than on wax jambu or Costa Rican guava. Because of their size, olives are expected to have a higher residue than wax jambu or Costa Rican guava. Second, olives account for most of the harvested U.S. acres for the members of subgroup 23A, whereas (as noted by the commenter) wax jambu and Costa Rican guava are primarily grown outside of the United States. Finally, the commodities in subgroup 23A are similar in fruit surface area, edible portions, and cultural practices.

3. New Subgroups. The final rule adopts the proposed three subgroups to the new Crop Group 23.

i. Tropical and Subtropical, small fruit, edible peel subgroup 23A. (Representative commodity—Olive). Fifty-six commodities are included in this subgroup.

ii. Tropical and Subtropical, medium to large fruit, edible peel subgroup 23B. (Representative commodities—Fig and Guava ). Forty-four commodities are included in this subgroup after consideration of one comment received concerning the addition of a commodity.

EPA received a comment from IR-4 requesting that Achachairú ( Garcinia gardneriana (Planch. & Triana) Zappi) be added to the proposed Crop subgroup 24B. After reviewing the comment and considering available information, EPA determined that the peel for Achachairú is edible and is used in fruit drinks. Therefore, EPA determined that it would be appropriate to include Achachairú in the Tropical and Subtropical Fruit, medium to large fruit, edible peel subgroup 23B. USDA APHIS indicates Achachairú is already being legally imported into the U.S., and therefore, being a member of the crop group will help avoid tolerance and import issues with this crop.

iii. Tropical and Subtropical, Palm fruit, edible peel subgroup 23C. (Representative commodity—Date). Nine commodities are included in this subgroup.

4. Amendment to Definitions and Interpretations. IR-4 originally petitioned the EPA to develop a new crop definition for guava to include many of the closely related genus (Psidium), species and varieties. EPA did not propose such a definition in the proposed rule and concluded that a guava definition was not necessary because it is one of the proposed representative commodities for crop subgroup 23B, “Tropical and Subtropical, medium to large fruit, edible peel subgroup”. In conjunction with new Crop Group 23, EPA received a comment to the proposed rule from IR-4 that stated, in part: “. . . IR-4 believes that this definition [for guava] is necessary because both fig and guava are required as representative commodities for Crop Subgroup 23B and all of the related guava varieties and subspecies would not be covered except with a subgroup tolerance.”

Upon review of the comment from IR-4, EPA agrees that a commodity definition for guava will be helpful to provide additional information on the closely related species and varieties of guava that are included for the commodity. Therefore, in conjunction with new Crop Group 23 and Crop Subgroup 23B, EPA is adopting a commodity definition for Guava to be added to § 180.1(g).

No additional comments were submitted on this provision, and EPA adopts its proposal with the changes noted in the previous discussion.

E. Crop Group 24: Tropical and Subtropical Fruit, Inedible Peel Group

EPA received several comments to the proposed Crop Group 24, which are individually addressed in this unit.

The Agency received a comment objecting to “Tropical and Subtropical” being removed from the proposed subgroups titled “Small Fruit, inedible peel subgroup 24A”; “medium to large fruit, smooth, inedible peel subgroup 24B”; “medium to large fruit, rough or hairy, inedible peel subgroup 24C”; “Inedible Peel, cactus subgroup 24D”; and “Inedible Peel, vine subgroup 24E”. The commenter stated these names could result in misunderstanding of which commodities are included in the adopted Crop Group 24.

EPA agrees with the commenter that removal of the names “Tropical and Subtropical” from the adopted subgroups as proposed, could result in misunderstanding. For clarity the subgroups will be named as follows: “Tropical and Subtropical, small fruit, inedible peel subgroup 24A”; “Tropical and Subtropical, medium to large fruit, smooth, inedible peel subgroup 24B”; “Tropical and Subtropical, medium to large fruit, rough or hairy, inedible peel subgroup 24C”; “Tropical and Subtropical, inedible peel, cactus subgroup 24D”; and “Tropical and ( printed page 26474) Subtropical, inedible peel, vine subgroup 24E”.

1. Commodities. The final rule adopts 104 commodities to the new Crop Group 24.

2. Representative Commodities. The final rule adopts the proposed Atemoya or Sugar apple; Avocado; Pomegranate or Banana; Dragon fruit; Prickly pear, fruit; Lychee; Passionfruit; and Pineapple as representative commodities.

