님에대하여 | 님의 산업별 적용분야 | 님 관련자료
홈으로이메일사이트맵
홈으로
농림부 시행규칙
美환경청(EPA) 자료1
美환경청(EPA) 자료2
美환경청(EPA) 자료3
美환경청(EPA) 자료4




Azadirachtin (121701), Clarified Hydrophobic Extract of Neem Oil (025007) Federal Register Notices
Azadirachtin (121701)
Clarified Hydrophobic Extract of Neem Oil (025007)

Neem Oil, Clarified Hydrophobic Extract
Date
Title
6/28/02
Clarified Hydrophobic Extract of Neem Oil; Pesticide Tolerance; Technical Correction A final tolerance exemption for clarified hydrophobic extract of neem oil on various commodities was published in the Federal Register of December 13, 1995. This technical correction removes the reference to the registration number in the text, considered necessary so as not to limit any other registrant. This would apply to anyone who wishes to use this chemical mixture from an alternate source in a pesticide product.
8/4/99
Experimental Use Permit Granted for Neem Oil to evaluate control of stored product insects in stored cocoa beans. The permit authorizes use in Massachusetts and Virginia (67384-EUP-2) from the American Cocoa Institute of McLean VA.
[Federal Register: June 28, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 125)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 43551-43552]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28jn02-14]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-2002-0073; FRL-6835-1]

Clarified Hydrophobic Extract of Neem Oil; Pesticide Tolerance; Technical Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; technical correction.

SUMMARY : EPA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of December 13, 1995 establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for clarified ydrophobic extract of neem oil. This document is being issued to correct the reference made to the registration number for exemption by removing it.

DATES: This technical correction is effective July 29, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Carol E. Frazer, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me? You may be affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected categories and entities may include, but are not limited to:

-
NAICS Examples of potentially
Categories
codes affected entities
Industry
111 Crop production
112 Animal production.
311 Food manufacturing.
32532 Pesticide manufacturing.

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

II. Background

A. What Does This Technical Correction Do?
A final tolerance exemption for clarified hydrophobic extract of neem oil on various commodities was published in the Federal Register of December 13, 1995 (60 FR 63950) (FRL-4990-8). This technical correction removes the reference to the registration number in the text, considered necessary so as not to limit any other registrant.
This would apply to anyone who wishes to use this chemical mixture from an alternate source in a pesticide product.

B. Why Is This Technical Correction Issued as a Final Rule?
Section 553 of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. EPA had determined that there is good cause for making today's technical correction final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment, because EPA is merely removing the reference made to the registration number from the previously published final rule. EPA finds that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).

III. Regulatory Assessment Requirements

This final rule implements a technical amendment to the Code of Federal Regulations, and it does not otherwise impose or amend any requirements. As such the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that a technical correction is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to review by OMB 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 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, Use (66 FR 28355) May 22, 2001. 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., or 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). 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); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards that

[[Page 43552]]

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). Since this action does 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. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that ``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.'' This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisi0ns of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have any ``tribal mplications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.''
``Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, 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.'' This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

IV. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General?

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 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. .C. 804(2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Food commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: June 19, 2002. Janet L. Andersen, Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is corrected as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346(a) and 374.
2. Section 180.1161 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 180.1161 Clarified hydrophobic extract of neem oil; exemption from the requirement of a tolerance.

Clarified hydrophobic extract of neem oil is exempt from the requirement of a tolerance on all food commodities when used as a botanical fungicide/insecticide/miticide.

[FR Doc. 02-16273 Filed 6-27-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M