Azadirachtin (121701), Clarified Hydrophobic
Extract of Neem Oil (025007)
Federal Register Notices
Clarified Hydrophobic Extract of Neem
Clarified Hydrophobic Extract
|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.
|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
[Rules and Regulations]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
| ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
40 CFR Part 180
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
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;
| 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
codes affected entities
|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
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
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
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:
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as
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