3. New Subgroups. The final rule adopts the proposed five subgroups to the new Crop Group 24.

i. Tropical and Subtropical, Small fruit, inedible peel subgroup 24A. (Representative commodity—Lychee). Nineteen commodities are included in the subgroup.

EPA received a comment from the University of Hawaii, requesting removal of Longan from subgroup 24C and placing it in Crop subgroup 24A. The request is based on the size and texture of the fruit although it is similar to lychee, the adopted representative commodity for subgroup 24A.

EPA agrees with the commenter to move Longan from Crop subgroup 24C to Crop subgroup 24A. Therefore, nineteen commodities are now in subgroup 24A.

ii. Tropical and Subtropical, medium to large fruit, smooth, inedible peel subgroup 24B. (Representative commodities—Avocado, plus Pomegranate or Banana) Forty-two commodities are included in this subgroup.

iii. Tropical and Subtropical, medium to large fruit, rough or hairy, inedible peel subgroup 24C. (Representative commodities—Pineapple, plus atemoya or sugar apple). 26 commodities are included in this subgroup.

As stated previously, the final rule moves Longan from the proposed Crop subgroup 24C to Crop subgroup 24A. Therefore, there are now 26 commodities included in this subgroup.

iv. Tropical and Subtropical, Inedible peel, cactus subgroup 24D. (Representative commodities—Dragon fruit and Prickly pear fruit). Nine commodities are included in this subgroup.

v. Tropical and Subtropical, Inedible peel, vine subgroup 24E. (Representative commodity—Passionfruit). Eight commodities are included in this subgroup.

No additional comments were submitted on this provision, and EPA adopts its proposal without change.

F. Other Changes

No comments were submitted on the proposed “other changes” provisions, and EPA adopts its proposal without change.

G. Other Comments

EPA received one comment from the Hawaii Farm Bureau Federation requesting that EPA ensure the opportunity for some other orphan crops grown in Hawaii to be listed in future crop groupings scenarios. Those crops of concern are coffee (Coffea arabica), tea (Camellia sinensis), awa/kava (Piper methysticum), moringa (Moringa oleifera), and noni (Morinda citrifolia).

The primary reasons for the on-going crop grouping effort is to include as many orphan crops into groups, as appropriate, to facilitate trade and to provide tools for producers of minor and specialty crops. EPA is making every effort to include all appropriate commodities into crop groups. The crop groups discussed in this document are based on five petitions developed by the International Crop Grouping Consulting Committee (ICGCC) workgroup and submitted to EPA by IR-4. EPA encourages the Hawaii Farm Bureau Federation to participate in the ICGCC to ensure all commodities important to their growers are considered. Additionally, just as with this action, there will be an opportunity to provide comments on any future proposed crop groups.

One commenter disagreed with placing Kei apple (Dovyalis caffra) and Sapote, white (Casimiroa edulis) in Crop Group 24. The commenter believes the edible peel of the fruit should place the fruits in Crop Group 23. EPA does not agree that Crop Group 23 is appropriate for these two commodities. Kei apples are small, petalless, and clustered in the leaf axils. The aromatic fruit is oblate or nearly round and long, with bright yellow, smooth but minutely downy, somewhat tough skin. Aromatic fruit is also mealy, apricot-textured, juicy, and has highly acid flesh. Most people consider the fruit too acidic for eating out-of-hand even when fully ripe. The skin for Sapote, white is thin, papery, smooth, inedible, and covered with a very thin waxy bloom. The skin should be thickly peeled to remove the bitter flesh underneath. Fruit can also be halved and the pulp can be scooped out.

V. The Final Rule

After fully considering all comments, EPA is amending the names of a few commodities, and adopting changes to its proposal as discussed in Unit IV. EPA is otherwise finalizing the rule as proposed, and based on the rationales set forth in the proposed rule.

VI. Implementation

When an existing crop group is amended in a manner that expands or contracts its coverage of commodities, EPA will retain the pre-existing crop group in § 180.41; insert the revised crop group immediately after the pre-existing crop group in § 180.41; and title the revised crop group in a way that clearly differentiates it from the pre-existing crop group.

The revised crop group will retain roughly the same name and number as the pre-existing group, except the number will be followed by a hyphen and the final digits of the year established ( e.g., Crop Group 4-16).

EPA will initially retain pre-existing crop groups that have been superseded by revised crop groups. EPA will not establish new tolerances under the pre-existing groups. Further, EPA plans to eventually convert tolerances for any pre-existing crop group to tolerances with coverage under the revised crop group. This conversion will occur through the registration review process and in the course of evaluating new uses for a pesticide registration. EPA requests that petitioners for tolerances address crop grouping in their petitions. For existing petitions for which a Notice of Filing has been published, the Agency will attempt to conform these petitions to this rule.

VII. International Considerations

In the proposed rule, EPA described other related activities involving active participation by its North American Free Trade Agreement partners, Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency and the government of Mexico, IR-4, and the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues. The goals of these activities remain minimizing differences within and among the United States and Codex groups and to develop representative commodities for each group that will be acceptable on an international basis, which in turn could lead to the increased harmonization of tolerances and MRL recommendations.

VIII. References

The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically referenced in this document. The docket includes these documents and other information considered by EPA, including documents that are referenced within the documents that are included in the docket, even if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For assistance in locating these other documents, please consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT .

( printed page 26475)

1. EPA. Bernard A. Schneider, Ph.D. Selection of Representative Commodities and Processed Commodities. July 24, 2014. Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0766.

2. EPA. Pesticide Tolerance Crop Grouping Program; Proposed Expansion; Proposed rule. Federal Register May 23, 2007 (77 FR 28920) (FRL-8126-1).

3. EPA. Pesticide Tolerance Crop Grouping Program; Final rule. Federal Register December 7, 2007 (72 FR 69150) (FRL-8343-1).

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/​laws-regulations/​laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review for review under Executive Orders 12866, October 4, 1993 (58 FR 51735) and 13563, January 21, 2011 (76 FR 3821).

EPA prepared an analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with the first proposed rule issued in this series of updates (Ref. 2). This analysis, entitled “Economic Analysis Proposed Expansion of Crop Grouping Program,” is available in the docket. Because the costs and benefits of each update to the crop grouping rule are essentially the same, and generally involve reductions in regulatory burdens and costs, EPA believes the May 23, 2007 economic analysis continues to be applicable. This was discussed in Unit V. of the proposed rule for Group IV, and EPA did not receive any comments on the analysis or EPA's findings.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

This action does not impose any new information collection requirements that would require additional review or approval by OMB under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. However, this action is expected to reduce paperwork burdens associated with submissions for tolerance related actions. For example, it may reduce the number of residue chemistry studies required to establish a tolerance for a crop within these groups because instead of testing each crop, only the representative crops would need to be tested under a crop grouping scheme.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule.

This action provides regulatory relief and regulatory flexibility. The new crop groups ease the process for an entity to request and for EPA to set pesticide tolerances on greater numbers of crops. Pesticides will be more widely available to growers for use on crops, particularly specialty crops. This action is not expected to have any adverse impact on any entities, regardless of size.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

This action does not contain an unfunded federal mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Accordingly, this action is not subject to the requirements of UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132, August 10, 1999 (64 FR 43255). It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175, November 9, 2000 (65 FR 67249). This action will not have any effect on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045, April 23, 1997 (62 FR 19885) as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, May 22, 2001 (66 FR 28355), because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

This rulemaking does not involve technical standards that would require the consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

This action does not involve special consideration of environmental justice related issues as specified in Executive Order 12898, February 16, 1994 (59 FR 7629). This action does not address human health or environmental risks or otherwise have any disproportionate high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous populations.

IX. Congressional Review Act

This action is subject to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

( printed page 26476) Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321 (q), 346a and 371.

2. In § 180.1:

i. Revise the entries for “Broccoli” and “Sugar apple” in the table in paragraph (g).

ii. Add in alphabetical order the entries “Fern, edible, fiddlehead”, “Guava”, and “Palm hearts” to the table in paragraph (g).

The additions and revisions read as follows:

3. In § 180.40, revise paragraphs (e) and (f) to read as follows:

4. In § 180.41:

i. Revise paragraph (b).

ii. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(6) through (28) as paragraphs (c)(7) through (29), respectively.

iii. Add a new paragraph (c)(6).

iv. Redesignate newly redesignated paragraphs (c)(8) through (29) as paragraphs (c)(9) through (30), respectively.

v. Add a new paragraph (c)(8).

vi. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (c)(25)(ii), (c)(26)(ii), and (c)(27)(ii) introductory text.

vii. Add paragraphs (c)(31), (32), and (33).

The additions and revisions read as follows: