-------
 o  Pesticide  establishment  registration and production -eoorting
 o  Inspections  and sampling
 o  Case  management
 o  Grants  information
 o  Contract inspections

 After a feasibility study  in 1979, a system design phase was
 initiatea in I960.  Development and Implementation was b-egun in
 early 1981,  and by October 1981 FAT£S was operational.  Regional
 system  installation and ussr training was accomplished in 1982,
 and system validation was  completed in 1983.  However, major FATZS
 data base system updates and enhancements are required to maintain
 data for  new program activities such as the FIFRA Child Resistant
 Packaging and  Label Improvement programs, and to provide compretieTi-
 sive information for the Administrator's Management Accountability
 System.   Additional ADP contract, resources are required to provide
 these system enhancements  and to maintain the additional data the
 new programs generate.  When fully operational, FATES should facili-
 tate priority  setting.

 Uni form Standards.  In 1982, an evaluation. protocol was included in
 the FY83  cooperative agreement guidance.  The protocol was developed
 1) to ensure that all State cooperative enforcement and C & T programs
 would be  evaluated, annually by the Regions according to uniform stan-
 dards;  and 2)  to en-sure that appropriate pesticide use problems would
 be addressed in State pesticide applicator training and certiri;a-ion
 materials.  This protocol was developed for a 5 e In ~ Y 3 3 a.~. i -,v • ; ;  D e
 modified  as appropriate based on experience with its use.

 Information from program evaluation is particularly important,
 since it  is to be used by the States to update priorities for the
 next year and  to determine specific areas needing additional
 regulation (for example, through OPP's label  improvement program).
 This use  of priority setting and evaluation gives ths program an
 element of flexibility which allows resources to be allocated each
year to those  areas where they are most needed and can be most
 effectively used.

 Primacy

     At the request of the States, EPA developed a rule interpreting
 several key provisions in  §26 and §27 of FIFRA.  The Interpretive
 Rule promulgated on January 5, 1933 aJ-dreused 1) when a State will
 be deemed to have adequate pesticide use laws and enforcement proce-
 dures,  2) criteria used by EPA to determine whether a State is
 adequately carrying out primacy. 3) EPA procedures for referring
 misuse  allegations to tne State and tracking State responses, 4)
 the meaning of appropriate enforcement action, and 5) factors con-
 stituting an emergency and circumstances under which EPA will defer
 to the  State for enforcement.  Generally, tne Agency determines
 whether a State should be  granted primacy or whether its use program
 Is adequate based on a review of the State's entire program rather
 than a  case by case review.  EPA evaluates a State's primacy program
 during  the end of the year grant review for those States with coopera-
 tive enforcement programs.

-------
                               - a -


     On May 11, 1981 EPA promulgated a rule (45 FR 25j53v govami
procedures to be followed by the Aaministrator in rescinding
primacy.  Under these procedures, whenever the Administrator makes
a determination that a State is^iot adequately discharging its
use enforcement responsibilities', ne must send a notice to the
State specifying the deficiencies in the State's use enforcement
program.  If after ninety days from receipt of a nstica by a Stata,
the Administrator finds that the otate has not corrected the
deficiencies set forth In the notice,  the Administrator may rescind,
in whole or in part, the Stata's primary enforcement responsibility
for pesticide use violations.  In practice, if someone complains or
deficiencies are discovered during an  evaluation, the Regional
office will contact the State and try  to resolve the problem prior
to formal rescission procedures.  Generally, few problems have arisen,
and those were satisifactorily resolved.

Trai ni ng/Guidance

     Throughout the development of the cooperative agreement- pro-
gram, EPA has placed a major emphasis  on training state pesticide
inspectors.  State inspector training  has been accomplished primarily
by the Regional offices through formal training sessions and through
having experienced EPA pesticide insoectors assist State inspectors
in the field.  In addition the National Enforcement Investigations
Canter (?iEIC), in cooperation with tha Compliance Monitoring Staff
(CMS) and the Regions, conducts us e/mi S'jse investigation wo^snoo'
for Stata pesticide inspectors.  T'nase .vcrk shops cover sta:a oj
the art pesticide drift monitoring technia-jes  and basic use/nisuse
investigation techniques.  The worxsnops induce ootn classroom
and field training.  EPA Intends to continue both these training
programs in the future.

     In addition to inspector training, EPA has emphasized the
improvement of State pesticide laboratories and training of State
chemists to ensure the quality of State pesticide analytical data.
Under a Memorandum of Agreement between CMS and NEIC, the NEIC con-
ducts chemists training workshops, provides advice to the States on
analytical techniques, conducts on-slte reviews of State pesticide
laboratories to evaluate sufficiency and recommend improvements,
and conducts a check sample quality control program.  These
activities will continue 1n the future.

     To ensure tlrat corap.llance/enforcement activities were properly
carried out, an Inspection manual and  case preparation manual
including a FIFRA civil penalty policy was issued to the States.
Additional strategies and penalty policies were developed for
new regulations.  In addition, guidance has been Issued to the
Regions/States governing response to cancellations/suspensions.
CMS and the Office of Legal Enforcement Policy recently released a
revision of the Pesticide Case Preparation Manual as the FIFRA
Compliance/Enforcement Guidance Manual.

-------
Certi f1cation and
Training Program

      In FY81, OMB transferred tne program to tne comsli>nce/
enforcement program.  This transfer provided an opportunity to
better  coordinate the two programs.

     FIF3A provides that certification of pesticide applicators
be accomplished under State Certif'c»tion Plans anproved by
EPA with training presided by the State Cooperativ-e Extension
Services (SCES's).  This objective has been largely accomplished.
Only Colorado and Nebraska lack approved certification plans and
only the Colorado* S££S fail.s to provide applicator training.  In
each of these States, EPA has established programs In tne absence
of State activity.

     Three Federal agencies, the Department of Defense (DOD),
the Department of Interior (DOI), and USDA, have established pro-
grams to certify their own employees.  These programs are authorized
by EPA to allow Federal agencies to certify their employees to apply
pesticides anywhere in the performance of their official  duties.
Federal  employees can still be certified by States, but  their certi-
fication has  the same geographic limitations as other applicators
certified by  the State.

     Sased on operational  experience, tne re has been a need for i:me
changes, and  certification plans nave been 2 mended in res pens 2 t:
these needs.

     Certification plans were required to contain a provision keeping
applicators abreast of changing technology.  This requirement is
generally met by recertlfication either at specified intervals or
when deemed appropriate by the State.  Most States have  completed at
least, one recertif i cati on cycle.

     EPA has  worked with USDA to develop training material.  There
1s need  to periodically update the material in order to  incorporate
information on new technology.  Existing training material  is
cataloged at  the USDA Beltsville library.

Additional  Activities - Federal  Program'	

iTtput tnto Development of Me* Regulations

     To  ensure that new regulations are enforceable, CMS  participates
and assists 1n the development of regulations  or other regulatory
actions  such  as suspension/cancellation orders for which  the Office
of Pesticide  Programs (OPP) has the lead role.
             tus Indicated an Interest 1n establishing a program,
which will initially cover only commercial  applicators.

-------
General	

     As mentioned previously, the Federal ro'e srii'taa, as rcc^e
States received grants, to the oversight of the ccooerative program,
enforcement response for State referrals, enforcement programs in
States without cooperative programs or primacy, ana a compliance
monitoring and enforcement program consisting of data audits,
import and export surveillance and efficacy testing.  With the
exception of the data audit program, which is managed at Headquarters,
the Regions have primary responsibility for the Federal Program.
CMS provides guidance documents, policy interpretations, technical
support, and oversight for Regional activities.

Data Audits
     The data audit program for studies submitted in support of
pesticide registration was instituted in 1975 after the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) found that studies submitted to it had
serious deficiencies.  The strategy has been to audit studies at
pro.blem laboratories, audit studies of special significance to"
regulatory decisions, and conduct routine audits at all pesticide
laboratories.  Under an Interagency Agreement originating in 1973,
FDA conducts inspections at laboratories which conduct haaltn
effect studies.  £°A inspectors primarily conduct audits of environ
mental studies.  EPA scientists participate on audits as aooroo
A Data Audit Panel within Office of Pesticides and Toxic S J b s t a .1 c
(OPTS) targets inspections, reviews reports, and recom-
 : 3 r. „ 3 2 p;
FIFRA Imoort Surveillance
                                     ort provisions of FIFRA is
                                       f..--— e	-'--.  Customs
                                                      roducts
                                                       States.
                                                        Customs
it a peatitiae appears to oe in viuiatiun 01 rirt\M, tne uusuum^
inspector stops the entry of the pesticide Into the Customs
Territory of ttie United Staes and refers the matter to the appro-
priate EPA Regional Office for resolution or enforcement action.
In addition, a Notice of Arrival form is required to be submitted
to' EPA for all importations of pesticides and devices.  An annual
average of 4375 Ntrtices of Arrival hav« be-en received and 670
inspections of imported products have be«n conducted for the past
few years.
Efficacy Testing
Disinfectant Testing

     The Federal program for disinfectant testing, which is no
longer active, inj/olvexl eff1.ca.cy testing of hospital disinfectant
Sucti testing 1s Important considering that failure of hospital

-------
 di s i nf set ants can contribute to the incidence of i n* ?--. i ens
 vulnerable patients and result in unnecessary and u r. •;-.:* i ? g ex::su-2
 of  hosoital staff to pathogenic organisms.  0?D's Saltiville
 laboratory formerly performed efficacy testing on aoout 200 sa-ioles
 per  year.  The failure rate ranged from 45% of 111 sa-ales in 1530
 to  72% of 40 samples in 1982.  T.he Beltsville laboratory suspencea
 testing of disinfectants, sanitizsrs, sterilizers, ana ger-nciaes
 in  Octaoer 1932 due to competing higher-priority needs, altnougi
 the  capability to perform such tests remains.  CMS proposed an"
 efficacy testing program for FY85; however, it was not included in
 the  priority listing of.OPTS programs.

 Ultrasonic Device Testing Program

     Under an Interagency Agreement between the FDA's Winchester
 Engineering Analytical  Center and EPA's CMS, the FDA tested the
 acoustical properties of a dozen different ultrasonic pest control
 devices being manufactured in the United States.  This information
was  used to select "representative" devices for testing the principl
 of  ultrasound on rodent control.  The efficacy testing is being
 conducted under a separate Interagency Agreement with the Denver
Wildlife Research Center, Flsti and Wildlife Service and CMS.%  A
 final report on the first of six devices was recently received,
 and  the other tests and reports will be completed by February
 1984. .CMS and OPP will use this information in the regulation of
ultrasonic device labelling claims which are overstated.

Electromagnetic Device  Tasting ?roc ran

     A program similar  to the ultrasonic program was conducted
for  devices which purport to control pests utilizing the principle
 of electromagnetism.  The Bureau of Standards, through an Interagenc
Agreement with CMS, conducted the electronic analysis of  eighteen
 different devices.  University and USDA personnel conducted efficacy
tests on rodents and insects for CMS and determined that  electro-
magnetic devices were Ineffective for these pests.  Appropriate
 regulatory actions were taken by CMS which resulted in the ban of
these types of devices  from the consumer marketplace.
Rodenticide Efficacy Testing
     The Office of Pesticide Programs funded an Interagency Agree-
ment with the Denver Wildlife Research Center in FY83 to conduct
a national prograa to test rodenticides for efficacy.  CMS is
participating 1n tills program by coordinating the sampling,
chemistry testing, efficacy reviews, and enforcement response, if
any, for the rodenticides.

-------
                               - 12 -

Monitoring of radars'! Ssray Programs	

     Ths EPA through tne Federal enforcement program or :.-.e
cooperative State programs routinely monitors spray pr^raas
funded by Federal agencies.  For instance, application 5~3y
for-hirs applicators during the Grasshopper Control Program nav»
been monitored by the States of New Mexico, Texas, and Oklahoma,
and by EPA in Nebraska and Colorado.  The E?A and tne States
may also conduct use investigations for smaller scale programs
Including aquatic weed control, forest p-est control,  and pre-
dator control programs.
Present State of compliance	

Regulated Community	

The following is a list of known members of the regulated community:

o Number of Registarad Establishments                     1-1,000

o Number of Applicators Trained and Certified

  Private                                              1,500,000
  Commercial                                          -   496,000

o Numsar of Laboratories Conducting FIFKA Studies            -03

o Number of Notice of Arrivals Received in 1982 (imports)  5,01-:

o Number of Export Notices received annually (approximate)    75

o Number of Experimental :J:a Permits Issued in 1982          441

o Number of §18 Exemptions issued in 1932          *         373

o Number of Restricted Use Pesticide Dealers              23,706
  (This number does not include dealers in Colorado,
  Montana, or North Dakota.  It is estimated that
  these States have approximately 300 RUP dealers.)

     This 11st does not Include Information on the total number of
perttclTle users or pesticide dealers of unrestricted pesticid-es.
Many users of pesticides only use general use pesticides and there-
fore are not certified.  This is especially true of homeowners who
are not commercial applicators or farmers.  Although the unknown
categories represent a large number of persons, The overall Impact
of violations by this group which go undetected 1s much less than
the effect of violations by members of the known regulated community.
Violations by the known community may involve more highly toxic
pesticides or product type violations which impact a large number^^
of people if left undetected.  Violations by private users who *r^B
uncertified generally affect a more limited population.  In additwfi,
violations by users whlcii result 1n serious harm are likely to be
reported to the Agency.

-------
                               - 13 -

InsDecticns and Actions
     The shift from a Federal  to a  State  program has  resj'ted  i-  an
increased number of inspections and increased  field  orasence.   ;
complete data oase on enforcement actions wnich  induces  State
activities only exists for FY31 and FY82.  In  FY31,  a  total  of
50,104- State inspections was conducted.   The  percen-  of  insoections
resulting in action was 17.4.   In FY32,  a total  of  59,317 State
inspections was conducted.  The percent  insoections  resulting  in
actions was 13.1.  Violations  figures for specific  types  of
inspections indicate a higher  rate  of noncompliar.ee  ~'ir  use  related
requirements than for non-use  related requirements.

     The number of Federal inspections for FY81  and  FY82  was  2254
and 2021 respectively.  In FY81, the number of enforcemerrt actions
was 755 and in FY82 the number was  1139.   These  figures  include
actions cased on referrals from the States.  A detailed  breakdown
of the numbers of inspections  and actions can  be found in Tables  I,
II, III, and IV.  (See Appendix.)

     Soth EPA and the States are collecting a  large  body  of  data
related to specific types of violations.   The  Agency  will inc'luae
this data in the FATES system  and then use the system  to  better  .
define major violations and specific causes of violations if
funding is available for system modification.

GoaIs ana Priorities

Long Term Goals

     Long term goals for the FIFRA  Compliance/Enforcement Program
are listed in order of priority below:

o Expand FATES to include State data and  assure  completeness  of  data.
o Develop a predictive model to set priorities.
o Ensure fhat all States participate in  cooperative enforcement
  agreements and the C 4 T Program.
o Improve EPA-State communication, systems through the  use of  state of
  the art technology, e.g., use of  electronic  mail.
o Provide guidance and training to  the Regions for  data  audits/
  laboratory inspections and case preparation.
o Conduct periodic surveys of  pesticide  use to improve priority
  setting system.
o Co-ntlnue reflneiwnt of program, management for  the  cooperative
  enforcement program, the C S T program  and  Federal  program.
o Improve program evaluation*
o. Ensure the adequacy of the C & T  program.
o Review certification and training materials.
o Ensure adequacy of Federal Compliance/Enforcement  Program.
o Promote programs to prevent  violations  of FIFRA.
o Provide technical and legal  support to  States.
o Continue to provide training for  State  inspectors  and  chemists.
o Continue cooperative relationship with  States.

-------
o Develop compliance monitoring strategies and enforcement
  response policies for new regulations and sjssansions'
  cancellations as appropriate.
o Update the Pesticides Inspection Manual.
o Consolidate FIFRA enforcement reoonse policies.
o Revise FIFRA §7 establishment registration rule  ana reporting fcr-n
  to improve the usefulness of data in the system.
o expand formal referral'systems within the Agency.
o Expand formal referral systems with other Agencies.
o Improve referral system between the Regions and  States.
o Expand work with the press and special  Interest  groups.
o Continue integration of inspections.

Near Term Priorities

     Priorities for the FIFRA compliance/enforcement program through
FY85 fall into the following management,  compliance monitoring
enforcement respons-e and certification areas:

Management
o Write FY85 Cooperative Agreement Guidance.
o Develop formal procedure for and provide support to OP? for most
  new regulations, suspensions/cancellations and other actions tor
  ensure that the documents are enforceable.  In order to do this
  effectively, it is mandatory that compliance/enforcement program
  staff be involved early in the development of such documents.
  This has oeen a problem in the past.  Therefore, a forma'  system1
  of communication between OPP, Office of General  Counsel, anc CMS
  should be developed.
o Finalize strategy for conducting data audits and Good Laboratory
  Practices (GLP) inspections.
o Finalize enforcement response policy for data audits/GLP
  inspections.
o Develop compliance monitoring strategies and enforcement response
  policies for most new regulations and suspensions, as appropriate.
o Ensure that all States and Regions conducting Federal
  enforcement programs have fully implemented the  most effec-
  tive/flexible system for allocating resources to priority
  pesticide problems.
o Provide technical and legal support to State*
o Provide training for State Inspectors and chemists.
o Prepare additional policies for the FIFRA Policy Compendium, as
  needed.
o Promulgate final FIFRA §4 rule requiring dealers to keep records
  of their restricted use pesticide sales and clarifying where
  commercial applicators must keep their records on their applica-
  tions of restricted use pesticides.

-------
                               -  15 -

Compliance Monitoring	

     Program  guidance  indicates tnat generally 75"  c-  ; -:: •= ;t •> :-:
resources should be directed at use proble-ns and 23*  at  :-:cuct
related priority problems.  The priority setting g'ji:2."!ce ;3 desi
to be flexible, allowing a shift  in inspection targets -rorn year to
year based sn shifts in State specific problems ana new  rI-3A
regulati ons.

     In addition, the Federal program will emphasize  tne data
audit/laboratory inspection program.

Enforcement Response	
     States will set their own enforcement priorities with major
emphasis being given to priority use problems which they have agreed
upon with EPA.

     The Agency attaches the highest priority to responding to the
following instances of noncomp1iance:

o Violations related to those priority use problems which
  EPA and the State have agreed to track under primacy ana
  for which the State does not take appropriate action.
o Violations related to other priority use probla-s established
  by the States or EPA.
o Submission of false data to EPA in conjunction with ?eit::;.:a
  regi strati on.
o Sale of Restricted Use Pesticides to uncertified applicators in
  Statas with Federal  Programs.
o Label or formulation violations likely to result in harm to
  health or the environment.
o Violations of Child Resistant Packaging regulation.
o Pesticide enforcement registration and reporting violations.

Certification
o EPA will conduct Certification Programs in States without
  approved certification plans.
o EPA and States will ensure that applicators are made aware of
  cka,n.gin.g technology.
o EPA and States will continue to certify new applicators.
o EPA will prepare guidance to encourage States to address major use
  problems 1n C S T materials.
o EPA will prepare guidance which ensures that State C & T materials
  meet Federal standards, as appropriate.

Plans for Achieving Program Goals

     This section discusses the compliance monitoring plan, the
compliance promotion plan, plans for responding to noncompliance,
certification and training, Headquarters/Regional coordination,
Federal/State relationship, and cross program effects.

-------
Comoliance Monitorina Plan
Objecti ves
     The basic objectives of the compliance monitoring clan ire:
1) to provide a visible enforcement presence which wi'"; encourage
voluntary compliance; 2) to collect evidence to support enforcement
actions; 3) to expand the data base for determining compliance oy
the regulated community (FATES) and to use this information to
identify persons likely to be in noncompliance; and 4) to discover
problem areas requiring resolution through re-gulatory initiatives
by OPP.

Compliance Monitoring Tools	
     Tools available to EPA and the States for monitoring compliance
with FIFRA include data review, letters, and on-site inspections.

     EPA can determine by reviewing available data whether an
establishment has met its §7 reporting requirements or wnetier
there is some questionable registration data.

     Letters are used to determine which specific industries are"
actually subject to FIFRA requirements when a full scale on-site,
inspection is not co-st effective.  They are generally used when
purposeful noncompliance is not suspected and the likelihood of
response is good.

     On-site inspections are the major method through which E?A
monitors compliance witi. 7TF3A.  Ti'.cas i "spacii c~; i"3 csnijcts.!
1n response to complaints and on the basis of target selection
under a neutral administrative inspection scheme (NAIS).

Inspections Based on Referrals/Complaints

     Both the Agency and the States place a high priority on
response to complaints or referrals regarding violations.
Referrals, tips, and complaints are particularly important to
EPA compliance monitoring for misuse.  This is because FIFRA §9
gives "EPA inspectors authority to enter only establishments where
pesticides are held, for distribution in commerce.  It does not
clearly give EPA authority to enter places where pesticides are
being used.  Therefore* the Agency can enter such places only with
1) consent of the owner or hts agent, or 2) with a warrant based
on probable cause that a violation has occurred, or 1s occurring.
Probable cause can be based upon a detailed allegation from a
reliable source Hnfc-fng specific action with a specific misuse.

     Some State statutes give their Inspectors broader entry
authority to detect misuse.

-------
                               -  17  -
     Misuse  is difficult to detect unless an inspect:"  • 3 o • -e s e n t
during  actual use or soon a.rter t.ie use of the pest^;:^=.   ~-iere-
fore, use inspections are conducted in resoonsa to a ::-.^", »:nt
referral or  during tne actual application of tha q-JSf'f'-e.  -eci-
timate  compl ai nts/referral 3 regarding pesticide rnsuse  ^ay  32
ineffective  if tney are-not made and investigated oromotly  oecause
tne evidence, especially in the case of highly totic organoonosonates
will no longer be there at tiie time of tne investigation.

     Even if there were no limitations on entry authority,  evidence
of pesticide misuse may be difficult to detect during a planned use
observation.  Because inspectors would not generally otherwise know
when and wtiera a commercial or private applicator is going  to make
a pesticide  application, they make appointments to conduct  the
observations.  It is, therefore, not as likely that instances of
knowing and  willful misuse will be detected on a planned inspection,
as on an investigation conducted in response to a complaint.
Routine Inspections
     EPA and the States can use on-sita inspection to determine"
with relative ease and at reasonable cost whether an establishment
has met its establishment registration or reporting requirements,
whether a product is appropriately lao-el-ea, or whether scientific
data submitted in support of a pesticide registrati on correctly
reflects the testing which -.fas conducted and trse results.

     Since most States have regulations requiring dealers of
Slip's to keep records of Cfieir aa'ies, i: is rel at i «c"i> ejj>  "or
States to determine whether the requirement is being met.  In
addition States can follow-up the records and inspect the applicator
to determine whether he is certified.  Based on records which
commercial applicators are required to keep, it-is often possible
for the States to determine whether the RUP was used'in accordance
with its label instructions.

     EPA does not have regulations requiring dealers in States
without cooperative agreements/primacy to keep records regarding
their sales of RUP's.  As a result, it has been difficult for EPA
to determine whether dealers in these States have sold RUP's
to uncertified applicators.  Although Federal regulations exist
requiring commercial applicators to keep records regarding their
RUP applications, the regulations were unclear about where these
records had to be kept.  However, EPA expects to remedy these
problera-s by promulgating a final rule under FIFRA §4 requiring
dealers to keep records of their RUP sales and clarifying where
certified commercial applicators must keep their records on their
applications of RUP's.  This rule should appear 1n the Federal
Register early 1n FY84.

-------
                               -  1 8  -

Ta rgett1ng	

     As indicated  on  page  6,  EPA  and the States  use  the  priority
setting system for pesticide  use/misuse  to  determine  specific
categories of persons  who  should  be  targetted  for  inspection.
Selection of specific  p-ersons  within each  category  is  based  on  an
NAIS.  The system  is  flexible  and may  vary  from  year  to  year  based
on major  existing  or  anticipated  problems.   Each  neutral  scheme
includes  a set of  criteria  designed  to  help  the  Agency and States
achieve the best  cost/benefit  ratio  between  the  use  of compliance
monitoring resources  and  detection  of  violations.   The criteria
applied to all facilities  under a neutral  scheme  vary  based  on
individual priorities  but  generally  include  the  following:   viola-
tion history, production  volume,  amount  of  specific  pesticides
used, inspection  history,  and  location.   Inspection  targets  are
selected, at random based  on available  resources  from  the  facilities
identified through application of the  NAIS  criteria.

     The  current  use/misuse priority setting system  is based-
primarily on data  in  case  files and  incident files.   It  thus
yields priorities  which  are responsive  to  previously  existing
problems  which posed  actual harm.  This  system should  be  com-
plemented by one  aimed at  predicting potent i a 1  f or  ha rm  based
on trends in the  quantities and types  of pesti ci des  used.  Such
a system  would require periodic surveys  of  pesticide  use  by  the
States and/or EPA.  To date,  resource  limitations  have prevented
further exploration of this option.

     The  priority  setting  system for p roduct/f aci 1 i ty  related
inspections (see  page  7)  results  in  the  targetting  of  specific
persons and products  for  inspection.   Again  priority  is  based  on
a number  of factors including  violation  history,  production  of
products  most likely  to  result in human  or  environmental  harm
if violative, and  the  need to  show a government  presence for
important new regulations.  Since States and Regions  will  use
this system for the first  time in FY84,  EPA may  need  to  make
adjustments in FY85.

     To assist in  targetting use  inspections,  the  Agency needs  to
encourage the successful  generation  and  transmittal  of  referrals,
tips, and complaints  in  both  misuse  and  use  areas.   Therefore,  EPA
should undertake  the  following activities:

Expand Formal Referral Systems
Uithin the Agency	

     A system for  data audi t /la borat ory  inspection  referrals  exists
between the Office of Toxic Substances  (OTS),  OPP,  and CMS.   Also,
OPP provides  referrals regarding products  not  in compliance  with
the Child Resistant Packaging Regulations.   A  formal  system  for
referrals for other requirements should  be  developed.   EPA should
encourage States  to develop similar referral systems within  each
State.

-------
                                           - 19 -


            Expand Referral Systems
            With Other Agencies	

                 While the Agency has referral  systems  fo." specific tyoas  of
            products or violations witn FDA, Consumer Product Safety Commissio-
            (CPSC),  Occupational  Safety and Health Administration (QSHA),  ana'
i            Federal  Trade Commission (FTC), it  should expand the systems.   EPA
i            should encourage States to set up similar systems.

            Improve  Referral System
            Retween  the Regions and States
i                           	
;                 FJFRA §27 requires EPA to refer all  significant allegations
I            of pesticide misuse to the States.   The Interpretive rule provides
'.            specific procedures for the referral  and  tracking of such cases.
!            Although all Regions  have implemented informal referral  and  trackin
:            systems, some systems are better developed  than  others.   All the
i      •      Regions  need to implement a formal  system.

            Expand Work with the  Press
            and Special Interest  Groups

                 Botn EPA and the States periodically encourage  the  national
            and local trade press to write articles on  new and  existing  pesti-
            cide control '•equi rements.  Knowledge of  FIF3A and  State pestici-e
            I j'.vs have consistently resulted in  discovery  of  violations  of  both
            laws.  Because evidence of pesticide  misuse'may  rapidly  disappear,
            ic is  particularly  important that EPA and the S:dtes expand  :.-si'r
 ;           efforts  to work with  such groups as  farmworkers  to educate  them
            about  basic evidentiary requirements  and  the  'need to contact the
            government as soon  as possible after  occurrence  of the  alleged
            misuse.   Efforts made in this  area  continue to be restricted by
 •           resource levels.  CMS has issued a  Complaint  Form, which was
            sent out as an update to the FIFRA  Inspection Manual, to facilitate
 j           the reporting of complaints or referrals.

 '           Integration of Inspections	

 I               To  make the most effective use  of resources,  both  EPA and the
 j           States currently conduct inspections  based  in part on geographic
 4           proximity of the targets.  Both will  continue this approach.

 i              EPA will also  continue its program of  integrating FTFRA and
 j          TSCA data audit/laboratory inspections.

 2          Inspection Frequency	
                 In  the past  EPA  and  the  States were  to  inspect  establishments
            manufacturing  general  u$« pesticides  every 5 years and those  manu-
            facturing  RUP's  every  3 years.   In practice, this has varied  based
            on  the number  of  establishments  existing  in  a  State.  EPA has  moved

-------
                               - 20 -

away from requiring a specific frequency in its guidance.  ".•.3:32:,
trie Agency suggests that frequency oe estaoiisned tire;::"1 : ne
priority setting system.  This is true for misuse as *e'! 2i
establishment inspections.

     Laboratories are expected fo oe inspected under -.-:e data aucit/
laboratory inspection program every 2-3 years.

    Inspections at device producing establishments should be oart
of the routine inspections of establishments manufacturing general
use pesticides.  When the Agency is conducting a major testing
program for specific devices, samples are collected at Headquarters'
request or in response to complaints.  Types of devices for which
testing has b-een/is being conducted are water purifiers and elec-
tromagnetic, supersonic, and ultrasonic devices with rodenticide or
insecticide claims.

     Disinfectants are collected as part of a State's routine
inspections.  Since the Agency no longer conducts efficacy testing,
there is no separate program for disinfectants.

     Rodenticides are collected as a result of sample requests
prepared by CMS.  Samples are requested based on an OPP prepared
list of products which OPP believes should be tested.

Follow-uc Insoections
     Follow-up inspections are conducted when more informati
is needed for a possible enforcement case or when violations
h2Y2 been fo'j~i i?d the R'^iorv'State d°te''**?'' ?°s t^'t aiT*hai"
inspection is necessary in order to assure compliance.  The
frequency is determined on a case-by-case basis depending on
the need for a follow-up inspection to assure compliance.

Inspection Quality	
     To ensure inspection quality and the evidentiary value of com-
pliance monitoring information collected by the States, EPA will
continue to provide training for State pesticide inspectors and
State pesticide chemists.  The types of training provided by EPA
are described under the training section on page 9.  Aside from
training, basic guidance on the conduct of pesticide inspections
1s contained in the Pesticides Inspection Manual.  This manual
will be up-dated and revised 1f resources for this activity are
available 1n the future.

     In addition to providing training and basic guidance, EPA
reviews State inspection reports to ensure that inspections are
conducted properly, appropriate inspection procedures are followed,
and sufficient evidence is collected to support enforcement actions.
This review 1s normally conducted as part of EPA's routine oversight
of the cooperative prog-raw during raid-year and end-of-year reviews.
T-his revvew activity *M 11 continue.

-------
      In accordance with the Agency's Quality Assjranca ' I; ;  require
ments, States receiving grant money through tne coooerative  enforce
ment  p'rogram must develop QA Plans covering botn corns 1 i d" ce  ;ncn i - or-:
and sample analysis.  These QA Plans must be submittec to tne .^egio
Quality Assurance Officers annually for review and apsroval.  Tne
Compliance Monitoring Staff, with the approval of the EPA Quality
Assurance Management Staff of ORD, has provided guidance  to  the
S-egions and States on the development of QA Plans.

Compliance Promotion Plans

Objecti ve	
     Compliance promotion is an important component of any
successful compliance program.  The objective of compliance pro-
motion 1s to ensure that the regulated community is aware of
the requirements of FIFRA and related Scate pesticide laws and
understands what it must do to comply.

     Since neither EPA nor the States have sufficent resources ta
inspect every member of the community regulated under FIFRA, both
must depend largely on voluntary compliance.

Tools
     EPA and the States promote voluntary compliance wi
through tne following mechanisms.

Educational Proarams
Certification and Training.  Perhaps the most widespread compliance
promotion tool is tne pestici de applicator training and certifi-
cation program.  This program is conducted by EPA in two States
and in other States by tne States themselves.  It ensures that both
private (farmers) and commercial applicators (all others) are  not
only aware of pesticide use requirements and generally competent
to apply pesticides but competent in particular to apply restricted
use pesticides.  Training materials are frequently revised,  and
EPA will issue further guidance in FY85 directing that information
from the priority setting process be Incorporated into certification
and training materials and examinations as appropriate.  Implemen-
tation of this guidance will be dependent on available resources.

Other education programs.  These programs are designed to promote
safe pesticide use.  An example is Project SAFE,  which is sponsored
by the National Aerial Applicators Association and the Extension
Service and is supported 1n part through cooperative agreement funds
During the first phase of project SAFE, trainers  were trained  to

-------
                             - 22 -


conduct fly-ins' to teacn aerial  applicators better ca'::-it::-
techniques to minimize pesticide  drift and to obtain octi.^a'  pss:
control with the minimum amount of pesticide.  The" r.ava ree'1
three trainer fly-ins which involved approximately  -3 States.
During the next phase of the program, these trained specialists,
mostly cooperative extension staff, will  be conducting fly-ins for
aerial applicators in their States to help the applicators calibrate
and apply pesticides in the most  environmentally effective manner.

Farmworkers Program

     Several ye-ar« *go, tke Agency initiated a .pro-gram to ev.aljj.atj3
the specific problems of pesticide misuse related to farmworkers,
especially the migrant farmworker.

     In 1974, the Agency promulgated 40 CFR 170 Worker Protection
Standards, which addressed four basic protections to persons
engaged in agricultural hand labor in the field:  1) protection
from being sprayed, 2) reentry periods (one general and 12 specific),
3) protective clothing, and 4) warnings.   The worker protection -rule
found in 40 CFR 170 are implemented through the labeling of agricul-
tural pesticides.  The regulation is enforced at the registrant  '
level by requiring sp-ecific label language.  The regulation is
enforced at the user label in that it is  illegal to use a pestici
in a manner inconsistent with its labeling.  A .v or :< group has  :~er.
formed to revise the Worker Protection Standards at 4Q CF-? i?C.

     Language for ase on outdoor  ajri ;-!tjral prcd-ct3 tc ~3rt
the standards is being developed  under OPP's Label Improvement
Program.  OPP is also considering a dual  language requirement,
English and Spanish, for highly toxic products labeled for agricul
tural use to help assure compliance.

     The Agency continues to hold meeting with farmworker groups
to discuss farmworker problems and seek solutions.  CMS included
in the annual cooperative enforcement agreement guidance a request
that States consider Farmworker exposu-e  in setting priorities.

Publications

Compliance Policy Compendium.  The Agency has developed and will
continue to expand its compendium of FIFRA Compliance  Policies,
These policies Interpreting compliance requirements are available
to the regulated community as well as the Regions and  the  States.
   *
    Fly-1ns are programs in which aerial  applicators actually  fly
their airplanes to the training- site.   They then fly over a
designated area and apply water containing a dye.  The  spray
pattern 1s titen

-------
                                -  23  -

Suspended  and Cancelled  Pesticides Booklet.   This  boc.s'et  *is  '"'-st
prepared  by  CMS  in  1977.   It  was  compiled  to  suma-i za  i~:  :lir--"y
Agency  actions on pestici-as  which nave  been  suspend:,  t'i.ica! 1 ec",
or  otherwise  restricted.   It  was  designed  as  a  ;'ji-t<  re'e-a^ca  r:--:a
for use by pesticide  inspectors but  is available to  fa  c-bl'-t.

Publication  of Results of  Major Testing  Programs.   In Octooer  133C,
CMS issued a  puolication called ihe_Investigat1on  or  Efficacy  anc
Enforcement  Activities Pel, at Ing to elect re lacr't::  ?a5t  Control
Devi ces"   rhe results of the  ultrasonic  testing program  will also
be  published  in  the future.   These types of publications  ara useful
to  other  Federal regulatory  agencies, consumer  groups,  foreign •
•countries, prospective producers  of  such devices,  and to  the public.

Notices of Judgment.  Under Section  16(d)  of  FTF3A, EPA  p-jblisnes
enforcement  act.ions taken  against violators.   It is  believed tnat
the Notices  of Judgment  have  some deterrent effect.

Press Releases.  Thssa ara ganarally issued when major  violations
occur or  if  puolic  attention  has  basn focusad on. a  casa.     • *

'Perso.nal  Contacts

Compliance Inspections.  Discussions of  regulatory  requirements
during  inspections  a", so  provide a system for  educating  t.ie  reguiatec
community  concerning  saectfic FIFSA -reqiii renents and  tne  rae1:  to
comply.      •                         •           .•  '
participate  in  pa-e1  i: icus:: :rs  zt  -r.ius       -   --

Pub!ic Presentations.  EPA personnel give presentations and
p 2"t i tl pata in p a.? a1  i: i t -
and other public meetings.

Noncompllance Response Plan
   s  The objectives of  a  program for  responding to instances of
 noncorapHance  are  1) to ensure that violations and resulting pro-
 blems  are promptly corrected; 2) to quickly and effectively take
 equitable enforcement action  against  violators; and  3) to deter
 similar noncompl1anca In  the  future.

     A broad range of enforcement  responses 1s available under
 FIFRA. Including advertisement letters  (I.e., letters to registrants
 regarding advertising claims), warning  letters, stop sale, use and
 removal orders,  request for voluntary recalls, seizure, Injunctions,
 administrative  civil penalties, criminal penalties,  suspension or
 revocation  of  certification,  refusal  to accept data  from labs
 refusing inspection, suspension/cancellation of the  registration.
 and revocation  of the establishment number.

     Detailed  guidance  for selecting  the appropriate response is
 available to the Regions  and  States in  the 1983 FIFRA Compliance/
 Enforcement Guidance Manual and 1n the  Civil Penalty Policies
 listed on page 25 under the Administrative Civil Actions Section.
 Inspections will continue to  be conducted with increased frequency
 at those establishments with  a violation history.

-------
                            - 2* -
     States also have a broad range of enforcement
including fines, revocation of licenses .and permits.  'J-:;- I?Vs
interpretive rule for primacy, c?A considers a State's i::':n
to be adequate if the State takes tie most stringent j::^- avail-
able which is comparable to the available FIFRA response.

     A description of the FIF3A enforcement responses foMows:'

Advertising letters	

     An advertising letter is a letter issued by EPA as notice
to the company that collateral literature concerning a product
(i.e., literature or advertising that does not accompany the
product) bears unacceptable pesticide statements or pesticide
or d-evice xl.ai.ms-  Ttxe letter may be issued on receipt of or
knowledge of such literature.  The letter requests a written
response from the recipient informing the Agency of what action
the company plans to take to correct the situation.  Receipt of an
advertising letter does not mean the recipient has been- found in
violation.
                                                             *.
Notices of Warning - FIFRA §9(c)(3) or SU(a)(2)            -*

     For minor violations, a written Notice of Warning may be issued.
Also, Notices of Warning are issued for first time violators which
are private applicators or other persons not covered by Section }-{i]
(1).  Section l*(a)(l) covers registrants, commercial applicators,
for hire applicators, wholesalers, dealers, retailers, !•">•: srne'-
di stri butors .                                                 •

Notices 3f Dats't* :*: - -!f?.A **"*    	

     Section 17 authorizes EPA to refuse admission of a pesticide
or device being imported Into the United States if EPA determines
that such pesticide or device violates any provisions of the Act.
This refusal is known as a Notice of Detention and Hearing.

Stop Sale. Use, or Removal Order - FIFRA 513	

     The Administrator may Issue a Stop Sale, Use, or Removal  Order
(SSURO) when: 1) based on Inspection or tests, there is reason to
believe thxt a pesticide or device 1s in violation of the Act or
will be sold or distributed in violation of the Act, or 2) the regis-
tration of a. pesticide has been cancelled or suspended.

Request for Voluntary Recall	____

     No expUct authority exists 1n FIFRA for the recall of pro-
ducts.  The effectiveness of a recall action depends on the
cooperation of the Involved company.  Recalls are considered for
products which are likely to result in adverse effects to the
user or environment, physical or economic Injury due to ineffec-
tiveness or presence of residues.  There are two types of recalls
foraal and Informal.  The level of recall also varies, I.e.,
wholesale point of distribution, retail, or user level.  The scope
•ay also vary, e.g.. one batch or all of the product.

-------
                               - 25 -


Seizure - FIF3A SI 3	

     Section 13(b)  gives £?A tne authority to initiate in rgm
condemnation proceedings in district court.  Seizure :s generally
used if a Stoo Sale,  Use, or Removal Order is not being obeyed,
or for extremely hazardous pesticides that require removal  from
tne marketplace or  place of use, or if a' company does not comply
with .a Recall Request, or to dispose of products being held unce-
a Stop Sale, Use, or  Removal Order, if appropriate.

Injunctions - FIFRA §16(4)	

     EPA has fie authority to Initiate injunctive actions before
district courts.  This is to be used 1) when all other remedies
would be inadequate to restrain a violation or to prevent unrea-
sonable risic, 2) all  other remedies have been used but the  vio-
lation continues, or  3) irreparable injury, loss, or damage will
result If relief is not granted.                              „
                                                             •  s
Penalties - FIFRA §14(a) and (b)	

     Any registrant,  commercial applicator, wholesaler, dealer,
re.tailer, or other  distributor who violates any provision of
tne Act may be assessed a civil penalty of up to 55,000 per
offense.  Should any  of the above-mentioned parties 'Knowingly
or willfully vidla-te  tne Act, a criminal p3-ial:y of '.ip to §25,000
ani/or imprisonment for up to one year may 5s :^oos*1.  A 3'v-
vate applicator or  other person not included above who violates
the Ait aftar receiving a *ar.v!r.s l-ettsr or cl ;i:; cr, for a  pri:,-
violation may receive a 51,000 civil penalty for each subsequent
offense.  "For hire"  applicators may be fined S500 for the  first
offense and $1,000  for each subsequent offense.  Criminal penalties
for private applicators and "for hire" applicators may be a fine
of "up to $1,000, 30 days' imprisonment, or both.

     Civil  Penalties  are Issued by the Agency and criminal  cases
are handled by the  Department of Justice.

Civil Administrative  Penalties - FIFRA §14(a)

     A civil penalty, as authorized by FIFRA §14(a), is the remedy
of choice for most  violations.  Figure 1 in the Appendix contains
a  flow chart for FIFRA cases.  A civil penalty should be proposed
where-'"the violation presents (a real but not an extreme and unreason-
able) risk to humans  or the environment; 1s likely to be an isolated
occurrence; was apparently committed as a  result of ordinary negli-
gence*- inadvertence,  or mistake; and either:

-------
                                -  26  -


 a  Involves  a  first  offense  under  the Act  by  any  registrar;:,
   commercial  applicator,  "for  hire'1  aaolicator,  wnoiesa'a.-,
   dealer,  retailer,  or  other distributor  (no  prior  waning
   is -required  by  FIFRA  for  violators in this  category);  or

 o  Involves  a  private  appl i cator'or other  person,  other  than
   any  party specified  in  the first category,  who  has  received
   a prior  warning or  citation  for a  violation  of  FIF3A.   (The
   prior warning or  cltat'ion may nave ieen  for  tiie same  or a
   different FIFRA violation.)

     Under FIFRA  §14,  the Agency  may issue  administrative'
 civil  complaints  to  persons who violate FIFRA  §12.  The  Agency
 •rnurt e-strtllsh by proper -evidence each element  of the violation
 charged.   Generally,  the Region issues the  Civil  Complaint.   (The
 Regional Administrator  is delegated  the authority to  issue
 administrative complaints and  negotiate and  sign  consent  agree-
 ments) .
                                                             K
     The fol low-ing  factors  are used  to determine  the  penalty *
 amount: 1)  the size  of  the  business  of the  person charged, 2)
 the effect on  the defendant's  ability to  continue in  business,
 and 3) the gravity  or  the violation.  The  penalty assessment  system
 initially  determines  a  penalty amount based  on  the  nature and extent
 of violation  and  then  adjusts  this amount  in  consideration of
 mitigating or  exacerbating  factors.  Th-e  guidelines for  assessing
 civil  penalties are  proviaed in the  following  documents:

 o  Guidelines  for  Assessing  Civil  Penalties  Under  Section  14(a)
   and  Citation Cwarges  *or  Viol at4 o^s of  FIF'.A  '-jubl i sn
-------
                                - 27 -


         Proceed"! ngs  - FIF3A  §!•*!)
     The Agency may  initiate  criminal  proceedings  in  eva.-y  :as-»  :n
which £?A can meet the stringent-  requirements  of  evidence  *r,*  p-oc-
leading to  a conviction.  However, Agency  polity,  as  well  as 3-2:-
matic resource considerations, argue against the  use  of  crimiiil"
sanctions in any but the most  serious  instances of  environmental
misconduct, as determined by the  nature  of tne  violation,  tne  .1: story
of compliance on t.ie part af  the  responsible person,  or  the  s.erious.ie
of the environmental consequences.

     Criminal action 1s appropriate for  knowing and willful  violation:
which actually or potentially  result In  serious harm  £o  health or the
environment.  EPA will follow  the guidance contained  in  the  Criminal
Enforcement Priorities 'for the Agency  set  forth in  Robert  E. Perry's
memorandum  :f October 12, 1982.   EPA will  identify  cases for crim'inal
action as early in the case development  process as  possible  to ensure
that the potential defendant's rights  are  protected and  to  ensure :.Hs
integrity of the criminal enforcement  process.  When  a Regton  receives
information indicating potential  criminal  activity, it wilixrefer
the matter to the Criminal Enforcement Division at  Headquarters  for
further i nvestigation and prosecution.

Use of Criminal Proceedings

     T .T 5 A g e n cy has  identified a  nj n b e r  of s o e c i f i c s i t •-' a t* : .1 3
for which criminal orosecut i on is particularly  aoprooriate.  ~i
list ti"2se  situations, however, should ?ot ^e  viewed  as  pre-
cluding criminal prosecuti on.  in circumstances  not  included  below:

o Failure to report  Information on the unreasonable .adverse
  effects of a register*: pesticide;
o Falsification of records;
o Violation of an order suspe-^ng or  cancelling  a product
v  registration;
6 Violation of an SSURO;.
o Unlawful  uses of pesticides; and
o Illegal distribution of unregistered pesticides.

Denials, Suspensions, Modifications, or  Revocations
.  of Applicator Certification

     The regulations relating  to  the certification  of pesticide
applicators (40 CFR  Part 171)  authorize  EPA to  deny,  suspend,
modify, or  revoke Federally Issued applicator  certifications
if the certificate holder violates FIFRA or Its regulations.   EPA
considers this a strong measure,  to be taken only  when public
health-, Interest-- or  welfare warrants Immediate  action.  Therefore,
EPA will deny, suspend, modify, or revoke  a certification  only in
response to serious  violations or against persons  with a history
of no-n compliance.
-------
                               - 28 -
Refusal to Acceat Cata f-om Laboratories Refusing
                                                        -
     This policy is statad in the final FIFRA Good laboratory
Practice Regulations (GLP's) which are to be prorrrj ' ;a :aa in FY'3-i.

Siisoensi on/Cancel lati on of Reaistration
     This is an action xnich may be considered if the statement
of compliance or noncompliance with the GLP's that is to be
submitted along with any data under FIFRA §3 is falsified.  This
action 1s discussed in the  final FIFRA GLP's.

Termination of Establishment Registration
   •
     The regulations on the registration of pesticide-producing
establishments (40 CFR §167.3) state than an establishment
registration will remain in effect so long as the establishment
continues to submit annual  pesticides reports.  If an establish-
ment does not submit an annual pesticides report within 20 days
.after receipt of a Noti ?« of Warning or civil penalty for fai-lura
to submit the report, EPA will initiate procedures to terminate  .
the establishment registration.

Federal  Facilities	

     Generally, if Fadaral  Agencies are fsuni :.? ' vi :1 »v en of -'•
the EPA does not issue penalties.  This is in accordance with Exe
Order 12088, Federal Comoliance With Pollution Control  Standarss,
which established a government wide program for ensuring Federal
facility ..compliance, with pollutl on''control requirements.  Instead of
assessing penalties, EPA tries to resolve the problem.   First, a
l^otice of Warning is issued to notify facility managers of violations,
aqd the EPA works with the  violative agency to establish a remedial
plan.  If the problem cannot be resolved between agencies, the matter
is referred to OMB.

     With regard to criminal action, the Department  of  Justice
has indicated 1t would not  allow EPA to file suit against another
Executive Agency.  In FY 1983, EPA Issued a warning  l«tter to the
F1sh and Wildlife Service for failure to comply with the pro-
visions of an EUP.

     The EPA Office of Federal Activities has developed-a Federal
Facilities Compliance Program Strategy which outlines how EPA
Headquarters and Regional offices will handle Federal facility
compliance activities.  This strategy covers:

o  Tee-nfil ca 1 Ass1 st a n ce - to ensure cost effect1v« and  timely
   compliance.

o  Compliance Monitoring - to -monitor actual compliance.
         *
o  Fiscal Planning Assistance - to assist OMB 1n evaluating budget
   "raquest* Tir ?».-£.» to ccsply with pollution csirtrcl  rsqyl rers
   and monitor use of funds.
-------
                               - 29 -

o  Resolution of Npn-Como1iance Disputes - to notify *>:- :•'•:_.•
   managers of violations ana estao 11 sn renedi a 1 plais.

o  Exemoti ons - to advise' the President,' through O.V3 ,  'ct -a sera:
   Agency FeTonrmendati ons for exemptions'.

He a d g u a rt e r s / R e a. i o n a 1  Coordination 	

     To ensure implementation of the  nations' -'.-t.- coc-lfance/
enforcement strategy,  Headquarters and the Regions will communicata
through the following  mechanisms:

o Policy and Guidance  documents
o Reporting and tracking ttrrougn FATES
o Technical assistance and  review for inspections and  casework
o Evaluation of State  and Regional Programs

The following is a brief discussion of each of these mechanisms.
                                                             \
Policy and Guidance Documents	                        .  s
                                                       *
 . :   Policy and guidance documents currently exist for all  phases
of the program.  These documents will  be revised and supplemented
as necessary.  Plans for revisions and new guidance are discussed
on page 37.  Both  Regions and States  will continue to  be included
in the review of all major  policy and guidance documents.

Reporting and Tracking
     7^a FATES systam iascri iai pra ,-i j-sly is an in:agral ::o" fjr
inspection targetting program evaluation, responses to the Hill,
OMB, and budget development.   Headquarters plans to revise the
FIFRA §7 establishment registration rule and report form to improve
the usefulness- of data in the system.

Technical Assistance
     Headquarters will continue to provide the Regions guidance in
performing Inspections and developing cases.  CMS will also continue
to- coordinate technical assistance for the Regions through NEIC.
Evaluation
     Headquarters will continue to advise the Regions regarding the
effectiveness of their Federal programs and oversight of State
programs through the Regional Reviews and through written and verbal
communication with the CMS.

Federal/State- Re-Tat1onshi p	

     Most .St-atss sou Itavfi entered into cospfirative .agreements with
EPA for compliance/enforcement and C i T programs.  However, EPA
st111 retains distinct rtsponsltoi Htles under both programs.  Ttve
relationship under the C & T program is discussed on page 32.
-------
                               - 30 -
                                  i


Cooperative Enforcement Program

     As the cooperative enforcement program has avol •/?•:, .:?e S.
with agreements have accepted increasing responsiblity  2nd now
fully in all phasas of the program *i:h EPA.

Comoli a nee/Enforcement Acti viti es
     The States with cooperative agreements conduct all FIFRA
compliance monitoring activities related to pesticide production
sale and use.  Federal  Inspections are limited to those related to
data audit, Imports, and assistance upon State request in major
spray programs in the Stat«.  (Th-es-e major spray programs are
usually funded by Federal agencies.) In addition, EPA through'
NEIC provides technical assistance including:

o pesticide use Investigation workshops
o state-of-the-art techniques for monitoring pesticide drift
o conducting state chemists training courses                 \
o evaluating State pesticide laboratories and providing check
  sample analyses

     Under the terms of the cooperative agreements, States will
take all enforcement actions on violations of only State law and
will re^er all violation* of only Federal law product and establish-
ment registration requirements to EPA for enforcement action.
Where tnere is a violation of both State and Federal law, a Stat*1
may take enforcement action itself or refer the case to EPA if it
is unwilling :r unable to do so.

     All States with cooperative agreements also have primary
use enforcement responsibility (primacy).  Under the terms of FIFRA
§526 and 27 and the final rule interpreting these sections, EPA
may not take enforcement action on a significant case referred to
the State unless the State does not take adequate and timely enforce*
ment action.

Stats Program Oversight	
     EPA has primary responsibility for cooperative enforcement
programs oversight; however, the States are closely involved in
this process.

Program Guidance and
Compl1 ance/Enforcement Priorities

     The States through SPIRES (State FIFRA Issues. Research and
Evaluation Group) participate in the development of annual program
guidance.  Although the guidance contains national priorities,
th-ese are only for consideration by the States as they develop
-------
                               - 31 -
tneir own annual program priorities.  Specific outputs  : ; " c:~-
pliance/ enforcement activities are negotiate*! on t-e  ? j : : 3  of  tie
State priorities and productivity factors in tne  guica-'-cs.

Program Evaluation

     Major elements of the Regional evaluation of State  programs
i ncl ude :

o Semiannual reports by the States of their accomplishments  compared
  to the  types and numbers of inspections projected in  the  grant
  agreement .

o Midyear and end of year on-site evaluation based on  a  uniform
  evaluation protocol  which contains both quantitative  and  qualita-
  tive evaluation factors.  The States are given  an opportunity to
  review  evaluation reports before they become final.

o Training and close informal review of the quality of  State  •
  activities.

     The  effectiveness of a State program is judged primarily on  .
the quality of its priority setting system, its  adherence  to
negotiated number of outputs, the quality of its  inspections  and
the adequacy of its enforcement responses.

Feceral  Program in Non -Co opera ti ve Agreement 'States

     In  Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming,  EPA conducts the  entire
Federal  enforcement program.   The Regions use  the same  priority
setting  mechanism used by States  with cooperative agreements  to
allocate  resources, conduct all inspections and  take enforcement
acti ons.

     EPA  will continue its efforts to persuade these States to
participate in the Cooperative Program.

Cooperative Certification and Training Program

Certification and Training Activities

     Currently all States but two have approved  and operating State
pesticide applicator certification plans.  All States with the
exception of Colorado  have applicator training programs  administered
by their  State Cooperative Extension Service in  accordance with
FIFRA §23.  Ten Indian tribes have received EPA  funds to develop
Certification Program*,  Under rh» C 4 T  program, over  1.6 million
private  applicators and 496,000 commercial applicators  have been
certified and trained.  As of September 1982,  there were over
600,000 private applicators and over 266,000 commercial  applicators
recertified.
-------
                               - 32 -


     EPA will ccntinue to conduct  cart 1*1 cation  ?r~--i-i  •?  5t;t
without ca "ti •": cati on plans.  3cth  EPA  and 3:at23  ^ :c=-.i  :-aini-^
material and information to ensure  trtat applicators  : —  a.vare  o"'
changing technology.  EPA and States will  continue  ~:  certify  ne*
app1i cators.

Program Guidance  and C & T Priorities

       In the past priorities for  the C &  T program  have  been  the
approval and, when necessary,the amendment of State  certification
plans  along  with  the maintenance of training programs.   Two  studies
of national  scope were performe-d.   One  involved  pre and  post  testing
of applicators in North Carolina;  the other consisted  of  a  comprehen-
sive  telephone survey of attitudes  and  practices of  private  applica-
tors  in five States.  On-site evaluation of State  program effective-
ness  has been performed by Regional personnel without  specific
guidance from Headquarters.  Headquarters  personnel  accompanied  by
Regional personnel have visited States  and reviewed  certification
files.  However,  there has been no  requirement that  EPA  monitor
certification and training sessions and evaluate content, presentation,
and effectiveness.  A recent GAO study  found in  two  States  that"
enforcement  misuse information was  not  incorporated  in  C  &  T  sessions
and that commercial  app-licators were not fully tested  against  the
EPA standards of  competency.

     In response  to  the recent GAO  report, EPA intends:   1)  to
ensure that  enforcement problems identified in the  oriority  setting
process are  addressed as appropriate in certification  and training
materials; 2) to  ensure t.*:at Stata  programs require  applicators  t:
meet  Federal standards of competency; and  3) to  review  and  revise
training materials as appropriate.

Program Evaluation	
    .Major elements of ttie Regional  evaluation  of  State  programs
i rrclude:

o Semiannual  reports by the States  of their accomplishments
  compared to the types and numbers  of activities  projected
  1n the grant agreement.

o Midyear and end of year evaluations based on  uniform evaluation
  protocol which contains both quantitative and qualitative  evalu-
  ation factors.

Coordination  with Enforcement	
     Stronger emphasis will  be placed on transferring Information
from the enforcement priority setting process to the  certification
and train-frig program for Inclusion in training and certification
aa-tartaLs.  T.o Accomplish this. EPA will include in Its  annual
Cooperative Agreement Guidance a request that States  establish
a management mechanism which will assure that information on
priority pesticide problems  *re Included in the State's  certifi-
cation and training programs, as appropriate.
-------
                               - 33 -

 Update  of V 21 e r i a 1 s

     The core manual and various ca:agory manuals *e"s racantlv
 updated to reflect changing needs and technology.  Co::as of cine
 manuals will se printed by the State Cooperative Extension Services
 (SCES).  These and other training materials will 3e cataloged at
 the USDA 3eltsville library using EPA funding.  T'->e problem continues
 to be future availability of copies.  Neither the Government Print:-^
 Office  or the Department of Commerce will maintain copies of these
 publications for distribution and sale.  Therefore, while copies
 can be  reviewed at the Beltsville library, a user can only print
 his own copies from a camera ready copy, or if the timing is correct,
 order from a SCES which is aioojt tja make a printing run.   SCES's
 do not  usually maintain an inventory of copies for sale.   Therefore,
 the problem is not so much updating training material, but making
 it available when requested to groups other than the SCES's.

 Indian Tribes
     Ten Indian tribes have received EPA funding assistance to
develop certification plans and some draft Indian plans are nojw
being reviewed.  Therefore, while some tribes will  probably ha've
approved plans, others will not.  EPA must then urge these tribes
to enter into an arrangement with States to perform certification
on the re.servati ons or EPA must establish Indian certification
programs.  There is also the possibility of some split options,
such as, States issuing certificates and EPA enforcing misuse  and
denial, suspension or revocation of certification.

Review Plans

     A more complex and long-term proposal is the review of all
existing certification plans for adherence to current standards.
Currently limited resources preclude such an evaluation.

Colorado and Nebraska
     Efforts will continue to be made to have  these  States
develop and submit certification plans.  Colorado has  recently
indicated its interest in developing a program which will  initially
address only commercial applicators.  The Nebraska State  Cooperative
Extension Service has provided training since  the program began,
and this should prove an asset in the effort to have the  Nebraska
Department of Agriculture develop a certification program.

Federal Facilities	
       Federal agencies can have their employees certified under
State or EPA administered certification programs.  Most  Federal
agencies chose this option, even though it imposes geographic
limitations am w.ti«re tfce applicator can apply pesticides,  I.e.,
the State Issuing the certificate or States with reciprocal
agreements.  However, because some Federal applicators must  work
1ft several States* often on stiort notice, EPA allows Federal
-------
                                         -  34  -
          agencies  to  develop  certification  plans  for their e-so/eas.
          Applicators  certified  under  Federal  agency plans can  irciy
          pesticides  anywhere,  but this  certification is  limite*:  :o official
          auty  functions.  To  date, three Federal  agencies, 003,  USOA anc
          DOI,  have  approved Federal agency  certification plans.
          Cross  Program  Elements
               The  pesticide  program  impacts  regulations  and  enforcement of
          other State  and  Federal  environmental  statutes.  There  is  a need
I          to  1)  establish  a better and  more formal  referral program, and 2)
          to  develop a  mechanism  to educate inspectors  on  the  various pro-
i          gram  r*equir«m€nts in order  for them to effectively  make  referrals
          to  other  programs.
|
:          I ntraAgency _
         Toxic  Substances Control Act  (TSCA)

              Since CMS  is  responsible  for  both FIFRA  and TSCA  compliance/
         enforcement,  activities under  both programs are closely coordinated,

         PCS's  (Polychlgrinated Biphenyls)  in Pesticides.   Use  of oil con-
         taining  any  ?C3's  as  a pesticide carrier  has  b~e~e n  prohibited under
         TSCA.  Additional  TSCA regulation  of chemicals may  Have a  sini
         impact on pesticide  registration and use  which require monito"
         under  both Acts.
              icide  Precursor?  and  Intermediates.  Hazardous pesticide ore-
          cursors, and  intermediates wnich are not directly regulated under
          FIFRA  are  regulated under TSCA.

          Pesticide  Wastes.  The TSCA  §6 Dioxin Rule  regulates waste from
          the  manufacture  of 2,4,5-Tri chl orophenol and its' pesticide deriva-
          tives-  TSCA  Dioxin Rule  inspection targets were derived primarily
          from information collected under FIFRA Section 7.

          Data Audit/Laboratory Inspections,  The FIFRA Data Audit Laboratory
          Inspection  program directly  complements the TSCA program in that
          information is snared and inspections under FIFRA and TSCA are
          coordinated and  conducted in conjunction with one another whenever
          possible.   The programs are  formally coordinated through an OPTS
          Data Audit  Panel which has representatives  from OPP, OTS, and CMS.
          The  Panel  deals with targetting inspections, cas« evaluation, and
          enforcement or regulatory responses,
-------
                                - 35 -
 Hazardous  'Vast a  Program

      Pesticides  are  a major constituent of the -vai:2S at a large
 number  of  hazardous  waste sites and information on registrants
 and producers is  needed for clean-up cost recovery and associate
 enforcement actions.' Information on oesticide manufacturers .113
 been  provided to  the Office of Waste Programs in-'orcament as part
 of the  Agency's  dioxin monitoring orogram.

      For pesticides  listed as hazardous wastes under Resource
 Conservation and  Recovery Act (RCRA), disposal of the pesticide
 and/or  empty container is directly regulated under .RCRA,  Investi-
 gations and cases involving illegal disposal of RCRA regulated
 pesticides identified under FIFRA or associated State enforcement
 programs requires close cooperation with State and Federal  RCRA
 personnel.  Pesticide investigations may also provide information
 on disposal practices which point to the need for regulation under
 RCRA.

 Water Program

      Use of pesticides resulting in drift into water is primarily
 a FIFRA and State pesticide enforcement function having a direct
 interface with Water Quality Criteria established by the Ware"
 Programs.  Pesticide contamination of groundwatsr resulting from
 pesticide use also requires coordination between :ne pesticides
 and water programs.

 I nterAgeney
Data Audits/Good Laboratory
Practice Inspections

     As discussed on page 10, FDA conducts inspections for EPA
at laboratories which conduct health effects studies.

Soray Programs

     As discussed on page ZB under Federal Facilities, EPA/States
have monitored spray programs conducted by USOA and the DO I.

Efficacy Testing

     As discussed on page 11, EPA has coordinated with FDA,  USOA,
001, and the Bureau of Standards to have testing conducted on
ultrasonic devices, electromagnetic devices, and rodenticides.
-------
                               - JO -
     EPA worxs witn other "ede.-al Agencies of tne'~ ~2juest :i
the aeve; opinent and implementation of C i 7 prp^rans.   Currently
DOD, USDA, and DOI's Sureau of "Land Management nave approved C *J *
programs.

Food C :.-rt2,r1 iat i an

     USDA  an-d FDA monitor pesticide residues in food.   3otn
agencies forward reports on food contamination oy pesticides
to EPA for followup investigation, if appropriate.

Referrals  and Information Exchange

     EPA coordinates with USDA, FDA, DOI, FTC, CPSC, and the
U.S. Postal Service on several specific types of products/devices
that are of mutual interest.

Program Eva 1uation

     A system for evaluating the effectiveness of the  FIFRA com-
pliance/enforcement program must define specific areas for evaluatio
measures of program success and mechanisms for performing the
evaluation.  The Agency can best measure its success in achievi^
compliance whan it has developed i) an adequate aata oasa for
identifying members of the regulated community and 2}  predict:
models designed to select those -nenoers most likely to be in
At that stage, the Agency can consider its program a succass if only
13i of those persons inspected under a neutral scheme  are violators
•% ~ ? T ? O ^
^ •  i • • . * .~\ «

Evaluation Areas

     Areas for evaluation include 1} adherence by EPA  and the
States to  quantitative and qualitative performance commitments; and
2) the extent of compliance with FIFflA by the regulated community.

Measures of Success

Adherence  to Commitment

     The adherence by EPA and the States to performance commitments
can be measured by the following factors:

o Implementation of a priority setting scheme.
o Adherence to output commitments as measured by the Administrator's
  Management Accountability System.
o Adherence to Inspection procedures required in guidance.
o Number,  promptness, success and adequacy of enforcement actions
o Accuracy and timeliness of compliance data entry and retrieval^

     These factors will allow a quantitative and qualitative
evaluation of the system.
-------
                                          -  J /  -

           Compliance  by  the  Regulated  Community	

                The  axtant  of conp':aica  for  tia  '•agu'atec  :: --rj -i: :/  -iay 33
           •neasured  to a  limited  degree  by tie  fallowing  fact o-s:

           o  Number  of applicators  trained and  certified.
           o  Proportionate  number of  estaolisnments  known  to  2e  in  como'iince.
           o  Proportionate  nunoer of  applicators  known  to  oe  in  corco1ianca.
           o  Proportionate  number of  laboratories  known to  ae in  compliance.
           o  Trends  in major  types  of  violations.

           Evaluation  Mechanisms	___

                Th-e  awjor mechanisms  to  txe used in program  evaluation  are
           the  following:

           o  FATES.  The  FIFRA  and  TSCA  Enforcement  System  contains  data on
             inspections  and  sampling,  case  development,  grants  and  contract
             inspections.   This data  will  be  analyzed to  determine  whatner
             program commitments  were  met.   The FATES system  should  be  modified
             to  include State data  and  to  generate descriptive information
             which could  be used  to  better target  inspection  areas  based" on an
             analysis  of  major  types  of  violations and  violation  trends..  How-
             ever such a  modification  cannot  be implemented without  additional
             resources.   In FY86,  CMS  plans  to  request  funding to  incorporate
             State data into  FATES.

           o  Mid-year  and and of  year  Stats  program  reviews.  As  discussed
             on  page 31,  these  reviews/evaluations are  bases  on  a  uniforii
             evaluation protocol  whic-  contains iot.i quantitative  anc.
             qualitative  evaluation  factors.

           o  Regional  Reviews.  A team  of  Headquarters  and  Regional  personnel
             visits  each  Region avary  two  years to conduct  a  thorough  program
             review.  The review  concentratas on  Regional  progYara  organization;
             performance  of outputs;  adherence to  national  guidance  in  the
             performance  of inspections  and  development of  cases;  and  the
             need for  Improved/expanded  Headquarters support  of  Regional
             activities in  specific  areas.

;                 Approximately four  weeks after  the on-site  review,  Head-
j             quarters  submits a written  report  to  the Region  covering  all
i             program elements that  were  part  of the  review.   The  report  notes
             btjfh positive  and  negative  aspects of the  Region's  pesticides
             compliance/enforcement  program  and includes  recommendations for
i             changes to be  Implemented  by  the Region and  Headquarters.   The
'             Director  of  the  Compliance  Monitoring Staff  conducts  a  follow-up
             visit with the Regional Administrator to go  over any  issues raised
             by  the  review  which  require  further  discussion.

           o  Periodic  review  of overall•program based on  review  of  FATES data
             and State and  Regional reviews.  In  order  to  effectively  evaluate
             the program, 1t  1s necessary  to  review  the program  in  its  entirety
-------
                                        -  33  -


           Pro oram  Modification	
                  EPA  uses  data  from  FATiS,  State  Program  3 a vi ew 3,  3 a g 13,12,
           reviews  and the  overall  program  review^  to  modify  '">•*  coro 1 ; 2 ica '
           enforcement program  as  necasary  and  to  give input  to  OP°  concern *->~
           regulatory  changes necessary  to  facilitate  comoliance  monitoring,
           enforcement,  or  compliance.

           Future  5u1 la nee

                The  following is  a  list  of  guidance documents  currently  under
           development or  consideration.*

           o FY85  Cooperative Agreement  Guidance.   This .document  will modify
            C  i T  al1ocations ,  specific instructions  on  transferring enforce-
            ment  priorities to  the C  4  T programs, evaluation  of  the CAT
            program  plans  and  training  materials,  and improved  productivity
            factors  for negotiating  grant  outputs.

           o FIFRA  Compliance Program Policy  Compendium  further  defines  the
            requirements  of FIFRA  regulations.Currently there  are  twenty
            such  policies  in the  compendium  and three under  review  by  the
            Regions,  the  States  (through SFIREG),  and the program office.

           o FIFRA  Inspection Manual  provides information  on  conducting  in(
            t i o n s,  c: i 1 ecti ng  samp" es ,  cna1! n-of-custody  procedures,  p.-2:
            suooort  documents,  and other indorsation  necessary  to cona
            FIFRA  inspections.-  This  document  snould  be  revised  if  resources
            are avai1 able.
             originalpenalty  policy  have  been  developed  over  the  years  to
::             reflect  amendments  to  the  law.   These  will all  be combined  into
             one  comprehensive document.

           o. FTFRA  Comoliance  Strategies.  The  FIFRA  Compliance Strategies  are
             developed for  all rules  promulgated  under FIFRA.   A compliance
             strategy  identifies the  (a)  requirements of  the regulation,  (b)
             the  type  of  act-Ions which  are appropriate for the violation,  (c)
,     '        the  Inspection scheme  (from  which  the  regulated community  is
;             targetted),  and (d) allocation  of  responsibilities between  Head-
             quarters  and the  Regions.

[           o QuaTity Assura-nce Plan Development Guidance  When manuals  are
;             updated,  and as resources  are available, CMS will coordinate
             with the  Office of  Research  and Development's Quality Assurance
             Management Staff  and the N£IC in developing  a model Quality
             Assurance Plan for  use by  the States in  developing individual
             Quality Assurance Plans.  States receiving Federal funds  for
             compliance monitoring  must submit  Quality Assurance Plans  to  EPA
             annually.


             * A  comprehensive 11st of  existing compliance/enforcement  guidance
               docym«nts  1s Included  1n the  Appendix  of tne  FIFRA  Cowplisacs/
               Enforcement  Guidance.
-------
- 39 -
   APPENDIX
-------
                                                                 FLOW
                                           NEUTRAL |
                                                IFOR  CAUSE)
  NO
ACTION
                                                        I INSPECTION!
                                                             J. ' '     (30 days to deteytilne compl lance/noncompl lance)
                                                        .   -if       .               .-  1    .IJ	,
                                                        (COMPLIANCE]               | HON-COMPUAIJTE. J
                                          (60 days  to prepare action)
                             _—	y  ,., ,,..  ,     —*
                             | ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS)
                                                                    |  JUDICIAL ACTIONS)
                 ADVERTISIN
                   UTTER

3
           TERNI NATION
           ESTAB. REQ.

                              1	,
                          ACTION TAKEN
                          ON APPLICAIOK
                          CFRTIFK ATIKI
                                                                                                     1
1
lit
Hi


(RFC



^
AlLSJ




STOP SALE
USE OR
REMOVAL
ORDER
1





CIVIL
PENA1




T
t-


ADM.
|E$
	 1
1

IIN.IUNC
1
1 — j

/
]buii!tt£j

r 	 J


               CRIMINAL
               PROCEEDING
             REMEDIAL
             ACT
9N
                                CACENI:Y
                                (iMpiAirn
                                                    |U.S.  ATTOHNEy'l
                                                                  UEPT
                                                                  JUSTICE
            (DEFAULT)
           NO
         ACTION
                                                 [ALJ
             DEFAULT
              ORDER
                                                      AI.U H tir NT)
                                                     —. — ~_—_._J
                                                                         HEARING]
                                                                                                i
   ToFV-
   ICE  I
   !*• ••—-—*  *
-4 NO ACflOU |
r- - "*
t
INITIAL
DECISION

                                                                        | U.S.  I) I ST. COUUT|—JNOT GUILTY J
                                              FINAL
                                              ORDER

                                     I  NOT   L
                                     I (.mi (y f
                                                                iii'HEt n(t —
                                                     APPEAL  TO
                                                    ADMINISTRATOR
                                             PENAL TY
U.S. COURT
 Ol: APPEAL
                                                                UPHELDi
                                                                                                               HOT
                                                                             U.S. SUJ'REMf
                                                                                 COURT
1                                                                                               r,u 11 ry JIIDHMFU
                                                                                              JJfjyNCJJON/SU/
                                                                                   JIIIK-MIIIF
                                                                                         /IIIU
'Determinations of compl lance/noncanpl lance are  deponent  upon  receipt of all documentation and completion of all
 Simple analyses.   Action  preparation  Is  dependent  upon resolutIon of any new policy Issues |.ti.-si;nlcv tin*
 Thif time frames are based  on the Ideal  situation.
-------
i I^Sl
                            i
ENFORCFMIW  ACllOrlli Rsill TING  FROM GRANT INSPECTIONS
               FYIM  ACCOfUM-ISIIMENTS
                lUTfHMI     National

ENFORCEMENT
ACCOMPLI SI HEMTS
i
Inspections
i
Civil Actions
Criminal Actions
Administrative
Hearings
Llconse/Cortlhcate
Suspension '
L 1 cense/Cert I I Icate
Revocation
L 1 cense/Cert 1 1 lea to
Conditioning or
Mod (Meat Ion
Number of Cases
Isfcued Warnings
Stop-|Sale, Seizure,
Quarantine or Embaryo
Cases Forwarded to
EPA for Action
Other Enforcement
Actions ,
Total Number of
Actionable Inspections
Percent of Inspections
Result Inp In Action
Percent ot total
Actions (8712)
Numbqr ol Cases
Assessed Finos
AGfllCU
Use
2,923
19
2
16
1
14
B
366
24
	 H
s
0
15.4
5.2
12
TURAL
Misuse
3.675
70
47
76
33
126
17
	 366
17
22
43
	 017
22.2
9.4
59
IIONAGRICIIUIRA!
Hsu
1,631
7
20
21
II
10
24
694
62
4
25
870
16.9
10. 1
9
Mis.lM,
I4OOJ
Kill
II
!>••
li
It

412
27
2'..
5,
U4<>
46. U
9.7
t a - a 3 -.. ;: :: :
IXP llr,F
INSP
Ml 4
20
0
0
0
0
0
	 16
3
3
0
42
1(1.9
0.5
14
PRODUCE
ES1AU
2,653
30
5
25
0
3
2
402
77
119
"~ 117
750
20.3
0.6
•3I»
MARKET-
PLACE
12,522
142
1
57
3
0
3
620
1032
163
970
2991
23.9
34.4
IM-
PORTS
523
6
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
10
19
3.6
0.2
CERTIFIED
API 'LICK
RECORDS
II, 175
159
90
67
502
2d

701

7
2
1561
13.9
17.9
H6 15 *,
KIT, IMC III)
USI PI SI
1)1 AUKS
9,1111
44
0
14
2
1
0
219
5U
0
9
VI /
>.'.
'1.0
•ft
IOTA!
50,104
665
242
343
565
IB6
t
57
3U02
J30I
354
1197
(1712
I/. 4
100
424

-------
                                                   1AHIE  I"
                             ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS KESOLllNli EKOH GRANT INSPECTIONS
                                            FY02  ACCOMPUSIIIOrs
                                                       HA 11 (illAl
FHFOitCEMENT
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Inspection!
Civil Actions
Criminal Actions
Administrative
Hearings
License/Certificate
Suspension
License/Certificate
((evocation
License/Certificate
"and t Honing or
lidh (cation
Yiiniliefr of Cases
Issued Uarhtngs
Stop-Sale, Seizure,
[)uarant1ne or Embargo
r.?•••• a i
254
5.2
3.3
10
Misbse
2,401
26
15
59
29
5
13
471
12
10
17
657
27.4
0.5
25
NONAGR
Use
4,962
20
41
43
7
in
3
666
311
10
173
i a as a a ai
1 .027
20.7
13,2
5
CUTURAL
Misuse
1,792
27
152
175
21
35
3
406
54
5
52
IBB tfSBBC i
930
51.9
12.0
105
VXF HSt
INSP
313






1

311
31
9.')
0.1
(•Homier
ISIAII
2,339
2
1
14



237
116
69
14
4/3
20.2
6.1
Trarr-
PI.ACE
15.932
10
5
57


1
505
1.024
m
940
2,706
17.0
34. H
£ J 6
IM-
PORTS
174






3
1
4
: _ a ^ a a s =
0
4.6
O.I
0
CEHTIFlEn
APPLICR
RECORDS
l4,;nii
. 7
5
27
1411
'I
2
742
5
2
102
1,041
7.1
13.4
25
USE I'EST
DEALEKS
11.779
5

11
11


210
119

12/
491
4.2
6.3
II
miirir
76




1






7
124
1
3
Mr.
1
1,
9
lOTAr
59.317
120
221
406
216
60
30
3,469
1.531
224
1,479
7,764
13.1
10(1
W I'-"'
Inrliirlnc  1C\  nlhpr I ncunr t I «»n< .»ml  i
                                                                                                            .I I.
-------
                              -o - ;
FEDERAL PESTICIDE COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS

Producer Establishment
I nspect i ons
Use Investigations
Marketplace Inspections
Import Inspections
Dealer Inspection's
Laboratory Audits/
Inspecti ons
CY70
443
482
1115
332
359
17
= Y30
234
559
320
494
955
3
r v a •
257
435
291
241
946
4
r / - ?
235
< • i
•* ; •»
233
306
719
" 13
r v : 2 '
15:
124
210
301
0
25
TOTALS                     2303     2621    2254      2021       821
2nc Quarter rYS3 Totals
-------
p-QERAL PESTICIDE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
                           rv79     " v 3 0    - y ~'
CivilCo™D'i3ints                 *
  Initiated                 252      175

Criminal  Referrals
  Initiate!:                   2        A

Stop Sale, Use, Removal
                                               0
Orders
Notices of Warning
Import Detentions
TOTALS
479 Ij
507
91
1332
113
831
70
1194
105
429
71
755
50
855
53
1137
42
1270
11
1545
I/ Second Quarter FY83 Totals
T/ An additional 24,000 Stop Sale Orders were issued to firms t£
   held SLisoended 2,4,5-" and Silvex products.
-------
1532,
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                             JAN 151985
                                                           OFFICE OF
                                                   PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Final GLP Compliance Strategy

FROM:     A. E. Conroy II, Director
          Office of Compliance Monitoring£fEN-342)

TO:       Addressees
     Attached for your information is the final compliance
strategy for the Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) regulations (also  .
attached) published on November 29, 1983 (48 £R 53922).  The
rules became effective on December 29, 1983 for the Toxic
Substances Control  Act (TSCA) and on May 2, 1984 for the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).  The Office
of Compliance Monitoring (OCM) is now evaluating comments on the
TSCA GLP enforcement response policy (ERP)  and the final ERP is
expected to be completed during the second  quarter of FY 85.

     We appreciate the time and effort spent by the various program
offices and regions in reviewing this document.  OCM received
several editorial comments regarding the compliance strategy
which has helped to clarify portions of the final  policy.  While
all the comments received were reviewed, all comments were not
incorporated into the final policy.  Responses to  the most
significant comments are provided below.

Comment 1-  For large commercial laboratories and/or complex
studies, two days notice prior to inspection is unrealistic.
Recommend two weeks.  Without adequate notice... personnel and
key data... (may not be) readily available.

Response-  The GLP regulations have provided adequate notice to
all persons, in the section for storage and retrieval of records
and data, that there shall  be archives for  orderly storage and
expedient retrieval of all  raw data and documentation.  Persons
will be in violation of the GLP regulations when not complying
with this provision.  Two days has generally been  accepted as
adequate notification by the other commentors and  OCM staff.
-------
                               -2-
Comment 2-  OTS has noted that "some data submitted with PMNs
have stated that studies were done according to GLPs (usually
OECD GLPs).  However, protocols are often missing, test
substances are inadequately defined, and there are other
deviations from any known GLPs.  OTS recommends that claims that
data were in accordance with GLPs not be allowed unless the data
reports are sufficiently detailed to support the claim.  As a GLP
compliance issue, this recommendation should be considered by
OCM."

Response-  OCM does not have the authority to restrict persons
from making claims such as described above.  OTS could remedy
this by amending the PMN rule requiring submitters to 1) provide
statements with PMNs indicating whether the submitted studies
adhere to the GLPs and 2) support such claims with sufficiently
detailed reports.  When OTS has concerns with specific data and
compliance with the GLPs, OTS should provide OCM a list of
studies supporting PMNs and the names of the labs.  OCM can then
schedule inspections/audits at the laboratory.

Comment 3-  OPP recommends that the "quality assurance unit
establish written procedures which it would follow in conducting
inspections."  OPP justifies this request by stating that section
160.35(d) of the FIFRA GLP regulations does not clearly identify
who is responsible for writing the procedures.

Response-  OCM agrees that such language is needed.  However,   i
OCM does not have the authority to require this in the GLP
strategy unless it first appears in the GLP regulation.  OCM
suggests that OPP propose an amendment to the regulation
regarding this subject.

Comment 4-  OPP recommends that the GLP strategy indicate that
management communicate deviations from the regulations "in
writing" to EPA because the GLP regulations do not specify the
means of communication.

Response-  Same response as for comment 3.

     If you have any questions concerning this memorandum, please
call Richard Green of my staff at (202) 382-7845.
Attachments

Addressees

Marcia Willia-ris     Air and Waste Management Division Directors
Don Clay            Environmental Services Division Directors
Steven Schatzow     Regional  Toxics and Pesticides Branch Chiefs
Terrell Hunt        Office of Regional  Counsel
Ruth Bel 1
Jim McCormick
-------
   Strategy for the Enforcement of the Good Laboratory Practice
                 Regulations Under TSCA and FIFRA
Overview

     On November 29, 1983, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) published final rules establishing Good Laboratory Prac-
tice (GLP) standards for the conduct of laboratory studies that
are used to obtain data for hazard evaluations under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), and the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA).  The GLP regulations became effective on
December 29, 1983 for TSCA and on May 2, 1984 for FIFRA.  They
were the result of investigations by the Food and Drug Adminis-
tration (FDA) and EPA which showed that some studies submitted
in support of the safety of regulated products and pesticides
had not been conducted in accordance with acceptable practice,
and that, accordingly, the quality and integrity of such studies
were not always adequate.  In conjunction with EPA's new data
audit efforts, the regulations are intended to ensure the high
quality of laboratory test data required to evaluate the health
and environmental effects of regulated chemical  substances and
pesticides.

     The Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and Toxic Sub-
stances has established a Laboratory Data Integrity Program
(LDIP)  within the Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM) which
combines the GLP inspection program with EPA's data audit program
OCM, the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), and the Office of
Toxic Substances (OTS) are charged with cooperating in the
development and conduct of an effective laboratory inspection
and data audit program.
Requirements of the Rule

Applicabi1ity

     The GLP regulations apply to any study conducted, initiated,
or supported on or after the effective dates of the rules that
relate to health effects, environmental  effects, and chemical
fate testing under TSCA and studies (as  defined by section
160.3(m) of the FIFRA GLPs) that support or are intended to
support applications for research or marketing permits for
pesticide products rrgulated by EPA.  By their terms the rules
apply to studies relited to TSCA Section 4 Test Rules, under
FIFRA to Section 3 'applications for registration), Section 5
(experimental use permits), Section 18 (emergency exemptions),
and Section 24(c) (registrations for special local needs), and
under FFDCA to Section 408 (tolerances for pesticide residues  on
raw agricultural commodities) and Section 409 (food additive
regulations).
-------
                               -2-                    -

     In addition, under TSCA the Agency will  require sponsors to
utilize the GLP standards When conducting testing under negotiated
testing agreements.  Agency policy also requires that all  data
developed as a result of regulations or orders under Section 5
of TSCA must be in accordance with GLP standards.  Any failure
to adhere to GLP standards in generating data under negotiated
testing agreements or under Section 5 of TSCA may result in the
Agency's electing to consider such data insufficient to evaluate
the health effects, environmental  effects, and fate of the chemical

Specific Requirements of the GLP Regulations

     The requirements of the GLP regulations  are contained in
40 CFR Part 160 (48 F£ 53946, November 29, 1983) and 40 CFR
Part 792 (48 FJR 53922, November 29, 1983).  Generally, the rules
contain proviTfons relating to:

          (1) General Provisions;
          (2) Organization and Personnel;
          (3) Facilities;
          (4) Equipment;
          (5) Testing Facilities Operation;
          (6) Test and Control Substances;
          (7) Study Protocols; and
          (8) Records and Reports.


     (1) General Provisions (Subpart A).

     Subpart A contains a number of key provisions that are
designed to promote an awareness of GLP requirements on the
part of all persons involved in the testing  process.  First, the
rules require that a sponsor must  notify of  the GLP regulations'
applicability any laboratory that  performs all or part of  a
study that is subject to the regulations.

     Second, any person who submits data from a study in connec-
tion with a TSCA Section 4 test rule or an application for a
research or marketing permit must  include in  the submission a
statement signed by the applicant, the sponsor, and the study
director, of one of the following  types:

     (a) A statement that the study was conducted in accordance
with the GLP regulations;

     (b) A statement describing in detail all differences  between
the practices used  .n the study and those required by the  GLP
regulations; or

     (c) A statement that the person was not  a sponsor of  the
study, did not conduct the study,  and does not know whether
the study was conducted in accordance with the GLP regulations.
-------
                               -3-

     Finally,  Subpart A details the sanctions available to the
Agency that are in addition to the imposition of ci.vil and crimi-
nal penalties.  For example, EPA may choose not to consider
reliable for purposes of  showing that a chemical does not present
a risk of injury to health or the environment any study which •
was not conducted in accordance with GLP requirements.  Any
determination  that a study will not be considered reliable will
not relieve the sponsor of a required test of the obligation
under any applicable statute or regulation to submit the results
of the study to EPA.  EPA may also require the sponsor of data
submitted under a TSCA Section 4 test rule to develop data in
accordance with GLP requirements where he or she failed to do so
in a previous  submission.


     (2) Organization and Personnel (Subpart B).

          (a)  Personnel (Sections 160.29 and 792.29).

     While specific qualifications are not required of laboratory
personnel, the rules generally require facilities to document
that each individual engaged in the conduct of a study has educa-
tion, training, and experience to enable that individual to
perform his or her assigned -functions.

     Personnel  are also required to take necessary personal
sanitation and health precautions to avoid contamination of
and control substances and test systems.
792.31).
                                                  test


(b)  Testing Facility Management  (Sections  160.31  and
     For each study, testing facility management is required to
designate as study director a scientist or other professional of
appropriate education, training, and experience.  The study
director has overall responsibility for the technical conduct of
the study, as well as for the interpretation, analysis, documen-
tation, and reporting of results, and represents the single
point of study control.

     Testing facility management is required to establish a
quality assurance unit responsible for monitoring each study to
ensure that the facilities, equipment, personnel, methods,
practices, records, and controls are in conformance with the
GLP regulations.  For any given study the quality assurance unit
must be entirely separate from and independent of the personnel
engaged in the t'irection and conduct of that study.

     Management is also required to ensure that test and control
substances have been properly tested for identity, strength,
-------
                               -4-         .         -   .

facilities, equipment, materials and methodologies are  available
as scheduled.  Finally, management must ensure that any deviations
from the regulations reported by the quality  assurance  unit  are
communicated, preferably in writing, to the study director and
that corrective actions are taken and documented.


     (3) Facilities (Subpart C).

     Each testing facility is required to be  of suitable  size,
construction, and location for the proper conduct of studies.
It must be designed so that activities are sufficiently separ-
ate to prevent any adverse impacts on the study.  More  detailed
requirements ensure proper facilities for:

          (a) Animal care and supplies;
          (b) Handling test and control substances;
          (c) Laboratory operation;
          (d) Specimen and data storage;  and
          (e) Administration and personnel.


     (4) Equipment (Subpart D).

     Any automatic, mechanical, or electronic equipment used
in the generation, measurement, or assessment of data,  and
equipment used for facility environmental control is required
to be of appropriate design and adequate  capacity to function
according to the protocol and must be operated, inspected,
cleaned, and maintained in a suitable location.  Equipment
used for the generation, measurement, or  assessment of  data
must be adequately tested, calibrated, and standardized.


     (5) Testing Facilities Operation (Subpart E).

     A testing facility is required to have standard operating
procedures (SOPs) in writing that set forth study methods
adequate to ensure the quality and integrity  of the data  generated
in the course of a study.  Any deviations must be authorized and
documented.  SOPs are required for most facets of a study.


     (6) Test and Control Substances (Subpart F).

     The identity, strength, purity, and  composition, and any
other characteristics which will appropriately define the test
or control substance, must be determined  for  each batch and  be
documented before the study is initiated.  The sponsor  or testing
facility must document all methods of synthesis, fabrication,  or^
derivation of the test and control substances and must  determine^
-------
                               -5-

that they are stable, properly labeled,  stored,  and  handled  in
such a way as to prevent contamination,  deterioration,  or  damage.
The receipt and distribution of each  batch  must  be documented
and reserve samples retained.

     For each test or control substance  that  is  mixed with a
carrier, tests must be conducted to  determine the mixture's
uniformity, concentration, and stability.   The expiration  date
of any components of the mixture must be shown clearly  on  the
contai ner.


     (7) Study Protocol  (Subpart G).
                                                  t
     Each study is required to be conducted in accordance  with
an approved protocol that clearly indicates the  objectives and
all methods for the conduct: of the study.   Any changes  in  an
approved protocol must be explained,  documented, signed and
dated by the study director, and maintained with the protocol.


     (8) Records and Reports (Subpart J).

     A final report must be prepared  for each study, signed
and dated by the study director, and  maintained  by the  sponsor
and the testing facility.  In addition,  all  raw  data, documen-
tation, records, protocols, specimens, and  final reports generated
as a result of a study must be retained  and archived for orderly
storage and expedient retrieval.  This includes  correspondence
and other documents relating to the  conduct,  interpretation, and
evaluation of data.


     (9) Environmental Testing (Subpart  L  - TSCA only).

     The TSCA GLP regulations contain special provisions that
adapt the regulations to environmental studies.   The FIFRA GLP
regulations contain no corresponding  subpart.
Regulated Community

     The regulated community consists of those who sponsor and
submit tests that are subject to the GLP regulations  and  the
laboratories that conduct such tests (see Appli cabi1ity ,  above)
-------
                      •   ,      -6-

Enforcement


Objecti ve

     The objective of this  strategy is  to  maximize compliance
with the GLP regulations in order to promote  the high  quality  of
laboratory test data necessary to evaluate the health  and  environ-
mental effects of regulated chemical  substances  under  TSCA and
pesticides under FIFRA.


Violations

     Generally, the failure to comply with any requirement of  the
GLP regulations is a violation of those regulations (see  Speci fi c
Requirements of the GLP Regulations, above).   However, violations
are actionable in a different manner under FIFRA than  under
TSCA, since, unlike TSCA, FIFRA does not provide that  it  is
unlawful to violate a regulation promulgated  under its authority.
Accordingly, a violation of the GLP regulations  is not necessarily
a violation of FIFRA.  Exceptions are where falsification  is
committed knowingly within  the meaning  of  Section 12(a)(2)(m)  of
FIFRA, and where records are not maintained as required by FIFRAL
The FIFRA GLP regulations provide further  that EPA may refuse
to consider reliable for purposes of supporting  an application
for a research or marketing permit any  data from a study  which
was not conducted in accordance with the GLP  regulations.

     In addition, the submission of a false statement  under the
certification provisions of the GLP regulations  may form  the
basis for cancellation, suspension, or  modification of a  research
or marketing permit, or denial or disapproval  of an application
for such a permit under Sections 3, 5,  6,  13,  or 24 of FIFRA  or
Sections 408 or 409 of FFDCA, for criminal prosecution under
18 U.S.C. 2 or 1001 or Section 14 of FIFRA, or for imposition  of
civil penalties under Section 14 of FIFRA.

     Similar sanctions are  contained in the TSCA GLP regulations,
except that the failure to  comply with  the TSCA  GLP regulations
is a violation of Section 15 of TSCA.  Violations are  therefore
subject to the sanctions contained in that section.


Inspection Scheme

     EPA, with t'»e assistance of the Food  and  Drug Administration
(FDA) and the National Toxicology Program  (NTP), will  use  a
Neutral Administrative Inspection Scheme (NAIS)  for laboratories
that have conducted or are  conducting health  effects studies
-------
                               -7-                    '

that are subject to the GLP regulations.  The responsibilities
of FDA and NTP are set forth in two interagency agreements.
Laboratories conducting environmental effects studies will be
addressed similarly, but only EPA will be involved in these
since FDA and NTP do not review studies of this type.

     The GLP regulations require testing facilities to permit
EPA inspections at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner.
EPA believes that the possibility of unannounced inspections
motivates compliance and efficiently uses resources.  Generally,
however, EPA will notify laboratories up to two days before
an inspection in order to ensure the availability of appropriate
personnel and records.  Once EPA notifies a laboratory, it will
not change the date of the inspection unless the laboratory
demonstrates unusual  circumstances and good cause.  EPA will
coordinate with FDA and NTP 1:0 avoid multiple inspections at
the same facility.

     The NAIS will consist of two major categories of inspections:
GLP inspections and data audits.  Inspections within both of
these categories normally will  be conducted on the basis of
objective criteria or random selection.  However, inspections
may be targeted for cause at certain facilities where:  1) major
problems were discovered during a previous inspection that might
affect the validity of unaudited studies; 2) EPA receives tips
(i.e., phone calls and letters from various sources, and
information provided by OPP or OTS based on their ongoing reviews
which OCM will  review for validity and significance to determine
the level of priority for enforcement action), complaints, or
other information indicating that a particular laboratory is in
violation of the GLP regulations; or 3) a particular study is
assigned a high priority because it is expected to form the
basis for major regulatory action.

     GLP inspections are laboratory-oriented and will focus on
a facility's compliance witli the GLP regulations.  They will
usually include partial audits of at least two ongoing studies.
GLP inspections will  be scheduled by OCM and carried out by
Regional  inspectors and FDA.  NTP, at OCM's request, will provide
assistance when OCM personnel  lack specific expertise.

     A data audit is stt'-jy-oriented and is the process by which
EPA verifies that the data from a completed laboratory study are
consistent with the final  report that was submitted to the Agency.
This is accomplished by examining raw data and other records
generated during the study and comparing them with results provided
in the study report.  Data audits will be scheduled and carried
out by OCM, with necessary assistance provided by FDA, NTP,
Program Offices, and the Regions.
-------
                               -8-

     Ideally, EPA should inspect regularly every laboratory that
conducts EPA-related studies and should audit every study that
has been (or will be) submitted to EPA in support of the safety
of regulated substances.  However, in the event that EPA's re-
sources do not permit such complete coverage of the regulated
community, EPA will  apply the following criteria to the conduct
of inspections:


     GLP Inspections/Partial Study Audits:  EPA will assign
     priority to the estimated 90-100 laboratories that conduct
     90 percent of EPA-related testing.  EPA plans to conduct
     inspections on  a periodic basis at every laboratory
     conducting testing under TSCA and FIFRA.  Priority will  be
     assigned to testing laboratories with greatest number of
     studies performed under TSCA and FIFRA and those who
     initiate testing under TSCA or FIFRA for the first time.
     The frequency of these inspections will depend upon
     available resources and will be geared towards visiting  labs
     to inspect the  full gamut of studies (acute, subchronic  and
     chroni c) , if possible.

     Data Audits:  EPA will assign priority to studies based
     upon the known  need of the specific program to form the
     basis for major regulatory action.  EPA will also assign
     priority to studies known to be or suspected of being in
     violation of FIFRA or TSCA.  High priority studies often
     will be the subject of both a GLP inspection/partial study
     audit while they are ongoing and an audit after completion.
     Studies that were not required to be conducted in accordance
     with the GLP regulations normally will be targeted for
     audit by the Program Offices.
     Within both
priority to res
indicating that
h of these categories, EPA will  assign the highest
ponding to tips, complaints,  and other information
 violations of the GLP regulations  exist.
Violation Detection Priorities

     The requirements of the GLP regulations may be separated
into two categories:  (1) those directly related to the actual
conduct of a study; and (2) laboratory housekeeping requirements.
EPA will assign a higher priority to violations in the former
category.  However, some overlap between these categories may
be expected.  Wnere this occurs, the guiding consideration becomes
the degree to which a given violation may compromise the validity
of a study.  For example, a violation of the recordkeeping require-
ments would ostensibly fall within the housekeeping category.
Nevertheless, the lack of records may prevent EPA from determining
that a study's results are valid and would therefore be given a
higher priority.
-------
                               -9-         •


Administrative Consideration?

     The attached Memorandum of Agreement  (MOA) between OCM,
OTS, and OPP will govern the administration of LDIP.  Generally,
the MOA establishes the LDIP Panel which will be chaired by OCM
and will include members from OPP and OTS.  The Panel will serve
as  a clearinghouse for the flow of information among participating
Offices and will periodically review LDIP  policies, procedures,
and operations and recommend program changes to the Director,
OCM, who has full responsibility for implementing the program.
The Panel will serve as a steering committee to ensure that
Agency commitments and objectives are fully implemented and met.

     OCM will  have the lead in directing the program by (1)
coordinating all laboratory inspections and data audits with
OPP, OTS, and the Regions, and by (2) acting as a liaison with
other agencies, such as FDA and NTP, which cooperate with EPA in
conducting laboratory inspections and data audits.  OCM will be
the Agency contact for scheduling FDA and EPA laboratory inspec-
tions and study audits, as well as for receiving and disseminating
audit and inspection reports to both OPP and OTS.  OCM will
monitor the status of each inspection and audit.
                            /'
     The Regional Offices will provide support for inspection
and enforcement activities as needed.  Regional  responsibilities
will include the conduct of and case development for most GLP
inspections.

     OTS and OPP will provide the scientific and regulatory
review of laboratory GLP inspection reports and data audit
reports within their respective program areas.  Program Office
scientists will recommend studies for audit and will participate
in  inspections and study audits at laboratories, consistent
with resource  allocations.  They will also serve as expert
witnesses in support of Agency litigation efforts.
-------
                        INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
                              BETWEEN
               THE  U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY •
             OFFICE OF  PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
                                AND
          THE  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
                    NATIONAL TOXICOLOGY PROGRAM
1.  PURPOSE
     This  agreement provides for cooperation between the National
Toxicology Program  (NTP) and the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) in the areas  of inspector training, inspection operations,
data audits and information exchange.  This cooperation will
enhance the EPA's mandated activities designed to determine
whether laboratory  testing was performed properly and in compliance
with Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) regulations and whether the
test report can be  fully validated through audits of the raw data
generated during the testing phase.
     The primary purpose of this cooperation is to utlize NTP's
experience in conducting and reporting laboratory GLP inspections
and data audits to  enhance the training and capabilities of EPA
personnel in these  activities.
2.  SCOPE OF WORK
     The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible
for setting tolerances for pesticide residues  in  or on raw
agricultural commodities 2nd processed food under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C.  346 and  348) and for
registering pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
-------
                               -2-

and Rodenticide Act  (FIFRA)(7 U.S.C. 136 et sec).  In addition,
EPA has- the mandated task under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) (15 U.S.C.  2601) to assure that no chemical will present
an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.
EPA regulatory decisions on such matters are based in part on the
results of toxicological testing performed by or for registration
applicants, tolerance petitioners, and chemical manufacturers
or processors.
     This agreement, which provides for cooperation in the
training of EPA laboratory inspectors and auditors, in providing
specific scientific expertise as required for laboratory inspec-
tions and data audit as well  as in the sharing of information on
laboratory GLP  compliance monitoring will enable EPA to
determine (1) whether the testing was performed in accordance
with specified methodology, (2) whether any reported deviations
may have affected the reliability of the test results, (3) whether
the test results as reported  can be fully supported by the raw
data generated during the study and (4) whether the testing was
carried out in compliance with EPA's GLP regulations.  The
authority for FIFRA GLP regulations is 4U CFR Part 160 and for
TSCA is 40 CFR 792.  For studies conducted prior to this, "GLP
regulations" refers to the Food and Drug Administration's GLP
Regulations (43 FR 59986).
-------
                                -3-





      Laboratories"inspected may  be  facilities  in  which  both  EPA



 and  NTP  have common  interests  or they  may  be.faci1ities  carrying



 out  studies  applicable  only to the  EPA  but  that the  EPA  finds  it



 cannot  inspect  due  the  to  the  lack  of  specific  expertise.



      While  EPA  may  have an  interest  in  an  NTP-sponsored  study,



 EPA  will  not audit  an  NTP-sponsored  study  without  the express



 approval  of  NTP  management.  Studies to be  audited  may be either



 in progress  or  completed.





 3.   EXCHANGE OF  INFORMATION



      Each agency  will  exchancie information  concerning active



 inspections  and  audits  of interest to the.  other agency.



     Each  agency  will inform the  other of legal or  administrative



 action being considered or  t
-------
                                          -4-

           have  developed  an  interest  in  the  chemical  during  the testing
           phase.   NTP  will  provide  CMS  on  a  quarterly  basis  with  the
           schedule  of  NTP  audits  of completed  studies  to  be  conducted  in
           the  next  quarter.
                b.   GLP Compliance Monitoring -  NTP  will supply CMS  on  a
           quarterly  basis  with  an advance  schedule  of  site visits to be
           conducted  by NTP  in  the next  quarter.  At  the request of  CMS,
           NTP will  provide  EPA  with a copy of  the report  of  a site  visit
           of interest  to  CMS.   EPA  will  not  institute  any enforcement
           action  against  an  NTP-inspected  laboratory  based solely on
           an NTP  inspection  report.
                c.   Training  -  NTP,  within  constraints  of  personnel  and
           schedules, will  detail  experienced NTP personnel who will act
                                                                           I
           as instructors  in  EPA-sponsored  courses or workshops on GLP
           compliance monitoring,  data audits and related  topics.  Schedules
           and topics will  be worked out  cooperatively  to  ensure adequate
           time  for  course  preparation and  review.   Such details of  personnel
           will  be  at no expense to  NTP  other than salary.
                d.   Expert  Inspections -  NTP, at the  request  of CMS, and
           within  the constraints  of personnel  and schedules, will detail
           expert  personnel  to  accompany  a  CMS  inspector or EPA audit team
           when  EPA  is  unable to inspect  a  testing laboratory or complete a
           data  audit because of the lack  of  specific  expertise.  CMS will
           provide  the  requer.ted scheduling in  advance  to  NTP along  with
           all non-confidential  information on  the laboratory and study(ies)
           necessary  to prepare  for  a  compliance inspection.
il
-------
                                -5-

 NTP  personnel  In this  situation  will  be  advisory  to  the CMS
 inspector, who  has the  responsibility  for conducting  the
 inspection  or  audit  and  preparing the  report  of the  inspection
 or  audit.   The NTP  personnel's  advisory  report of  findings will
 be  incorporated into the EPA  inspector's  report.   Wherever
 possible  such  inspections will  be at  no  cost  to NTP  other than
 s a 1 a ry.
      e.   Confi denti ality - Under various  provisions  of FIFRA
 and TSCA, toxicology data submitted to EPA may be  considered
 trade  secrets  entitled to protection  from unauthorized public
 disclosure.  Such information will not be furnished.to NTP
 personnel in advance of  a laboratory  inspection or a study audit.
 Any requests for  further disclosure of such information received
 by the NTP  under  the Freedom  of  Information Act will be referred
 to the EPA  for  processing.  NTP personnel will not prepare any
 reports utilizing data which  may be confidential.
 5.  EPA'S RESPONSIBILITIES
     a.  List  of Laboratories for Coverage - EPA will provide NTP
with a quarterly  listing of labortories to be visited.   This
 listing is  to  be provided to  NTP at least 30 days   in advance  of
a given quarter and will  include the name(s) of the facility(ies )
to be inspected, the dates of the inspections and  the EPA
scientific  personnel who will participate in the inspection
or audit.   This information will be classified as   "For  Official
Use  Only" and should not  be disclosed except on a  need-to-know
basi s.
-------
                                    -b-
     EPA will  identify for NTP those inspections where assistanc
is  requested from.NTP and provide NTP with a clear definition b
the assistance needed.
     In advance of a  laboratory inspection EPA will provide NTP
with a list of EPA studies in progress as well as test protocols,
EPA test guidelines as available and FDA test guidelines as
appropri ate.
     b.  Reporting Format - A mutually agreed format will be
used by NTP in reporting its advisory portions of EPA inspections
     c.  Studies to be Audited - EPA will provide NTP with copies
of the test protocol, guidelines and toxicology test reports
including any  special instructions which might be appropriate to
the study to be audited.  None of the material so provided will
be classified  as Confidential Business Information.
     d.  Confidenti ality - EPA is required, under both FIFrtA and
TSCA, to maintain confidentiality of certain test-related infor-
mation.  EPA will not provide NTP any material classified as
FIFRA or TSCA  "Confidential Business Information."  EPA may
furnish NTP with material classified as "For Official Use Only"
which is not to be disclosed by recipient NTP personnel to others
except on a need-to-know basis.
     e.  NTP Requests - EPA will respond to all requests for
information received by NTP under the Freedom of Information Act
which relate to visits performed for EPA by NTP.
-------
                                 -7-
      f.   Delegation  of  Authority  - As  necessary-EPA will  provide
 to  NTP  personnel  a  letter  containing  appropriate  delegation of
 authority.   This  letter will  then be  furnished  to the management
 of  the  laboratory  at  the beginning of  the  visit.
      g.   Notification of Sponsor  - Contracts may  exist between
 laboratory  and  sponsor  prohibiting disclosure of  raw data by the
 laboratory  without the  permission of the sponsor.  In order to
 ensure  that raw data  are available to  EPA  and NTP personnel
 conducting  a  data  audit, EPA's Compliance  Monitoring Staff will
 notify  the  sponsor of the  study of the intent to  audit one or two
 working  days  preceding  the  scheduled visit.  CMS will exercise its
 own discretion  regarding advance  notification to  the laboratory
 of the  scheduled  visit.
      h.   Evaluation of  Reports - EPA will  determine whether
 discrepancies listed in  the: compliance inspection reports submitted
 by NTP  personnel  or study  iiudit reports impact on the validity of
 studies.  Any administrative or regulatory actions resulting from
 these reports will be the  responsibility of EPA.
      i.   Training Schedules - CMS will consult with NTP  on the
 content  and scheduling  of  training courses and workshops and will
 jointly  determine the faculty for such courses and workshops.
Both  EPA  and  NTP  staff  will be invited to  attend such courses  and
workships as  appropriate.
-------
                               -8-     '

 6.  DURATION OF AGREEMENT
     This  agreement will .become effective on the date of the last
 signature  and shall continue in effect until September 3U,. 1984,
 unless modified by mutual written consent of both parties or
 terminated by either party upon a ninety (90) day advance written
 notice to  the other.  This agreement may be reviewed by written
 consent of both parties on a fiscal year basis.
 7.  PROJECT OFFICERS
     For EPA:  Dr. Dexter S. Goldman (EN 342)
               Head, Laboratory Data Integrity Program
               Compliance Monitoring Staff
               Environmental Protection Agency
               401 M Street, S. W.
               Washington, DC  20460
     For NTP:  Dr. Bernard A. Schwetz
               Chief, Systemic Toxicology Branch
               National Toxicology Program
               National Institute of Environmental  Health Sciences
               P.O. Box 12233
               Research Triangle Park,  NC  27709
8.  FUNDING
     No transfer of funr!s is necessary  under this agreement.   Each
agency  will fund its part of cooperative actions.  EPA will  fund
travel  and travel  associated expenses of NTP personnel requested
to participate in  EPA activities described above.
-------
                               -9-
9.  AUTHORITY
    APPROVED AND  ACCEPTED FOR
    THE  ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION
    AGENCY

    BY
       0Dhn  A.  Moore, DVM
    TITLE:   Assistant Administrator
             for  Pesticides and
             Toxic Substances
    DATE:
-£/
APPROVED AND ACCEPTED  FOR '
T.HE NATIONAL TOXICOLOGY
PROGRAM
   David P. Rail ,  MD,  Ph.D
TITLE:   Director
DATE:
-------
                     MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT .
                             BETWEEN
                 THE COMPLIANCE MONITORING STAFF
                THE OFFICE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES  AND
                 THE OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS
         IN THE OFFICE OF PESTICIDES AND TOXIC  SUBSTANCES
                    FOR A MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK
                        FOR THE CONDUCT OF
              LABORATORY INSPECTIONS AND DATA AUDITS
1.  PURPOSE AND PRINCIPLES
     A Laboratory Data Integrity Program (LDIP)  has been estab-
lished within the Compliance Monitoring Staff (CMS) of the Office
of Pesticides and Toxic Substances (OPTS).   LDIP is specifically
charged with developing and conducting laboratory inspection
and data audit programs to assure the reliability and validity
of data reported to EPA under both the Federal  Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) Sections 4 and 5.   This  Agreement establishes
the matrix management framework under which CMS, the Office  of
Pesticide Programs (OPP) and the Office of Toxic Substances
(OTS) will work cooperatively to assure an  effective laboratory
inspectionanddataauditprogram.
-------
                               -2-




2.  PROGRAM ABSTRACT





     CMS will establish and chair the .Laboratory Data Integrity  -



Program Panel (the Panel) which will  also include members  from



OPP and OTS.  The Panel will serve as the conduit for the  flow



of information between participating  Offices and will periodically



review LDIP policies, procedures, and operations and advise  the



Director, CMS, who has full responsibility for implementing  the



program, of recommended program improvement and changes.   The  Panel



will  serve as a steering committee to ensure that Agency commit-



ments and objectives of the LDIP are  fully implemented and



met.



     The CMS will have the lead in directing the program by  (1)



coordinating all FIFRA- and TSCA-related laboratory inspections



and study audit activities with OPP and OTS as well as by  (2)



liaison with other agencies, such as  the Food and Drug Administra-



tion  (FDA) and the National Toxicology Program (NTP), which


cooperate with the EPA in laboratory  inspections and data  auditing.



LDIP  will be the Agency contact for scheduling FDA and EPA labora-



tory  inspections and study audit activities, as well as for  receiv-



ing and disseminating audit and inspection reports to both OPP and



OTS.   LDIP will monitor the status of each inspection and  audit.



     It is the goal of LDIP to (1) ensure full compliance  with



FIFRA and TSCA Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) regulations, as


applicable, a.*; all testing facilities performing studies  to  be
                  i


presented to the EPA to meet requirements of both FIFRA and



TSCA  and (2) to audit fully all data supporting the  results  of
-------
                               -3-

these studies.  Both the CMS iind the OPTS Program Offices  are
responsible for.recommending studies for audit  and laboratories
for inspection.
     The OPTS Program Offices will provide the  scientific  review
of laboratory GLP inspection reports and data  audit   reports of
studies within their respective program areas  to  LDIP.   Program
Office scientists will participate in inspections and  study
audits at laboratories, as appropriate and as  resources  permit.
     A detailed description of the responsibilities  of CMS,  LDIP,
OPP, OTS and the Panel is given in Section 3 of this document.
     A detailed definition of terms used in this  document  is given
in Section 5 of this document.

3.  DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES

     a.  Compliance Monitoring Staff
          (1) Appoints the Chairperson of the  Panel.
          (2) Establishes inspection procedures and  specific audit
procedures, with necessary technical input and  review from OPP
and OTS.
          (3) Establishes neutral  administrative  inspection  schemes
for routine selection of laboratories for inspection and,  based
on recommendations from OPP and OTS, specific  criteria for "for
cause" and follow-up inspections,  where necessary.
          (4) In conjunction with  the Regional  Offices,  supports
appropriate enforcement actions based on the information provided
in reports, audits, reviews and impact assessments.   Notifies
OPP and OTS of the progress and disposition of compliance  procedings
-------
                               -4-



          (5) Responds to FOIA requests for Information  on  and

availability of completed -compliance inspection  reports-(GLP

inspections or data audits).

          (6) Reports program activities to the  Assistant Admini-


nistrator for Pesticides and Toxic Substances  and  to  the Admini-

strator through the Management Accountability  System.

     b.  Laboratory Data Integrity Program

          (1) Closely coordinates activities with  FDA and NTP  to

avoid duplicative efforts and to achieve maximum efficiency in

auditing studies used for government decision  making.

         (2) Trains EPA inspectors and auditors  in the conduct  of

laboratory inspections and audits with technical assistance from

OPP, OTS, FDA, NTP and contractors as needed.

         (3) Establishes and maintains an accessible  data  file  o^

studies submitted to or required by the EPA under  TSCA Section  4

Test Rule or Negotiated Testing Agreement, TSCA  Section  5  Signifi-

cant New Use Rule, Section 5(e) Order, FIFRA Sections 3, 5, 8,  18

and 24(c) as well as FFDCA Sections 408 and 409.  This data file

will be maintained and updated by LDIP staff and will  permit  the

tracking of both CMS-directed activities on studies as well as

OPP- or OTS-negotiated study milestone dates starting with  the

date of agreement betwe'.-n OPP or OTS and Sponsor and  ending with

the final study data audit report.

        (4) Receives copies of notices of deliverables sent by test
                 i
Sponsors to EPA Product Managers and enters dates  of  deliverables

into the data file.  The deliverables themselves are  directed

to OPP or OTS by the Sponsor.
-------
        (5) Notifies OPP or OTS Product Managers  of 'schedule  devia-
tions and refers to CMS evaluations -by OPP or OTS scientists  of
deviations as well as recommendations for action.
        (6) Receives notices of sponsor-requested protocol  changes
and refers these requests to the  OPP  or OTS Product  Manager for
evaluation and recommendations.  Refers these evaluations  and
recommendations to CMS for communication to the  Sponsor.
        (7) Maintains security as needed on all  reports,  schedules
and data files under its control.
        (8) Within the constraints of available  resources  selects
laboratories for inspection and studies for audit based  on  the
neutral  administrative schemes and selection criteria  of  CMS  along
with target lists and selection criteria supplied by  OPP  and  OTS.
        (9) Schedules data audits and laboratory  GLP  inspections
for health effects, for ecological effects and chemical  fate
studies.  Coordinates the audit and inspection schedule  with
FDA, EPA Regional Offices and with OPP or OTS scientific  support
staff as necessa'ry.
        (10) Receives inspection  and  audit reports from  FDA and
EPA inspectors after the ;audit or inspection is  completed.
        (11) Develops and utilizes procedures for clarifying  ques-
tions and resolving conflicts raised  in data audit reports  with
the testing laboratory and/or the test sponsor prior  to  issuing
a final  report of a data audit to ensure that the audit  can be
properly evaluated.
        (12) Prepares GLP compliance  reports and  final  data integ-
rity statements based on inspection reports as well  as  reviews
-------
                               -6-

of the raw data and final  study report.
     c.   O'fflce of Toxic Substances and  the Office  of Pesticide
Programs
          (1)  Appoint a representative to the Panel.   This  repre-

sentative will  also be the focal  point for all  information  exchange
between  OPP, OTS and CMS and will  serve  as technical  program  repre-
sentative.
          (2)  Provide LDIP with information needed  to track  studies
submitted to or required by the EPA under TSCA  Section 4 Test
Rule or  Negotiated Testing Agreement, TSCA Section  5  Signifi-
cant New Use Rule, Section 5(e) Order, FIFRA Sections 3, 5,  8,  18
and 24(c) as well as FFDCA Sections 408 and 409.
          (3)  Maintain a current  awareness of LDIP-set laboratory
GLP inspection and study audit schedules from the LDIP data  file.
Recommend to LDIP changes in these schedules when problems  are
noted that may jeopardize a study.  Such requests will contain
an assessment  of the need for the inspection or audit based  on
OPP or OTS review, pending regulatory decisions and other estab-
lished criteria.
          (4)  Provide LDIP with copies of the study protocols and
revisions , FIFRA or TSCA testing guidelines for each type  of
test, available EPA scientific reviews, and all study interim
and/or final reports as well as other pertinent test  information
from both the  room or and the testing laboratory before inspections
and audits are undertaken.
-------
                               -7-

          (5) Within resource constraints designate  appropriate
scientific staff to -accompany FDA and EPA inspectors  on  GLP
inspections and study audits as requested by  LDIP.   Staff  scien-
tists may participate in routine inspections  and  audits  as recom-
mended by LDIP, and will participate in inspections  and  audits
where violations are suspected by CMS.
          (6) Provide LDIP in a timely  fashion  with  review and
assessment of Sponsor-initiated protocol  changes,  test  laboratory
schedule changes and any other study-related  Information from
either the Sponsor or the testing laboratory.
          (7) Provide LDIP in a timely  fashion  with  regulatory
significance reviews of GLP inspection  and data or  study audit
reports including an assessment of the  impact  of inspectional
or audit findings on the study itself.
          (8) Recommend, to CMS and LDIP, specific  criteria  for
"for-cause" or "priority" GLP inspections or  study  data  audits.
          (9) Regulatory decisions (registrations,  cancellation,
suspension, rule-making, etc..) are the  responsibilities  of the
program offices; enforcement responses  (stop-sale,  civil complaints,
etc.) are the responsibility of CMS.
     d.  The Laboratory Data Integrity  Panel:
          (1) Serves as a steering committee  to ensure  that  EPA
committments and objectives on LDIP are implemented  and  met.
          (2) Serves as a steering committee  to oversee  the  manner
              *     s
in which LDIP tracks studies under FIFRA and  under TSCA  Sections
4 and 5.
          (3) Assists CMS in evaluating the effectiveness  of  the
-------
                               -8-
audit and inspection programs through periodic  program  reviews.
        '  (4)  Advises the Assistant Administrator for  Pesticides
and Toxic Substances through the Director, CMS, of recommended
improvements and changes in LDIP.
          (5)  Reviews, at the request of LDIP, criteria  for  labora-
tory* inspection and study audit priorities to ensure that  needed
changes in inspection or audit schedules are made  promptly and
in a manner consistent with OTS requirements.
4.  IMPLEMENTATION
     The Director, OTS and the Director, OPP shall select  that
Office's representative for the Panel within 30 days of concurrence
in this Memorandum of Agreement by the Assistant Administrator.
The Panel members' names shall be provided to the  Director, CMS.
5.  DEFINITIONS
     a.  Data Audit - The data audit is the process by  which  the
Agency determines the validity of the results of any ongoing  or
completed laboratory study.  Validation is accomplished by
examining raw data and other records generated during the study
with results provided in the study report.  A data audit is not
a scientific review of the conclusions of the study.  Data audits
may be partial or full.
          (1) Partial data audits are associated with:
             -5    /
             (a)  In-life studies where data are still  being
generated and the audit provides confidence that the data in
general are being generated according to protocol  requirements
and time frames and properly recorded.
-------
                               -9-
              (b)  Completed studies where selective  percentages
of available data are examined.
          (2) Full data audits are those audits  where,  insofar  as
possible, all raw data from all  segments of a  completed study  are
audited.  Full data audits are usually associated  with  rule  or
regulation processes where full  prior validation of  the
results is considered necessary.
     b.  Study Audit - A study audit compares  the  actual  conduct
of a study with the approved study protocol.   A  study audit  con-
tains elements of a data audit and a Good Laboratory  Practices
inspection and may be partial  or full.
     c.  Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) Inspection  - The authority
for GLP inspections is contained in 40 CFR Part  792  (TSCA) and  40
CFR Part 160 (FIFRA).  A GLP inspection is an  inspection of  a  test
facility or laboratory where EPA-related test  data are  generated.
The purpose of such an inspection is to ensure full  compliance  with
GLP's (as regulations).  GLP inspections may be  carried out  by  EPA
inspectors or by inspectors or other designees of  other government
agencies under interagency agreements.  At present such an inter-
agency agreement exists between EPA and FDA.
     Other definitions pertaining to studies  and to  GLP are  con-
tained within the GLP regulations.
-------
                              -10-
6.   CONCURRENCES
    V /Tr*-*^^
        Moore,  D.V.M.
Assistant  Administrator
for Pesticides
and Toxic  Substances
                                      Date
                                               O
                 •LS
Don R.  Clay,  Dired
Office  of Toxic  Substances
Date
Edwin L.  Johnson,  Director
Office of Pesticide  Programs
                                        Date
A. E. Conroy/11 ,| Di rector
Compliance Mbnitbring  Staff
Office of Pesticides  and  Toxic
 Substances
                                         Date
-------
X,
              UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                          WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                              SEP 3  1985
MEMORANDUM


SUBJECT:


FROM:


TO:
                                                            OFFICE OF
                                                    PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCE!
        Compliance  Strategy  for  FIFRA  §3(c)(2)(B)
        Suspensi ons
        A.  E.  Conroy  II,  Director
        Office of  Compliance  Monitoring

        Addressees
     Attached is the Compliance: Strategy for FIFRA Section
3(c)(2)(B) Suspensions.  This strategy sets forth the
responsibilities of the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP),
OCM and the Regions in implementing a program to assure com-
pliance with suspensions issued under section 3(c)(2)(B)  of
FIFRA.

     Section 3(c)(2)(B) of FIFRA authorizes the Administrator
to require registrants to develop and submit data to fill  gaps
in the data base for registered pesticides.  Failure to respond
to a section 3(c)(2)(B) data call-in or to properly develop
data results in suspension of the product for which the data
was requested.

     Comments on the draft compliance strategy and OCM's
responses are as follows:

     0 One Region requested that the three month period for
       conducting inspections for compliance with the Stop
       Sale, Use or Removal Order (SSURO) not begin until  the
       States receive the information on the issuance of  the
       SSURO.  The strategy has been amended to reflect this
       comment.

     0 One Region noted that each time a State is requested  to
       conduct  a Section 3(c)(2)(B) inspection, the grant  will
       have to  be renegotiated and outputs will have to be
       adjusted.  An amendment to the FIFRA Enforcement Grant
       Guidance was issued on July 31, 1985 to address this
       problem.
-------
                              -2-
     0 Several Regions questioned the need to search FATES to
       provide a list of inspection targets to the States.
       The list provided by OCM lists only the registrants
       affected.  The FATES data will provide the States with
       any establishments that may have produced the suspended
       products.

     0 One Region commented on the fact that the policy does not
       address contract manufacturers or supplemental registrants
       who may have produced suspended products.  By the Regions
       providing States with information from FATES on those
       establishments which have in the past produced suspended
       products, the States should be able to reach those distrib-
       utors who have produced a product which has been suspended
       In the case of contract manufacturing, the registrant
       should immediately instruct the contract manufacturer to
       cease production.  The SSURO sent to registrants covers
       those products produced under contract as well as pro-
       ducts supplementally registered.  States can confirm
       that distribution has been halted by visiting those
       establi shments.

     0 One Region commented that the Regional offices needed the
       certified receipt cards for the NOITS and SSURO to support
       enforcement cases.  OCM will not routinely send the certi-
       fied receipt cards to the Regions.  Please note that OCM
       may have one green card, verifying that the registrant
       received the SSURO, which applies to several establish-
       ments located in different Regions.  If a Region needs
       a certified receipt to support a specific enforcement
       action, OCM will provide it on request.

     0 The Office of Pesticide Programs suggested that OCM in-
       clude a copy of the OPP Standard Operating Procedure
       Number 3049.1 - Suspension of Pesticide Registrations in
       the package.  OCM has attached the SOP to this package.

     Thank you for your cooperation in reviewing the draft
strategy.  If you or your staff have questions, please contact
David Stangel of my staff at FTS 382-7845.

Attachments
-------
                                                        SGP  3665
        COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) SUSPENSIONS
OVERVIEW	

     Section 3(c)(2)(B) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) authorizes the Administrator to
require registrants to develop arid submit data to fill in gaps
in the data base for registered pesticides.  Failure to respond
to a FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) data call-in appropriately or failure to
develop data as agreed to in the FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) response will
result in suspension of the product for which the data was
requested.  In those cases the Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP)  will issue a Notice of Intent to Suspend (NOITS).  The
suspension becomes effective thirty days after its receipt unless
the company complies with the requirements of the data call-in
notice, requests a hearing, or requests a voluntary cancellation.
Generally, there will  be no existing stocks provisions for products
in the registrant's possession unless registrants request a
voluntary cancellation.

     In order to enforce a suspension under FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B),
it is  necessary to issue a Stop Sale, Use, or Removal  Order
(SSURO) and to conduct followup inspections.  A registrant whose
product is suspended under FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) may comply with the
data call-in requirements at any time.  OPP will lift  the suspen-
sion and OCM the SSURO provided all FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B)  data
requirements have been met for that product.
REGULATED INDUSTRY	

     The regulated industry consists of all  registrants which
receive a FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) data call-in notice.  There are
several types of data gaps for which data call-in notices may be
issued:

     0  chronic toxicological  data gaps,
     0  registration standards data gaps,
     0  special review data gaps, and
     0  others such as product chemistry data gaps, confidential
        statements of formula,, or ground water data gaps.
REQUIREMENTS	

     Section 3(c)(2)(B) of FIFRA:

     0  Authorizes the Administrator to require additional  data
        on a chemical to further evaluate the chemical  and  to
        support existing registrations.
-------
o
                                -2-

        Requires each registrant to provide evidence within
        ninety days after notification that he is taking appro-
        priate steps to secure the additional  data.

     0  Grants EPA the authority to issue a Notice of Intent
        to Suspend if a registrant fails to take steps to secure
        the required data. (This includes failing to respond to
        the data call-in notice, responding inadequately such as
        maintaining that testing is not necessary, or failing
        to submit data in the timeframe to which the registrant
        committed or which OPP established.)

     0  Allows a registrant and other parties  adversely affected by
        the NOITS to request a hearing within  thirty days of
        receipt of the NOITS by the registrant regarding whether:
        (1)  the registrant diligently took one of the listed
        steps to develop the data, or whether  (2) the Agency's
        decision on the disposition of existing stocks is consistent
        with the Act.  If a registrant requests a hearing, the
        suspension on his product does not take effect until
        after the conclusion of the hearing.

        Each registrant originally is given the following options
     for complying with the data request:

     0  develop or supply the required data himself or jointly
        with other registrants;

     0  certify that the product is exempt, e.g., because it is an
        end-use product formulated from a registered, non-suspended
        manufacturing use product and was therefore not subject
        to the data call-in for safety data;

     0  delete uses that require the data requested;

     0  request and receive a waiver of some or all of the data
        requirements; or

     0  voluntarily request cancellation.

     Failure to exercise one of these options  within certain
specified time periods will result in the suspension of the
registrant's product.  When a product is suspended under FIFRA
§3(c)(2)(B), there will generally be no existing stocks provisions
for products in the registrant's possession.  More information
on how OPP suspends a product and the conditions of the suspension
can be found in OPP's Standard Operating Procedure for FIFRA
§3(c)(2)(B) Suspensions.

ENFORCEMENT OBJECTIVES

     The aim of the compliance strategy is to  enforce the FIFRA
§3(c)(2)(B) suspension via a SSURO.
-------
                                -3-
TYPES OF VIOLATIONS
     Section 12(a)(2)(J) of the Act prohibits the violation of a
suspension order under FIFRA §6.  There is, however, no specific
unlawful act under section 12 for the violation of a section
3(c)(2)(B) suspension order.  Under section 13 of FIFRA, the
Administrator may issue a SSURO when a product is suspended.  By
issuing a SSURO, EPA is able to enforce the suspension.  Any person
violating a SSURO would be in violation of section 12(a)(2)(I) and
would be subject to the penalties thereunder.  It is essential that
each registrant of a suspended product be issued a SSURO in order
for the section 3(c)(2)(B) suspension to have the force of law.
NEUTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE INSPECTION SCHEME	

     The Regions should work with the States to schedule inspec-
tions of producing establishments of suspended products within
three months after the State receives notification of the SSURO.
Once it is determined that a producing establishment is in compli-
ance, no additional special targetting is necessary.  However,
continued compliance should be checked during the next routine
inspection.

ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATIONS

Program Management	

     OPP is responsible for tracking data requests up until  the
point at which a commitment to test is made.  At that point,
the Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM) is responsible for
tracking the test schedule.  OPP is responsible for issuing
the NOITS and tracking the registrants'  responses.  When a pro-
duct is suspended (thirty days after receipt of the NOITS unless
the registrant requests a hearing or complies with the data
request), OPP notifies OCM and forwards a copy of the NOITS  to
OCM.  At that time, OCM will issue a SSURO to the registrant of
the suspended product.  Previously, OPP had allowed a specified
amount of time for continued production of the product and sale
of all existing stocks.  The current OPP Standard Operating
Procedure indicates that there will be no distribution of stocks
by the registrant allowed after the effective date of the suspen-
sion, i.e., thirty days after receipt by the registrant.  If
there are any existing stocks provisions allowed, OPP will forward
this information to OCM at the same time OPP notifies OCM of the
effective suspension.  Normally, there will be no prohibition on
sale of suspended products in the channels of trade.
-------
                              -4-
     At the time that OCM issues the SSURO,  it  will  send a sample
copy of the SSURO, a sample NOITS,  a list  of registrants to whom
SSURO's were issued and products affected, and  any other relevant
supporting documents to the Regions.  The  Regions will  notify
States of the suspension and the SSURO and provide them with
copies of all the information which the Region  has received from
OCM.  The SSURO may only be vacated by OCM.   This will  only be
done when OPP is lifting the suspension because the  company has
come into compliance with the data  call-in request.   The Regions
will be notified immediately that OPP has  lifted the suspension
and OCM has vacated the SSURO.  Regions and  States may  issue
SSURO's for any products which have been distributed in violation
of a SSURO issued by OCM.

ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES	

OPP
Issues data call-in notices and tracks responses.

Issues NOITS as appropriate and tracks responses.

Notifies OCM of products suspended and provides copies of
NOITS at that time along with other relevant documents.

Lifts suspensions when registrant fully complies.

Prepares letters lifting the suspensions and the SSURO's for
OPP and OCM signature.

OCM
Tracks testing once commitment to test is made and notifies
OPP of failures by registrants to meet commitments.

Issues a SSURO to the registrant after being notified that
a suspension is effective.

Sends the Regions a list of registration numbers for suspended
products and the names and addresses of registrants which
received SSURO's within 5 days of mailing the SSURO's.  OCM
will  also send a sample SSURO and NOITS.  Upon request by a
Region, OCM will provide the actual  SSURO and NOITS for a
specific product as well as the certified receipt.

Vacates a SSURO at the same time OPP lifts the suspension for a
registrant, which fully complies with the data call-in, and sends
the Region information on the vacation of the SSURO.
-------
                             -5-
Is working with OPP to develop und implement a system for tracking
suspensions and SSURO's.

Regions	
Regions forward information on the suspensions and SSURO's to
the States within a week of receipt and work with the States
in monitoring compliance.  The Regions will provide to the
States a list of producing establishments which have produced
the products subject to the suspension and SSURO.  This informa-
tion should be obtained from FATES.

In those States without State Cooperative Enforcement Agreements,
the Regions monitor compliance with the SSURO's within three
months of their receipt of the information on the issuance of
the SSURO.

Regions negotiate with the States to assure that States conduct
inspections at producing establishments to verify compliance
within three months of the date the State receives the information
on the SSURO and that States check for compliance during
future routine producing establishment inspections.

Regions will handle any cases arising from violations of the
SSURO's issued by OCM.

States
States will conduct follow-up inspections to ensure compliance
with the SSURO's and forward results of the inspections to the
Regions.  For situations involving a violation of the SSURO, the
State will  forward the case file to the Region for appropriate
enforcement action.

PENALTIES                  ~                                   ~

     Violation of a SSURO is a violation under section 12(a)(2)(I)
and subject to the penalties found under section 14(a)(l)  and
section 14(b)(l).  Violation of a SSURO will generally result in
an administrative civil  complaint.  The FIFRA penalty policy
provides guidance on calculating the administrative civil
penalty for this violation.  Repeated or continued violations of
SSURO's will  be considered for criminal referral.
-------
       3     UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

      f    '             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                                          OFFICE OF
                                                  PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCL
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:  Compliance Monitoring Strategy for Pesticide
          Registration Cancellations Due to Nonpayment of Fees

FROM:     John J. Neylan III, Director
          Policy and Grants Division
          Office of Compliance Monitoring

TO:       Addressees


     Attached is: (1) the Compliance Strategy for Pesticide
Registration Cancellations Due to Nonpayment of Fees; and  (2) the
Notice of Cancellation which was published in the Federal
Register on October 18, 1989 (54 FR 42936).  Thank you for your
comments on the February 12, 1990 draft.  A summary of those
comments and our responses is also attached.

     The effective date of cancellation for the first fee period
was October 10, 1989, the date of the letter informing                 I
registrants of the Cancellation Order.  However, registrants           •;
could continue to sell and distribute existing stocks until March      [
1, 1990.  The attached Strategy calls for routine producer             i
establishment inspections to ensure that the 20,000 pesticide          ?
products are not sold in violation of FIFRA.  Last October, the        <
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) sent the States and Regions         ^
copies of the list of approximately 20,000 products, which were        c
cancelled for nonpayment of fees under FIFRA section 3 and             y
section 24(c).  On March 9, 1990, the Office of Compliance             ^
Monitoring (OCM) sent the Regions a list of the registrants and        '
producing establishments, which have produced since 1984 any of        £
the pesticide products cancelled for nonpayment of fees.               t
                                                                       H
     Please provide copies to the State pesticide control              z
officials in your Region as soon as possible.  If you have any         ft
questions regarding the Strategy, please contact Beverly Updike
of my staff at FTS 475-9438  (EN-342).


Attachments
                                                            Printgd on Recydij Paper
-------
                   ADDRESSEES
           l'    Louis F. Gitto, Director
                Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div.

           II   Eiarbara Metzger, Director
                Environmental Services Div.

           Ill  Thomas J. Mas1any, Director
                Air, Toxics and Radiation Mangt. Div.

           IV   Winston A. Smith, Director
                Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div.

           V    William H. Sanders III, Director
                Environmental Services Div.

           VI   Bob Hanneschlager, Acting Director
                Air, Pesticides & Toxic Div.

           VII  William A. Spratlin, Director
                Air and Toxics Div.

           VIII Irwin L. Dickstein, Director
                Air and Toxics Div.

           IX   David P. Howekamp, Director
                Air Management Div.

           X    Lynn McKee, Acting Director
                Air and Toxics Div.
cc:  Valerie Jewett   (TS-788)
-------
     Douglas D. Canpt
     Edwin F. Tinsworth
     Anne Lindsay
     Steve Johnson
     Michael Walker
     Mark Greenwood
     A. E. Conroy II
     Connie Musgrove
     David Dull
     Mike Wood
     Phyllis Flaherty
     Jerry Stubbs
     Maureen Lydon
     Ken Kanagalingam
     Bob Zisa
     Sherry Sterling
     Jan Bearden
                               ADDRESSEES
                             (TS-766C)
                             (TS-767C)
                             (TS-767C)
                             (H-7506C)
                             (LE-134P)
                             (LE-132A)
                             (EN-342)
                                it
                                it
                                n
                                it
                                n
                                n
                                ii
                                n
                                n
                                n
     Jake Mackenzie
     Western Regional Compliance Director
II
     Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
     Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div.
     Pest. & Toxic Substances Br.

     Ernest Regna, Chief
     Environmental Services Div.
     Pest. & Toxic Substances Br.
Ill  Larry Miller, Chief
     Hazardous Waste Managt. Div.
     Toxic & Pest. Br.

IV   Richard D. Stonebraker, Chief
     Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Di.
     Pest. & Toxic Substances Br.

V    Phyllis Reed, Chief
     Environmental Services Div.
     Pest. & Toxic Substances Br.
VI   Robert Murphy, Chief
     Air, Pest. & Toxic Div.
     Pest. & Toxic Substances Br.

VII  Leo Alderman, Chief
     Air and Toxics Div.
     Pest. & Toxic Substances Br.

VII  Martha Nicodemus, Act. Chief
     Air and Toxics Div.
     Toxic Substances Br.

IX   Davis Bernstein, Chief
     Air Management Div.
     Pest. & Toxics Br.

X    Kenneth Feigner, chief
     Air and Toxics Div.
     Pest. & Toxic Substances Br.
-------
   RESPONSE TO COMMENTS OM PESTICIDE CANCELLATION STRATEGY


     All of the following comments submitted by the Regions are
appreciated and have been considered.  The Compliance Strategy
incorporates many of these comments.

Existing Stocks

COMMENT 1

One commenter wanted the following language used in the Strategy
to be added to the Summary:

     Due to the face that the Cancellation Order allows stocks at
     the dealer and user level to be used until exhausted,
     inspections beyond those at producing establishments are not
     being requested.

RESPONSE 1

We have incorporated that sstatement into the Summary.
COMMENT 2                                                              I
- -                                                               \
A commenter reported that the proposed existing stocks provision       ;
presents a problem for those States in which pesticide products        i
must have a current EPA registration to be offered for sale.           'r

RESPONSE 2

State inspectors should take their direction from the State laws       ^
in those States which have more stringent laws regarding the           £
distribution and sale of existing stocks of pesticide products no      £
longer registered by the EPA.                                          ;
Enforcement Response
                                                                       t
COMMENT 3                                                              J
                                                                       i-
One commenter asked what would be the appropriate enforcement          ?
action if the inspectors discovered pesticides on the                  p
cancellation list in the marketplace.                                  £

RESPONSE 3                                                             1
                                                                       §
If an inspector finds existing stocks at the user and dealer           £
level which have been produced, packaged or labeled after October
10, 1989 (effective date of cancellation) , those stocks are in
violation of the Cancellation Order. Registrants had until March
1, 1990, to dispose of existing stocks of cancelled products.  A
Stop Sale, Use or Removal Order (SSURO) should be issued for
violative acts and penalties! assessed as needed.
-------
Cancellation Information

COMMENT 4

One commenter requested that the list of registrants and producer
establishments which produced since 1984 any of those pesticide
products included among the 20,000 cancellations be sorted by
registrants with product names.

RESPONSE 4

The information was developed in this format and mailed out by
OCM.
COMMENT 5

One commenter cited a need for a list of current cancellations
and SSUROs.

RESPONSE 5

This Strategy deals only with the cancellations related to
nonpayment of the registration maintenance fees.  OCM will send
out periodic updates amending the list of products cancelled for
nonpayment of the fees.  In addition, in April, the Compliance
Division of OCM published a booklet, "Suspended, Cancelled, and
Restricted Pesticides", which summarizes the Agency's actions on
such pesticides.
-------
                        SUMMARY
      COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY FOR PESTICIDE
  REGISTRATION CANCELLATIONS DOB  TO  NONPAYMENT OF FEES
The due date for-the EPA required payment of the maintenance
fee to maintain registration was March 1, 1989.

On October 10, 1989, EPA notified registrants of 20,000
products by letter that their registrations were being
cancelled due to nonpayment of maintenance fees.  A Notice
of Cancellation was published in the Federal Register on
October 18, 1989.  The effective date of cancellation was
October 10, 1989, the date of the letter informing
registrants of the Cancellation Order.

Registrants could continue to sell and distribute existing
stocks until March 1, 1990.  Existing stocks are defined as
those stocks produced, packaged and labeled on or before the
effective date of cancellation.

Compliance inspections; to assure compliance with these
cancellations will be conducted by States and EPA (where
there is no Cooperative Enforcement Agreement) as part of
their routine pesticide producing establishment inspections.
Due to the fact that the cancellation order allows stocks at
the dealer and user level to be used until they are
exhausted, inspections beyond those at producing
establishments are not needed.

All imports are to be checked against the cancellation list
prior to Regions signing off on the Notice of Arrival.

Exports are subject to FIFRA section 17(a) after
October 10, 1989 and should be checked as part of routine
inspections.
-------
                COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR PESTICIDE
      REGISTRATION CANCELLATIONS DUE TO NONPAYMENT OF FEES
OVERVIEW	;	

     Section 4(1)(5) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act  (FIFRA) requires the payment of annual pesticide
registration maintenance fees by March 1 of each year to keep
registrations in effect.  During the first fee collection period
ending March 1,  1989, there were approximately 20,000 registered
products for which registrants did not pay the required fee.
Section 4(i)(5)(D) of FIFR& states that the Administrator may
cancel the unpaid registrations without a hearing.  Accordingly,
Cancellation Orders were issued to cancel the majority of the
unpaid registrations.  This group includes approximately 13,500
products registered under section 3 of FIFRA and about 6,000
under section 24(c) of FIFRA.  The Notice of Cancellation was
published in the Federal Register on October 18, 1989 (54 FR
42936).  However, the effective date of cancellation was October
10, 1989, the date of the cancellation letter.  As new
cancellations go into effect for subsequent fee periods, OCM will
provide an amendment to Appendix II which will inform the Regions
of the products cancelled, the date of the cancellation, and any
existing stock provisions.

     The Federal Register Notice of October 18, 1989, deferred
for 30 days the cancellations of 189 pesticide products
(containing 77 different active ingredients) for which the
registration maintenance fee was not paid.  These were products
which have been  in production at least one year since 1984.
Additionally, unlike the majority of the other cancelled
registrations, the records for these 189 products shbw that there
are no other registered products containing these active
ingredients. The deferral period allowed potentially affected
users of these pesticides an opportunity to develop strategies to
maintain the continued registration of any products important to
their needs.  Only four of the registrants producing the 189
pesticide products have novr complied with the provisions of the
maintenance fee requirements.  See Appendix I for the list of
product registration numbers and names of the registrants.

     This Compliance Monitoring Strategy provides for compliance
checks during routine producer establishment inspections to
assure compliance with the Cancellation Orders issued for
nonpayment of maintenance fees and to assure compliance with
FIFRA section 17 export requirements.   Note that registrants of
cancelled products for the first fee period could continue to
sell and distribute existing stocks until March 1, 1990.  Due to
the fact that the Cancellation Order allows stocks at the dealer
and user level to be used until they are exhausted, inspections
-------
beyond those at producing establishments are not needed.  As the
Strategy is amended for future cancellations, Appendix II will be
updated to include Federal Register information on existing
stocks, dates of effective cancellation, etc.


REQUIREMENTS

     The Cancellation Order of October 18, 1989, allowed
registrants to continue to sell and distribute existing stocks of
the cancelled products until March 1, 1990, the due date for the
next annual registration fee.  Existing stocks are defined as
those stocks produced, packaged, and labeled on or before the
effective date of cancellation.  Existing stocks already in the
hands of dealers or users can be sold and used until they are
exhausted.  The exceptions to these provisions are cases where
more stringent restrictions on sale, distribution, or use of the
products have already been imposed through separate Agency
actions.  Dates regarding existing stocks provisions for products
cancelled after subsequent fee periods can be found in
Appendix II.                                                             P
                                                                         c
Exports	        P.

     In the case of exports, any products exported after the             r
effective date of cancellation must comply with section 17 of            k
FIFRA, which includes citations for other applicable FIFRA               2
requirements. Under section 17, prior to export, a foreign               £
purchaser must sign a purchaser acknowledgement statement and a          ^
copy of that statement must be submitted by the exporter to EPA.         £
In addition, note that unregistered pesticides intended for              ^
export must conform with labeling requirements pursuant to               £
section 17, including section 2(q)(l)(H) (i.e., the label must           5
say in a conspicuous manner "Not Registered for Use in the United        g
States of America").                                                     ^
                                                                         N
                                                                         ^
COMPLIANCE MONITORING                                                    ^


     Compliance inspections are to be conducted by the States and        *
EPA (in States without Cooperative Enforcement Agreements) during        £
routine producer establishment inspections to monitor compliance         £•
with the cancellations and the section 17 export provisions for          ^
such products.  If inspectors find cancelled products at the             P
producing establishment after March 1, 1990, Stop Sale, Use or           g
Removal Orders (SSUROs) should be issued.  Prior to establishment        $
inspections, States should check the list of producing
establishments to determine if an establishment has produced one
or more of the products since 1984.  Appropriate enforcement is
also to be taken for violative products.
-------
ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES
     The following is a summary of the allocation of
responsibilities between OPP, OCM, Regions and the States.

Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP)	

Will provide the Regions and States with a hard copy and disks of
the list of products and registrants cancelled because of
nonpayment of maintenance fees for section 3 and section 24(c)
registrations.

Will provide periodic updates of deletions or additions to the
cancellation list will be provided to OCM.

Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM)	

Will provide the Regions with a list of registrants and producer
establishments which have recently produced (since 1984) any of
those pesticide products included among the approximately 20,000
cancelled for nonpayment of maintenance fees.

Will prepare the Compliance Monitoring Strategy for Pesticide
Cancellations Due to Nonpayment of Maintenance Fees and will send
periodic updates of additional cancellations or deletions to the
cancellation lists.

As new cancellations go into effect for other maintenance fee
periods, OCM will update the Compliance Strategy to include
information on the number and type of product cancellations.
Appendix II will be updated to include Federal Register
information on existing stocks, dates of effective cancellations,
etc.

Regions	
r  i*

Will provide the States with the Strategy.

Will conduct compliance inspections as part of routine producer
establishment inspections in States without Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements to assure compliance with the October 18,
1989 Cancellation Order and section 17 export requirements.

Will distribute the list of cancelled products; the names of
registrants whose products have been cancelled; and information
on producing establishments to the States, including updates on
newly cancelled products or products whose cancellations have
been rescinded.

Will check all Notices of Arrival for imports against the list of
cancelled products before releasing such products.

Will take enforcement action and issue Stop Sale, Use or Removal
Orders  (SSUROs), as appropriate.
-------
States	

Will conduct compliance inspections as part of routine
establishment inspections to assure compliance with the October
10, 1989 Cancellation Order and export requirements.

Will take enforcement action and issue Stop Sale, Use or  Removal
Orders (SSUROs), as appropriate.
                                                                         w
                                                                         •
                                                                         c
                                                                         (D
                                                                         vo
                                                                         £>
                                                                         U>
                                                                         CO
                                                                         p.
                                                                         I
-------
                            APPENDIX Z
The following registrants for the pesticide products listed
below, which were previously included among the 189 deferred
products, are now in compliance with the 1989 maintenance fee
requirements of FIFRA.
          Registrant &
Reg.No.   Product No.

#47319    Savanah Co.
          047319-00001
          047319-00002
          047319-00004

#11275    Guth Corp.
          011275-00002
#01457    Hexcel Corp.
          001457-00015

#08730    Hercon Environ-
          mental Co.
          008730-00035
Product Name
  Sevana Bird Repellent
  Sevana Bird Repellent
  Agrigard Insect Repellent
  Lithate 2,4 D - Broadleaf Weed Killer
  Non-Volatile
  Bromat
  Lure N Kill Roach and Ant Killer
  Insecticidal Baits With Sex Lure
-------
                                               APPENDIX II

                                      SUMMARY OF CANCELLATIONS
FEDERAL
REGISTER
NOTICE
MAINTENANCE
FEE PERIOD,
MARCH 1
NUMBER OF
PRODUCTS
CANCELLED
EFFECTIVE
DATE OF
CANCELLATION
EXISTING STOCKS AT
REGISTRANT, DEALER &
USER LEVEL
10-18-89
 88-89
                 13,500 sec. 3
                  6,000 sec. 24(c)
                      10-10-89
                  Registrant can continue to sell and
                  distribute stocks until 3-1-90. Dealer
                  and user can use existing stocks until
                  exhausted.  Existing stocks are defined
                  as those products produced, packaged or
                  labeled by 10-10-89.
-------
                                    APR 30 1.990
                                                    i " : - -. i .•• • '1 " ;X!'J SUBSTANCES

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Strategy for Aldicarb

FROM:     John J. Neylan III, Director 7$^-^
          Policy and Grants Division
          Office of Compliance Monitoring (EN-342)

TO:       Addressees

     Attached is the Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the
Voluntary Action by Rhone-Poulenc for Aldicarb.

     On April 11, 1990 Rhone-Poulenc announced that it would
voluntarily stop sale aldicarb labeled for potato use and recall
stocks of aldicarb in areas where potatoes are grown, for
modification of the labels.  In addition the Environmental
Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture also issued a statement on this action.
This.is a voluntary action by the company while further studies
are completed.  Rhone-Poulenc has not amended its registration to
delete use on potatoes, and they have not voluntarily cancelled
the use.

     No specific inspections need to be targeted as a result of
the voluntary action by Rhone-Poulenc.  In keeping with the
voluntary stop sale by Rhone-Poulenc for these pesticides, the
attached strategy calls for Regions and states to notify
distributors/dealers/retailers of the action if aldicarb stocks
are found during routine inspections and to monitor compliance
with the revised label as part of any routine or for-cause
inspections.

     Please transmit the strategy to the States within your
Region.  If you have any questions on the attached aldicarb
strategy, please contact Virginia Lathrop at FTS 475-8418.

Attachments
-------
 Addresses:

 Douglas  Campt   (TS-766C)
 Edwin  F.  Tinsworth   (TS-767C)
 Anne Lindsay   (TS-767C)
 Fredrick Stiel  (LE-134A)
 Mark Greenwood  (LE-132A)
 A.E. Conroy II  (EN-342)
 Connie Musgrove   "
 David  Dull   "
 Mike Wood "
 Jerry  Stubbs   "
 Maureen  Lydon     " '
 Ken Kanagalingam   "
 Bob Zisa   "
 Sherry Sterling   "
 Jan Bearden   "
 Michael Walker   (LE-134P)
 Valerie Jewitt   (TS-788)
 John Tice  (TS-769C)
 Artie  .Williams (H-7508C)
 Phil Ross (LE-132A)
REGIONS, DIVISIONS:

Jake Mackenzie
Western Regional Coordinator

Louis Gitto, Director
Air Management Division, Region I

Barbara Metzger, Director
Environmental Services Division, Region II

Thomas J. Maslany, Director
Air, Toxics and Radiation Management Division
Region III

Winston A. Smith, Director
Air, Pesticides & Toxics Management Division
Region IV
0
William H. Sanders III, Director
Environmental Sciences Division, Region V

Bob Hanneschlager, Acting Director
Air, Pesticides and Toxics Division, Region VI

William A. Spratlin, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region VII
-------
Irw.in L Diskstein, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region VIII

David P. Howekamp, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region IX

Gary O'Neal, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region X

BRANCH CHIEFS:

Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Branch
Region I

Ernest Regna, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Branch
Region II

Larry Miller, Chief
Toxic & Pesticides Branch
Region III

Richard Stonebraker, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Branch
Region IV

Phyllis Reed, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Branch
Region V

Robert Murphy, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Branch
Region VI

Leo Alderman, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Branch
Region VII

Alvin Yorke, Chief
Toxic Substances Branch
Region VIII

Davis Bernstein, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Branch
Region IX

Kenneth Feigner, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Branch
Region X
-------
                                                Attachment
         ALDICARB COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY
BACKGROUND
     On Wednesday, April 11, 1990, Rhone-Poulenc announced that
it would voluntarily stop the sale of aldicarb for potato use and
recall the stocks of aldicarb labeled for use on potatoes in
areas where potatoes are grown.  The recalled stocks will be
relabeled to delete the potato use.  This is a voluntary action
by the company while further studies are completed.  Rhone-
Poulenc has not amended its registration to delete use on
potatoes nor has the Company voluntarily cancelled the use.

COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES

     Given that this is a voluntary action by the registrant,
sale, distribution and use of Rhone-Poulenc aldicarb for use on
potatoes remains legal.  However, once a user has a product with
the potato use deleted, he may not use the product for potatoes.

     Although no inspections are being specifically targeted,
routine or for-cause pesticide inspections may involve aldicarb.
During these inspections, two actions should be taken:

    o  When aldicarb products are found at the distributor/
       retailer/user level in States where potatoes are grown,
       the inspector should inform the distributer/retailer/
       user of the voluntary stop sale and recommend that the
       person contact Rhone-Poulenc at 1-800-334-9745.  It may be
       useful to provide copies of the attached statement when
       aldicarb stocks are found  (See Attachment).

    o  If a user applies aldicarb bearing a label which no longer
       has potatoes on it, appropriate enforcement action should
       be taken for use inconsistent with the label.
-------
                              - 2 -
AFFECTED PRODUCTS
Aldicarb products with potato use on label:
EPA Registration No.     Brand Name
264-319                  Temik Brand TSX Granular Aldicarb
                           Pesticide (1)
264-417                  Temik Brand 15G Aldicarb Pesticide  (2)
264-331                  Temik Brand 10% Granular Aldicarb
                           Pesticide (3)
    (1) This is the most common aldicarb product sold  in  1986  to
        1988.
    (2) Sold primarily in 1988.
    (3) Only sold for export in 1987.
-------
*>EPA       Environmental  News
                                 .
                         (THURSDAY,  APRIL 11, 1990)
       The -following joint statement is being issued as  the result of
   action taken yesterday by Rhone-Poulenc Ag Co. to voluntarily stop sales
   and  recall the stocks of the pesticide aldicarb for use on potatoes.  The
   Company has informed EPA that it found the allowable residue level of
   aldicarb was exceeded on a few potatoes in one field among 26 fields
   tested.  Aldicarb has been registered since 1970 to control insects,
   mites and nematodes.  Since aldicarb was registered, there have been  no
   reported illnesses from eating potatoes.  For more information, contact
   Al Heier at (202)  382-4374.

                             JOINT SATEMENT BY

                      ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                        FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
                                    AND
                       U.S.  DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

       The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),  the Food and Drug
   Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
   commend Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company for voluntarily ceasing the sale and
   recalling the stocks of the pesticide aldicarb for use on potatoes due to
   recent data which indicate that the allowable residue  level was exceeded
   on potatoes in isolated cases.  The action taken yesterday is a cautious
   measure to ensure the safety of our food supply.

       Consumers should not be alarmed and they should continue their
   normal consumption of potatoes.   The company is taking this action after
   recently finding that the allowable residue level was  exceeded in ten
   individual potatoes among approximately three hundred  that were tested
   following a request for data from the EPA.

       In the seventeen years aldicarb has been used, there are no reports
   of illness from eating aldicarb-treated potatoes.  At  the highest levels
   found in a few potatoes, aldicarb could cause flu-like symptoms such as
   nausea, headache and blurred vision which disappear quickly.

       EPA will continue to review and monitor this situation and t.ike i:.y
   further action if necessary.
   -52
-------
• V/;'/ i"    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
r, ,.,,.'..^>'                     WASHINGTON. D.C.  2CM60

                                           JAN 1 o 1975
 To:        Regionj,lJUlministrators

                 Qtt-rrs.f-s £.  X^-C'Cr
                 uvt Administrator* lor water
          and Hazardous. Materials (WH-556)

          Assistant Administrator for Eiifbrcemen'/V
          and General Counsel (EG-329)

 Subject:   Continuing State Registration of Products  Containing
          Aldrin and Dieldrin for  Which Uses Have Been Suspended

     Late in December, 1974, the Agency became a\varc of the existence of
 activity in  the above referenced matter, first in the State of California,
 and subsequently in several  other States in other Regions0 Preliminary
 investigation into the magnitude of the problem suggests that there may
 be significant continuing activity on  a national scale, that there is con-
 fusion as to the ex tent of Federal jurisdiction over such activity by States,
 and that  the  economic,  political  and regulatory considerations involved
 require additional action by the Agency.

     Accordingly, our joint staffs are preparing a Federal Recastor notice,
 v/hich, upon  publication, vn.ll formally assert Fed"^r"al~3urisdiction over
 non-Fcclorally  registered products  containing  Atfi'rin and Dieldrin by
 impl^'iv.cntinrj Scct-lcvi 3. of the Federal insecticide; Fun^Lcid^ and
 Rcdsr.Ucide Act (FIFRA), as amended (7 U.S. C. 136 et seo.). Attached
 is a strategy paper \vhich explains the background of this matter in greater
 detail and  provides an explanation of ho'.v these Aldrin and Dieldrin pro-
 •ducts should be treated upon the activation of Section 3.  In addition,
 proposed enforcement activities by the Agency, anticipated in cooperation
 \sith involved States, is discussed.

     We shall expedite publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
 Pending  formal publication, you should  proceed v.ith  confidence in the
 proposed substance of the notice as outlined above and in the attached
 paper to inform affected States in your Region of  these developments.,
 Further, \vetrustyou v.ili encourage their support and cooperation in our
 effort to achieve orderly and equitable disposition of existing State-reg-
 istered products together v.ith  even-handsd ?.ud comprehensive enforce-
 ment' of the  Aldrin-Dieldrin cancellation and  suspension  orders.  The
 Enforcement Division o:  each  region v.ill be contacted by th-3 Pesticides
 Enforcement Division in Washington v/hich v.ill provide  additional doiails
 and support,  v/hcrc needed, to achieve Federal-State cooperation in  pro-
 viding notice of  these  developments and in  proceeding v.it.h enforcement
 of the Administrator's orders relating to cancellation and suspension of
 Aldrin and Dieldrin.

 Enclosure:
                 •*•
-------
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                        WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
Strategy Paper:

         State Registration of Products Containing Aldrin and* Dieldrin
         for Which Uses Have Been Suspended


Background;

    Late in  December, 1974 Headquarters was informed by Region IX
and the State  of California that products containing Aldrin and Dieldrin
were being.registered by the State in possible contravention of  the intent
of the Administrator's Order of December 7, 1972 (37 F.R. 26463, 25463).
That  order provided that henceforth all technical  Aldrin  and Dieldrin
must bear the label restriction:  "For use only in formulating products
bearing EPA-approved FIFRA registr?.tions. " It was thought that  such a
restriction on use of the technical material, which is available only
through import and therefore subject to Federal jurisdiction, would pre-
clude further formulation of finished  products  for State registration
and thereby provide de facto Federal control of all products containing
Aldrin or Dieldrin. Investigations by California and Region IX (confirmed
now by several other Regions and State.-;) have revealed that many State-
re«ist."ved Alck-Ln-Dieldrin products were:   1) formulated from technical
material held prior to December 7, 1972  and  therefore not subject to  the
restrictive  labeling requirement,  2) formulated from so-called "end-
use" or finished Aldrin-Dicldrin products bearing State or Federal
rcgistx-ations and lacking any stated restrictions concerning refor-
mulation, 3) formulated from technical mete rial sold after December 2,
1972 which failed to bear  the required restriction,  4) formulated from
technical material restrict!vely labeled and ignored  by the forrnulator.
Stales,  having lately become aware, of the intent of the Decemoer, 1972
order, are faced with a dilemma: pressure to reregister for continued
shipment, sale and use products formerly approved by them and the
likelihood that such registration  contravenes at least the spirit,  and- in
some cases possibly the letter,  of a Federal  cancellation order.

Action;

   In order to clarify existing ambiguities concerning the legal status of
these non-Federally registered  products  with respect to Federal  junc'Hc-
tion over their production, shipment,  sale, and use, and to insure -jven-
hanclod enforcement of the Aldrin and Dieldrin cancellation and  suspf'pion
orders, ihe Agency will formally implement Section  3 of the Federal Insec-
ticide, Fun'gicide, and Rodcnlicide Act, as amended  (7-U. S. C.  136 ct seq.)
by notice in the Federal Register.  This notice will contain an exemption,
-------
                                -2-

pursuant to the provisions of Sections 6(a)(l) and 15(b)(2) of the Act, allow-
ing States to register for orderly disposition through shipment, sale and
use in that State,  existing stocks of products containing Aldrin and
Dieldrin produced on or before the date of signature by the Administrator
of the order implementing Section 3 of the Act as to these  State-registered
products. Effective the day following signature of the order implementing
Section 3 of the Act, production of products  containing Aldrin and Dieldrin
must cease,  and States must cease  to register for shipment,  sale and use
any but existing stocks of such products.

    Regional offices should  arrange to advise appropriate authorities in
States in that Region, in advance, of the planned activation of Section  3
and its attendant prohibitions,  and should request State authorities to
notify all State registrants and any other potentially affected parties of
the activation of Section 3 and  of the effective date of related prohibitions.
States are  to be asked to provide to the appropriate Regional Offices lists
of State registrants or persons with registration applications pending for
products containing Aldrin or  Dioldrin. Information relating to location
and relative amounts of these  State-registered products also is to be
sought.

    The Agency's pesticides enforcement personnel will enlist State coope-
ration in continuing its on-going investigation of the formulation since
December  7, 1972, o:  products containing  Aldrin or  Dieldrin for State
         D'.IO  Should it be the case that Federal registrants of technical
A.ldrin c
-Dieklrin have not r«^i.~belc<") their orocv.cts in conl'ormancc with
the Adr.vnistrcJ.or's Order of December 7, 1972, or that pesticide pro-
ducers have  formulated products  containing Aldrin  or  Dieldrin in con-
travention of labeling prohibitions against xise in non-FcderaUy registered
products,  such viclr.ticns will be prosecuted in accordance with the apprc-
priaue provisions of the Act.
-------
      UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                     WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
To:      [Enforcement Division Directors]
From:   A. E. Conroy II, Director
         Pesticides Enforcement Division
                                         H-ZC-JL^
                                         /* •         x^\

Subject:  Non-Federally Registered Products Containing Aldrin or Dieldrin


Background;

   In his memorandum of December 10, 1974,  Point #4,  the Director
advised that production of non-Federally registered products containing
Aldrin and Dieldrin contravened the  December  7, 1972 Order of the
Administrator (37 F.R.  25463, 26465). The intent of that ord<=r was to
restrict use of technical Aldrin and Dieldrin to use in EPA-registered
products only. The Director's memorandum continued that production
of non-Federally registered products containing Aldrin and Dieldrin
could subject such products to stop sale and their producers to liability
under Sections l2(a)(2)(G) and (K) of  the Act.

   Subsequent to  the Director's memorandum, it has come to the
Agency's stter>tion that numerous products containing Aldrin and DLeldrin
r-'.a^' have be~n produced since December 7. 1972 and ppcristPt-AH v>y .^fot^a
under circumstances not strictly contravening the  December,  1972 Order.
Details concerning this production and questions relating to the scone of
Federal jurisdiction over such production under the Dscember, 1972
Ord**'* are elaborated in the attached memorandum and strategy paper,
which »vere sent to all Regional Administrators on January 10, 1975.

Action;

   For purposes  of £ ederal enforcement activity, the following develop-
ments are important:

         I)  The Agency has determined to implement Section  3 of the
            Act with respect to products containing Aldrin and Dield: in
            intended for intrastate shipment. States will be permitted
            to register and allow shipment, sale and use in that State
            of stocks of products containing Aldrin or Dieldrin in 3
-------
                                -2-

            and States must cease  to permit registration or to allow
            shipment, sale or use  of any but existing stocks.  Viola-
            tions of the Act will be subject to prosecution 60 days
            after Federal Register publication of the Administrator's
            order,  (This of course will not apply to-those products
            registered Federally and by States for uses which have
            not been suspended:  1) subsurface ground insertion for
            termite control; 2) dipping of non-food roots and tops;  3)
            moth-proof ing in a closed system.)

         2) It is the obligation of each Region to notify,  in advance,
            appropriate  State authorities of this development  and its
            attendant prohibitions and to enlist their aid in notifying
            registrants and other affected persons in their State.
            Attached is a sample letter which States may wish to
            employ as a guide in the notification process.

         3) Immediately upon signature, of the Section 3 order.  Head-
            quarters staff will notify Regional officials who should con-
            tact the State authorities directly.

         4) Cooperation and  aid of State authorities is to be enlisted in
            obtaining for Federal use:

            -  lists of State registrants or persons with applications
               pending for Aldrin-Dieldrin product registration;

            -  information on location anH relative smnuntes of s\\ch i^^B
               ducts within the State;

            -  assistance of State enforcement authority to achieve com-
               pliance with the production, registration, and shipment,
               sale and use cut-off.

         5) EPA regional  personnel are to continue  their investigations
            of production since December 7,  1972 of products contain-
            ing Aldrin and Dieldrin for State  registration.  Should it be
            determined  ;ha*. Federal registrants of technical Aldrin or
            Dieldrin have  not relabeled their products in conformance
            with the Administrator's Order of December 7, 1972,  or
            that pesticide  producers have formulated products confin-
            ing Aldrin or Dieldrin in contravention of  labeling prohi-
            bitions  against use in non-Federally registered products,
            such violations are to be prosecuted in accordance with the
            appropriate provisions of the Act.

    Shovld you have  questions or  encounter difficulty with regarn to any
of these matters,  please notify the appropriate Regional Coordinator.


Attachments:
-------
                                         Attachment I

                   Aldrin - Dieldrin Strategy

1.  R.C. 's phone Region in advance of order - inform of "strategy

2.  R.C. 's send Director's enforcement package to Regions

3.  Regions  inform States of pending action and request names of
   State registrants

4.  PEP sends Administrator's order to Regions

5.  HDQ sends Administrator's order to States

6.  Slates or Regions notify State registrants of order
   (See Attachment ii).

7.  Regions  follow-up at each State registrant.
-------
                                     Attachment  II SAMPLE LETTER
State Registrant
(Address)
Gentlemen:

    On (date), the Administrator of the United States Environmental
Protection Agency issued an Order asserting Federal jurisdiction over
all non-Fedcrally registered Aldrin-Dieldrin products in intrastate
commerce by invoking Section 3 of the Federal Insecticide Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA),  as amended (7 U.S.C. 136 ct seq.).
As a result of this Order,  the  shipment,  sale,  and use of non-Feder-
ally registered Aldrin-Dieldrin products, produced after the effective
-d^rte-of-the-Qrd-cr~\y-iHr-be-prohibited-.- At^ct3rdingiyr^he-5tatg-of--(TraTn-e)
can register or continue registrations only of non-Federally registered
Aldrin-Dieldrin products \vhich were produced on or before the date
of the Order. Such  registrations are being permitted to allo\v the
orderly disposition of non-Federally registered products through
shipment,  sale, and use in the registering State.

    Any further questions regarding the Order should be directed to
Mr. 	,  EPA,  Region	, street	_,
city, 	•	,  State	, telephone number

                                       Sincerely,
-------
                                             Attachment III

Types of Violations Involving Non-Federally Registered products
containing Aldrin or Dieldrin

1.  Failure of a Federal registrant to place a statement such as "For
    use only in formulating products bearing EPA-approved F1FRA
    registrations" on manufacturing use only labels.

          Violation:  Misbranded, inadequate directions
                    Section  12(a)(l)(E)
           Action:  Civil/Criminal/Stop Sale

2.   Use of a "manufacturing  use  only" product bearing a statement such
    as "For use  only  in formulating products bearing EPA-approved
    FIFRA registrations" on the  label in a non-Federally registered
    Aldrin - Dieldrin product.

          Violation:  Misuse  Section 12(a)(2MG)
         Action:    Civil/Criminal/Stop Use

3.   Sale of a non-Federally registered Aldrin - Dieldrin product pro-
    duced after the effective  dale of the Order, but before violations
   are actionable (GO clays after  publication in the Federal Register).

         Action:    Slop SaL-

4.   Sale cf a non-Federally registered Aldrin-Dieldrin product pro-
    duced after the effecti\-e  date of the Administrator's Order  (day
    after signature) and after the date violations become enforceable
    (GO days after publication in the Federal  Register).

         Violation:  Ncn registration Sec. 12(a)(l)(A)
         Action:    Civil/Criminal/Stop Sale
-------
            UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                        WASHINGTON, DC 20460
                        JUN   6 1989                        a™**
                                                         PESTICIDES AND
                                                         TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Compliance Strategy  for the Cance
          Uses of the  Inorganic  Arsenlcal's

FROM:     John J. Neylan  III,  Director
          Policy and Grants  Division
          Office of Compliance Monltorln

TO:       Addressees

     Attached Is the Compliance  Strategy  for  the  Cancellation
of the Non-wood Uses of the  Inorganic Arsenlcals.   On  June  30,
1988, the Agency published "Inorganic Arsenlcals;  Intent  to
Cancel Registrations for  Pesticide Products Registered  for  Non-
Wood Preservative Use; Conclusion of Special  Review"  In the
FEDERAL REGISTER (53 FR 24787).  This notice,  which  Is  also
attached, cancelled all minor  uses of inorganic arsenlcals  with
the exception of the Insecticide use of arsenic trloxide  in a
solid formulation and  packaged In a sealed metal  container,  and
the solid formulation  of  arsenic trioxide for  the  control of
moles, gophers and pocket gophers.  Also  attached  is  a  summary
of the action for your convenience.

     The turf herblcldal  use of  the flowable  formulation  of
calcium arsenate, the  grapefruit growth regulator  use  of  lead
arsenate, the grape fungicidal use of sodium  arsenlte,  and  the
deslccant uses of arsenic acid on cotton  and  okra  grown for
seed, i.e., the major  uses,  are  still under special  review
awaiting food crop residue data  from registrants  as  requested
under FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) .

     Compliance with the  NOIC will be determined  by  Inspection
of registrants and producers of  cancelled products  to  determine
If production and sale for distribution within the  U.S. has
ceased and that distributors have been notified of  the  action
as required by the Notice.   Inspections of dealers  and  users
will  be conducted to ensure  that cancelled products  are no
longer being sold or used.   Tips and complaints are  to  be
Investigated as received.
-------
                           -2-
     The cancellation  has  been  appealed  and  a  list  of  those
persons appealing the  cancellation  Is  attached.   If you  have
any questions  concerning this  action  please  contact David
Stangel of  my  staff  at 382-3477.
Attachments
-------
                                 ADDRESSEES
Douglas D. Campt    (TS-766C)
Edwin F. Tlnsworth  (TS-767C)
Anne Lindsay        (TS-767C)
Frederick F. Stiehl (LE-134A)
Mark Greenwood      (LE-132A)
A. E. Conroy II     (EN-342)
Connie Musgrove
John J. Neylan III
David Dull
Mike Wood
PhylI is Flaherty
Jerry Stubbs
Maureen Lydon
Ken Kanagalingam
Bob Zisa
Sherry SterlIng
                            n
                            it
                            tt
                            it
                            n
                            n
                            tt
                            tt
                            it
                            it
     Jake Mackenzie
     Western Regional Compliance Director
     Louis F. Gitto, Director
     Air Management Division

     Barbara Metzger, Director
     Environmental Services Division

III  Stephen R. Wassersug, Director
     Hazardous Waste Management Div

IV   Winston A. Smith, Director
     Air, Pest. 4 Toxics Mangt. Div

V    WilliamH. Sanders III, Director
     Environmental Services Division

VI   William B. Hathaway, Director
     Air, Pesticides & Toxic Division

VII  William  A. Spratlln, Director
     Air and Toxics Division

VIM Irwln L. Dlcksteln, Director
     Air and Toxics Division

IX   David P. Howekamp, Director
     Air Management Division

X    Gary O'Neal, Director
     Air and Toxics Division
                                   Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
                                   Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

                                   Ernest Regna, Chief
                                   Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

                                   Larry Mi Iler, Chief
                                   Toxic 4 Pesticides Branch

                                   Richard DuBcse, Chief
                                   Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

                                   Phyllis Reed, Chief
                                   Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

                                   Robert Murphy, Chief
                                   Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

                                   Carl Walters, Acting Chief
                                   Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

                                   Alvln Yorke, Chief
                                   Toxic Substances Branch

                                   Davis Bernstein, Chief
                                   Pesticides 4 Toxics Branch

                                   Kenneth Feigner, Chief
                                   Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br
cc:  Michael  Walker      (LE-134P)
     Jim Roeloffs        (TS-788)
     John Tlce           (TS-769C)
-------
        COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR THE CANCELLATION OF
          NONWOOD USES OF THE INORGANIC ARSENICALS
OVERVIEW	

     On June 30, 1988, the Agency published "Inorganic
Arsenicals; Intent to Cancel  Registrations for Pesticide
Products Registered for Non-Wood Preservative Use; Conclusion
of Special  Review" in the FEDERAL REGISTER (53 FR 24787),
which cancelled all minor uses of inorganic arsenlcals with the
exception of the Insecticide  use of arsenic trioxide In a  solid
formulation and packaged In a sealed metal container, and  the
solid formulation of arsenic  trioxide for the control of moles,
gophers and pocket gophers.

     The turf herbicidal use  of the flowable formulation of
calcium arsenate, the grapefruit growth regulator use of lead
arsenate, the grape funglcldal use of sodium ersenlte, and the
desiccant uses of arsenic acid on cotton and okra grown for
seed, i.e., the major uses, are still under special  review
awaiting food crop residue data from registrants requested
under FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B).  A reassessment of the carcinogenic
potency of  Inorganic arsenic  as it relates to dietary and
dermal  exposures will be conducted when this data Is received.
REQUIREMENTS OF THE RULE	

     All minor uses of inorganic arsenicals with the exception
of the  Insecticide use of arsenic trioxide in a solid
formulation and packaged in a sealed metal container, and the
solid formulation of arsenic trioxide for the control of moles,
gophers and pocket gophers are cancelled effective August 8,
1988.  Manufacturers of cancelled products are required to
notify their distributors of the time limits on distribution
and sale of cancelled products in the possession of the
distributor by July 25, 1988, and to keep records of the date
of contact with the distributor.

Regulated Industry	

     All registrants, producers, distributors, and users of the
minor use products of Inorganic arsenlcals with the exception
of arsenic trioxide products registered as an Insecticide for
use In a solid formulation and packaged in a sealed metal
container or as a solid formulation for the control of moles
gophers and pocket gophers.  This action affects 45 registrants
producing 60 products.
-------
                             -2-


Existlng Stocks	
     As of August 8,  1988,  no existing stock  of  any  cancelled
product may be distributed,  sold,  offered  for sale,  held  for
sale, shipped, delivered for shipment, or  received  and  (having
so received)  delivered or offered  to deliver, or used.  This
includes products voluntarily cancelled which would  otherwise
still be allowed to be sold  under  the terms of the  voluntary
cancellation.  Persons holding existing stocks of cancelled
products must dispose of them In accordance with the applicable
requirements  of the Resource Conservation  and Recovery  Act
(RCRA).  NoncompI Iance with  the cancellation  order  Is a
violation of  FIFRA  §§12(a)(1)
-------
                             -3-
WIII transmit the list of those products which have been
cancelled to the Regions.

Will transmit the list of registrants and producing
establishments of Inorganic arsenicals to the Regions.

Reg ions	

Will provide copies of the Compliance Monitoring Strategy to
the States.

Will distribute a list of products, registrants and producing
establishments affected by this Notice to the States.

WIN conduct Inspections In States without Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements as part of their routine inspectional
scheduIe.

Will take enforcement actions as appropriate.

States	

Will conduct Inspections of registrants within 6 months of
receipt of the compliance strategy.

Will conduct inspections of dealers as part of their routine
inspectional schedule.

Will take enforcement actions as appropriate.

Will report to the Regions on actions taken under this Notice,
-------
     INORGANIC ARSENICALS NON-WOOD PRESERVATIVE USES
               NOTICE OF INTENT TO CANCEL
All non-wood preservative uses of inorganic arsenical pesticide
products are cancelled effective August 8, 1988, with the
exception of the following uses.


The following registrations will be retained without change;

1.  Arsenic trioxide insecticide use (solid formulation
    manufactured in a sealed metal container only) for:

    Domestic outdoor - domestic dwellings
    Domestic indoor - domestic dwellings

2.  Arsenic trioxide mole, gopher, and pocket gopher killer use
    (solid formulation only) for:

    Domestic outdoor - domestic dwellings
    Terrestrial non-food crops - golf courses, ornamental
    plants and lawns, non-crop areas


Registrations not considered in this action;

1.  Lead arsenate plant growth regulator use on grapefruit.

2.  Sodium arsenite fungicide use on grapes.

3.  The desiccant uses of arsenic acid on okra (grown for seed)
    and cotton.

4.  The flowable formulation of calcium arsenate for use on
    turf.

Decisions on these uses are deferred pending the Agency's Risk
Assessment Council's reassessment of the carcinogenic potency
of inorganic arsenic for dermal exposure and the receipt of
dietary exposure data the Agency has requested.


Effective Dates

As of August 8, 1988, no existing stock of any cancelled
product may be distributed, sold, offered for sale, held for
sale, shipped, delivered for shipment, or received and (having
so received) delivered or offered to deliver, or used.  This
includes products voluntarily cancelled which would otherwise
still be allowed to be sold under the terms of the voluntary
cancellation.

Registrants were required to notify their distributors of
cancelled inorganic arsenical products by July 25, 1988, to
inform them of the time limitations on distribution and sale of
existing stocks in the hands of the distributor.
-------
                PARTIES REQUESTING A HEARING
Jones Products Company
Box 204
Middleton, WI  53562

Jones Ant Killer   EPA Reg. No. 29-4
Senoret Chemical Company
566 Leffingwell Ave.
Kirkwood, MO  63122

Terro Ant Killer   EPA Reg. No. 149-2
General Pest Service Co.
1819 Goldfield Street #B
North Las Vegas, NV  89030

Ant Jex Redwood Ant Stakes   EPA Reg. No. 3324-3
Protexall Products, Inc.
1109-11 Hwy 427 N.
Longwood, FL  32750

Protexall "Ant-Kil"   EPA Reg. No. 4972-8
-------
l»
: PBoLt0
          UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                      WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                          JUL  6
                                                       OFFICE OP
                                                PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTA
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Compliance Strategy for the Conditional Registration
          and- Cancellation of Certairfi\$romoWni IxPToducts
                                      X,. X X  , i ^
FROM:  •   John J. Neylan III, Director
          Policy and Grants Division
          Office .of Compl iance Monitori

TO:       Addressees
     On May 5, 1989 the Agency approved an Agreement with Rhone-
Poulenc to conditionally amend the -registrations of three
bromoxynil pesticide products (buctril, bronate, and buctril +
atrazine), pursuant to FIFRA section 3(c)(7)(A).

     On June 5, 1989 the Director of the Office of Pesticide
Programs, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances, signed a
FEDERAL REGISTER .Notice entitled: "Order Cancelling Registrations
For Pesticide Products Containing Bromoxynil Butyrate."  The
registrant requested voluntarily cancellation of bromoxynil
butyrate products and proposed to conduct a recall of the
cancelled products down to the user level.

     Attached are the Final Compliance Monitoring Strategy, a
summary of the Strategy, a copy of the Agreement between the
registrant and EPA, and the Cancellation Order.  Please transmit
a copy of the Strategy and other attachments to the States.
Please note that because of the nature of this action, this
Compliance Strategy is immediately effective.  If you have any
questions or comments regarding the Strategy, contact Steve Howie
(E-mail EPA 7201, FTS 475-7786) of my staff.

     Thank you for your cooperation.
Attachments
-------
                                 ADDRESSEES
      Douglas D. Campt    (H7501C)
      Edwin F. Tlnsworth  (H7505C)
      Anne Lindsay        (H7505C)
      Frederick F. Stlehl  (LE-134A)
      Mark Greenwood   ,   (LE-132A)
      A.  E'. Conroy I I      (EN-342)
      Conn is Musgrove         "
      Mike Wood              "
      Jerry Stubbs           "
      Sherry Sterling         "    .
      David DulI              "
      Ken Kanagalingam       "
      Bob Zisa  .             "
      John J. 'Neyian  III      "
      PhylI is  E.  Flaherty     "
      Maureen  Lydon           "

      Jake Mackenzie
      Western  Regional  Compliance Director
VI I
VI I I
IX
Louis F. Gi.tto, Director
Air Management Division

Barbara Metzge'r, Director '
Environmental Services Division

Stephen R. Wassersug, Director
Hazardous Waste Management DIv

Winston A. Smith, Director
Air, Pest. 4 Toxics Mangt. DIv

William H. Sanders  III, Director
Environmental Services Division

William B. Hathaway, Director
Air, Pesticides 4 Toxic Division.

William  A. Spratlln, Director
Air and Toxics Division

Irwln L. DIcksteIn, Director
Air and Toxics Division

David P. Howekamp, Director
Air Management Division

Gary O'Neal, Director
Air and Toxics Division
Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

Ernest Regna, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxjc Substances Br

Larry Mi Iler, Chief
Toxic 4 Pesticides Branch

Richard DuBose, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

PhylI is Reed, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

Robert Murphy, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

Carl Walter, Acting Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

Alvin Yorke, Chief  '
Toxic Substances Branch

Davis Bernstein, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxics Branch

Kenneth Feigner, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br
cc:  Michael Walker      (LE-134P)
     Jim Roeloffs        (TS-788)
     John TIce           (TS-769C)
     Al Heier            (A-107)
-------
    SROMOXYNIL CONDITIONAL  REGISTRATION AND  VOLUNTARY CANCELLATION

              COMPLIANCE MONITORING  STRATEGY  SUMMARY  SHEET
  1.    Conditional  Registration  of products containing  Buctril,
        Bronate,  and Buctril +  Atrazine.
TARGET DATE FOR
INSPECTION
by 9/6/89*
          CONDITIONS OF REGISTRATION TO BE MONITORED BY
          INSPECTION             .
          5/25/89;  Point-of-purchase communication carried
          out by registrant per schedule in conditions of
          registration.

          Used only by certified applicators according to
          conditions of registration.
                                                      LEV
by 8/7/89
by 9/6/89*
Restickering of products released for shipment
after 5/5/89; Stickers sent to dealers for
relabeling by 5/15/89.
Restickering of dealer stocks carried out by
)
Registr
Produce
Distrib
                                                    User
between 10/1/89
and 11/1/89
between 10/1/89
and Spring, 1990
growing season
Revised Labelling on all products by 10/1/89; all
bulk containers have correct transfer mechanism by
10/1/89.
Compliance with EPA-approved user training plan.
Plan must be implemented prior to 1990 Spring
growing season.
• Registr,
Produce:
Registr£
User
' Interfac
  2.
Vo 1 untary Cancellation  of Broiiioxynil.  Butyrate  Products**

                                                              LEVEL
TARGET DATE FOR
INSPECTION
ACTIVITY  TO BE MONITORED BY  INSPECTION,
PER TARGET DATE
by 8/7/89


by 9/6/89*

by 9/6/89*
          No shipments  intended for sale/use after 6/12/89


          No sale after 6/12/89

          No use after  6/12/89
                                                    Registrar
                                                    Producer

                                                    Distribut

                                                    User
*    As part of routine inspections.

**   Includes the following products: Dragonmate, ME 4 Bromfnal, Torch Twin Pak, 3+3
     Brominal, Bromoxynil  Butyrate Technical,  Certrol, and Buctril 4 EC.
-------
            COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR THE CONDITIONAL  REGISTRATION
              AND CANCELLATION OF CERTAIN BROMOXYNIL PRODUCTS
OVERVIEW	

     Bromoxynil is 'a selective, postemergence herbicide used to
control broadleaf weeds primarily in field corn, wheat, garlic,
barley, oats, rye, sorghum, onions and flax.  Most use occurs
between February and June on small grains and corn.

     On May 5, 1989 the Agency approved an Agreement with Rhone-
Pou,lenc to conditionally amend the registrations of three
bromoxynil pesticide products (buctril, bronate, and buctril +
atrazine), pursuant to FIFRA section 3(c)(7)(A).

     On June 5, 1989 the Director of the Office of Pesticide
Programs, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances, signed a
FEDERAL REGISTER Notice entitled: "Order Cancelling Registrations
For Pesticide Products Containing Bromoxynil Butyrate."  The
registrant requested voluntarily cancellation of bromoxynil
butyrate products and proposed to condu'ct a recall of the
cancelled products down to the user level.
REGULATED COMMUNITY	

     Rhone-Poulenc, the only registrant, producers,
distributors, and users of bromoxynil are affected by the
Agreement and the Cancellation Order, although responsibility
for meeting the terms of the conditional registration Agreement
is on the registrant.  At the time of the Agreement and
Cancellation Order there were 8 registrations and 6 producer
establishments.  A list of these can be found in the Appendix.
REQUIREMENTS OF CONDITIONAL REGISTRATION	

     Under FIFRA Section 3(c)(7)(A), EPA.has imposed certain
conditions for the continued registration of three bromoxynil
octanoate products (buctril, bronate, and buctril + atrazine).
These conditions include adding warning statements to the
product labels stating that exposure during pregnancy causes
birth defects in laboratory animals, restricting its use to
certified .applicators, and requiring additional protective
clothing for mixers, loaders and applicators.

     The registrant is also required to conduct an extensive
notification and educational program for bromoxynil users to
inform them of the potential birth defect risks for mixing,
loading and applying bromoxynil as well as the importance of
following the new risk reduction measures.

     The registrant is also required to provide extensive
data within specified time frames and interim reports to enable
-------
                                     -2-

 the Agency  to  better  estimate  the magnitude of  risk to exposed
 workers.

 Stocks  of Products  With Amended  Stickerina/Labeling	
      By May  6,  1989  the  registrant was  required to halt shipment
 of  all bromoxynil  products  until  approved  amended stickers are
 affixed to each container within  the company's possession.

      By May  15, 1989,  the registrant was required to provide
 each  distributor holding inventory of bromoxynil products
 sufficient stickers  for  such  inventory.

      By' May  25, 1989 the registrant was required to provide each
 reseller  and retailer holding inventory of bromoxynil products
 sufficient, stickers  for  such  inventory.

      The  registrant  was  also  required to provide each
 distributor, reseller, and  retailer with instructions concerning
 the manner in which  the  sticker must be affixed to each
 container, and  to  implement the attached labeling communication
 plan  by the  dates  described therein.

      The  registrant  is also required to assume responsibility
 for insuring that  each distributor, reseller or retailer
 attaches  the sticker to  each  container  which is sold or
 distributed  by  the distributor, reseller or retailer after the
 date  the  stickers  are received.

      After October 1, 1989, revised labeling, which deletes all
 claims, references,  and  use directions  pertaining to the
.previously permissible uses for turf and non-crop areas,  and
 which includes  all new label  provisions as required by the
 agreement, must be attached to the containers of all bromoxynil •
 products  released  for shipment by the registrant.

 Additional Requirements	_____	

      By October 1, 1989, the  registrant must develop and  submit
 to  EPA a  proposed  program to  provide additional training  to
 users of  bromoxynil  products  prior to the  1990 spring use season
 and will  implement the program once it  has been approved  by EPA.

      By October 1, 1989, the  registrant is also required  to
 establish a  program  to provide assistance  to users who do not
 own a mechanical transfer system  which  terminates  in a drop-
 free  hard coupling and who  wish to obtain  such a system or  to
 modify their present system.

      After October 1, 1989, the  registrant is required to insure
 that  all  bulk containers released for shipment  include a
 mechanical transfer  mechanism which terminates  in  a drip-free
 hard  coupling which  may  be  used only with  a spray  or mix  tank
 which has been  fitted with  a  compatible coupling.
-------
                                    -3-
     By January  l,  1990, the registrant is required to have
 investigated and reported to EPA, the feasibility of packaging
 bromoxynil products  in containers which are smaller than 30
 gallons and which include a hard coupling designed for use with
 a specific closed mixing and loading system.

     By  specified dates, the registrant is required to develop
 and submit rabbit dermal teratology, male reproduction effects
 and worker exposure  studies to EPA.  The agreement requires the
 registrant to submit one-line, status reports on each required
 study on at least a  quarterly basis to EPA.
CONDITIONS OF CANCELLATION
     All pesticide products containing bromoxynil butyrate were
automatically canceled, effective the day following publication
of the Cancellation Order in the Federal Register.

Recall     _

     in their request for voluntarily cancellation, the Company
stated that it would institute a plan to recover remaining
stocks of these products from distributors, dealers, and users.

Existing Stocks _

     Sale, distribution and use of existing stocks of bromoxynil
butyrate product now in the possession of distributors, retailers
and end-users is not permitted after the date of publication of
the Cancellation Order in the Federal Register.  The registrant
also .indicated that they will accept for disposal any stocks of
bromoxynil butyrate products turned in by distributors, dealers
and end-users.  Persons holding existing stocks of cancelled
bromoxynil butyrate products must dispose of them in accordance
with the applicable requirements of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA).  Noncompliance with the cancellation order
or its terms is a violation of FIFRA sections l2(a)(l)(A) and/or
COMPLIANCE MONITORING
Reional/State Activities
     Inspections will.be conducted by the States and EPA (in
non-grant states) to monitor compliance with the Conditional
Registration' Agreement and the Cancellation 'Order.  This will be
accomplished through registrant; producer establishment, and
marketplace inspections.  Enforcement actions regarding the
Cancellation Order will be taken, as appropriate, by the States
and Regions , with reports of such actions and/or potential
violations made to EPA headquarters.  States and Regions will
also report to EPA headquarters all violations or potential
-------
                                    -4-      .          ' '

and Regions, with reports of such actions and/or potential
violations made to EPA headquarters.   States and Regions win
also report to EPA headquarters all violations or potential
violations of the conditions of registration of bromoxynil
octanoate products.

Registrant/Producer Level	
     Within 30 days of the date of this strategy, the
Regions/States will schedule and conduct inspections of Rhone-
Poulenc's producer establishments to obtain assurance that the
company has complied with the requirements of the May 5, 1989
Agreement "by not having released products for shipment without
the amended stickers, and the June 5, 1989 Cancellation Order
to determine if production and sale for distribution of
cancelled bromoxynil products within the U.S. has ceased.
Information obtained during inspections of registrants records
regarding disposition of stocks of conditionally registered and
cancelled products should be forwarded to other Regions for
their use in scheduling inspections.

     After October l, 1989 inspections at producer
establishments will assure that all products released for
shipment by the registrant have the required revised labelling,
and that all bulk containers released for shipment include the
required mechanical transfer mechanism with a drip-free hard
coupling.

     After October 1, 1989, and before the Spring 1990 planting
season, inspections will be conducted to determine registrant
compliance with the EPA-approved plan for user training and
assistance.  This plan will be sent to the States and Regions
following its approval.  The inspections will-be appropriately
directed at the registrant-user interface and may, for example,
include monitoring or inspection of training sessions/materials
by Regions or States.

     Within 60 days of the date of this strategy, the
Regions/States will follow-up and track the recall of the
cancelled bromoxynil butyrate products, that the registrant is
undertaking, following the outlines in section 14 of the
Pesticides Inspection Manual.

Distributor/Reseller/Retail Level

     Within 60 days of the date of this strategy, the
Regions/States will inspect, during routine scheduled
inspections, distributors, resellers, and retailers to assure
that the registrant has adhered to the time frames and
requirements listed above under "Requirements of Conditional
Registration," and the June 5, 1989 Cancellation Order to
determine if sale and distribution of cancelled bromoxynil
butyrate products within the U.S. has ceased.
-------
                                    -5-            .  .

User L,evel	

     Within 60 days of the date of this strategy, inspectors
will assure, during routine scheduled inspections, that non-
cancelled bromoxyni.l products are being used only by certified
applicators and in accordance with the use' directions and
protective clothing requirements on the amended sticker/label,
and that cancelled bromoxynil butyrate products are not being
used.
ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES	

Office of Pesticide Programs	

Will develop and provide OCM with a list of all products
affected by the Conditional Registration Agreement and the
Cancellation Order.

Office of Compliance Monitoring	•	
Will develop and transmit the Compliance Monitoring strategy to
the Regions.

Will receive quarterly reports from Regions for one year
following the date of this Strategy.

Will transmit to the Regions a list of those affected products
and a list of producing establishments.

Will transmit to OPP any information regarding violation of the
conditions of registration.

Realons	
Will provide copies of the Compliance Monitoring Strategy to
States.

Will report quarterly to the Director of the Compliance
Division, OCM detailing .State inspection activities per their
quarterly reports, for one year following the date of this
Strategy.        "                                       0

Will distribute a list of products, and producing establishments
to the States.

Will conduct inspections in States without Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements as specified in this Strategy.

Will take enforcement action as appropriate.
-------
                                    -6-

noncompliance with the requirements of the Agreement, including
information on tips and complaints received.

Will report to the Director of the Compliance Division, OCM
regarding violations of the conditions of registrations
immediately upon receiving such information.
                  «
States	

Will conduct inspections as specified in this Strategy.

Will make quarterly reports to.the Regions detailing the number
and dates-of inspections related to this Strategy, for one year
after the date of this Strategy.

Will take enforcement action as appropriate provided they have
the authority.

Will report to the Regions on potential violations of the
bromoxynil conditional registration agreement, including
whether training and assistance activities are conducted, and
enforcement actions for violations of'the Cancellation Order.
Reports will be submitted within two weeks of Knowledge of
violation or enforcement action.

Will investigate tips and complaints as received.  If States
receive information which indicates possible noncompliance with
the Agreement,- they should-investigate to ensure compliance.
-------
                                            APPENDIX

                  BROMOXYNIL  REGISTRANT,  PRODUCTS,  AND PRODUCING ESTABLISHMENTS (1985-87)
Rhone-Poulenc AG  Company
P.O.  Box  12014  2  T.W.  Alexander  Drive
Research  Triangle Park, NC  27709
Product Name
~~1
Buc'tril*
EPA Reg. No.

  264-437
Broot 15GX  (Bronate)*    264-438
Buctril + Atrazine*      264-477

ME 4 Brominal
(Buctril ME 4)**         264-340
(Also produced as
3+3 Brominal
and Torch Twin Pack)
  Estab. No.

  264-OR-001



  264-OR-001

  264-IA-001
Estab. Address

Rhone-Poulenc AG Company
6200 NW St. Helens Rd.
Portland, OR  97210
                                                             Rhone-Poulenc AG Co
                                                             2100  S  21st St.
                                                             Clinton,  IA 52732
                     No USA Production Records for 1985-88
                     264-MO-001
                  Rhone-Poulenc
                  PO Box 367
                  317 West Florence Rd
                  St. Joseph, MO  64502
Buctril 4 EC'**

Certrol**
  264-474

  264-421
  264-NC-001      Rhone-Poulenc AG Company
                  T.W. Alexander Or
                  Research Triangle Pk, NC  27709

55259-IL-001      Bradford Ag Service Inc.
                  401 Phoenix Ave
                  Bradford, IL  61421

 2393-IL-003      Hopkins Agri. Chemical Co.
                  303 SW Arch St.
                  Atlanta, IL  61723

  No USA Production Records for 1985-88

  264-MO-001 •     Rhone-Poulenc AG Company
                  PO Box 367
                  317 West Florence Road
                  St. Joseph, MO  64502

 2393-IL-003      Hopkins Agricultural Chemical Co
                  303 SW Arch St.
                  Atlanta, IL  61723
-------
                                              -2-
Dragonmate Broad!eaf
 Herbicide**
264-339
264-MO-001
Rhone-Poulenc
PO Box 367
317 West Florence Rd
St. Joseph, MO  64502
* uonaitionai ly registereo products.

** Registrant has requested voluntary cancellation of these registered products and they are
cancelled by the cancellation order published in the FEDERAL REGISTER (54 FR 24948).
-------
                        Federal.Register  /  Vol.  =>4,  \'o. ill  / Monday. June  12.  1989  /  Notices
                                                                                                   24949
    Name Of KX*C«M
                             Locjuon
                                Proieo desuuvon
                                           Reviewing agency
Osteof line*
  action
Long tattnd Ughbng Co. '
! West Babylon. NY.
Nassau Oistrict Energy Corp..) unondale. NY	
Karmne Carmage Cogerwa-  j Carthage. NY	
  lion Co.. Inc.            I
Momlt Pfess Co	i Purm NY		

Kamir.e Soutn Glens FJMS   Socin Gtens FaJs.
  Cogeneration Co.. Inc.     ;  NY.

  ces. Inc.
Soise Cascade Corp	: Seever r*!s, NY....
Hoffmann La Rocfw Inc	' Setvidera, NJ	
        Inc ........................ ' Par1'?.. NJ ..„ ...... ___

Long island bglnng Co .......... S-Torenam. NY ______

Life Severs. Ice ................. : ...... ! Las Piedras. P3 .....


Aooon Laooratsriss ................. ' Sarcetoneta, PH.. ..

Mecan-aacme. Assoctites. ; Carton. NY ............
  Inc.             .     :
United Cevetocmcnt Gtouo- j Niagara Fstia,  NY...
  Niag&ra. inc.
Town of North Hempstead ; Port Was^ngton.
  SoM  Waste Managemen^j   NY.
  Aumcnry.              \
       f7/ Systems. Inc ....... kowvi;.*. NY ............
Construction of a 220 MW gas lurtxne y»ie»aliori
  factty.
Cortrucoon ol a 57 MW cogeneraton Facility	
Conjtrucaon of a So MW jaa turbine, steam gener-
  ator.
Construction of an 11 station rotogravure press and
  modricstion of an 8 smon rotogravure press.
Corsmxaon at a 50 NW gas (ureme/steam gener-
  al.
Construction of a 53 MW jat turBme.'steam gener-
  a;or.
Herxaccment of an eusdng oil-fired baler win a
  new oil-fired ooiier.

Revision of me nitrogen oxide emission limit piew
  pusly  permitted  tor a  23.3 MW cogeneraticn

Revfeon of tns  partcutsM matter emission  Urnfl
          permined for mree ooaMved balers.
           of a  220 MW gas turbine generation
  facing
ConBtrucrier of a  new steam boHerand •  new
             corwersun ot an mti"*j genere-
  tor and OoAer to standby operation.
Re-..*on of m\PM emission limit previously permit-
  ted for a ZC 2Vw cogenerawn facility.
Construction of a\l9 MW gas turbme/ steam gener-
  sior.
Construction of a coaj fired cogeneration system....
FennsajKen  Solid  A«te  PerVsr-'kei. NJ
  Managamem Autronty '.  j     \
Construction of a 990 i
  resource* recovery I

Construction of a 49 MW i
  ator.
Construction of f-»o  250
  s-M waste incirerattrs.
                                        I" ^ rnunicipal waste
                                          > turbine/steam genef-

                                             per day muniopal
NYSCEC 	
NYSCEC
NYSDEC . _ 	
NYSOEC 	 —
NYSDEC 	
NYSDEC
NYSDEC 	 - 	
SPA region II 	 _....
EPA fegion II
NYSCECs 	
EPA region 11 	
EPA region II 	 \_..
NYSCEC 	 .ii
NYSDEC 	 	
NYSDEC 	
NYSCEC.... 	 	
NJOEP 	 ..._...
PSO permit

do . 	 .
	 00 	 ,.._ 	
_"* '
PSO non-
applicability
determination.
PSD perm* revision .
da
PSD permit
approval.
PSO non-
appiicability
PSO pcnrM rwo»w.-
PSOpermil
\ approval.
\ do 	
X'™*
PSOyptatttty
dftklDnffliiMsX
PSO permit
_ do 	 J\.'.
7/18/88
10/07/88
10/19/88
I2/05/8S
12/05/88
1/09/89
1/11/39
1/17/99
1 / 1 " • 89
1/23/89
3/01/89
3/06/89
3/06.89
3/10/39
3/1S/89
. 3/20/89
4/20/89
                                                                                               i
    ' On M*y 18. '9ae. me Lo-g is^rnj L^rmng Comoar.y (LiLCO) was issued a PSD pymrl by trie New York State Department of Environmental
120 veqawan 'MWl gas 0:0 ne cocer->)Q9on ^~(^ tor "i Ae«t Barjy.on pom. The penk was not considered elective and thereiore was not :nct
Us Nov-jTioer C5. 1988 F£r?o«L P^c-.sTtn ronce on fi-n PSO acnr^s because ao-ssu6d a °iJ permiMn February 10, 1989 by tne Mew Jersey Department of
Protecti:n This .-^rmn wcoid "ave becc^v «nec'.:ve on Vi'cn 13, '939 if no pec'jon for aarrmjiratrve review was tiled wnrt tne EPA Aarmmstraior •«
C-C. Hcwcver. a oemion for review wis '*ta Syve Tawrinip ot Cinnarpmsoa tne 9orougft of Painyra and tne Bvougn of Rrverton on Marcn 7. 1989. On
198». '.19 EPA Aomk-Hstratar oectcec  d".er careful revie* of \f~9 appeal  not to grant 'urtr^r rev>«\ ttt try; petition. Therefore, me PSWMS PSO permit 3 effect
ol Apr,l 20.  198J.
                                                                                                                              lor a
    us notice lists or.iy the sources that
      received finai PSD determinations.
Anyone who wishes  to review these
detcrnWiaiior.s and related materials
should \ntact tl.s following offices:

EPA  Actions
I'nitod Stat-jj-Envirormentai Protection
   Atency. V- ,-gion il Oifice. Permits
   AJiriir.istrition Branch—Roc.r. 505. 26
   Fsci'.-.-al Pl^zd.j^'ew Yoiic. New York
NYSDEC Acuons
New York Sta!" Dppar^inent of
  Environmental CcrserVation. Division
  of Air Resources. sourc\Rev:ew and
  Re-.v«nal Siippcrt SfctionVso Wolf
 . Posd. Alb'jny. New York :\L:33-0(Xn.
        Actions
.'•'ei%  I'Tsey IK-njrtment of
  Environrr.i ntul Protection. D.\.aiNn nf
  Fnyironmcr.ieii Qisfliity. D:;reju of
  F:r.;.-.nser;nc; A Techno'lt TV 401 Er-sO
   jtate Street Trenton. New Jersey
     525.
      iLavailabie pursuant to the
   Consolidated Permit Regulations (40
   CFR P\rt 124). j'idicial review of these
   rletermitutiors under section 307(b)(l)
   of the Cle\n Air Act [the Act) ziay be
   sought or.lyyby the f:::r.g of a peti'ion for
   review in the\L'nited States Court cf
   Appeals for tnW appropriate circuit
   within 60 days ftam the date on which
   these determinatitins are published in
   the Federal Registek Under section
   307(b)(2) of ihe Act. fhcse
   determinations shall n\t be suhjcct to
   later judicial review in c\v:I or c:l.~ir.al
   proceedings for cn:orcerr\i:.

     Dated: )une 1, 1969.

   William |. Mu'iynsla,
   \'.~R Doc. S')-1.I349 Filed 6-9-38: 8 4S .ir-.f
   B:LLIKC CCCE i^co-so-u
                                                                 10PP-661M; FRL-3600-4]

                                                                 Order Canceling Registration for
                                                                 Pesticide Products Containing
                                                                 Bromoxynil Butyrate
                                                                 AGENCY: Environmental Protection
                                                                 Agency (EPA).
                                                                 ACTION: Cancellation notice and order.

                                                                 NUMMARY: This no ace announces EPA's
                                                                 decision to cancel all registrations
                                                                 issued under the Federal Insecticide.
                                                                 Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (F1FRA)
                                                                 for pesticide products containing the
                                                                 butyric acid esMr of bromoxynil (3.3-
                                                                 dibromo-t-hydroxybenzoniL'-i'.e). The
                                                                 registnnt Rhone-Poulenc AC Company
                                                                 has requested voluntary cancellation of
                                                                 these products. Because of the
                                                                 developmental risks  associated with
                                                                 exposure to these products. EPA will not
                                                                 permit and the cancellation order will
                                                                 explicitly prohibit the sale, distribution.
                                                                 iuid use of existing stocks of affected
                                                                 products.
-------
24'J."0
Fedorjl  Register
             ..Ill  ,  Mor.i!,.v. L:r.
DATE: The cancellation order
incorporated in this notice will become
effective June 13. 1989.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[u-:o Andreasen. Special Review/
  [^registration Division (H7j08C).
  Office of Pesticide Programs.
  r-;.:-. inr.mental Protection Agency. 41)1
  M Sir-ret SW . Washington. DC 20400
Offire iucatiun and telephone number:
  F>~. inooF. CM =:. l?:i Jeffprson
  D,iv;s riigh'.vay.  Arlington. VA. (70rO
  jj"-1170.
SUPPLEMENTAHY INFORMATION:

I. Request for Voluntary Cancellation
  On May 1.1989.    Rhone-
                   Po-jler.c.

                   ill. Cancellation Order

                     Effective June 1.1, I3B9. the
                   registrations for all pesticide products
                   containing the butyric acid e.^te; cf
                   bromoxynil (3.5-Jib:omo-4-
                   hydroxybenzonitrilf) are canceled
                   pursuant to section 6(f)(l) of FIFRA. 7
                   U.S.C. 136d(f)(l). Effective June 13. 1989,
                   it shall be unlawful under FIFRA section
                   12(;0(1)(A) and/or FiFRA section
                   l2(a)(2)(K). 7 U.S.C. 136j(a)(l)(A),
                   136j[a)(2)(K). for any person to distribute
                   or sell, or  to use for any pesticidal
                   purpose, any of the following canceled
                   products containing the butyric acid
                   ester of bromoxynil:
                                              Product
                                           '.. Kinjr.i 10325  !.-.:.Ti-stcJ c '•
                                         i;iy submit ccT.r'.i.T.ts t-n r:T.~.
                                         Iroomer.: to I!IP S
  EPA
registration I registration '
No.
264-339
264-340
264-340
264-340
264-3SM
264431
264.474
HO. '.
	 • QragonmatA
ME 4 Srcminal
• Torch Twin Pafc
i 3-»-3 Qfominflti
	 	 	 ; Sromoynd Sutyrate
! Technical
Certrot
3£0-'i6 Buetnl 4 EC.
I
                     This Order does not prohibit any
                   shipments of canceled products
                   containing the butyric acid ester of
                   bromoxynil which are associated with
                   the program to recover stocks of such
                   products established by Rhone-Poulenc
                   AC Company, or which  are otherwise
                   necessary to facilitate proper storage or
                   disposal of such products.
                     Dated: June S. 1969.
                   Douglai D. Caoipt,
                   Director. Office of Pesticide Programs.
                   [FR Doc. 89-13648 Filed 6-9-89: 8:45 air.)
                             MARITIME COMMISSION

                                 Filed
                     The FedcraVMaritime Commission
                   hereby gives nomeof the filing of the
                   following agreemenHfiJ pursuant to
                   section 5 of the ShippirtiAct of 1984.
                     Interested parties may inspect and
                   obtain a copy of each agreement at the
                   Washington. DC Office of the Federal
                   Maritime Commission. 1100 L Sti
                                              within 10 days jfter 'he .:
                                            pderal Register :n u;::rh :h
                                               . The reqtiin'ms.'T.ts for
                                               ,'a are four.J ;n 5 5~J.!'i'
                                               i Code of Ft:-:oral R-- -
                                                  persons should Co.'.s-
                                                    i cunirr..:",»:;!i:r.: '••>
                                                        ii:r.-' a pprni1".!
                                                   yVcJ.: 202-
                                          TYr.'i.'. Su::th\Eurcpe. l.'.S.A.
                                       Conference ("i
                                                            v.cii Esrar.
  Achille Lauro
  Compania Trasi
    S.A.
  Ccsta Container L\ne (a Divis
    Contship Containeriines Lir.;
  d'Amico Societa di .\avigaz:o:u
    S.P.A.  •          \
  Evergreen Marine Corporation
    (Taiwan) Ltd.
  Farrell Lines. Inc.
  "Italia" di N'avigazione S.^
  Jogolinija
  Jugooceanija              \
  Lykes Lines (Lykes Bros. Steiim'
    Co.. Ltd.)                 \
  A.P. Moller-Maersk Line      \
  Nedlloyd Lines (N'edllcyd Lijr.cn
  Sea-Land Service. Inc.
  P 4 O Containers (TFL). Ltd.
  Zim Israel Navigation Company.
  \nopsis: The proposed mod:fkc
would permit any member !o
disassociate itself from any Confer
actionVi a rate or service item tha
would mult in a reduction in the o
cost per cargo unit to the shipper b\
giving wrinen notice to the other
members prwr to the time the rate c
service item lias been filed with the
FMC and become effective.
  Agreement No.: 217-010738-003.
  Title: Barber Blue Sea/Open Bulk
Carriers Chartering Agreement.
  Parties:
  Wilheimsen LinesNA/S
  Open Bulk CarriersvLimited
  Synopsis: The proposed modificat
would authorize the parties to discu:
and agree upon rates, charges and a
competitive matters regarding
intermodal movements. It would alsc
permit the parties to agree upon saili
schedules, service frequency.\nd po
to be  served by each party. It would
further make other non-substantVye
administrative changes.
  Agreement No.: 232-011184-002.>
  Title: Evergreen Marine Corpora ti\
(Taiwan) Ltd. Italia di Navigazionc S
-------
            UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                        WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
                                                          OFFICE OF
  	   •   •                                    "  FCSTICIOeS AND TOXIC SUBST.

Mr.- Nick Somma.
Rhone-Poulenc Ag. Company                                 ... _  •
P.O.- Box 12014
2 T.w. Alexander Drive
Research-Triangle Park, NC 27709

Dear Mr. Somma:

Subject:  Application for Conditional Amendment - Revised
         .Labeling/Restricted Use Classification/Data
          Requirements/Additional Conditions.
          Buctril Herbicide
          EPA Registration No. 264-437
          Bronate Herbicide
          EPA Registration No. 264-438          .     ...
          Buctril + Atrazine Herbicide
          EPA Registration No. 264-477
          Your Submission Dated May 1,  1989

     Your application dated May 1, 1989 to conditionally amend the
subject pesticide registrations to incorporate  revised  labeling,
a new classification for restricted use, additional  claims-,-and
specific conditions for continued registration  is granted,
effective immediately.  -Continued registration  of these
pesticides will be contingent on satisfaction of each of the
conditions set forth in the approved amendment.  Please submit
for each of the subject registrations five  (5)  copies of the
final printed stickers incorporating this amendment.  A stamper
copy of the approved text for these stickers is enclosed for your
records.
                                  Sincerely  yours,
                                  Robert  J*:  Taylor
                                  Product Manager  (25.)
                                  Fungicide-Herbicide  Branch
                                  Registration Division (H7505C1
-------
DAT£i   MfiY  '  f't-L  TIM£: .  //•C«A*\  TOTAL NO,  OF PAGES
                                           (INCLUDING COVER PAGE)   75"

TD»     ejU'^   7/vsc/j-t/V	  LOCATION:  _^/» - 4'tc_/vg_/^


FAX N0»        7^J.  55-?  ^3/^>6	  SENDER)
PLEASE  ADVISE BY FACSIMILE OR PHONE IF MESSAGE  IS  NOT LEGIBLE OR ALL  PAGES
ARE NOT RECEIVED.

FACSIMILE NO, ISi
DIRECT  LINE TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS  OPERATOR IS


                                     M£SSAfi£
    TO:  Edwin  Tinsworth
        EPA
   . Attached Is the AflpJJ.catlon for Amended Registration of bromoxynll products,
"•"''It should contain  all the revisions discussed.   A copy is also being sent overnight
    mall.  If there are any questions, please let me know.
    Sincerely,

    Nick Somma
'513A
                         • <
-------
 RHON£-POULENC
RH6NE-POULENC AO COMPANY

                                                          May  1.  1989
     Robert  Taylor  .
     Environmental  Protection  Agency
     Office of Pesticide Programs
     Crystal  Mall, Building 2
     Arlington,  Virginia   22202
     Dear Mr. Taylor:
           SUBJECT   Buctril  (264-437),  Bronatc (264-438)
                       Buctril  4 Atrazine  (264-477)

           Rh6ne-Poulenc  Ag  Company  hereby applies to conditionally
     amend pursuant to FIFRA §3 (c) (7) (a)  the  pesticide product
     referenced above  to  incorporate the  revised  labeling, new
     classification  for  restricted  use,  additional claims, and  specific
     conditions for continued registration set  forth below.   Rh6ne Poulcnc
     hereby claims in  connection  with  this application for alienee:.
     registration  that it will.conform  to  the following  conditions as cart of
     its distribution  and sale of these products.

           The  text  for stickers which incorporates new language  adding  a
     classification  for  restricted  use,  a new  label  warning concerning .
     developmental toxicity, and specific  use directions requiring
     additional  protective  clothing and  equipment and new use practices
     is appended to  this Application  as Attachment A.. Rhone  Poulcnc
     agrees as a condition of  registration that it will •attach  the stickers
     appended  to this  Application  as  Attachment  A to- all  containers  of
     these  products  that are  released  for shipment  by Rhone-Poulenc
     after the date of approval  of this amendment by  EPA.   Rh6ne
     Poulenc further agrees as  a condition of  registration  that  it will
AC6CARCM TRIAK.CLC »•<. * C 377M

•NTERNATlOhAL TELEX NUM8E" '9903?l ANSWERBACK APC RTP
INTERNATIONAL OlSmie J'ON StBviCCC TClCX NUMOCn «8W377-ANSWe"BACK APC IOC
-------
                     CONDITIONAL  REGISTRATION


I.Revised Labeling
     A.What
          1.Classification
          2.Warning Label
          3.New use pracices
     B.How
          1.Stickers
               a.All stocks leaving RP after 5/5/89
               b.All stocks leaving distributors after 5/15/89
                    (1)instructions
                    '(2)enougn for all inventory by 5/25/89
          2.New permanent labels
               a.Plan by 5/22/89
               b.On products by 10/1/89
               c.states:
                    (l)deletes claims for turf and non-crop uses
                    (2)all restickering provisions
                    (3)equipment needs

11.User Training
     A.Training of users
          1.prior to 1990 spring use
          2.pending EPA  approval
     B.Hard-coupling transfer systems
          1.program to assist users not owning such system
          2.plan by 10/1/89

III.Repackaging
     A.Hard-coupling for all bulk (>30 gal) by 10/1/89
     B.Feasibility study for small  containers by 1/1/90

IV.Safety assessment data
     A.Rabbit dermal Tox--5/l/90
     B.Male repro--6/l/90
     C.Worker exposure--12/31/90
-------
 RHONE-POULENC
RHdNE-POULENC AO COMPANY
     provide  to  each distributor  holding  inventory of  these  products
     quantities of  these  stickers  sufficient  for  such inventory within  ten
     days after the date  of approval of this amendment by EPA, and  that
     Rhdne Poulenc  will  assume  responsibility  for insuring  that  each
     distributor attaches  the sticker  to  each container  of  these  products
     which  are sold or distributed  by the  distributor after the date (he
     stickers are received.   Rhdne Poulenc  further agrees as  a condition of
     registration  that  it will provide  to each reseller and  retailer holding
     inventory of  these products  quantities of  this sticker  sufficient  for
     such inventory  within  twenty days  after the  date  of  approval of  this
     amendment  by EPA. and  that  Rhdne Poulenc  will assume
     responsibility  for insuring that each  such  reseller or  retailer  attaches
     the  slicker to each  container which  is sold or distributed by the
     reseller or retailer after the  date the stickers are  received.   Rhdne
     Poulenc  further agrees as a  condition  of registration that it  will
     provide to each  distributor,  reseller, and  retailer along  with such
     stickers  the information  package and  the  instructions concerning  the
     manner in which  the  sticker must  be  affixed to each container of
     these  products which  are  appended  to this  application  as  Attachment
     B.  Rhdne Poulenc  further agrees as a condition of registration that it
     will  implement the communication plan appended to this  application
     as Attachment C  in  the  manner and  by the  dates described therein.

           Rhone-Pouienc further  agrees as a  condition of registration  that
     it will submit by May 22, 1989 a complete  copy of revised labeling
     for  subject  products  which (1)  deletes all  claims,  references, and  use
     directions pertaining to the  previously permissible uses for turf and
     nOn-crop areas,  (2)   includes all the  new  label provisions included in
     the  sticker which is appended to this  application  as  Attachment  A,
     and (3)  incorporates  the  additional  revised  labeling concerning  the
     equipment .which must be  used for mixing and loading as set forth in
     Attachment  D.  Rhone-Poulenc  -agrees as  a condition of registration
     that, after review and  approval by EPA of  the complete revised
     labeling  to  be submitted by  May 22,  1989,  such revised labeling  will
     be Attached  to each  container of these products which  are  released
     for  shipment  by Rhone-Poulenc  after  October 1, 1989.

           Rhdne Poulenc  further agrees  as a  condition of registration that
     it will develop and  submit to EPA by  October 1,  1989  a proposed
        :. TELEX NUMStM «W937»- ANKWfcM*A(.K A&C DTP
          'STH'B'J'tO*. 3£«VlC£S TClCX NJMQCB «9W3»- ANOWCnOACK APC 103
-------
RHONE-POULENC
RHONE POUUENC AQ COMPANY
     program  to  provide additional  training to users of  bromoxynil
     products  prior  to  the- 1990 spring use  season,  and  will  upon  approval
     by EPA  implement such a training  program.   Rhonc-Poulcnc  further
     agrees  us a  condition  of registration  that  it will by October  1,  1989
     establish  a program to provide assistance to users who do  not  own a
     mechanical  transfer system  which  terminates  in a  drip-free hard
     coupling  (the  type required  for  30 gallon drums in  the  labeling  which
     must appear  on containers  after October  1,  1989) and  who wish
     either to obtain such  a system  or to  modify their  present  system.
     Rhone-Poulenc further  agrees  as a condition of registration that  it
     will  thoroughly investigate the  feasibility of packaging these
     products  in  containers  which  are smaller  than  30 gallons and  which
     include a hard coupling designed for use with  a  specific  closed mixing
     and loading system, and will provide to EPA a detailed  report  of its
     findings  and  conclusions no later than  January  1.  1990.  For  products
     sold  in  bulk containers;   Rhone-Poulenc  hereby applies  to  amend its
     registration for these  products  to provide, and  agrees as a  condition
     of registration, that all  bulk  containers of these products  which  are
     released  for shipment by Rlionc-Poulenc  after  October  1, 1989 will
     include  a mechanical transfer  mechanism which terminates in a drip-
     free  hard coupling which may  be  used only with a  spray or mix tank
     which has  been fitted  with  a compatible coupling.

          For each of the specific  data requirements described  below,
     Rh6ne  Poulenc agrees as a condition of registration  that it  will
     develop  and  submit the  specified  data according to  the specified
     schedule.  Rhine  Poulenc  agrees  that  failure to submit the required
     data, or  to adhere to  any element of  the  specified  schedule for
     development  and  submission  of the data, will  constitute grounds for
     cancellation  of Uiis registration  under  FIFRA $  6(e), unless  Rhdne
     Poulenc  demonstrates  that it  has undertaken in  good faith  and in  a
     timely  manner all steps necessary  to  develop  and  submit  the  data
     according 10 the  specified schedule  and that its failure to  submit the
     data  or to  adhere  to the schedule  was  due to  factors that could not
     reasonably have been  within  its control.
     Rabbit Dermal Teratology  Study
          . *•**(«* HC *

            NUMe£P«0
            JUT.CN SEBvCCS TCtCx M'jMOCf *M9W- ANCWcnaxCK xrc IDS
-------
 RH6NE-POULBNC
 RH6NE-POULENC AQ COMPANY

     Pilot:
           Submit Protocol-May 8,  1989
           EPA  Approval of Protocol by--May 23,  1989
           Study Initiation-May 31, 1989
           Study Completed-September 1,  1989
           Final  Report-October 16, 1989

     Full:
           Submit Protocol-June 1,  1989  (without dose  selection)
           EPA  Approval of Protocol by-July  15,  1989
           Discussion of Dose Selection-October  2, 1989
           EPA  Approval of Dose Selection by-October 23,  1989
           Study Initiation—November  1,  1989
           Study Completed-March  1,  1990   •
           Final Report--May 1.  1990
     Male  Reproduction  Effects Study

     Pilot:
           Submit Protocol  -June  IS,  1989
           EPA  Approval of Protocorby-July 3, 1989
           Study Initiation-July  14,  1989
           Study Completed-September 1, 1989
           Final Report-October  2,  1989

     Full:
           Submit Protocol-July  3,  1989 (without  dose  selection)
           EPA  Approval of Protocol by-August 4, 1989
           Discussion of Dose Selection-October 2, 1989
           EPA  Approval of Dose Selection-October 14, 1989
           Study Initiation--November  1,  1989
           In-Life Completed-February  1,  1.990
          Final report-June 1.  1990


     Worker  Exposure  Study

     Submit Protocol—June  15,  1989
PO SOX 12014 2TW4LFI*NnPRnHIVE
              NC 37700
iNTCRNtflOMAV UkCx NUMKR 
-------
ff RHONE-POULENC
    RHdNE-POULENC AQ COMPANY

         (Protocol  is to be  based  on scope of  study as presented in Attachment
         E)
         EPA Approval of  Protocol -August 18,  1989
         Draft Report  (Non- QA'd)--November  15,  1990
         Final Report-December  31,  1990
         The  schedules  given above are based  on  Rhone-Poulenc's expectation
         that  EPA  will respond  to the protocols  and dose selection in a timely
         manner.   If EPA does  not  provide a  full response  to a  proposed
         protocol or  proposed dose  selection by  the  date  specified for  EPA
         approval,  the  agreed schedule  may be  adjusted  to  permit an equal
         delay in  completion of subsequent steps.   However,  if EPA responds
         in  o  timely manner but is  unable  to  approve a proposed protocol or
         proposed  dose  selection by the specified date due to  substantive
         concerns  regarding  the content of  the  proposal, Rhonc-Poulcnc  agrees
         that  it will  adhere  to the  established schedule unless EPA  approves
         an extension.

         Rhone Poulenc  will  submit one-line  status reports  on each  of the
         required studies on  at  least'a quarterly basis.   The  proposed protocol
         for the  Worker  Exposure Study, will  also  describe and  require
         submission  of  appropriate  interim  reports.   In  addition  to  submission
         of these reports, Rlione-Poulenc will  immediately notify  EPA  if  any
         problems  arise which might  prevent  the  timely  completion or
         submission  of any of the  required  studies.

               Rhone Poulenc acknowledges that this ..pplic .tion f«.r
         conditional  amendment  is  based on  the Agency's  assessment  of  the
         data  concerning the risks and benefits  of  bromoxynil use available to
         EPA  as  of the  dale  of this  application.  Rhone Poulenc declares that it
         is Rhdne  Poulenc's  present intention  not  to request additional
         amendments of  this  registration during the  time required to develop
         and submit  the  data described  above.   Rhdne  Poulenc specifically
         agrees that  EPA may deny without hearing any  additional  application
         to amend  this  registration  which Rh6ne Poulenc  may  submit during
         the time  required  to develop and  submit the data required  above,  if:
         (1) EPA  determines  that Rhone-Poulenc has not submitted
         substantial new evidence which materially changes  the Agency's
    "O BO* i»u 2 TW AlEMNPS* CM'VE
    nCSCAUCH TRIANGLE P*B< NC 37709
    Old) S*9 JOOO
    INTERNATIONA^ TCICX NUM3CB 49003'! ANSWERBACK *P? DTP
    INTERNATIONAL P'STaoUWON SC/WlCES ?6»E« NJMfl£P 49003V-AKgWfcuOX* **: IOC
-------
 RH&NE-POULENC
RHdNE-POULENC AQ COMPANY

     assessment  of the  risks and benefits of use of  bromoxynil  and which
     was not available  10 cither EPA or Rhone-Poulcnc  at  the time this
     application  was  submitted and   (2) EPA  provides  a  written
     explanation of  the  basis for its determination.
     Sincerely,.
     Nick Somma
     Registration  Manager


     COPY: Mr. Edwin  Tinsworth
(9*9) $497000
INUfttMJIONAl 'tkCX NUMBED 4«Q»)?8 ANSWtBBACn 4PC ATP
                       ..C* NJMOCP *v»n ANCWCTOATK APC os
-------
  P/EPA
                                        0*
                                                 DC »4«fl
 Application for P«sticld«:     Registration
_ __       L& Amendment
                                                     102852
 iCompany/Produci Number
       364*477
   . Oitt
                                            fitctlon
       May  1.  1989
S Nam* «nfl Add'tu of Appi-c*fll (incite* ZIP OoSOT
                                M«n«gtr
                            Robert Taylor
4 Pfopo»«o tun ''Ci:
n
                              Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company
                              P. 0. Box  12014. 2 T. W. Alexander Drive
                              Researcn Triangle Park, NC  27709
 f*"l ChfOi K thli l»
              Bucirll  <*• Atrazme Herbicide
                                 Saetlon H - Am«ndm«nt Information
             A^^ .-..,
                                         ^ •*,
                                                                            Dei* of Letter
                                                                                  1,  1989
          Label modification to Include  Restricted Use. Classification and  additional
          label restrictions.
                                            •ectlon Ml
i. Location of Net Content* tofo'maQonjf
 nut**
n
                              r*
                            pMk«Q« wgt No.
                                 wolgM   No por eentolnor
                                                                            2 ' yp* Of CenUln«r
                                                         M*U!
                                                         PtWtic
5 locaoon of UMI Ouoeitoni

    gOnUMt
    On m«t«f/«t •coomponytng product
              •. Mannor in VVhiefl UMIM Affixed To Product
                   U*oarapl»
                                                  fV
        Nick Somna
       Registration Manager
                              919-549-2372
   I o»rtify Vt«t ««• •uiomwtd I h*«« m«d* on Alt tomt «M« *0 «iueAm«(«» ft«r«to an trw«.
   eompM*. l •oknewi*0g« tfut any knowingly falat or miaiMding »uurtw»t may b« puftiaKabia by flno or
   tmpritonmont or ooffi gndaf appKoapl* law.
CTypOdNarw
            Nick Sonina
                                                   9. TiUo
                                                     Registration Manager
                           0 Daw Signed
                             May  1.  1989
 A roiM asro-i («•». «••*) Pr»*
-------
RHOAJE— £»OLrr*EXJC
BROMOXYNIL SPECIAL LABELING COMMUNICATION PLAN
09:20;38A
Nay 1, 1989
COMMUNICATION
MEDIA
PAX
DIRECT MAIL
PERSONAL CONTACTS
STICKER PERSONAL
DELIVERY
DATA -LINE
RADIO
POINT OF PURCHASE
INFORMATION
DISSEMINATED
RESTRICTIONS/
USE DIRECTIONS
RESTRICTIONS/
USE DIRECTIONS
V
RESTRICTIONS/
USE DIRECTIONS
V
PACKAGE STICKERS
RESTRICTIONS/
USB DIRECTIONS
RESTRICTIONS
(SEE DEALER FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION)
RESTRICTIONS/
USB DIRECTIONS
TARGET
AUDIENCE
DISTRIBUTORS/
RPAC SALES/FD
DISTRIBUTORS
RESELLER/CUST APPLTR
UNIVERSITY EXTENSION
GROWERS < RESELLER MAIL)
UNIVERSITY EXTENSION -
NEED SCIENTISTS
RESELLERS
CONSULTANTS /FARM MGRS
DISTRIBUTORS
RESELLERS
GROWERS
GROWERS
GROWERS (VI A RESELLERS
PLACE OF BUSINESS)
ESTIMATED NO.
INDIVIDUALS
160
169
50
6,000
4,000
5,000
100
3,000
100
160
2,000
35,000
143,000
40,000
DELIVERY
TIME FRAME
DAY 2
DAY 5
1
V
WEEK 3
WEEK 1
WEEK 1 - 1,500
WEEK 2 - 1.500
WEEK 2
WEEK 1-2
WEEK 2-3
WEEK 3
WEEK 3
WEEK 2-3
TOTAL NUMBER CONTACTS: 23d, 739
-------
                                                         ONw* ol PtHiciiJ*
                                                                      -ii4, Oot»c:.s-
                                                                         sxao
^V FRtV      Application for Pesticide: U Registration
\rl-t  *m       rr	LL'Amendment
                                                                                                      10285:
                   1 . Company/Product NumOO*
                          264-438
                           Q«t
                                                                 JUfillon
                              May 1, 1989
               Applicant jlnciuo* Z/f Qo5ij
     3~ Product M»nag«r
         Robert Taylor
                   5 Ntmt «nO
                                                  Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company
                                                  P.  0. Box  12014, 2 T.  W. Alexander Drive
                                                  Research Triangle Park. NC  27709
                                  Bronate  Herbicide
                                                      flacllon It. Amandmant
n
                          P~nftn«l pi
                          '  lin"..^
                                                                                                   0«t« of L*t1«r
                                                                                                    May 1.  l?89
                             LaDel modification  to Include Restricted Use Classification  and .additional
                             label restrictions.
                                                                 ^•etlon III
                   1. M«l»fl»l TMl PfOOuCI A'lll 8* P«eK«8»fl In
                   DV   O*
                        tion o N»l Content* kife<«naiion 4.
                   i Location o» U6«i Oi'tcnoni
                                              Unit PtouQinp
                                                      TU
                         Unit popfcag* wyt  No. por o»nujn«r
                                                                               a Typ« o( Cenuif
                                                                                   Mtul
                                                                                   PUrte
                                                                                      No.
                                                                                                       Otfi.i Qf»clty)
                       On m«Mrl» •ocompanyfnQ protfu«t
                                       «. Mannor In WHich UMIM AWiatd To Product
                                                                 Stctlon IV
                     t. Contact Point »»«M«*o<>nM«yp«*>iv4»rtf*/Tt*feWbno/MtfM0t««/»o*

                                                 J2JUBBUUUU
                         Wick SOOIM
                    ^
                         Registration Manager
                     OOTipMi* I •cfcnowtodgw lh«t «ny
                     (mpntonmtnt
          t or both undtr ipp«e«M« low.
                                  M* fomi «nd
                                  («lM or
                                                    T«l«pnorw No. f*»o/«o» Xn>« Coo*»>
                                                      919-549-2372
tUt*m*nt m*y p* puni«i»«W« by fin* or
                    »8"«iu»»
                    Typ*d NvnT
                               Mick Sonnu
                                                    3 . TIM
                                                      Registration Manager
                                                     . C«M
                                                       May 1.  1989
                                              oowoni •/• oo«oi«i*
-------
.  j»'O'»
United Sl*'«l Cn»'io**^ feqo/a/n ae aetow (tor MvtHrlf ettoA o/ MdM«««a/
Nlma
N1ck Sonma
Registration Managtr
too*

Telcphon* No. (toctvd* ATM CooV/
919-549-2372
1 oortfry that th« otatamorm 1 ha*o mad* on thi» form and ad anaenmantt ftereto aro triio, aoeurata. and
oompiet*. 1 aokno««odo* tftat any knowingly falM or mldaading Matamant may bo pwnlihabl* by Una or
ImprlMnmont or both wndtt applicable law
"""" ^^^^
4. Typed Name S /
N1ck Sonma
PA f e»* e»»0-i («e». 4-aaj Pie**oy» edition* a>e obMtow.
3* *'U9
Registration Manager
5. Oat* ftioned
May 1. 1989


-------
ATTACHMENT A
-------
            RESTRICTED  USE  PESTICIDE
                              durs » poisons di*ajy unb** ttwir scporvison and ooty tor then* uaon o*«jr«d by t
                                                    faaaans tf IB product a cUafad Racrtaad Uta
     r-or rojuJ Mt» a and u«« only by
                  Ao*atyi ortKfcattoo
 BUCTRIL*  HERBICIDE
     THE CONTROL Or C&HTAJN 0HOAlA.CAr VYCCAV9 lr» 9MAU. UnAirQ, oCXIAJrtU ALT AUTA, VASrVl, WJWVinUM, FLAX. UARUC.
                                                    '
                                                _
                of far«jrno«yn<* (3,8 dtn'omo 4 fry i>ou'|>^*)fgoriRrl>^.
                                                                                        .33.4%
 •Bromezynll oeteneito •qu^*l*rrt to KJTk of bromoiynll or not toM th*Vt
 it) pound* ef bfomorynll per gallon. __ •      _
                          KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN
                                   AVISO    WARNING
 PRECAUTION AL USUAHIO: Si U»t»d no 1
                                 , no u»» •«• pf oqucto h«»a quo » •Uqu>u i\iy» »Mo •Kpltc+oo
C.P.*. Bog. No. ZS4-437
                                        ^•f PBQOUCT L«E l»l«m»lla»l Cll 1 JOfl ill
                                    tUKMBMeY intomoilo* ONLY C»l»« Haul A Q«y
N*{AHM TO HUMAN* ANO DOMCino AMMACi
W4MMMQ . M1TWCUO UM
                                              i* W*
••< U  MUM Mr* ••
|* •h*M« M *A>1k
    Mill MMtkM,

   01 •••^M (M«tifii am *r
                                         •nlcnd*.
an b»
                                        rxt FOUOWNQ
                       I'M v* Una, aim
•M i*r Ti\» cp»«nl>j nui t» ««n a
IMVOI. t duMtiatf '••tAff •»•« «••
oewwingi. or Daea R ymi UM • m«e«|Kioot »|n*l« iri»m tor «J mbln| «M
      . M* «r « etwrtal fvowii opw<« • oauontv
                In • 10 BOcn aiwni o> * gnu n*y«i» • mwl * K Ml^v ot <^>«
IMI poOa pht Mr. rou •"»• JM * mMMAittJ ixnolor «r»i*m tar of mouna, oM 0*0
       whon w»ftj i ^Ktxmot' »»vnl»i >|»i»nv OB .*
    from itw eBmtln* uniti aw eg»ui^*y h»» bM« tnt*** ond 'rtrMd Th, oun« or
             w r)n** (!• orpi, «0ui.« or< % Unto ih» itnoM *t«BI> • ft* nMn|
                   ie »•* OHM/I u UM ***** ii»<« a mew («I«M 
•twi ftptiinf • etMnuta, M^irtpmoni UMO WOK *• orMuCI. grew tfc»' •<• c*Mn (Will* OJKM
   Cinmttt nvm a* HOI* Mr o ang i » i iNrt «r* long

  •BlKMM IMMOi Or OMK) *M •* a»»»»«« •*•*»•<• •• <
        «*o/ Ctior^c*! (m»iorn inaM. oho* antltift. or I
AfpUeoJion (rant t voaor «th | avrvMiorr onowcr) a* • oi0»0l» OM gi«*M *«M «Mf< HOjMlKf Ifto OOM1HI1JO mull •• I0»ll»0» Pltr 10 «NtO«M| AD
|nrJooH«otoropd«orl  WM« fOB>»*x< "orx • trAM»'««» or onctaMd e». ri*nono» « i
             I IMMMO. »*V *• OOTV <%. «MM. •»•••••
                          tf» or a****) iMr*] Bw oqutomon lor •ny «h*i
AMICATOI •* CXMQAHON ITMI t* don* OT row) ««•. I ItIX oflrMJO Odwrm or
                    otto • wM« tgr Hmn«aOMiM4 -»•.
                                                  •tikiM. A*i«ol MPHuiian • p>eKM«a tMhin 100 IMI d iMia«mi«i «M<
                                                                                                           it.g . nomn
                                                            OCNUAk

                                                                TANTT Mar*
                                                                              torn
                                                                                     UN
                                                            !>•• m»»owghr> •*•< •*••
                                                                                           tn«
                                                                                                        *n« i*e> ««i MMC
                                                              COEII
                                                              «*>
                                                             >• loop on4 MMr. 0« W •*•! Or '»-.« «nu<*irwid e«oiMng  W
                                                    OEII«I oqvtjmom irtn iwoi «Ro> 0*01 uoo  Vioudiiro eeiMng •»• Ognng j*» m,u
         of MUeitOAl TdCATMtMT

If •WAllOWfOi 0* •••'Ml otor)u««  00 Mi !"*«•» «O«*IMO ooMaini o«'d«u>->
dkiU*Mi Do id j«<» 4ir"*>« 6» mourn 10 •/> uKeprwaoyi ooioon
>• OH SWH: Wort w«ti p*rvr ol ooov ojM *oMr. Oot mdlool ononilox I Mnicn ponku
* M CTf •: HIM* •»» «•)• W l» MMMO Ooi HMHAJ oM«wr)
IMVltOHMfMTAL HAIAHOS
Tt»i i MI 1 1 ii » ««« ID •»»»• OM taK uw «o> co>* «nox occfifl 10 ora«* i>oqu«xi«« af
«*M** or Mtopfo 10 oftj oe«r Of «oior Do no oppf «i>oa« 10 *c»i. 3« na *BBIV •**>>
»»»of conduani l*noi 4«i dam utooi WOM  Oo nei CRK Umnolo «oi*> Or OMnmg at
                                                         AMO CHIUCAk MAZAMOI
                                                  So "rt <^ « •!•• >IM> KOBI or onm R*IKO>
                                                           ran utt ^o» ino«n**i
                                                  IT it A vioiAnoH o» not*Ai CAW TO u«i IMI MOOUCT IN A MAMHIP
                                                            wire rr» UMUNC.
                                                  OIOHABI ANO

                                                  tTOAAOK                     o
                                                  Oo ia oor«An«noi* MM> taod • too* g» daroQ* or
                                                  Don* (Mr* M
                                                    M* fOOvlin Mm IM HM oj Mo pnoVO m*) b> ««BO»«d 4 OB *•> w of ir «ccnn•
                                                            01 • ocntosv IfltfDL 0» IKIMr»on • f
                                                                                       Br »i*u ox« toul ouinorMoo. 67 bvrmng I
            of M •
         IttUOl

•H«M Honixc Al COTMjnt
R.O. •«« 1o*14. t T W. Ut*tf
     • T«M>o»or«.tarK»eM)l*w tTTOl
                                                                         AgeonrMnr
-------
                                                                                          erf
                    RESTRICTED USE  PESTICIDE
    For r«uj Mb b and u—> orly by G*tf«d AppMBas or
                                                                   n *cf only kit Doa» u»«s cowwd I*
                                                        f«aaon» lha product b dtof «d R*<>tei«d U»»
 BUCTRIL** Atrazine Herbicide
POSTEMERGENT HERBICIDE  FOR  CONTROL  OF CERTAIN BROAOLEAF WEEDS  IN CORN AND
SORGHUM.   _ _____
ACTIVE INOflED»6WT
  OoUnoto «oW
                                                                                                15.74%
                                                                                                21.62%
•Pwddd cort*TS frcrtwynl ootaroXt «qu*»~*«••  A«rt4! (Mllullex to »>«*l>dlW «*>th tOO l«* •< <*i««ml*l *>••• (• f . Homo.
•mm xoipu* fMi.«u|          •    .

OCMCNAl MOWMtUCNT* POH AU UM

                           « «•• w»* mtf*«. flu* in* wtitM o» IM
                           s «« m*n row ntnai tna '*» ••» taic


AFTf N WOAK pom i>ni to dl«e«rt»S II in* »nd ol «iai Air  T»t of 111 Clwn«i tnu
                      0* 1*1
    «in PDI* xulo
gt»o>. i tftomuv roMtAn «ron. 9019101 • foot fMwd. •«« enoffwn >M«IO«« (teto «!«•
oo-wixjl. or OO»t»  it )«u UM i •MM'wiii M'M'O' «y*lo« lor oV nM«M| •«* _XI»t
Op*'«llar». VM o>« cnomeu liOUW •ran k <
« *» erwufl I MCMOM w • X) jtion dium • I «ou Mn«» • «ul « V H_ra a rare
       pv d«r. row ">Mt W
                                                      |T/TfM!Hr O* —JACTICAl INIATMtMr

                                                      IF •WALLOWtO: .0*1 i»dW tBmflon  Oo no) liMuo* •oiMldg. OD«*«I o*»O>«vm
                                                      *utai_ Oo *• i»t iByuxnt Br "»ui|> » »" K«eB^oow» amen
                                                      9 ON MM. W«h vtt 0*Mr * XMC «id
                                                      rmfru:  num •*»••« * PMRKM* • IOOC M ••««• 4M ffeft UM wH* «V» <*•«> Wf"? 10
                                                                             Oc no w>r 4l<«a% le »•!•< So nc< «v'r <^<«^
                                                                              «•. Ot noi ow Mmn«i* "*•' By cw*n.ig 01
                                                            et AtOMf * «•§(*»
                                                      MTTUCAL  AN* CMIMCAl
AII MVOM AWIVMO n Mni) Mk
                        rill MM *•>• M4TMW «• MM*.
                 o i*n»lom| ordiiM c_« or otnol oajtMHon o> >
                   to 100 • mox K»OB to • *O*M» MUUOMH »rooMiNo. ««ori aw «»iof •%. •_•§, on* on
          ~ i •rMuoi Mftrt voioi 4o^r or
    I* 0^
                   ^ cM«if«w«. «o POIMA inur onor ito «pgu_iioi> Mo
                                                      tTOMM
                                                      D>«Ol
                                                      Oo «•
                                                              Mro« tonvoroiiMO OBw» M*' tot M rauri • vnue»—jw*f mo
«*••* rMitil torn M wo*


COMTAMCN  DMPOCAk

     10 (oi ipjir ipunj  T*«Aei^
     kr •«• on* loooJ OMMoMoi. «T kurwi). • bumoo. Mr M 01 w*au».
                                                      Mo Ml
                                                                     Tf«n ofloi to
                                                                        mn o» t
• 0
                                                      •IMt "M«» PO^OKI A« C
-------
tor
                      RESTRICTED  USE  PESTICIDE
    For r«jj MM to «/KJ u*# only Dy C«rtff«3 Apptc o> p».-x»<» drocty v«3ox tN»» n^jojrvaon and only foi res* uMa covovoo b, ih«
                                     Sw« yirjcaolunary ttdlamen^ fe' ma^cris ihe. praOcO a
 BRONATE* Herbicide
run CONTROL Or CfeMTAJN UHUAULuir Wt_bl/3 In wnu> 1, BAH!_e~. UAT9, AMU HYfe.
ACTIVE INGREDIENT
    Ocunolc acid ••»«f ryniactana«*«
" Equ»v«i<*t to 2 V9% 2ep»Xic aod or nq tea tMn 2 0 pounds MCPA arid p»' paten _

                          KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN

                                              WARNING
fcPA H>g. No.
                                                              EPA E«t No.
                                    for PRODUCT USE Information C«IM«eOO-W4-9745
For EMERGENCY Information
r>0>CCAUTIOHANV •TATCMfMTO

HAIAQOI TO HUMAN* AND OOMtoTIC ANHUU
wAftmNo  •toTmcTto uoi
Uo* •« M* •reluct m*f b* ru«/tf*yo W ?*ur h»«tf<  Cwciun i» IM« pr««u(t
        »Mwn I*  c*u*»  kl>«« atKCI* M ltkor««>y «nlffl*l».  Women •<
          f4 **4wi« k*  »>M«•*•«< to
c«/i 6* «e<«^«« DT ogMMCimg Mwn* ^iMne Ag Cenwr « ' •» U* »'•»
MI PCO»OHS U
OJOUBSUSWT8
•n* '«* Tt« «ov*>tn AMI •* Mem «««, | long imn |M1 «M tang Mn>t  «•••> •*•«• *•>•*
                              * (kicM. t«4 «M^«IMI >W4iv« <«•«. •>«•
         o«oa  R fOu wM • mtcMniMl HD«(«i »fti»m Iw Ml wolnj 1M I
                                       <*)•« ot K f *>«n> o> nwo 01
   pmduo ew Mf. r*« "><•' «• • "»»v"i* ifontloi ifiiofn lor tf m*ing cxa Mating
             »g a <^ci*««i I'imi*' mum. oo "0 iwiro o» fl*eoin«M m* p»nv or
            iinai until Ow Goxi«nt< IM§ &•»> ofl«M« in* *«•*. Tn« pm^p or profco
ir«iom nun b* U
                   S ••OOLCT ON •*»•'•"«! 0*1
UtCD wiTu Tu« OOOOUCT. uygr OSKRVC "1 or OlMNx* *«i
            PM0u« kvo • IfMTIa (vnlow IN* UM>*> M* 11
                                    . you »W4i »oo> OIMK «••
                        •»•' t* MK» •> *• **•««•.
                         MM* IAM o« Hnf •««•
                     to 1M
      OM t«M» •** tdioii MMIn* in* oorMMiolo mm bo romovoa piw w omomf on
•MM*O« GOB « cpo)w« wiwn ojHyttf Inxt o moM> MK on OMOMO* cot. ctti eoMouili ond
OMP nflm* o,i*v** ma\ to kopi imoo »to bob. ood nwu bo nvm «m«n OIIMQ wo cot 10
                                   MMf »0 00>»n*jr» lot
AMXCATCN IV OMfUOArOM •«« •» **M «* tin* POM. <

o^py voy wntt (4 IVMHV o)l
                                                                         P*Y 1 -000^3*- T5T7
WMI •< if OK(«*0* »«<».

OUMtNa AIRIAl APPLICATION. h»mtn
«*hia*i .Aono) oeeiteiiun n pionen*fl ««nln
VWOOJ.bOIPMO. l'«aB«9 V**. OK.)

       MOUi«CM(nT* POM AU UM
                                                                   410 B'o*bn«« v"i*M in »-
                                                                  looi ft >«*«*r*i t. «•*• i« 9 ..
                                 IkVOOItANf I |*«ow '••on«a (•>« or *ioM« t M» •»• opo>*i.o«- *•«* in* oviie* o> IK*
                                              •*!•> Atarvi rom*o fio>m tnt •«•« row "
                                              Mt. Miing «mwg. « loooihg
                                                            o/<« ••• ootoi*
                                              1009 *n« •*!*> Q* DO! •••/ Or '«•••• MKUn'lAI
                                              •!» •«•' of(o> ooen u*o  Pioiono* 0011119 vain
                                 •TATIUINT OP MACTICAk TflfATWCNT

                                 IP  (WAtlOWIO:  tt*l o«OKO> **O»W.  0* KOI
                                 okuJouo Oo KOI |"» AT"""* or «ouin u ox uneoMora

                                 V ON tNN: n**n win exnij gl loop ana »«»i  o
                                                                       «n*nian « n«*iion
                                              MAlA*Ot
                                 TMi poornm • tone e •Odin* «/id UK Uio <«i g»* o*j >i*qu*niM -Qy
                                 o4Bti« or oMoeoxi to oxy boar * •*•'  Oa «• •Hur «i'»a» to m*r • Oo nei 0901, ON**
                                 •MIKOI uui«d>mi lt«oi drill rrom Urgoi ojooi  Oo not con umnoi* •min DF o»4f«g w
                                              i o» •••oo
                                         AND CMCUICAI. HAXAHOI
                                 Oo Mi«o or MOI* noo/ *>•» fl» OB

                                 omtonoM* POM utr • •••

                                 IT If A MOCAT1OM OP PCOfOAl LAW TO UO« TMt PDODWeT IH 4 MAMMI*
                                 MCOMMtTCMT WITH ITt UICUHQ.
                                 •TOBAOC AMP
                                                             •TOMAOf
                                                             Oo i»i opmo
                                                             f.
                                            IBOJ*> road Or I*M OT *>OroCO Of dOJOBMI.
                                 PIITICIOK OWPOSAl
                                    not (ooulifcg Horn mo uoo ol Mi pioduel mor b* dosoiod ot on tft* or • §n tpermod >ut*
                                 COMTAIMC*  OlSPOSAl
                                 Trfck) »*•• (•> oo.»r.o)»f. *r »«^wi«f« «M «**a*« •<
                                 r>oi«nu^ undia » ronoronn or»o«i»odp> (Miocnd *e* owmonioo b> Owning I
                                 kirnoo, our oui ol »r»*»o	
PO OOf 1IOU. f T W
BoM040l>Tllol
-------
ATTACHMJNT B
-------
                  BROMOXYNIL COHTAINCR RCLABCLiNG SCHEDULE.
 FOLLOWING IS  A DETAILED  PLAN  DESIGNED  70  APPROPRIATELY RELABEL ALL BROMOXYNIL
 PRODUCT CONTAINERS  EXISTING WITHIN  THE CHANNELS Or TRADE,  INCLUDING
 RHONE-POULENC,  DISTRIBUTOR. AND  DEALER  INVENTORIES, IN A TIMLFRAME CONSISTENT
 WITH  THE APPLICATION  FOR  AMENDED  REGISTRATION.  UPON FINAL EPA APPROVAL
 THESE STEPS WILL  IMMEDIATELY  BE IMPLEMENTED:
 DAY  1  FOLLOWING. EPA AMENDED REGISTRATION APPROVAL

 RHONE-POULENC WILL INITIATE THE PRINTING OF APPROVED AMENDED LABELS
 FOR  BUCTRIL*. BUCTRIL* * ATRAZINE AND BRONATE* HERBICIDES IN SUFFICIENT
 QUANTITIES TO RELABEL ALL EXISTING BROMOXYNIL CONTAINERS HELD BY RPAC,
 DISTRIBUTORS AND RETAILERS, .AS HELL AS FUTURE PRODUCTION QUANTITIES
 SCHEDULED FOR THE REMAINDER OF 1969 USE SEASON.

 RPAC HILL IMMEDIATELY HALT SHIPMENT OF ALL BROMOXYNIL PRODUCTS UNTIL
 APPROVED AMENDED LABELS CAN BE PRINTED AND AFFIXED TO EACH CONTAINER
 HITHIN RPAC POSSESSION, IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE "RELABELING
 PROCEDURES" OUTLINED IN ATTACHMENT A.
DAY 4-10 FOLLOWING EPA AMENDED REGISTRATION APPROVAL

REVISED LABELS HILL BE DELIVERED AND STICKERING OF RPAC INVENTORIES
AT PLANTS AND WAREHOUSES HILL BEGIN.  NEWLY L .) E H  IKtU '  H LL BE
RELEASED FOR SHIPMENT TO DISTRIBUTORS.

ADEQUATE QUANTITIES OF EACH APPROPRIATE LABEL, ACCOMPANIED WITH "RELABELING
PROCEDURES", HILL BE SHIPPED TO RPAC FIELD SALES REPRESENTATIVES FOR
IMMEDIATE DELIVERY TO DISTRIBUTOR WAREHOUSE LOCATIONS WHERE BROMOXYNIL
INVENTORIES EXIST OR WILL BE DIRECTLY MAILED TO DISTRIBUTOR LOCATIONS.
APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION FEES WILL BE PAID TO DISTRIBUTOR FOR RELABELING.
AND VERIFICATION OF LABEL DELIVERY HILL BE MADE BY DISTRIBUTOR SIGNING
THE "RP LABELING COMPENSATION" FORM.  MONITORING BY RPAC FIELD REPS
HILL BE PERFORMED TO INSURE COMPLIANCE.  DISTRIBUTORS HILL BE INFORMED
THAT NO BROMOXYNIL PRODUCTS MAY BE SHIPPED PRIOR TO RELABELLING ONCE
LABELS ARE RECEIVED.
-------
                BRONATE'/BUClRkVBUCTRJL* * ATRAZ1NE
                   RELABELING COMPENSATION PROGRAM

 THIS PROGRAM  JS DESIGNED  TO  COMPENSATE THE DISTRIBUTOR AND RESELLER
 FOR RELABELING HIS CURRENT  INVENTORIES OF BRONA1E*, BUCTRIL* AND/OR
 BUCTRJL** ATRAZINE BROADLEAF HERBICIDES  TO COMPLY WITH EPA REQUIREMENT:

 TO PERFORM THIS TASK  IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIFIED 'RELABELING DIRECTIONS,
 DISTRIBUTOR/RESELLER  WILL BE COMPENSATED  AT A RATE OF $0.50 PER
 CARTON, 30-GALLON DRUM, OR 1JO-GALLON MIN-I-BULK CONTAINER.

 CURRENT PHYSICAL INVENTORY AS OF 	
                                        (ITATET

               BRONATE'*    BUCTRIL*    BUCTRIL* * ATRAZINE
CASES
DRUMS
MINI'S
I HEREIN CITIFY THAT AS OF DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE, WE HAD IN OUR
INVENTORY THE QUANTITIES OF RHONE-POULENC BROMOXYNIL PRODUCTS
AS LISTED AiiOVE, AND HAVE RECEIVED ADEQUATE QUANTITIES OF REVISED
LABELS FOR RELABELING ABOVE INVENTORIES.
BUSINESS NAME:

STREET ADDRESS:
CITY:	 COUNTY:      -       STATE: 	 ZIP;
OWNER/MANAGER: 	^WTWrTW^	 PHONE:
                       (SJoNAlURE)
RHONE-POULENC REPRESENTATIVE:
                                    (SIGNATURE;          TtRR.  H
-------
DAY 11-20 FOLLOWING EPA AMENDED REGISTRATION APPROVAL

FIELD REPRESENTATIVES WILL INITIATE DELIVERY OF APPROPRIATE LABELS TO
EACH ACTIVELY SELLING BROMOXYNIL RESELLER, BEGINNING FIRST WITH PRIORITY
ACCOUNTS WHERE LARGE INVENTORIES ARE KNOWN TO EXIST. INSTRUCTIONS FOR
PROPER RELABELING WILL BE1 PROVIDED AND COMPENSATION MADE TO INSURE COMPLIANCE.
RESELLS WILL BE INFORMED THAT NO BROMOXYNIL MAYBE SOLD PRIOR TO RELABELLING
ONCE LABELS ARE RECEIVED.  RETAILERS WILL BE SUPPLIED WITH ADEQUATE
NUMBER OF LABELS TO PROVIDE TO GROWERS.  VERIFICATION OF LABEL DELIVERY
WILL BE MADE BY RESELLER SIGNING THE "RELABELING COMPENSATION" FORM.   •

EFFORTS TO HAND DELIVER NEW LABELS TO ALL RETAILERS WITH BROMOXYNIL
INVENTORIES WILL BE MADE, HOWEVER, MAILINGS TO MINOR BUSINESSES MAY
OCCUR TO INSURE DELIVERY IN TIMELY MANNER.  THESE MAILINGS WILL BE DONE
USING REGISTERED MAIL TO VERIFY LABEL DELIVERY.
DAT 20 FOLLOWING EPA AMENDED REGISTRATION APPROVAL

LABEL DELIVERY FOR BROMOXYNIL FIELD INVENTORIES WILL BE COMPLETE AND
MONITORING BY RPAC FIELD REPRESENTATIVES WILL CONTINUE, TO.INSURE ALL
CONTAINERS PROPERLY LABELED FOR SALE.
-------
                                ATTACHMENT A

                   0UCTRIL*.  BUCTRIl* « ATRAZ1NE. BRONATE*
                            RELABELING PROCEDURE
 2*-GALLO* JUG

 1.  DEPALLETI2E CARTONS  (36 PER PALLET).

 2.  USING THIN, FLAT METAL BAR, OPEN THE CARTON BY SLIDING BAR UNDER
    TOP  FLAPS FROM MIDDLE OF CARTON TOWARDS END OF CARTON.  USE BAR
    TO BREAK CLUE SEALANT ON BOTH FLAPS BEING CARFUL NOT TO DAMAGE FLAPS.

 3.  REMOVE NITRILE GLOVES AND SET ASIDE.

 4.  REMOVE BOTH JUGS FROM CARTON.

 5.  REMOVE THE PRODUCT BOOKLET FROM THE LABEL ON SIDE OF JUG, ROLL BOOKLET
    AND  PLACE INTO HANDLE HOLE OF JUG.

 6.  PEEL BACKING FROM NEW PRODUCT LABEL AND PLACE NEW LABEL COMPLETELY
    OVER EXISTING LABEL ON THE JUG.                                   •
                                                  o

 7.  RETURN JUGS TO CARTON AND REPLACE GLOVES ON TOP OF JUGS.

 6.  FOLD DOWN THE TWO SMALL FLAPS OF CARTON AND FOLLOW WITH TWO LARGE
    /LAPS.

9.  TAPE CARTON CLOSED WITH COLORED PACKING TAPE CENTERING ALONG THE
    CARTON OPENING AND EXTENDED DOWN BOTH SIDES 2-3 INCHES.

10. REPALLETIZE CARTONS IF NECESSARY INCLUDING RESTRETCH WRAPPING IF
    AVAILABLE.
       c

3O-6ALLO*  DRUM AND MO-GALLON MINI-BULK

PEIL BACKING FROM NEW PRODUCT LABEL AND POSITION NEW LABEL OVER THE
EXISTING LABEL ON CITHER THE 30-GALLOW DRUM OR 1)0 MINI-BULK CONTAINER.
-------
ATTACHMENT C
-------
ff RH&NE-POULENC
                   AO COMPANY


    OFFICE MEMORANDUM


     TO:     Nick Somjna      .              DATE:   May J, 1989

     FROM:   Dave Downing


         Please find attached the Bromoxynil  Label Amendment Communication
     Plan.  Our goal '1$ to reach all  persons  who sell, apply or recommend
     bromoxyntl products within the agricultural community in an orderly,
     logical and timely manner.  With this  1n mind, we plan to first communicate
     new restrictions the day following  EPA approval to all RPAC Field and
     Office Personnel  Involved with the  sale, promotion, development, field
     testing and distribution of bromoxynil products.  By the second day
     all bromoxynil product distributors will be contacted with this Information
     via overnight mall.  All resellers, university extension personnel and
     weed scientists will have bromoxynil label  restrictions direct mailed
     to them within the first week  following  EPA approval of copy.

         In addition to written communication, distributors, resellers, university
     extension  personnel and weed scientists  will be personally contacted
     by our field representatives within 2  weeks of EPA approval.  Resellers
     will be contacted on a priority  basis  according to their past sales
     volumes as recorded by Rh6ne-Poulenc.

         Following these written and  personal contacts, with those who will
     be called  upon to provide Information, mess connunlcatlon to growers,
     crop consultants  and farm managers  will  begin via radio spots, data-line
     Information system, and point  of purchase posters., Informing them of
     the new "Restricted Use" classification  for bromoxynil products and
     to contact their  local reseller  for detailed information.

         Rhone-Poulenc feels that this communication plan will serve the
     Intended need to  alert the agricultural  Industry of the proper manner
     to handle  and apply bromoxynil products  with minimal risk during the
     1989 use season.
     DPO:vwg
     Attachment
     cc:     J.N. Harton
             S.A. Schmotzer
-------
                BROHOXYNIl LABEL AMENDMENT COMMUNICATION  PLAN
 UPON RECEIVING FINAL APPROVAL FROM THE  EPA  OF  1989  LABCL AMENDMENTS
 FOR  COMMERCIAL BROMOXYNJL  OCTANOATE FORMULATIONS, AND APPROVED COPY
 OF INTENDED INDUSTRY COMMUNICATIONS.  RPAC WILL IMMEDIATELY INITIATE
 A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO DISSEMINATE NEW PRODUCT PRECAUTIONS AND RESTRICTIONS
 TO APPROPRIATE AUDIENCES WITHIN  THE PESTICIDE  CUSTOMER/USER NETWORK.
 FOLLOWING  IS-A DETAILED DESCRIPTION AND TIMETABLE OF HOW THAT PLAN WILL
 UNFOLD:
PAY  1 FOLLOWING  EPA  APPROVAL  OF COPY

COMPLETE LABEL AMENDMENTS. WITH A COVER  LETTER HIGHLIGHTING EACH PRECAUTION
AND  RESTRICTION  OF THE BROMOXYNIL LABEL, AS WELL AS A DESCRIPTION OF
THE  PRODUCT RELABELING PLAN,  WILL BE TELEFAXED TO EACH DISTRICT AND
REGIONAL OFFICE.  WITHIN RHON£-POULENC AG  COMPANY.

OVERNIGHT MAIL,  INCLUSIVE OF  IDENTICAL INFORMATION, WILL BE SENT TO
EACH FIELD REPRESENTATIVE WITHIN THE COMPANY, AS WELL AS APPROPRIATE
RPAC ADMINISTRATIVE  AND PLANT PERSONNEL.
DAY 2 FOLLOWING EPA APPROVAL OF COPY

ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE BROMOXYNIL LABEL CHANGES AND THE PRODUCT RELABELING
PLAN WILL BE SENT. VIA OVERNIGHT MAIL TO ALL BROMOXYNIL DISTRIBUTORS.

RPAC FIELD SALES PERSONNEL WILL BEGIN MAKING PERSONAL CONTACT CALLS
ON BROMOXYNIL DISTRIBUTORS AND RESELLERS GIVING CONTACT PRIORITY TO
THOSE RETAILERS REPRESENTING THE MAJORITY OF BROMOXYNIL SALES TO GROWERS.
IN ADDITION RPAC FIELD DEVELOPMENT REPRESENTATIVES WILL BEGIN CONTACTING
UNIVERSITY EXTENSION PERSONNEL AND WEED SCIENTISTS.  AN ESTIMATED 3.000
TOTAL CONTACTS CAN BE MADE WITHIN TWO WEEKS.
-------
DAY 5 FOLLOWING EPA APPROVAL OP COPY

DIRECT MAJL LETTERS OUTLINING THE LABEL AMENDMENTS AND NEW RESTRICTIONS
HILL BE SENT TO DISTRIBUTORS, DEALERS, CUSTOM APPLICATORS AND UNIVERSITY
EXTENSION PERSONNEL - AN ESTIMATED 12,000 INDIVIDUALS.  THIS WILL REINFORCE
PERSONAL CONTACTS BY RPAC FIELD PERSONNEL.
DAY 14 FOLLOWING EPA APPROVAL OF COPY

"RESTRICTED-USE" CLASSIFICATION OF BROMOXYNIL HERBICIDES WILL BE COMMUNICATED
TO SOME 35,000 GROWERS THROUGHOUT HIGH INTENSITY USE-AREAS, VIA DATA-LINE,
A COMPUTERIZED INFORMATIONAL SYSTEM, WITH COPY THAT INSTRUCTS GROWER
TO SEEK DETAILED LABEL USE AND HANDLING PRECAUTIONARY INFORMATION THROUGH
THEIR AG CHEMICAL SUPPLIER.

DIRECT MAIL LETTERS OUTLINING THE LABEL AMENDMENTS AND NEW RESTRICTIONS
WILL BE SENT TO FARM MANAGERS AND CROP CONSULTANTS.

PRINTING OF POINT-OF-PURCHASE POSTERS WILL BE COMPLETED AND SENT TO
RESELLERS. TO BE DISPLAYED AT THE RETAILER LOCATION TO ALERT GROWERS .
HHO'PURCHASE BUCTRIL*. BUCTRlL* «• ATRAZINE OR BRONATE* HERBICIDES OF
THEIR "RESTRICTED USE" CLASSIFICATION.

A RADIO CAMPAIGN. TARGETED AT GROWERS WITHIN BROMOXYNIL USE-AREAS WILL
KICK-OFF ON DAY 14 TO COMMUNICATE THE "RESTRICTED-USE" CLASSIFICATION
OF BUCTRIL*. BUCTRIL* + ATRAZINE AND BRONATE* AND VO  Ni'.Ul . U
-------
                            DEALER/DISTRIBUTOR LETTER
 ATTCKTIOK - LABEL CHANGES FOR BRONATE*.  BUCTRJL* AND BUCTRIL* * ATRAZINE
 This  1s to  Inform  you  that  BRONATE*.  BUCTRJL*  end  BUCTRJL* * Atrazlne
 broadleaf herbicides  have  recently  been  reclasslfled  as "RESTRICTED USE
 PESTICIDES"   and  that  the  labels   have  been amended   to  Include  new
 precautionary statements, additional protective clothing  requirements, and
 new handling  and application restrictions.

 These changes have  been  Implemented  because  recent tests have shown that
 exposure to  the  active  Ingredient  1n  these  products  has  caused birth
 defects  In  laboratory animals.   The new label  amendments have been added to
 substantially reduce  the  exposure  to  these  products  when handling  or
 applying.                                        .  -

 Enclosed you will .find copies of  each  new label for your review.   Please
 take  time to  become'familiar with this Information In order that you are 1n
 full   compliance with each  Important  amendment.    Significant  additions
 Include:   1)  New warning  statement*;  2) Specific use directions requiring
 additional  protective clothing  and clean-up procedures; 3) The requirement
 of  mechanical transfer systems  when handling  30 gallons or more product In
 a single day; 4) Use  of  enclosed cabs when applying  180 or more acres 1n a
 single day; and  5) New chemlgellon and aerial application  restrictions.

 In  an effort to  assure .that  all  Inventories  of  BRONATE*.  BUCTRIl* and
 BUCTR2L* + Atrazlne are  stlckered with these changes,  a  relabelling-program
 1s  being Implemented  by  RhSne-Poulenc and within the  next  several days your
 RP   Field  Representative   will   be  delivering  adequate  quantities  of
 self-adhesive  labels   with  Instructions  for  relabelling  your  current
 Inventories.    To  perform  this  task  Rhfine-Poulenc will  compensate  your
 efforts  at  a  rate  of SO.SO/case. 30-gallon drum or no-gallon  mini-bulk
 unit,  and will verify  your participation with  an enrollment form at time of
 label  delivery.   In addition, your  RPAC Field Rep  will provide  Resellers
with  a  polnt-of-purchase  poster  for  hanging,  and   grower handouts,  both
alerting him to  the label  changes  of  which he mist comply.

Once  you have received  revised labels,  no product  may  be shipped  or sold
until  stlckered  with  the  new label.  If for any reason distributors.don't
receive  labels  within  7  days  of receipt of  this  letter  (14 days  for
Retailers),   please   call   tne   toll   free   Rhfine-Poulence   Hot-Line  at
l-BOO-334-9745.  and labels will be  lowedlately shipped to you.

Thank  you  for  your   continued   support  and  help  In  communicating  this
information.   Please  contact your  RPAC Field Representative 1f you  have
Questions or  specific  Issues relating to this matter  that  you would like to
discuss.

                                       Sincerely,
-------
                        UNIVERSITY/CROP CONSULTANT LETTER
ATTENTION - LABEL CHANGES FOR BRONATE*-, BUCTRIL* AND BUCTRll* * ATRAZINE
Th1i  1*  to  Inform you  that  BRONATC«,  BUCTRIl*  and BUCTRR*- * Atrazlne
broadleaf  herbicides  have  recently  been reclasslfied as  'RESTRICTED  USE
PESTICIDES"   and   that  the  labels  have  been  amended  to  Include  new
precautionary  statements, additional  protective clothing  requirements,  and
MM handling and application restrictions.

These  changes have  been  implemented because  recent  tests  have shown that
exposure  to  the  active  ingredient  in  these products  has  caused  birth
defects in laboratory  animals.  The new label  amendments have been added to
substantially  reduce  the  exposure   to  these  products when  handling  or
•pplying.

Enclosed you  will  find copies  of each new label for your  review.   Please
take time to become familiar with  this information  in order that you are 1n
full  compliance  with  tach  Important amendment.    Significant  additions
Include:   2)   New  warning  statements; 2) Specific  use directions requiring
additional protective  clothing and clean-up procedures; 3) The requirement
of mechanical  transfer systems when  handling  30 gallons or more product In
a single day;  4}  Use of enclosed  cabs when applying 180 or more acres 1n a
single day; and 5)  New chemigation and aerial application restrictions.

Thank  you  for  your  continued support  and  help  in communicating  this
Information.   Please  contact  your RPAC  Field Representative 1f you have
questions or specific  issues relating to  this  matter that you would like to
discuss.
           i
                                       SI ace-rely.
-------
             GROWER LETTER TO BE AVAILABLE AT RESELLER LOCATION

 RH6NE-POULENC    _^_____
f f£mf^^^m*m*mmf**t*^*t**f**^f*^*^*j*f***^^****^*^^^i^fmil**'**********^*^^**m^^f^*m^mm^^m


 HM6NI.POULINC AQ COMPANY



               TO: BUCTRIL»/BUCTRIL« «•  Atrazine/BRONATE*  Users
   BUCTRIL*.  BUCTRJL*  +  Atrazine  and  BRONATE*  herbicides  have  been
   reclassified  "Restricted   Use  Pesticides",   and   additional   label
   restrictions  and  precautions  have   been  added  to  minimize  user
   exposure.   " '-'

   PI east note when  review  the  revised product labels  the following
   changes have been made:

      *    Warning  Statement: This product has  been shown to  cause  birth
          defects   \r\  laboratory  animals.   Women  of  childbearing age
          should  be  particularly careful when  handling this product to
          avoid ingestion  and skin contact.

      *    Protective  clothing  requirements  such  as  nitrile  gloves,
          co.tton   coveralls,  chemical  resistant  shoes,  and   chemical
          resistant  apron  for  mixer/loaders  have  been  added. Please
          review the label  for full details.

      *    Mechanical   transfer  systems  are  required  to be used 'for
          loading-of 30 or  more gallons of product are used per day.

      *    Enclosed cabs are  required for ground  applications if 180 or
          more acres are treated per day.

      *    New  chemigation  and aerial  application  restrictions have been
          added. Please review the label  for details.

  Please thoroughly familiarize yourself with and strictly adhere to the
  label  requirements  because  the  safety  of  you.  the  user,  is our
  foremost  concern.  Please  contact your local  chemical supplier if you
  have questions or require  further  Information.

  BUCTRIL  and  BRONATC  are  registered trademarks  of  Rhone-Poulenc  Ag
  Company.
03 BOX 190U ? TW A>,.ri(AMXR DRIVE
BtKABCwt«iANSi.E»AB* NC 27706
(919) 149-MOO
MTEflSATiONAl. TElEX NUM««»4»W3»»-
                                               °c IOS
-------
               RADIO/DATA-LINE COPY
ATTENTION GROWERS!
                             i

BUCTRll*,  BUCTRIL* «•  ATRAZINE  AND BRONATE* HERBICIDES/
USED  FOR PO£T-EMCRGENCE  BROADLEAF  WEED CONTROL/  HAVE
               *
BEEN RE-CLASSIFIED AS RESTRICTED USE PESTICIDES.
FOR COMPLETE  DETAILS  AND INFORMATION/ CONTACT YOUR FARH
CHEMICALS SUPPLIER.  AND REMEMBER ... YOUR SAFETY IS OUR
TOP  PRIORITY.     SO/   AS   WITH  ANY  CROP  PROTECTION
CHEMICALS/  ALWAYS  READ  AND FOLLOW  INSTRUCTIONS  ON THE
LABEL.
-------
       POS1ER FOR RESELLER
      BUCTRIL'
     BRONATE •
              1
 BUCTRIL* + ATRAZINE
       ARE NOW
RESTRICTED USE PESTICIDES
 ASK HERE FOR COMPLETE
 DETAILS AND INFORMATION,
 RHONE-POULENC AQ COMPANY
-------
                          ATTACHMENT D
In lieu of the sentence which states, "If this product is
packaged in a 30 gallon drum or you will hor.-ile a total of 30
gallons or more of this product per day/ you must use a
mechanical transfer system for all mixing and*loading
operations," the complete revised labeling will state, "If you
will handle a total of 3C gallons ox, mor« of this produce per
day, you must use a mechanical transfer system for all mixing and
loading operations.  If this product is packaged in a 30 gallon
drum, ycu must use a mechanical transfer system which terminates
in a drip-free hard coupling which may be used only with a spray
or mix tank which has been.fitted with a compatible coupling.  If
you do not presently own or have access to a mechanical transfer
system with this type of coupling, contact your dealer for
information on how.to obtain such a system or to modify your
present system."
-------
ATTACHMENT  E
-------
                                                         APR 2 5


     DRAFT   PROPOSED PROTOCOL:   BROMOXYNIL  EXPOSURE STUDY



 1.0   INTRODUCTION '

       A passive  doeinetry  study shall be  conducted to ••seas th«
 dermal and inhalation exposure  occurring  during routina  uaa of
 broooxynil.   The atudy •hall  be designed  so that the
 Environmental Protection Agency may be able to:  (1) quantify the
 exposure occurring during  nixing/loading, application, and clean-
 up when brcBoxynil is applied by ground boom to field crops
 employing rigs where boom  lengths typically exceed 50';  (2)
 quantify the  exposure occurring during mixing/loading,
 application,  and clean-up  when  broaoxynil is applied by  ground
 boon  to crops where  rigs of 20'  to 40' predominate? (3)  within
 each  subgroup estimate the total potential  dermal exposure and
 the actual deposition ta the  skin under the clothing worn by each
 study participant.   As an  additional objective, this study or a
 seperate study will  quantify  the potential  dermal exposure and
 •Kin  deposition  occurring  during open pour  aixing and loading
 with  the new  Rhone-Poulenc 2.5  gallon container and a
 conventional  2.5 gallon container.

 2.0   MATERIALS AND METHODS

       2.1 Sits  Selection

       The study  will addr+ss  two sain crop  groupings.   The first
 grouping shall be crops to which daily treatment* of 150 acres or
 acre  art typical and boom  sices of 50' or greater are the norm.
 The usual application speed it  expected to  be approximately 0.5
 acres/ainute.  The second  grouping shall be crops to which daily
 treatment of  So  to 120 acres  is standard and boom sizes  average
 20' to 40'.   The usual application speed is expected to be
 approximately 0.25 to 0.35 ecree/ainute.

       within  each grouping the  sites shall be eelected based on
 routine  use of broaoxynil  or  other early post'emergent herbicides
 in that  area.  A ainimua of ten sites are to be used within each
grouping.

2.2  Cooperator  Selection             		 ._

       Cooperators used in  the study are to be individuals
intending to  apply a post  emergent herbicide independent of
possible participation in  the study.  The candidates are to be
•elected  in a  Banner identical  to that employed in the May 6
 Baker  canada/Rhone-Poulenc Study with the exception that a
ainimua  number of participants  with enclosed tractor cabs shall
be required.   The questionnaire  used should be similar to that
used  in  the Canadian study.   Selected cooperator* will receive
-------
                             -  a  -

broaoxynil  in  a  Banner  identical to a non-cooparator who vould b«
obtaining bromoxynil  for  bi»/her use except that broaoxynil aav
ba providad in a non-standard  containar aa necaatary to
effectuate  the study.   Rhona-Poulanc say provide elaan coveralls
and  nitrila gloves  to study  participants.  Tha atudy participants
will initially ba instructed to  follow label direction*.  Should
tha participant  attampt to handla broaoxynil with last than tha
label required prottctive clothing, Rhona-Poulenc will record
such deviation froa the label  directions and then require the
participant to .utilize  all required clothing.  The normal and
typical work routines of  the participants are not to be altered
once the-study participant has begun handling broaoxynil during
the aonitoring portion  of the  study.

2.3  Application Details

      Information collected  for each application of bronoxynil
shall include  target  crop, data  involving cultivar, growth stage,
date of planting, and row spacing.  Equipment information shall
include sprayer  aodel snd make, tractor model snd make, procedure
and time required to  mix  and load the -sprayer and the date and
method of aprayer calibration.  Alterations to the equipment such
as shielding of  booas and opening of windows in closed cab
tractors will  be recorded.   Application rate and amount of active
ingredient  handled  shall  be  recorded as will the actual tiae of
application.

      Field conditions  including wind speed and direction,
relative humidity,  rainfall, temperature, and cloud cover shall
be recorded at each aonitoring site for the duration of each
monitoring  period.  A description of each tast site will ba
recorded.

2.4  Deraal  Exposure

      Dermal exposure to  ell body areas with the exception of the
hands will  ba  monitored in a manner that will permit the
estiaation  of  potential damal exposure and dermal exposure to
the skin.   Potential  dermal  exposure will be monitored by the
Durham-Wolfe patch  method (Measurement of Exposure of Workers to
Pesticides,  lull. Hid Hlth Or?., 1962, 26:75-91).  Patches shall
ba placed in a manner specified in Subdivision U of the Agency's
Pesticide Assessment  Guidelines on tha outside of the
cooperator'• clothing.  Dermal exposure to body areas covered by
clothing shall ba monitored  using either whole body dosimeters
composed of a  long  sleeve cotton T-shirt and long legged cotton
underpants  or  by a  fluorescent tracer technique.  The whole body
dosimeters,  if selected,  vill  be provided to each cooperator by
Rhona-Poulenc  at laast  ena day prior to the study and shall be
placed en each eeoperator, by  the cooperator, at the time that
tha cooperator gets dressed  to perform the day's work routine.
The) whole body dosimeters are  to ba worn under all clothing
-------
                             - 3  -

 normally worn by the coeperators.   Facial  exposure nay b«
 monitored by the use of facial swabbing  in lieu  of dosimeter*.
 Hand exposure will be aonitbred  by  use of  hand rinses.

       The monitoring period will consist of the  handling of  not
 less than 19 lb» ac.tive ingredient  with the exception that
 external patchea will be changed and hand  rinses will be
 conducted at the end of each six/load cycle and  each application
 cycle.

 2.5   Inhalation Exposure

       Inhalation exposure will be aonitored by use of personal
 •lr  samplers.   The air saaplers  will be turned off during each
 break in the work routine likely to exceed 30 minutes.  The
 duration of  the sampling period  should be  the entire day's work
 routine; however,  caution oust be taken to prevent breakthrough
 from saturation of the collection aedia.   The duration of
 sampling and calibration of air  flow will  be conducted for each
 •ample period.

 3,6   REPLICATIONS

      A  replicate is defined as  one aonitoring period consisting
 of the handling of at least 15 Ibs  active  ingredient.  The
 residue  levels  of external patches  for each body area and hand
 rinses will  be  combined in the calculation  of total potential
 daily exposure  for each job function and the combined nixing,
 loading,  and application functions.  For each crop grouping a
 minimum  of ten  sites are to be selected.   For each erop grouping
 • •minimum of 20 replicates shall be monitored.   Per each set of
 20 replicates,  a minimum of 7, but  no more  than  13 replicates,
 •hall involve application from enclosed tractor  cabs.  A total of
 at least 40  mixer/loader/applicator replications will be
 conducted for the  study.   Monitoring of the exposure resulting
 from the use of the new 2.5 gallon  container may be conducted
 either as an ancillary portion of the study or as a separate
 study and must  consist of a minimum of 15 replications of the new
 2.5 gallon container .and 15 replications involving a conventional
 2.5 gallon container.   Each set of  15 replications will involve a
minimum  of fiva individuals at three different sites.  A
 raplicata for this portion of  the study is defined as one
mix/load cycle  in  vhicfc • spray tank is filled to capacity.
3.7  QUALITY A£SU*AKCZ

      All quality assurance as defined in subdivision U of the
ZFA's Pesticide Assessment Guidelines will be required.

3.0  DATA ANALYSIS

      The purpose* of this study are to quantify the exposure
-------
                            • 4 -

received during the use of broaoxynil and the identification of
regulatory option* that »ay be required to reduce expoeure.

      The data will b« presented a* a aean exposure and « rang*.
The standard deviation will also be determined.  Non-parametric
or other appropriate statistics say be employed to determine the
statistical significance of different variables in determining
exposure.  Major emphasis will be placed on tractor type, bo.os
size, and tank site.  Post priori analyses Bay be conducted on
other variables depending on observed patterns in the data.   A
priori statistical tests will.be defined in the protocol by the
Agency.
A priori statistical method* will test the following null
hypotheses: 1) Exposure during nixing/loading with standard 2.5
gallon containers is the same as with the new 2.5 gallon
containers; 2) Exposure during application involving snail rigs
is the same as those involving large rigs; and 3) Exposure during
application from open tractors is the ease as froo enclosed
tractor cabs.  Any post priori statistical analysis will be
determined upon receipt and assessment'of the data.  The Ageney
fully recognizes the fact that sxposurs data is inherently highly
variable (C.v. > 100%) and that identification of variables
having statistical significance at p < 0.05 say not occur without
requiring an even greater number of replications.  Such an
undertaking would be prohibitive in cost.  Trend analysis of the
data aay bs conducted in the absence of statistical significance.
-------
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

      •                  WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
     ^
                                                           OFFICE OF
                                                   PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCE
                          JUL I  3 198T


MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Compliance Strategy for the Cancellatio
          of Carbon Tetrachloride

FROM:     John J. Neylan III, Director
          Policy and Grants Division
          Office of Compliance  Monitorin

TO:       Addressees
     Attached is the Compliance Strategy for the Cancellation
of Carbon Tetrachl oride.  The attached strategy provides
guidance for the enforcement of the November 12, 1986 order
which cancelled all pesticide products containing carbon
tetrachloride, except those registered for use on encased
museum specimens.

     This strategy is effective immediately and calls for
compliance monitoring of the cancellation order through
inspections of registrants, producers, dealers and users of
cancelled products.  Inspections will  be conducted by States
with Cooperative Enforcement Agreements, and EPA in States
without Cooperative Enforcement Agreements, as part of their
current routine inspections.

     We appreciate.the comments offered on the May 5, 1987
draft of this strategy.-  Most of the comments  were editorial
and have been incorporated into the final document.  However,
one commenter suggested that the strategy should also
address the disposal  of any carbon tetrachl oride products.
OCM does not believe  that this  issue should be addressed
in the strategy.  OCM recommends that  the disposal  of any
remaining stocks of carbon tetrachloride should be in
accordance with the label directions.

     If you have any  questions  concerning the  attached strategy,
please contact Dan Helfgott of  my staff at FTS 382-7825.


Attachments
-------
                            ADDRESSEES
I


II
                          (LE-132A)
                          (EN-342)
Douglas D. Campt     (TS-766C)
Frederick F. Stiehl   (LE-134A)
Stanley Abramson
Peg Anthony
Ken Shiroishi
David Hannemann
John Martin
John J. Neylan III
Jerry Stubbs
Mike Wood
Dexter Go!dman          "

Jake Mackenzie
Western Regional Compliance Director

A. Charles Lincoln
Eastern Regional Compliance Director

Louis F. Git to, Director
Air Management Division

Barbara Metzger, Director
Environmental  Services Div.
Ill  Stephen R.  Wassersug, Director
     Hazardous Waste Management Div.

IV   Winston A.  Smith, Director
     Air, Pest.  & Toxic Mgmt Div.

V    William H.  Sanders III, Director
     Environmental  Services Div.

VI   William B.  Hathaway,  Director
     Air, Pesticides & Toxics Div.

VII  William A.  Spratlin,  Director
     Ai r & Toxics Division

VIII Irwin L. Dickstein, Director
     Air & Toxic Subs. Division

IX   Jeffrey Zelikson, Acting Director
     Toxics & Waste Management Div.

X    Gary O'Neal, Director
     Ai r & Toxic Hi vi sion
Gerald M.  Levy, Chief
Office of  Pesticides & Toxic Sub,
Ernest Regna, Chief
Pesticides & Toxics Sub.  Bra

Larry Miller, Chief
Toxic & Pesticides Branch
                                                                     n^i
                                    H.  Kirk Lucius, Chief
                                    Pesticides & Toxic Subs.  Branch

                                    Phyllis Reed, Chief
                                    Pesticides & Toxic Subs.  Branch

                                    Norman E. Dyer, Chief
                                    Pesticides & Toxics Subs. Branch

                                    Leo Alderman, Chief
                                    Toxics & Pesticides Branch

                                    Alvin Yorke, Chief
                                    Toxic Substances Branch

                                    Richard Vaille, Chief
                                    Pesticides & Toxics Branch

                                    Anita Frankel, Chief
                                    Pesticides X Toxic Subs.  Branch
cc:  Jim Lamb
               (TS-788)
-------
                 . COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR  THE
              CANCELLATION OF CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
OVERVIEW
     In 1984, the Agency suspended all  registrations  of
pesticide products containing carbon tetrachloride,  except
those products registered for use on encased museum  specimens,
after registrants failed to respond to  a FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B)  Data
Call-In.  On July 23,  1985, the Agency  issued a Stop  Sale,  Use,
or Removal  Order (SSURO) to all registrants covered  by the
suspension  order.  This SSURO stated that registrants may  not
legally distribute, sell, offer for sale, hold for  sale,  ship,
deliver for shipment,  or receive and (having so received)
deliver or  offer to deliver pesticide products containing
carbon tetrachloride after the date of  receipt of the SSURO.
Registrants who  later  agreed to voluntarily cancel  their
registrations, as well  as all persons who sell or distribute
pesticide products containing carbon tetrachloride,  were
allowed to  distribute,  sell, offer for  sale, hold for sale,
ship, deliver for shipment, or receive  and (having  so received)
deliver or  offer to deliver carbon tetrachloride  until  December
31, 1985.  Stocks were  allowed to be used until June  30,  1986.

     On November 12, 1986 (51 FR 41004), the Agency  issued  a
Notice of Intent to Cancel (NOIC) for all remaining  suspended
registrations of pesticide products containing carbon tetra-
chl ori de except  those  products registered for use on  encased
museum specimens.

     Carbon tetrachloride was present as an active  ingredient
in pesticide products  registered for use as fumigants on  stored
grain, in flour  milling and grain processing plants,  as  well  as
on encased  museum specimens in storage.   All registrations  for
pesticide products containing carbon tetrachloride  as an  active
ingredient, except for  use on encased museum specimens,  have
now been cancel 1ed.

     Carbon tetrachloride poses significant toxicological
risks, and  may contribute to the breakdown of the atmosphere's
ozone layer.  The use  on encased museum  specimens will  be
allowed to  continue because the current  label  instructions  are
sufficient  to reduce applicator exposure so that  the  benefits
outweigh the risks.

     Compliance  with the Cancellation Order will  be  determined
through inspections of  registrants, producers, dealers,  and
users of cancelled products.  Inspections will be conducted by
States with Cooperative Enforcement Agreements, and  EPA in
States without Cooperative Enforcement  Agreements,  as part  of
their current routine  inspections.
-------
                              -2-
REQUIREMENTS OF THE RULE
     All  pesticide products  containing  carbon  tetrachloride,
except for use on encased museum  specimens,  were  cancelled
thirty days after publication  of  the  NOIC  or the  date  of
receipt of the Notice by the registrant,  whichever  date was
1ater.

Regulated Industry	

     All  registrants, producers,  distributors,  and  users  of
carbon tetrachloride other than  those with products  registered
for use on encased museum specimens.   At  the time of the  ori-
ginal  Data Call-in, there were 52 registrants  and 114  registra-
tions.  Vulcan Formula 72 (EPA Registration  Number  5382-2)  is
the only  product registered  for  use on  encased museum  specimens.

     Carbon tetrachloride is also known as perch!oromethane
and tetrachloromethane.

Existing  Stocks	

     Previous regulatory action  has already  prohibited regis-
trants and retailers from distributing, selling,  offering for
sale,  holding for sale,  shipping, delivering shipment, or
receiving and (having so received)  delivering  or  offering to
deliver carbon tetrachloride after  December  31, 1985.
Additionally, all provisions for  use, except use  on  encased
museum specimens, have been  prohibited since June 30,  1986.
Therefore, the November  12,  1986  NOIC provides for  no  additional
existing  stocks or use provisions.   Noncompliance with the
carbon tetrachloride cancellation order is a violation of FIFRA
§§12(a)(l)(A) and 12(a)(2)(K).
COMPLIANCE MONITORING	

     Compliance with the Cancellation Order will  be determined
by inspection of registrants and producers of cancelled products,
inspections of dealers and users, and investigation of tips and
complaints.

Neutral Administrative Inspection Scheme	

     Since the issuance of the Cancellation Order is an admini-
strative action which cancels all carbon tetrachloride pesticide
products suspended for noncompliance with the FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B)
Data Call-In, inspections for violations of this  cancellation
order will take place within the existing compliance monitoring
framework.
-------
                              -3-
ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES
Office of Pesticide Programs
0 Will develop and provide OCM with a list of those products
  which have been cancelled.
Office of Compii a nee Monitoring
0 Will develop and transmit the Compliance Monitoring Strategy
  to the Regions.

0 Will transmit the list of those products which have been
  cancelled to the Regions.

0 Will transmit the list of registrants and producing establish'
  ments of carbon tetrachloride.
Regi ons
0 Will  provide copies of the Compliance Monitoring Strategy to
  States.

0 Will  distribute a list of products,  registrants and producing•
  establishments to the States.

0 Will  conduct inspections in States without Cooperative
  Enforcement Agreements as part of their routine inspectional
  schedule.

0 Will  take enforcement action as appropriate.


States	

0 Will  conduct inspections as part of  their routine inspectional
  schedule.

0 Will  take enfocement action as appropriate provided they have
  the authority.

0 Will  report to the Regions on  actions taken under the carbon
  tetrachloride cancellation.
-------
                            ATTACHMENT


          CARBON TETRACHLORIDE REGISTRANTS AND PRODUCTS


                           REGION I (1)

Uniroyal Chem. Co.
74 Amity Rd.
Bethany, CT 06525
EPA Reg. No.  : 400-192,-193,-197,-200,-203,-268
                          REGION II (3)
Rochester Midland
Box 1515
Rochester, NY 14603
EPA Reg. No. :  527-11

Prentiss Drug & Chem. Co.
21 Vernon St. C.B. 2000
Floral Park, NY 11001
EPA Reg. No. :  655-624

Bernard Sirotta Co., Inc.
67 35th St.
Brooklyn, NY 11232
EPA Reg. No. :  2826-1

                          REGION III (0)

                          REGION IV (11)

Lester Labs
2370 Lawrence St.
Atlanta, GA 30344
EPA Reg. No. :  337-16

Hil.l Manufacturing, Inc.
1500 Jonesboro Rd. , SE
Atlanta, GA 30315
EPA Reg No. : 402-54

Quinn  Drug & Chem. Co.
Box 847
Greenwood, MS 38930
EPA Reg. No. :  416-48

Selig  Chem. Industries,  The
840 Selig Dr.,  SW
Atlanta, GA 30378
EPA Reg. No. :  491-2,-47,-82,-154,-190
-------
                               -2-

Southland Pearson  and Co.
Orexel  Chem. Co.
Box 9306
Memphis, TN 38109
EPA Reg. No. :  723-19

Peach County Property Inc.
Sureco
E. Main St. Box 938
Fort Valley, GA 31030
EPA Reg. No. :  769-70

Oxford  Chemicals
P. 0. Box 80202
Atlanta, GA 30366
EPA Reg. No. :  3635-136

Stephenson Chem.  Co.  Inc.
Box 87188
College Park, GA  30337
EPA Reg. No. :  4887-57,-127
                 •
Vulcan  Materials  Co.  Chem.  Div.
P. 0. Box 7689
Birmingham, AL  35253
EPA Reg. No. :  5382-1,-2,-4,-6,-7,-9,-l1,-31,DC38000100

Big F Insecticides, Inc.
Box 3346
Jackson, TN 38303
EPA Reg. No. :  33161-2

Mid America Chem.  Co.
P. 0. Box 490
Montrose, AL 36559
EPA Reg. No. :  36480-47,-48,-49,-50,-51

                           REGION V (5)

Riverdale Chem. Co.
220 E.  17th St.
Chic. Heights,  IL  60411
EPA Reg. No. :  228-8

Dow Chemical USA
P. 0. Box 1706
Midland, MI 48640
EPA Reg. No. :  464-32,-34,-97,-171,-181,-188,-193 ,-216 ,-227
-------
                               -3-
Walter Haertel Co.
8719 Lyndale Ave So.
Minneapoli s, MN 55420
EPA Reg. No. : 821-2

E. H. Leitte Co.
Box 180
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
EPA Reg. No. : 939-25

Universal Cooperatives Inc
7801 Metro Parkway P. 0.  Box 460
Minneapolis, MN 55440
EPA Reg. No. : 1386-463

                          REGION VI (6)

Main Pro. Inc.
P. 0. Box 153249
Irving, TX 75015
EPA Reg. No. : 1325-22,-51

Staffel
ESCO Distributor Inc.
301 1/2 Staples St.
Corpus Christi, TX 78411
EPA Reg. No. : 3286-8098

Voluntary Purchasing Group, Inc.
P. 0. Box 460
Bonham, TX 75418
EPA Reg. No. : 7401-82

Grain Conditioners, Inc.
2622 Poydras St.
New Orleans, LA 70119
EPA Reg. No. : 10203-1

Soweco, Inc.
411 So. Parker'St.
Amarillo, TX 79106
EPA Reg. No. : 21327-8145

J. Chem. a division of Fumigators Inc.
P. 0. Box 5421
Houston, TX  77012
EPA Reg. No. : 36301-5
-------
                               -4-

                         REGION VII  (17)

Bartels and Shore Chem.  Co.
1400-02 St. Louis Ave.
Kansas City, MO 63110
EPA Reg. No. :  413-51

Industrial  Fumigant Co.
601 E. 159th St.
Olathe, KS  66061
EPA Reg. No. :  485-7,-9,-13,-15,-16,-17

MFA Oil CO.
Box 423
Shenandoah, IA  51601
EPA Reg. No. :  746-93

Douglas Chem. Co.
P. 0.  Box 297
Liberty, MO 64068
EPA Reg. No. :  1015-10,-20,-22,-27,-29,-33,-36 ,-53

Warren Dougas Chem Co.,  Inc.
3002 F St.
Omaha, NE 68107
EPA Reg. No. 1616-4

Weevil-Cide Co. a subs,  of  Research  Products  Co.
411 N. 7th  St.- Box 1057
Salina, KS  67401
EPA Reg. No. :  1629-1

Knox Chem.  Co.
7625 Page Blvd.
St. Louis,  MO 63133
EPA Reg. No. :  1645-12

Farmland Industries Inc.
P. 0.  Box 7305
Kansas City, MO 64116
EPA Reg. No. :  1990-116,-184,-392,KS-83000400

Patterson Green-Up Co.  Div  of  Curry  Cartwright,  Inc
1400 Union  Ave.
Kansas City, MO 64101
EPA Reg. No. :  2169-92

PBI/Gordon  Corporation
1217 W. 12th St.- P. 0.  Box  4090
Kansas City, MO 64101
EPA Reg. No. :  2217-108
-------
                               • J "•

The Huge Company, Inc.
7625 Page Ave.
St. Louis, MO 63133
EPA Reg. No.  : 2270-5

Research Products Co.
Box 1057
Salina, KS 67401
EPA Reg. No.  : 2548-3,-13,-22,-30,-48

Chemi.  Sol Chem. and Sales Co.
P. 0. Box 1485
Hutchison, KS
EPA Reg. No.  : 2618-2

Brayton Chem. Inc.
P. 0. Box 437
West Burlington, IA 52655
EPA Reg. No.  : 2993-7,-14,-23

Ferguson Fumigants, Inc.
93 Ford Lane
Hazlewood, MO 63042
EPA Reg. No.  : 3886-13,-18,-136

Stewart Sanitary Supply  Co., Ltd
P. 0. Box 15061
St. Louis, MO 63110
EPA Reg. No.  : 43954-6

Kaw Valley, Inc.
1801 S. 2nd St.
Leavenworth, KS 66048
EPA Reg. No.  : 44215-58,-59,-60 ,-61,-62

                         REGION VIII  (3)

Lystad  Inc.
Box 1718
Grand Forks, ND 58201
EPA Reg. No.  : 2881-21

FalIs Chemi cals Inc.
P. 0. Box 2345
Great Falls, MT 59403
EPA Reg. No.  : 40831-21

Morgro  Chen, and Energy  Corp.
145 W.  Central Ave.- P.  0.  Box  151048
Salt Lake City, UT 84115
EPA Reg. No.  : 42057-98
-------
                               -6-

                          REGIQN  IX  (5)

Stauffer Chem.  Co.
1200 S. 47th St.
Richmond, CA 94804
EPA Reg. No. :  476-537,-1112,-1113,-1543

Hockwald Chem., Div.  of Oxford  Chem.
275 Valley Dr.
Bri sbane, CA 94005
EPA Reg. No. :  1111-132

Coyne Chem.  Co.
999 Anderson Dr., Suite 140
San Rafael ,  CA  94901
EPA Reg. No. :  3050-23

Cardinal Chem.  Co.
Green and Sansome Streets
San Francisco,  CA 94111
EPA Reg. No. :  5440-6,-20,-22

Siskiyou County Dept. of Agriculture
525 S. Foothill Dr.
Yreka, CA 96097
EPA Reg. No. :  CA79027400
                           REGION X (1)
Atomic Chem.  Co.
Box 1111
Spokane, WA 91210
EPA Reg. No.  :  6152-5,-6
-------
        UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                       WASHINGTON. D.C.  20460
                            JAN 15 1976
                                                    OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
SUBJECT:  Enforcement of Administrator's Decision and
            Order Suspending Most Uses of Hep.tachlor and
            Chlordane '
TO:        Enforcement Division Directors
            Pesticide Branch Chiefs

FROM:     A. E. Conroy H, Director
            Pesticides Enforcement Division (EN-342)
I.  LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS
istrator on the Suspension of Heptachlor-Chlordane (In re Velsi-col
Chemical Corporation, et al., FIFRA Docket No.  384) ordered the
suspension or registrations of all pesticide products containing hepta-
chlor or  chlordane for use on corn,  household, garden, lawn, and
turf pests, use against ticks and chiggers, and use as a'consLL'cuent
in shelf paper.  This Final Order reversed the December 12, 1975.
"Recommended Decision" of Chief Administrative Law Judge Herbert L.
Perlman dismissing the Administrator's July 29, 1975,  "Notice of
Intent to  Suspend. "#

    On January 8, 1976,  the Agency filed a "Suggestion for Clarifcation"
(attached) requesting the Administrator to adopt the Agency's interpre-
tation of  the meaning and limitations of the Final Order.   The Admin-
istrator has requested briefs on the  issue of  the appropriateness of  a
clarification.

    Finally, appeals have been filed  by the Environmental Defense
Fund (in  the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit)
and by Velsicol (in the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit). The
Velsicol  appeal of the District Court's denial of its motion for pre-
liminary injunction  against the Administrator's issuance of the July
*  Copies of the Administrator's "Conclusions" and the "Order" are
attached.
-------
                             -2-

 29, 1975, "Notice of Intent to Suspend" remains in abeyance in the
 Sixth Circuit as well.
                                                       •

 II.  CURRENT AGENCY ACTIVITY    		.._..!...._..

       The office of the Hearing Clerk is preparing to serve by :
 certified mail copies of the Final Order on all parties to the suspen-
 sion proceeding.  In addition, the Registration Division is preparing /
 to notify all registrants by letter of their status under the Order and
 of what label amendments,  if any,  are necessary for  them to continue
 the registration of their products in accordance with the Order.

 III.  ENFORCEMENT
       The Pesticides Enforcement Division is preparing a general
 strategy to enforce the Administrator's Order.  This strategy will
 provide status of registrants vis a vis the cancellation and suspension
 proceedings,  lists of formulatorjand distributors of chlordane and
 heptachlor products, and status of product uses as clarified by any
'subsequent Orders.

       Pending the completion of this strategy, regions should pro-
 ceed with normal surveillance and inspection activities relating to
 chlordane  and heptachlor products. Enforcement actions should await
 official notice of ^suspension to subject registrants.  •

       Until that time you may find it helpful to deal with general
 inquiries as follows.

             1) So far as FED is  able to determine at this time, stoc
 of prodiigi-S— intgadgfj jQE_sn£ngiirig^3— ILS&S v/hich were formulated after
         975. are illegal for  furt^v gh-j^^c,^*| g,.i^ ^r,,ejj.
            2) Persons desiring to dispose of illegal stocks may arrange
with involved regions to ship the products for assorted disposal,  includ-
ing for return to a supplier, for export, or in accordance vdth directions
provided by the Office of Solid Waste Management.   Disposal questions
may be referred to Ray Kreuger in Washington at (202) 755-8050. Regional
offices should cooperate in every way possible with responsible efforts to
dispose of suspended chlordane /heptachlor stocks.

            3) Questions relating to label status should be referred to
Tim Gardner of the Registration Division, Washington,  (202) 426-9425.
As soon as firm policy exists as to this issue you will be informed of
its substance.

            Should you have questions concerning any facet of the
chlordane /heptachlor suspension, please contact the appropriate  regional
coordinator.
-------
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                        WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460



                             jAfi-re.1976
                                                        «
                                                    OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
SUBJECT: Clurl'lcr.!.:..:: of Heptachlor/Chlordane
           Suspension Order

TO:       Enforcement Division Directors
           Pesticide Branch Chiefs

FROM:    A. E. Conroyn,  Director                ii/ (
           Pesticides Enforcement Division (EN-342) ff^1^


    Please find attached a copy of the Administrator's "Clarification
of Order of December 24, 1975 (In re Velsicol Chemical Corooration
et al., FIFRA Docket No. 384), " dated January 19, 1975. Although   •
the Administrator did not adopt per se Respondent EPA's proposed
order and table for clarification (see my January 15th memorandum
and enclosures), this document makes patent that all registrations
(Federal and State) of pesticide products containing heptachlor and
chlordane for uses not specifically continued (as set forth in paragraph
4 of the Conclusion to the December 24th Decision) were suspended.
For purposes of  enforcement,  "Attachment A" will be used as the
list of uses not suspended.

    Should questions  arise concerning the Clarification, or any other
matter relating to the heptachlor/chlordane proceedings, please con-
tact the appropriate regional coordinator.
-------
                " UNITED  STATES  OF AMERICA
               ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                  BEFORE  THE  ADMINISTRATOR
i«itKi>1  Chemical Corporation
  c ^ jtjj.*
                Rfiqistrants.
                              .FIFRA  Docket No.  384
             CLARIFICATION OF .
        ORDER OF DECEMBER 24, 1975
                                  ....
Chemical  Corporation; counsel for the Pineapple Growers
   of Hawaii  and the Attorney General and Department  of
                                                                                  ^* *'.
                                                                                  *v>
                                                                                  t*'r.
     C*> January 7, 1975, Respondent  EPA filed-a Suggestion for — ----   '•
purification of the Order of  December  24, 1975, in the above-
                     •                        *     "          •
u,-f. i".cd proceeding, seeking  clarification of  the uses of
•rt-i.-cts containing heptachlor and chlordane for which
                                                                                  fV.-r'
**•:' Order.  Respondent also submitted a Proposed Order, including
i-\ «'.ucfvr,cnt setting forth a  proposed  list of  uses not suspended,
'i-;?:f.cr with certain explanatory notes.                     '
   .  On January 13, 1976, I 'issued a notice of  the filing of
''••scnJcnt's Suggestion for Clarification  and Proposed Order
••••* f^isstcd  written- conments from the parties, thereby
                                                                                ' •••>»*.
          my intention to consider the possible need for      "                 fe"
                                                                          £/.•
             of the December 24. Decision and  Order.*  Oi   . "                      .-
                                                                                 U*-% -
       15( 1976, 'written comments were received  from counsel  for                C-V-.
                                                                                 f.-.
                                                                                 r
-------
                               2                   '  ••                   ••
 Agriculture of the State of Hawaii; counsel  for some 300
 registrants of various products containing heptachlor or chlordane;   .
                                                                        •
 the Environmental  Defense Fund; the U.S. Department of Agriculture;
 and Respondent EPA.  All of the foregoing parties, except the
 Environmental  Defense Fund, oppose Respondent's suggested
                                   •                              •          • •
 clarification  of the December 24 Order, both on grounds that the
               •         '                                  '   •       '              F
 Administrator  lacks jurisdiction or authority to clarify, modify,                {•
                                                              '-.'•••     •   f
 or alter the .Order .ajid. .that. .the.. Order Js_f inal.-and. ca.nnot.now-.be. . - —'.  ,  ..    r
                                                    .-•'•-.                -I
 chanced .in the canner proposed by Respondent.       •         •    .'               j
      Even though not expressly provided for in the Rules of
 Practice governing expedited hearings under the FIFP»A, I have
.determined that authority does exist to clarify the Decesnber 24
 Order and that some clarification is warranted, in view of the
 apparent possibility that its provisions may be unclear.  In my
 view., the December 24 Decision and Order are clear and specific
 in their terms and should not require any further elaboration.
 Implicit in Respondent's suggested clarification, however, is the
 •    •                                •                 •              •   .
 notion that proper administration of the Decision and Order by
 the Agency and explicit understanding thereof by all the parties        :
                                                                 • •        • . *
 require a clear statement of the uses of products containing
 *	 _."___._„._..   .   •      _                         •*     „•"•    .*.       .
 heptachlor and chlordane for which registrations have not been
 suspended. ' In an atbuhdance of caution and concern,"therefore,
 I believe proper administration of the Decision and Order vniV.be
    •                                                     ?       *  - "
 served and facilitated by the following clarification of the..
                         •  •••     •          ••-      .    ••..«•    'v.
 December 24 Order.           .        .                 •     •„£...  "
-------
               .  '  -               3-                                 .           '   •   '
         In reviewing the Decision and Order and the possible need              .
  '.for'clarification, I-have not considered any new eviu'eiiCis or       •   .   v
    argumentation.   I have sought only to discern any possible"source'       .     '.   .
    or sources of any lack of clarity in the expression of my         . . •      '.  .    j
  •                         m                                       .         • *         i
    intentions at the tima I  issued the Decision and Order.  Comments          .       !
    received from the parties have been most helpful- in determining            •     i
    •whether or not  my intentions v.-ore clearly expressed.  The sole  .    ,           ;
  .  purpose of this clarification is to add clarity to the expression   .           '   !
                 •   •                        •                                         *
    of my intentions  at the time I issued the December 24 Decision   •                !
           .                        -                                *'..••'
    and Order.     •        -.    •   '    •    '      ..         '••*•'•.             !
                                "        '        *                •      ".'•''     i
         The December 24  Order, by its terms, provides that all                  .     ;
 '.  pesticide products containing heptachlor or chlordane for use         • '   .  .   ,
    (1) on corn pests, (2) on household, garden, lawn, and turf pests                 j
    (both by private  homeowners and by pesticide control operators),        •  .   '    |
    (3) against ticks and chiggers, and (4) as a constituent in         . •           !
                     •                                                    •            (
    shelf paper, are  suspended [the suspension of products for use on   .  ^          :
•  .           '             '                        .                      •     •       i
 :   corn having a post-effective date of August 1, 1976],  The Order                 i
    further provides  that any stocks of technical grade heptachlor  ...      ..     |
             "         .                    '              •              :•'"'.  V.I
    or* chlordane formulated into products intended for such uses            .    .     [
    [after July 29, 1975] may not be placed in commerce, sold, or used    '            I
    for such purposes or  any  other purpose not specifically     '  •      .       .     J
  • ;exempted [in the  November'^18; 1974, cancellation order] or_              -'       ;*
    specifically permitted in •accordance v/ith the Decision of the  •      •            •
                 1                   .    .                               •     •  .       •»
  •'  Administrator attached thereto. .                      . »                          i
                                                                                     t
                                                                                    -—
                                                                                  •• I
                                                                                   • I
                                                                                 •'• -r— —
-------
     .Ths uses specifically permitted or continued by the
 Decision accompanying the December 24 Order include or.ly those set              ••
 forth in paragraph 4 of the Conclusions contained in the Decision*
                                                              •   •   •  .        •*
 and, therefore, these uses (together with the exempted uses for
 subsurface ground injection for termite control and dipping of
 roots or tops of nonfood plants) are the only uses not suspended
 by the December 24 Decision and Order.  All other registrations
 for uses of products^containing hcptachlor or chlordass are  •
 suspended.  Because th-2 words "intended for such uses" in line 12
 of the Order might be interpreted as limiting the suspended, uses
 to the four uses enumerated in the first sentence of the Order,
 the v/ords "intended for such uses" are hereby deleted from the
 Dec.eir.ber 24 Order.      .        •  ''  '                 •
      The reasons for the specific enumeration of four uses   •
'suspended in the first sentence of the Order, while suspending uses
 for "any other purpose" in blanket form in the second sentence, are
 twofold:  (1) other than an occasional reference to certain
 fruits and vegetables and other miscellaneous crops, the record
•(including the Recommended Decision.of the Administrative Law
 Judge) does not adequately address many other (presumably minor).
 uses of heptachlor and-chlordane, as to-which-little or-'no benefits         .   .
 evidence was presented at the hearing, and,, indeed, because* the
 record was so inadequate in this regard, the Administrative  Law
 Judge recommended that such other uses not be continued, and
    Uccision of the Administrator, p. 76
                     -.  •  .    •...••'-•:«-. •.•  •'  .• i\-.. .;•••.• ;••;•'    •..-:'    •  •       •        ,i
-------
 (2) the four uses enumerated specifically  in  the  December  24



Order nro ?.ino;ir t1' usos ns to which  sufficient benefits evidence

                 .           '        •

was presented at the hearing to permit a risk-benefit asse§sr,iont.
                                •                              •


Itlankot suspension of uses as to which there  was  little or no



evidence on benefits was necessary because the evidence on



carcinogenicUy risk v/as applicable to all uses.   In view  of the



risk so established, and in the absence of.sufficient benefits
                  .                      •
        •  *                   t

evidence.as to uses for "any other purpose,"  it was of course '



necessary to suspend such other uses, even though  (for ths reasons

                •   •               '         '     •

indicated above) they could not bs enumerated specifically in the



Order. . '    '      .     -        '.- "        .       "            •  •

 •

     As to the grouping of uses on "certain fruits and vegetables



and other miscellaneous crops" [referred to in paragraph 5 of the



Conclusions in the  Decision], it was my intention, that the 	
                     •                        •         •  •     •


provision in the Order applicable to uses for "any other purpose"



apply as well  to this grouping of uses.  In stating that "the



record in this proceeding is not sufficient to reach a conclusion"



regarding this grouping of uses,* I stated only that the evidence



on  benefits  was insufficient to permit the kind of discussion of



the risk-benefit assessment which I had used for better documented
                    •      .                                    •
            •  .                 ^*-             *

wsos.  Therefore, with respect to this grouping of uses, I reached



    tame ultimate conclusion as discussed above concerning uses for.
      •-.  •        ..     ••'  •.•.•-.-...•.•• •.- «•..    •      ••. • •  •••      •••
          •*• •        .        •'•-.''

           of the  Administrator, p. 76.
-------
 "any other  purpose"  generally, i.e. that, in vicv/ of'the        %

 evidence on carcinogenicity risk, and in the absence  of  sufficient

 benefits evidence, these uses are suspended, even though they "
      •                               •    •                        •
 could not be enumerated specifically in the Order.  Thus, there is

 no inconsistency bstv/aen paragraph  5 of the Conclusions in the
                                  •                             "
•Decision and the provisions of the,Order.
      In view of the foregoing, I do not find  it. necessary to
     «                               •              •
 either-adopt or- peaect .-the .Proposed-JOities. subnu±tfiil_b^.R£S.patiKldnt*
                                                                                   \"
                                 B
                                 t
                                               .1
Russell i. Train
 Dated:  January 19,  1976
                                                                                   t.t
                                                                                   • •"•
                                                                                     l
                                                                                   •  t
                         '/.: ' ' •'"• ' '.  • '
                         ' '•""*'*:• .'•."'.':•*• '  ' •
-------
                                  ATTACHMENT A
                     •"•'  '                 1
                         SPECIFIC USES   or cm.onnANv: ^ m:PTAcni.on
                     NOT SUSPENDED UY AUMIWSTHATOU'S OUDlill OF 12/24/75
  COMPOUND^)
                   USEle)
                                                                   -STATUS OF USE(s)
             •            .                                         .
  chlordnne &         Subsurface ground insertion for termite control       continued
,  heptachlor •
•  chlordane &
  hcptachlor
                     Dipping of roots or tops of non food plants
                                                            2
                                                   continued
I
  chlordane &
         '4
  hcptachlor
 Control of cutworms on corn (both pfe and post

 emergence)                  '            '
                                                                      continued until

                                                                      8/1 /7G only
  heptachlor
 Control of narcissus bulb fly
                                                                      continued
'.hcptachlor
                     Seed treatment
                                                           .
                                                   continued
.- heptachlor—
           »'
• Ant control lb ach'ieVe pineapple" mealy bug"
                  5
 control in Hawaii
                                                                       continued
                                                                         »•.
 t
  chlordane
 In Federal /State quarantine programs for
                6                .5.6
 Japanese Beetle  and imported fire ant
                                                                       continued
  »
  i
  dilordane
 Control of black vine weevil on Japanese Yew
 in Michigan
                                                                       continued
  chlordanc
 Control of Texas harvester ant in Oklahoma
                                                                       continued
  chlordane
 Control of imported fire ant by private
            5.7
 individuals
                                                                       continued
. . chlordane
' Control of white fringed beetle attacking food

 crops   In 8S.E. States CAL.FL.GA.LA.MS.NC.
 SC, TN)
                                                                       continued
 .[.
.•I
                                                                                                •r
  dilordane
 Control of soil insects  attacking Florida citrus
                                                                      continued
  'chlordane
 Control of strawberry root pests by pre-plant        continued
 treatments
  chlordane
 Control of white trrubs in Michigan
                                                                       continued
  1*  All registrations (Federal and state) 01 pcsucioe products containing hcpiaclilor ana
      chlordane for uses not specifically continued are suspended by the Administrator's
      Decision and Order on the Suspension of Hcptachlor-Chlordanc.. The effect of the
      Order is'to further prohibit the manufacture, formulation or reformulation of products
  :  ' . containing Heptachlor or Chlordane -for any purpose other than for those registered
     • uses which have been exempted in the Order and for manufacturing uses as an
    . Interim step in the. ullimate.formulalion for. such registered uses. Sale and use of .
 '.     existing stocks'ofrcgistcrcd''products which \vcrc formulated prior to July 30, 1975
      arc permitted' for both continued and suspended uses. ...... ------ ™ :"      •
 •2.'  PR Notice 74-11  (39 FR 41296) exempted this, use from cancellation.  Such use
      was similarly exempted from the Notice of Intention to Suspend. 40 FR 344SC
      (7/29/75).               .                                   ...
  3.  Clarified at 40 FR 30522 (7/21/75) to apply to the use of emulsifiablc or oil
      concentrate formulations  for controlling subterranean termites on-structural
     .cites such as buildings, houses, barns, and sheds, using current control
      practices.    t                            .                         .r
  4*  Velsicol has represented  that it would voluntarily suspend domestic shipments
      of hcptnchlor for this use pending resolution of the cancellation proceedings.
  5.  On the assumption that Mi rex is not available.  •'
  0.  To include treatments required to certify to pest. free conditions aa well as for
  -  •  use in suppression and control programs.    .-• •        •  —• -----  ___
  ?•  To include use on both public and private property by cither owner, agent.
      employee. .or contractor.        .    "  .    v '•'•-. ;.'•. ••-.•'   '".,       •
  8.  Not intended to preclude use on cotton* However;, uco oh 'tobacco is suspended.
  9.  Restricted to citrus root weevils. •    ':  -!".          "' .
                                                                             ^
                                                                             f€
                                                                             r-

                                                                            f
                                                                             r;
                                                                            i
                                                                             !.
                                                                             \:
                                                                             k
-------
 •» »-» «£
 ^i/7 ?   UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                         WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
                                   9 1976

                                                     • -OFttfiE OF ENFORCEMENT
SUBJECT:   Strips Report on tne Hcptachlor/Chlordane Suspension

TO:         Enforcement Division Directors
             Pesticides Branch Chiefs

FROM:      A.  E. Conroy n.  Director         f\G
             Pesticides Enforcement Division   I/V  /
    The purpose of this informational memorandum is to keep you
abreast of Agency activity relating to the Administrator's suspension
of most heptachlor/chlordane registrations.   •                   •   •

    The Office of the Hearing Clerk has completed an uncertified mail
service of the final order and the clarification in the heptachlor/chlor-
dane proceeding to the approximately 425.parties involved.. The Agency
has sent to the Federal Register the "Notice of Intent to Suspend,  the
"initial Decision, " the "Administrator's Decision and Order,"  and the
"Clarification" for publication.   An expedited publication is expected.

    The 'Registration Division is currently in the process of serving'
by certified mail a notice of suspension to all affected registrants  of
heptachlor/chlordane products. Please find attached three form letters
being used to notify registrants of their products' status under  the
December 24 Order. These letters will apprise the particular registrant
that it's products.registration (1) has been finally suspended, (2) was
suspended, but by discontinuing the use of heptachlor and chlordane in
the product's formulation, continued registration is permitted,  or (3)
was suspended, but may continue to_be sold and distributed if the reg-
istration is provisionally amended.         "                     •   ~

    You will be receiving shortly a region specific.list of all suspended
registrations on the basis of which you may begin surveillance  and
enforcement activities' to "ensure compliance with the Administrator's
order.                       '  .-                           •      •
                            •* •:•'<„•" »•  '.^ -••  •
                 ..••"••  •   • • • •'••**"'• "''.j.-  ..'•. :•-.• ..
-------
                 \
i'^V^ ?   UHITEO STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

        r                      WASHINGTON. D.C.  20460
     CERTIFIED MAIL
     Gentlemen:

     Subject  :   Notice  of Suspension  for:
  •  'On December 24,  1975,  the Administrator  issued his Decision and Order
     on--the. suspension of Heptachlor and  Chlordane.  Most federal and state
     registrations of Heptachlor and Chlordane were suspended although
     certain uses were specifically exempted, (Refer to the enclosure).  Any
     registration which included a suspended  use was suspended effective
     December 24, 1975.  This letter is to  notify you that your above
    .•registration contained a use suspended'by the Order and therefore has
     been suspended effective December 24,  1975.
             *.    .                '.                                 .         •
     If you wish to be permitted to continue your registration, you have two
 . -'alternatives.  First,  you may rimply discontinue the use of Chlordane
   * or Heptachlor in the formulation of  your product.  If you select this'
     approach you will not be required to submit ^petition for an amendment
    'if your product contains no other insecticides and all insecticide claims
     are eliminated.   If other insecticides are contained you must apply for
     an amended label which in certain instances .may require new efficacy
     data.  If you wish to continue to formulate your product with either
     Heptachlor or Chlordane you may continue to do s,o only for uses not
     suspended and only after you have submitted a petition for a label
     amendment in which all references to suspended uses have been deleted.
-------
   7 ?   UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

           '  '              WASHINGTON. D.C.  20460
                                                        ''
 CERTIFIED MAIL
 Gentlemen:      '  .-•"  '-.•"-'  "•'••  '*•   .'
                    *•  *    *   «

 Subject   :   Notice  of Suspension for:.

  On December 24, 1975, the Administrator issued his Decision and  Order
  on the suspension of Heptachlor and Chlordane.  Most  federal  and state
  registrations of Heptachlor and Chlordane were suspended  although
.  certain uses were specifically exempted (Refer to the enclosure).  -Any
  registration which included-a suspended use was suspended effective
  December 24, 1975.  This letter is to notify you that your subject
  registration contained a use suspended by the Order and therefore has
  been suspended effective December 24, 1975.              .- :   • •
            ,                                                 •
\  If you wish to be permitted to continue to formulate  and/or  sell Hepta-
•  chlor and/or Chlordane for uses not suspended, you will be required to
  petition for a provisional amendment of registration. Such  petition •
  Should request the"elimination from-your labels of any reference to
  suspended uses.  It is sufficient to. send a cover-letter  with an amended
  label or label in which the suspended uses including  any  claims  referring
  to these^uses haveibeen^Mocked^outv"- 'The'granting by-the Agency of such
  a petition will pieralt^ypu^p^c&ntinue^fpnwlation and/or sale of Hepta-
  chlor and/or Chiofdaner-fpr'exempte'd usesV" Petitions  for  a provisional
  labeling amendment/in accordance.with the enclosure must  be  received
  within 30 days of receipt of this letter at the following address:
            »•—   .   • •  -.- • •  •    -f ~ -.-••• -. .--
            .  • .-•    .  .' -• -" • ••«"••" • : ** **"*i.'"C '* •• '
          •  • '   ."*- •• • ..".; *.• • •« - r-»'*'-:- .-'^T.V**»-.rr~ •'•- •"*-' •• :
     > • . •** • ' •.- .*•. -    -• . * .-••"••.-.., ^ .»-. . ;*^iv» «.-..•! *«.-..-•
      .-'  . ;-..-. •:•.,. ':• &:: #''-~ '?
-------
               A""
               1 1  .
           UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                   .                                         •  . .
                            WASHINGTON. D.C. 20450  " '
  ' CERTIFIED MAIL

   Gentlemen:       .  •           •

   Subject   :  Notice of Suspension for:
   This  is to notify you that on December 24,  1975,  the Administrator
   issued his- Decision and Order on the suspension of Chlordane and
   Heptachlor.            '    ••  .       ,.:  •     .   .  •  •.    ^ •  •

   This  document provides that all uses of Chlordane and Heptachlor are
  .. suspended except those set forth on the enclosure. Your subject regis-
 .  tration was suspended effective December 24,  1975.                    '

   As stipulated in the Administrator's Notice of Intent to Suspend, issued
•'  on July 29, 1975, the product under this registration may  not be formu-
  • lated, shipped, sold orjused after July 29; 1975..     ••        :

   .The^Administrator's Decision and Ordei? wilj be published-in the Federal


   Sihcerely'yours, :
    John B.  Ritch, Jr.  •.   -  =..
    Director
    Registration Division (^1-567).

    Enclosure  ,    .      "
                         *
-------
              It is  sufficient to send a cover letter with  an  air-sr.ded  label or  lab
              in which the  suspended uses including any claims referring  to these
              uses have been blocked out.  The granting by  the Agency  of  such a
              petition will permit you to continue formulation and/pr  sale of Hepta-
              chlor  and/or  Chlordane for exempted uses.  Petitions  for a  provisional
              labeling amendment in accordance with the enclosure must be received
              within 30 days of receipt of this letter at the  following address:  .

                                     Mr; Timothy A. Gardner
                                     Product Manager (15)           •     •.-•••
                                  •   Registration Division  (WH-567)
                                   .  Environmental Protection  Agency
                                     Washington, O.C.  20460.
              The amendment^wJlljiQt Abxc^a£e_y^
             "nonsuspended uses in the continuing cancellation proceeding.
              Existing stocks of EPA registered pesticides containing Heptachlor or
              Chlordane may be distributed and sold for suspended uses only if the
              stocks were formulated prior to July 30, 1975.  This date was stipulated
              in the Administrator's Notice of Intent to Suspend, issued on July 29,
              1975.  Stocks of Heptachlor or Chlordane formulated after July 29, 1975,
              may only be distributed and sold for those exempted uses included in tha
              enclosure and under labels containing no suspended uses.  Stocks which
              you may presently have on hand, if-manufactured or formulated after
              July 29, 1975, may not be shipped or sold until you receive EPA epp
              of your amended label.                                  .
                   *

              The Administrator's Decision and Order will be published in the Federal
              Register in the near future.
              *                                                  *    *

              Sincerely yours,              '..'.•       '•'••*      '"
              John B. Ritch, Jr.
              Director
              Registration Division (WH-5677

              Enclosure  •           •
— .r ...... — •.-.-•>- ••••  •   ••••  ••   »-.•       •  • •  •••.*  ••••.- v ..... •"••'!•»•"
  .V   ••   .'.'  :•' ..    .••     . .   '...      ••-«.   . .*   ••'••« • •• ' ••
                                       . t  r ' '  *           .
                                                                                     ,.er.
-------
                        SPECIFIC USES  OF CIILORDANK / I!rTTACl
                \ '  NOT SUSt'EKDED BY ADMINISTRATOR1:: Oi'.iJlJil OF 12/2-1/75
COMrOUND(s)
Chlordane &
• heptachlor
chlordane k
heplachlor
chlortianc &
4
heplachlor
4
hcptachlor
•' heptachlor
. beptachlor
USE(s)
Subsurface ground insertion for tcrmile control
z
Dipping of roots or tops of non food plants
Control of cutv.-orzns on corn (both pre and post
emergence)
Control of narcissus bulb fly
Seed treatment* *
Ant control to achieve pineapple mealy bug
control in Hawaii
STATUS OK USE(s)
Z.3
continued
•
«. .*
continued
•
. continued until
8/1/76 only
continued
continued
continued
•
chlordane
                In Federal/State quarantine programs for
                               6                     5.6
                Japanese Beetle  and imported fire ant
continued
chlordane
                Control of black vine weevil on Japanese Yew        continued
                in Michigan	'    	
chlordane
               'Control of Texas harvester ant in Oklahoma
continued
chlordane
                Control of imported fire ant by private
                           5.7
                Individuals
continued
chlordane
                Control of white fringed beetle attacking food
                      8                              •
                crops   in 6 S.E. States (AL.FL.GA.LA.MS.NC.
                SC. TN)
continued
chloi-dane
                Control of soil insects  attacking Florida citrus     continued
chlordane
                Control of strawberry root pests by pre-plant     .   continued
                treatments
chlortianc
                Control of white grubs "in Michiean
continued
 All registrations licocrai anc Mate) oj pesticide products containing ncpiacnlor and
 chlordane for uses not specifically continued arc suspended by the Administrator's
 Decision and Order on the Suspension of Heptachlor-Chlordane.  The effect of the
 Order is to further prohibit the manufacture* formulation or reformulation of products
 containing Heptachlor or Chlordane for any purpose other than for those registered
 uses which have been exempted in the Order and for manufacturing uses as an
 Interim step in the ultimate formulation for such registered uses. Sale and use of
 existing stocks of registered products which v/erc formulated prior to July 30,  1975
 are permitted for both continued and suspended uses.                 '  •
 PR Notice 74-11 (39  FR 412?3) exempted this use from cancellation.  Such use'  -
,was similarly exempted from the Notice of intention to Suspend, 40 FR 34456
 "(7/29/75)..'   -.  ---.v:  .   .                                                    '  '
 Clarified at 40 FR 30522 (7/21/75) to apply to the use of cmulsifiable or oil
 concentrate formulations for controlling subterranean termites on structural
 filtco such as buildings, houses, barns, and sheds, using current control        .
 practices.                                                 !.
 Velaicol has represented lliat it would voluntarily su.-.pcnd domestic shipments
4.
    of heptachlor for this use. pending resolution of the cancellation proceedings.
 5.  On the assumption that Mir ex is not available.
 6.  To include treatments required to certify to pest free conditions as well as for
    use in suppression and control programs.  '"
 7.  To include use on both public and private property by cither owner,  agent.
    employee, or contractor.'     .                      .                      •
 8. • Not intended to preclude use on cotton.  However, use on tobacco is suspended. •
 9.  Jtestrictcd tojcilrus root weevils. ,.                    ..             .-••;.    :
-------
                      '

                                              "li  '.  ..
                                                .•.    • «••:
           '.'  •     •   -Mr.  Timothy A. Gardner            •*'•.'
   .     ..:    ... '       Product Manager (15)             ' %   '. "•': ' '   '
              .;        Registration Division (WH-567)         '   '   .  •'
         . •    ."   '•     Environmental Protection Agency       .
                        Vteshington, D.C.  20460.      •        ]     •

The  amendment v/ill  not abrogate your right to defend both suspended or
nonsuspendsd uses. in the continuing cancellation proceeding.

Existing  stocks of EPA registered pesti-cides containing Heptachlor or
..Chlordane jiia., .b£_ distrJ buted,
 stocks- were formulated prior to July 30, 1975.  This date was stipulated
 in  the Administrator's Notice of Intent to Suspend, issued on July 29,
 1975.   Stocks of Heptachlor or Chlordane formulated after July 29, 1975,
 may only be distributed and sold for those exempted uses included in  the
 enclosure and under labels containing no suspended uses-  Stocks which
 you may presently have on hand, if manufactured or formulated after
 July- 29, 1975, may not be shipped or sold until you receive  EPA approval
 of your amended label.       ..  '            ...     '      . ...: _______ '-•  -

 The Administrator's Decision and Order will be published in  the Federal
 Register in the near future.  . •  -•      ••
                            •                           •

 Sincerely yours »    '  '   .     ,'.?. . ' ;V ,
 John B. Ritch, Jr.      '  .  .
 Director         .    .''.'''•
 Registration Division (WH-567)
                       >   .
 _  , •            .'..'••-.   ...*.
 Enclosure             • • *     •
        .  •   •  • . • %   . •  . ;   .
      •*••.:••• .;.'• A:*-. »-.•=. v.  „
      .   : •- ••'.••!;"••' «i.rv--.-  .'
       «     .-.     .
                                                                1
          , . ; _ •:;'    . •'• •'.
         •" '  • • . • '• .•-••" ••''
-------
kS22 *   UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
\^   4/          .;        WASHINGTON. D.C.  20460
                 \*


                              2 3 MAR 1976
                                                     OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
    SUBJECT: Heptachlor/Chlordane Suspension Order
               Enforcement Strategy

    TO:.    - , Enforcement Division-Dir^ctors-—.'-.-	
               Pesticide Branch Chiefs
    FROM:    A. E. Conroy II. Director
               Pesticides Enforcement Division

         In my memorandum of February 19, 1976 regarding the status
    of Agency activity on-the Administrator's December 24th Order sus-
    pending most heptachlor and chlordane product registrations, I alerted
    the appropriate Regional personnel that a more specific strategy for
    ensuring compliance would be forthcoming. This memorandum pre-
    sents EPA's enforcement strategy concerning the three categories
    of these products: (A) Federally registered products,  all uses of which
    have been suspended}  (B) Federally registered products, some uses
    of which were suspended, but which may continue to be sold and dis-
    tributed for continued uses upon amendment of the product's registration
    and labeling to delete  any suspended uses; and (C) intrastate products
    afforded the opportunity to continue in intrastate commerce until the
    completion of the cancellation proceedings.


    I.  SUSPENSION ORDER PROVISIONS   ' "     ...  .__.-.

         In previous memoranda, the terms of the Administrator's Sus-
    pension Order have been discussed. To recap, the December 24th Order
    and January 19th Clarification provide the following:

         (1) All registrations of pesticide/products containing
            heptachlor and chlordane for uses not specifically
            continued [see "Attachment A - - Specific Uses of
            Chlordane and Heptachlor Not Suspended by Admin-
            istrator's Order of 12/24/73TT"for the list of uses
            exempted] were suspended as of December 24, 1975.
-------
                              -2-

      (2) By invoking the "Special Rule" provision of section
         15(b)(2),  the Administrator has provided that stocks of
         EPA registered pesticides containing heptachlor or
         chlordane formulated prior to July 30. 1975,  may be sold,
         distributed,  or used for suspended uses.

      (3) Stocks of heptr.cMor or chlordane products formulated
         g/ter July 20,  1975 may be sold, distributed, or used
         only for exempted uses, as per "Attachment A".


 n.  CATEGORIES OF HEPTACHLOR /CHLORDANE PRODUCTS '     _ •_..-v±LI

      As stated above, there are three categories of heptachlor/chlor-   ...    .
 dane products:

     (A) Federally registered products, all uses of which have been     -~   _
 susp'ehded. The Registration Division/Office of Pesticide Programs
 has notified, by certified mail, all affected registrants that their prod-  .'  .
 ucts have been finally suspended by the December 24th Order. 1 /  An
 example of a product in this category would be a product register ed    	
 for use only on ticks  and chiggers.  There are approximately 644 prod-  -
 ucts registered by over 300 registrants which have been so suspended.  .
 You will find attached to this memorandum a list of suspended product
 registration numbers, product names, registrant names, and the names
 and addresses where such heptachlor/chlor dane products have been pro- .
 duced.
                      *
     (B) Federally registered products, some uses of which have been	
 suspended As noted in the introduction and in previous memoranda,   r
 there is a large category of registered products whose uses were sus-
 pended in part by the December 24th Order, but whose sale and distri-
 bution may continue upon ["provisional"] amendment of the product's
 registration and labeling to delete all suspended uses.  A typical product
 in this category would be one registered and labeled for indoor roach con-
 trol and for subterranean termite uses (the former being a suspended use,   —
 while the latter is a permitted use).  Pending the decisions by the regis- -
 trants to amend or not [such decision must be made within 30 days of   -
 receipt of the notice of suspension],  it is not .possible to determine
 the registration status of products in this category.  Upon RD's comple-^
 tion of the necessary registration- review, a region  specific list will
 be forwarded to you noting the.status of individual products in this category.  - -
                                                                    •
     (C)  Intrastate products.  Although this third category is comprised
 of products similarly situated to those in above categories (A) and (B),
 for purposes of this enforcement strategy, "intrastate'products" are
.being-treated separately.  The Registration Division has notified the
 i/ see my * ebruary 19, 1976 memorandum entitled "Status Report on the
"TTeptachlor / Chlor dane Suspension. " and its attachments.
-------
                            -3-
 registrants of 140 "intrastate11 products as to the impact of the
 December 24th Order on their heptachlor/chlordane products.
 These products were being sold only in intrastate commerce when
 they became subject to the FEPCA registration requirements by
 the accelerated activation of section 3 in November 1974. Sub-
 sequently, all applications for Federal registration were denied
 and the applicants who timely requested a hearing were made
 parties to the cancellation proceeding and the subsequent suspen-
 sion hearings.  Accordingly; these products were equally affected
 by the December 24th Order in that to continue marketing them.
 registrants must delete suspended uses from their labeling.  Please
 note the attached three Registration Division form letters used to
 apprise-this •ca.teTgoryof~r egvstrants~c«> Lu ~tl.ic.u~ pi-uduuly'••-it'atusr™"~
 You will find an attached list of forty-eight-products in this cate-
 gory whose sale, distribution,  and use was  prohibited as of Decem-
 ber 24, 1975, for formulations made after July 29,  1975.  As soon as
 the suspension status of the remaining products in this category is
 available, you will be advised.	
m.  ENFORCEMENT POLICY       -

    The Agency intends to ensure that-the-Administrator's Order
of December 24th-is strictly complied with-by all affected persons,
including manufacturers, formulators, registrants, wholesalers,
retailers, and users.  The Administrator, in his December 24th
Order,  provided that, products formulated prior to July 29, 1975,
should be permitted distribution and use through normal channels
of trade until the stocks are exhaused.  Affected persons were
informed of the consequences of formulating after July 29th--those
that chose to continue formulation despite the Notice of Intent
to Suspend did so at their own risk.  The Agency wants to ensure
that the pesticide producing industry does not interpret a Notice
of Intent to Suspend as a signal to increase production of the subject
product during the pendency of the suspension proceeding.

    It has been the general policy of the Agency to request national
recall where product registrations have been suspended in order
to prevent an imminent hazard to man or.his environment.  That
policy will be applied in the instant case.r As the initial step in  ....
implementing this  policy, EPA has requested the recall,  down to
and including the retail level, of all heptachlor/chlordane products
for which all uses  were suspended and which were formulated
after  July 29, 1975 [category A products].  In addition, the Agency
intends  to request  the recall—in some instances fox* relabeling--of
all heptachlor/chlordane products formulated after July 29, 1975
-------
                            -4-
 whose labels contain both suspended and non-suspended uses [category
 B products].  "Intrastate" products [category C products] will be treated
 in a manner consistent with similarily situated Federally registered
 products.


 IV.  ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS.                	•

     As has been the established policy in such matters, enforcement  "
 actions will be taken, in accordance with normal procedures and at
 levels consistent jwith those provided for in the Pesticides Enforcement
 Division Case Proceedings Manual, against all persons found in viola-
 tion of the heptachlor/chlordane suspension order.         ._.„.. ..^

   " There exist a number of enforcement action options available .to .-.L-.U:
 ensure compliance with the Administrator's Suspension Order.  As - ---*--
 previously stated, the Agency has determined that a national recall	  -
 of violative products would be the most effective and efficient means -••  -
..of ensuring compliance with the suspension-order.  Because of.the  ..._._..,
•-extra-ordinary number of products and'firms which are affected by~~-'  -
 the December 24th Order and the commensurate amount of Agency   ~r—••
 resources which would be involved in-conducting a formal recall, -the-••-••
 Agency feels that the procedures outlined in the Case Proceedings      |
 Manual,  Chapter 12, for informal recalls would be more appropriate
 in this matter.  Information and guidance with respect to  specific en-
 forcement related actions which may be directed toward each of the
 aforementioned categories of heptachlor/chlordane products follows: .:..-

     (A) Federally registered products, all uses of which were sus-
 pended and which were formulated alter July 29, 1975.  As per recall ~~"
 initiation procedures, the Pesticide Enforcement Division has notified
 by certified mail those registrants who had all uses of their heptachlor/
 chlordane product(s) suspended by the December 24th Order, that EPA
 is requesting that all subject products formulated after July 29, 1975;.
•be recalled immediately.  This letter,-..a.copy of which is attached to-
 this memorandum, refers the addressee, to the Registration Division
 suspension letter  informing the registrant of the registration status of
 his product(s), and continues by specifically requesting that (a) the .,.-.
 company initiate procedures to determine the locations of all quantities-
 of their finally suspended product and the amount of such product at
 each such product location, (b) that the product be returned to the
 registrant from all locations, and (c) that the named regional  contact
 person be informed of all actions taken in connection with the recall.

 In your follow-up  to determine compliance  with the recall request, you
 should:

       (1) be assured that the registrant has recalled the product
            from the retail level,  and either

            (i)  disposed of the product.
-------
                               -5-


            (11)   exported product in accordance with section 17, or  2/

            (ill)  sought new registration for continued uses;

        (3) stop sale any such product found in consumer channels
            under section 13; and

        (4) where appropriate, initiate enforcement action under
            section 14.  3/              ........
                       M^M  f

    (B) Federally registered products with both suspended and con-
'tihu'e'd uses and which were "formulated after July 29,  1975.  As soon
as these products can be  identified as to their registration status,  FED
•-win- request ^a^h-registrttnt-toncotttaclraH, kuowTrdtstrltruturtf;' whoTg-—
salers, and retailers that the subject product  should not be sold or
otherwise distributed.  Registrants will be instructed that they should .
recall from retail level as set forth above for category A products.

When following-up to determine compliance with the recall of these pro-
ducts, you should:

      - (I) be assured that the registrant has recalled the product
            from the retail level,  and either

            (i)   disposed of product if amendment to labeling is not
                 made,

            (ii)   exported product in accordance with section 17,

            (ill)  relabeled product with amended label deleting sus-
                 pended uses,  or      --	          .

            (iv)  in accordance with EPA approved instructions,
                 overlaid product  with approved sticker labels.
                 masked  out suspended uses,  or used other means to
                 delete suspended uses from the labels;
 Z/  Registrants: should be informed -thafthe Agency would interpose
 no objection to the export of products affected .by. the suspension order,
 but wishes to caution, registrants concerning the recent stipulation
 signed by the Department of State concerning the utilization of US funds
 for USAID procurements of such products.  See USAID regulation entitled
 "Pest Management Program,  Interim Pesticide Procedures, " published
 in the Federal Register on January 7, 1976.

 3/  Those persons who distribute or sell a suspended heptachlor/
 chlordane product in violation of the terms of the December 24th
 Suspension Order will be in violation of section 12(a)(l)(A) for non-
 registration, as well as section 12(a)(2)(J) for violation of a section
 6 suspension, order.                        .       " ~-  k  •
                                                                        t —
                                                                       .. rr
-------
                               -6-
        (2) stop sale any such product found in consumer channels
            under section 13; and

        (3) where appropriate,  will initiate enforcement action under
            section 14.  3/

     (C) Intrastate products.  The policies outlined above will also
 apply,  as appropriate, to intrastate products as they become identified.
 At present, the 48 products thus far identified will be treated the same-
,as JE^erally,j,e^^ieeed.pcod««tSr-'aili^
 [category A products].

     Now that all parties affected by-the Administrator's Decision and
 Order in the heptachlor/chlordane suspension proceedings have been -  -
 duly notified of this action and of their obligations attendant thereto,
 the Agency places the highest priority- on assuring full and immediate- •'
 compliance.  The initiation  and follow-up of the heptachlor/chlordane
 recall herein authorized will represent a significant addition to* exist-  "
 ing regional enforcement burdens.  It is anticipated that regions will -  - .
 exercise initiative and energy in performing,, in addition to program*--:  - '
 med outputs, the surveillance,- inspectionsy-enf-orcement actions,--and	i
 routine follow-up necessary to implement this recall.

     The region should report the. following information to the appro-
 priate regional coordinator  as soon as available:

      (1) the number of firms subject to-recall;      -

      (2) the amount of each product recalled; and                  ~   •

      (3) the methods of actual or planned disposal
         of recalled material.


 V.  DISPOSAL OF HEPTACHLOR/CHLORDANE PRODUCTS

     Persons desiring to dispose of stocks.of heptachlor/chlordane
 should be apprisedvthat they may arrange with the appropriate regions
•to ship the product :for disposal, including return to a supplier, for
 export, or in. accordance with directions provided by.the Office of
 Solid Waste Management. Disposal questions may be referred to
 Mr. Ray Kreugeri Operations Divison, Office of Pesticide' Programs
 [(202) 755-8050]. Regional offices are encouraged to cooperate in every
 way possible with responsible efforts to dispose of suspended heptachlor/
 chlordane stocks.
-------
                                            - 7 -
               •

             VI.  INDEMNITIES

                 The Office of Enforcement has been advised by th-? -Office of
             General Counsel that the registrants of heptachlor/chlordane products
             suspended by the December 24th Order are not eligible for indemni-
             fication under section 15 of the amended FIFRA.


             VIE.  INQUIRES

                 Should you have any questions concerning any facet of this memor-
             andum and the heptachlor/chlordane suspension order, please contact. .
             the appropriate regional coordinator. -Questions relating to registration
             and label status should be referred to Mr. Tim Gardner, Registration -
             Vm. ATTACHMENTS           ________ -._-..-.•
.71
                 Please find attached the following:

 !                   (1)  "Attachment A — Specific Uses of Chlordane and
                       -. Heptachlor Not Suspended by Administrator ' s Order  —
 |                       of 12 724/75 .""""

 I                   (2)  Copies of recall request-letters sent-to registrants by
 I                       FED.

 I                   (3)  Three form letters sent by RD/OPP  to "intrastate"
 :                     .:• heptachlor/chlordane registrants.

 i                   (4)  41 FR 7552 (February 19, 1976) — "Velsicol Chemical
 .               ..... _________ Co.  et al. , Consolidated Heptachlor /Chlordane Hearing. "-
                    (5)  List of Federally registered heptachlor/chlordane pro-
                        ducts,  all uses of which have.been suspended [category
                       -.A products] was mailed by PED to the regional pesticide.
                      .  branch chiefs under separate cover March 17, 1976.     "  -

                    (6)  List of the 48  "intrastate".heptachlor/chlordane products,
                        .all use of which were suspended [category C products].    --
-------
  -at*"*'**1.
 S"   f*.
1
 *~~  i
Ss5g? i=    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
     ^                   WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                        27AUG1976
                                                       OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
   TO:     Enforcement Division Directors
           Pesticides Branch Chiefs

   FROM:  A. E. Conroy II. Director
           Pesticides and Toxic Substances
           Enforcement Division (EN-342)

   RE:     Heptachlor/Chlordane Suspension Or\ier
           Enforcement Strategy — CORN USE


        Some confusion  has arisen concerning the enforcement response
   to certain heptachlor/chlordane products now on the market which are
   labeled for use on corn pests. The Administrator concluded in In re
   Velsicol Chemical  Corporation, et al.  (Expedited Hearing On Heptachlor-
   Chlordanej,  41 Fed.  Reg.  7552  (February 19, 1976) that

        the benefits of continued use of heptachlor and chlordane to
        control cutworms on corn crops  during the time which may
        be required to reach a final decision in the cancellation
      .  proceeding are not sufficient to outweigh the human health
        risks identified; provided, however that particularly in view
        of the difficult transition required to implement alternative
        cutworm control methods,  the use of heptachlor and chlordane
        to control cutworm on corn crops should be permitted during
        the 1976 corn growing season.  Accordingly, I have concluded
        that the registration for use of heptachlor and chlordane to
        control cutworms on corn crops  should be suspended effective
        August 1, 1976. j*/

        As you are aware, the Administrator's heptachlor/chlordane orders
   provide the following concerning the legal status of the various products:
        */  See also, "Clarification of Order of December 24, 1975," 41
   Fed."Keg. 7552 (February 19,  1976).
-------
                             -2-

      1.  With the exception of the corn use. all registrations of pesticide
 products containing heptachlor and chlordane for uses not specifically
 continued (e. g., chlordane to control black vine weevil on Japanese yew
 in Michigan), were suspended as of December 24, 1975. *»/

      2.  By invoking the "Special Rule" provision of FIFRA section 15(b)
 (2),  the Administrator has provided that stocks of EPA registered pesti-
 cides containing heptachlor/chlordane formulated prior to July 30, 1975,
 may be sold, distributed, or used for suspended uses, including use on
 corn.

      3.  Stocks of heptachlor or chlordane products formulated after     ..A
 July 29,1975, may be sold,  distributed, or used only for exempted uses
 [see "Attachment A," enclosed].   Thus, for example, a chlordane product
 whose sole registered use was for cutworm control on corn could legally be
 produced, distributed, sold,  and used without violatingthe December 24
 suspension order until this product became finally suspended on August 1,
 1976.

     You will remember that prior to our request for the recall of violative
 heptachlor/chlordane products. Registration Division, Office of Pesticide
 Programs advised affected registrants that if amended labeling which deleted
 all reference to suspended uses was  submitted and approved by EPA, the
 relabeled product could  continue in commerce.  To accomodate those pro-
 ducers of agricultural products listing  corn uses, a decision was made to
 allow the registrant to continue to display the directions for use on corn,
 provided the following disclaimer was inserted immediately after the crop
 designation: "USE SUSPENDED EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1, 1976. " Ten com-
 panies exercised their option to relabel accordingly; the 19  products are as
 follows:

 279-2656    NIAGARA CHLORDANE 5 COATED GRANULES
 279-2904    CHLOR KIL 10 DUST INSECTICIDE
 449-123     SURE DEATH BRAND HEPTACHLOR 3E
 449-74      SURE DEATH BRAND HEPTACHLOR 2E
 876-55      VELSICOL CHLORDANE 72EC SOIL INSECTICIDE
 876-89      VELSICOL BELT 72 ECF
 876-99      VELSICOL BELT 33. 3 G  AGRICULTURAL INSECTICIDE
            GRANULARS FOR SOIL INSECT CONTROL
 876-102     VELSICOL BELT 72 EC AGRICULTURAL INSECTICIDE .
 876-172     BELT 40% WP AGRICULTURAL INSECTICIDE'              '"
 148-139     CHLORDANE E-8
 226-178     TASCO BRAND CHLORDANE 20 GRANULAR
 226-219     TOBACCO STATES 50% CHLORDANE WETTABLE POWDER
 228-92      RIVERDALE 25% CHLORDANE GRANULES
    .  **]  To arrive.at a result consistent with the Administrator's intent to
suspend all use of chlordane/heptachib^.on corn,  regardless of target pest,
the use of these pesticides to control th"e white fringed beetle attacking corn
crops in eight southeastern states (AL,  FL, GA. LA, MS, NC, SC, and TN)_
and to control white grubs on corn in Michigan is  also precluded.
-------
1029-77    A7.DEX CrlLORDANE 8E
2&35-131    RED TCP CHLORDANE 8 SPRAY
9859-51     CHLORDANE 10 GRANULAR
9859-53    CHLORDANE 5 GRANULAR
9859-55    CHLORDANE 25 GRANULAR
'14775       CHLORDANE-TOXAPHENE BAIT NO. 11 (Florida "intrastate"
            —Asgrow Florida Company,  P. O. Drawer D, Plant City, FL)

     Therefore, after Jjecember 24, 1975, no product produced after July 29,
1975 for corn use could be legally distributed or sold without the  above men-
tioned disclaimer.  The detection of such violative product will continue to
receive Agency response  in the form of a FIFRA section 13(a) Stop Sale,  Use
or Removal Order and section  14 action, as appropriate.  It is the Office of
Enforcement view that enforcement action,  including SSURO's, should not be
taken against the sale and distribution  after August 1, 1976  of products bearing
the disclaimer.  The use  of such product on corn after August 1, 1976 is in vio-
lation of the suspension order [§12(a)(2)(J)J, as well as a misuse [§12(a)(2)(G)J.

    • To summarize:  (1) products formulated  prior to July 30, 1975, includ-
ing those with directions for use on corn, may continue to be sold, distributed,
and used;  (2) products formulated after July 29, 1975, m?/  ne sold, distri-
buted,  and used only with labeling amended to include only continued uses;
and (3) products formulated after July  29, 1975, with directions for use on
corn, must bear the following disclaimer immediately after the corn use
directions: "USE SUSPENDED  EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1, 1976."

     The Agency is not  contemplating at this time the recall of the above
products for relabeling  to delete reference to  corn uses.  At the  conclusion
of the cancellation proceeding,  heptachlor/chlordane labels will be revised
to conform with the Administrator's final order.

     All inquiries in this  matter should be referred to the appropriate regional
coordinator.
-------
>,t\.:  T   l.T'i': .~.J STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
*• ''--'—
 •
                           WASHINGTON. D.C. 20*60
                                                        OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
     To:     Enforcement Division Directors
             and Pesticide Branch Chiefs

     From:  A. E. Conroy n. Director
             Pesticides and Toxic Substances
                Enforcement Division

     Re:     Continued Enforcement of the Suspension of Registration
             for Certain Products Containing Chlordane and Heptachlor


        On August 1, 1976, the suspension of existing registrations of
     heptachlor/chlordane products for use on corn was effective as to
     all products formulated-after July 29, 1975.  Thus, the Admini-'
     strator's suspension order.of December.24, 1975-became completely
     effective as to all subject products formulated after August 29, 1975*
     and not  already cancelled.  The  recall of subject products initiated  in
     March 1C76 is no\v essentially complete and a final report should be
     submitted to PTSED for inclusion in the heptachlor/chlordane file.
     Therefore, each region should prepare a Recall Final Report  (Exhibit
     14-E, Pesticides Inspection Manual) for each product subject to  our
     recall request which was produced after July 29, 1975.  This report
     should be submitted to the appropriate Regional Coordinator no later
     than December  31, 1976.

        Recently the Court of Appeals for the D.C.  Circuit sustained the
     Administrator's decision to suspend certain uses of chlordane and
     heptachlor in all but one important respect.  (Environmental Defense
     Fund v.  EPA, No. 76-1247 (D.C. Cir., decided Nov. 10,  197b)). With
     respect  to the Administrator's decision to allow use of existing  stocks,
     the court remanded for reconsideration of such issues as amounts of
     existing stocks  and the problems involved in their return  or disposal.
     How the Agency will proceed  in meeting the requirements of the
     remand  has not been determined.
-------
                             -2-

    Future surveillance for compliance with the Administrator's
order should bo routine except in the erne of firms revising to rr.-cnll.
Additional visits to producers and/or distributors may ,5e necessary
to assure compliance in these situations.  Regarding enforcement
actions,  pending a final outcome on the issue of the remand, the fol-
lowing should be pursued.  Any suspended hcptachlor/chlordane pro-
duct produced after July 29,  1975,  and remaining in commerce should
be stop saled.  Additionally, since all but retail distributors should .
have been notified to. return the violative products, any suspended  - '
products found in channels of trade above the retail level should be
sampled  and civil penalty actions issued to the distributor and/or the
producer, as appropriate. Civil penalty actions should also be issued
for any violative samples previously collected above the retail level.
Beyond stop sale,-decisions on-t-he level«of'action'to-"berapplieid"'atthe-^	
retail level are left,io regional discretion,  though any repetition of
violation or evidence of bad faith should warrant civil penalty action.
This policy is reiterated now because a period of grace was previously
allowed for return or disposal of violative stocks.  Now that the recall
is complete and the suspension order close to a year old,  such leniency
is no longer appropriate.

    Finally, in several instances recently,  questions have aris'en con-
cerning indemnities.   The Agency's position has been that such requests
pursuant to section 15  of the Act are inappropriate in the absence-of a
final order of cancellation.  (See letter attached).

Enclosures:
-------
                    UNITED STATES ENVIROrifJlcNTAL PROTECTION .'••'".'. • ;CY
'v ' /;f') tr<" *"•''. ''•'
     * •    . £
Y
                                      120CT  1976
          Mr.
          Executive Director
        x  Chemical 3p.?ciiilti3C?
            Asaocifition; Incorporated
       v  10'Jl  Connecticut Avenue,  N.
        .  Suite 1120
        •  Washington, •;. C.  20036

          Deer  Hr. Ur.qel:

               Your letter of 7»uguct  30,  1976, hsu boon  referrad. to
        •'•  this  office £or rev-ly*-  ^.eco.use of. tue Adr:.inistrator' s
          OMooin-j  rule in the chlordan -r/heyuscnlor prccesciinus,  it  (
          would *:2'improper under the Agency's rules of  practice
          for him  to respond to your  inquiry.
                     *                •                  •             •*
          •t    Your letter asks that  the  Acnsiniotratof invoke the '. .
          "special rult"/untter ^15(b)(n), in orcier to allow inven-
          tories of chloro'ane products  foraiulstod bctvrc-^n  July 29,. ;
          1<.'75,  and DucemUer 24, 197!>,  end currently on  asalor
          shelves, to be eold until such  fctocks- ore exhausted.
                                      *                            »•  .
       /•••'•                                                 '•
        .       Your  request would-necessitato' wo.Jlif iciticn o£ the
          order  issued by the Administrator on !)ceei?.oer  24> 1975.
          Requests for such wcdifications must be wade in  cont'ornancc
          with  the roles of practice  set  forth in 40 CFR Part 164.
          S«"f especially 40 Ci'K Io4.6(b), concerning 'enlarcieiT,cnt o£
        •fillno oeriotlsj 40'.CFU Iti4,31,  concerninq intervention;
        .anJS 40 CT»v IG^'.llO, concerning  wo.cicns for reconsideration
        •'of orders.             •      .
  ,v
                                    CONCURRENCES
 S.1XAMI ^  /

 DAH
                                                                OFFICIAL i-lLE COF
-------
    t
                             - 2 -
      Finally,  candor requires that I infant) you  that -the
Aqency  statf  would oppose any cucn .notion  to  itiotJify trie* .
.suspension  order,  snould one in fact.be filed.   Essentially,
t.his  is because  the suspension order in a  temporary order,
which ultimately will be sucerceded. l.-y an  order  qt the
termination of the cancellation proceeCinq. .The question
of  the  extent' to which distrionticn ol! existing  stocks ot
cJn''f>i'onr,-2 protects should be allowed can and  should bo
a'Jc.rossed  in  the cancellation proc^eui'rxj,  and resolved in
the order at  ths conclusion of that proceeding.   Sound  •
• considerations of  procedural nian&goratsnt militate against
interruption  of  the cancellation proceeding to consider •
this  question  at this time.      t

  :                      • •*  '   Sincerel'/r-^..
                               G. William Prick
                               General 'Counsel   (A-130)
                                V
                                                                •• i
-------
                        / pru|im^
                        I IxfvNLiuLiO
                         VJ/J..X*'' inmnxo nu
CHEMICAL SPrCIALTIES MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION. INCORPORATED
        CXCGUJr.1 w'i r.r • SIP'E HSU • «UCICOHNtCTlCUtAV£..N.W.WAS»«NClON. D.C. ?003C • (?02)«rMM10
      August 30, 1976
      Hr. R;:ssell E. Train
      Administrator, EPA            .    •  •   .  :      '   .
      •401 M Street, S.W. .  Room W1200                   .
      Washington, D.C. 20460        .          .'
                                    •
      Dear Mr. Train:         _      -   -         *.''"'

      On August 16, CSMA counsel Robert Ackerly and  Roger
      Copland of my staff met with several Agency  officials,
      including those from the Enforcement Division  and  the
      Office of General Counsel, to discuss the situation
      pertaining to products containing chlordane.

      Pursuant to that meeting,-I hereby  request that you"
      invoice the Special Rule of §15 (b) (2)  and-allow inven-
      tories of chiordane products formulated between July 29,.1975
      and December 24, 1975 and currently-on dealer  shelves to
      be sold until'such stocks are exhausted.
                                              •  .     *  *    * *
      There are several reasons for this  request:

           1) Recall is in most cases a practical  impossibility
              and constitutes an economic hardship,  particularly
              to smaller forraulators.   There are literally thou-
              sands of small retailers  who may have  a few units
              of chlordane products in  stock.  It  is not always
              possible for the formulator to ascertain where
              such products are being sold.   If stocks are dis-
              covered, compliance with" Department of Transpor-
              tation regulations governing the shipment  of
              hazardous materials becomes  a major problem,
              especially in view of the fact that substantial
              numbers of retailers will have only a  few  units
      ,    '   of various brands.
      •  •  m
           2)  Invocation of the  Special Rule will not create a
              health hazard.   Use of the products as directed
              may be the safest  way of  disposing of  remaining
              stocks.   The remaining supply  of chlordnne pro-
        i     ducts does not,  in relative  terms, constitute a
              large amount.   We  estimate that between 1,800,000
-------
                      -2-
   to. 3,600,000 units re.-n^in on the shc.lves of some
   75,000 retail dealers.  While the recall or stop-
   sale of these units would have an adverse economic
 '  impact on many formulators, their normal, generally
   outdoor use would not significantly exacerbate a
   situation that has been ongoing for some 26 years.
   Furthermore, we have heard that some dealers are/'
 .  simply flushing unmarketable units away, thereby
   pocsibly creating a potential hazard more pro-
   nounced than that created by accepted uses before
   suspension.  Indeed, safe disposal remains a pro-
   blem for the formulator.

3) There has been some ambiguity concerning the sale
   of chlordane that has left a number of formulators
   confused and uncertain.  On July 29, 1975 you, in
   your Notice of Intent to Suspend, announced that
   you were invoking the Special Rule for those pro-
   •ducts formulated as of the date of the notice.
. . We believe that this action should have been, taken
   when the registrations of chlordane for most uses
   was suspended on December 24, 1975.  Had you is-
   sued an emergency'suspension order on July 29th/
   the Special Rule could ha^e been"invoked.  By
   letter dated September 23, 19.75, the Office of
   General Counsel indicated that the sale of pro-
   ducts formulated after July 29th was legal until
   final suspension decision was made.  On December 24,
   you suspended most registrations and stated that.
   products formulated after July 29th could not be
   sold.   On March 23, 1976 the Enforcement Division
   requested formulators to undertake a voluntary
   recall of products formulated after July 29th.
   The net effect of these actions has been to en-
   gender confusion-in many people over the mandatory
   nature of a ban on sales.  While perhaps not de-
   cisive, we believe this factor should in good faith
   be considered.           ,.-      .                •
                          '                        *
4)  Harassment of dealers by some Enforcement officials,
   especially in the Northeast,  has fostered resent-
   ment of the Agency as a- whole and,  in some cases,
   strained relations along the distribution chain.
   The orderly sale of remaining inventories would-. • . .
   reverse these counterproductive tensions.         :

-------
                           -3-
Of course, should you  invoke  the  Special  Rule,  it would
alleviate indemnification problems  that will arj.so with
.respect  to products  formulated  prior to the Suspension
Order.          .                  .      •

I look forward to hearing from  you  concerning this impor-«
tant matter.•                         .
Ralph/Cngel
Executive Director
RErkas
cc:  A.E. Conroy
-------
 o*v
USB,
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                             APR  I 3
                                                 OFFICE OF
                                          PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
  MEMORANDUM

  SUBJECT:  Revised Compliance Strategy for
           Suspension of Chlordane and Hep

  FROM:     John J. Neylan III, Director
           Policy and Grants Division
           Office of Compliance Monitoring

  TO:       Addressees
                                               ion  and
                                                 ides
      On February 23, 1987, in the case of the National Coalition
 Against the Misuse of Pesticides vs. EPA, the U.S. District Court
 ruled  that  the Agency's allowance of the continued sale and use
 of all cancelled chlordane and heptachlor products was void,
 and  ordered EPA to take "whatever action is necessary ... so
 that on and after April 15, 1988, sales, commercial use, and
 commercial  application of existing stocks of chlordane and
 heptachlor  which have been the subject of voluntary cancellation
 shall  cease..."  Since sale, distribution, and use of Velsicol's
 chlordane and heptachlor products are already prohibited after
 April  15, 1988, the District Court Decision effectively only
 applies to  the non-Vels1col chlordane and heptachlor products
 which  have  been voluntarily cancelled.
      In
order to
     ii i
Implement that Court Decision
                                                on April  5,  1988,
EPA issued a "Chlordane/Heptachlor Termlticides;  Notification
of Cancellation and Amendment of Existing Stocks  Determination."
That Notice Informed the public that the  registrations of the
products listed 1n that Notice are cancelled (see Appendix C for
this 11st), and that 1t 1s a violation of the cancellation order
for any person to distribute, sell, offer for sale, hold for sale,
deliver for shipment, receive (and having so received) deliver
or offer to deliver to any person, or to  make commercial  use or
commercial application of those products  after April  14,  1988.
-------
                               -2-
      In the spirit of the February 23, 1988 U.S. District
Court Order, on April 5, 1988, EPA also issued a."Chiordane/
Heptachlor Termiticides; Notice of Intent to Suspend Registrations
and to Place Limitations on Sale and Use of Existing Stocks".
All of the chlordane/heptachlor termiticides affected  by this
April  5, 1988 Suspension Notice were previously suspended and
issued Stop Sale, Use, or Removal  Orders (SSUROs)  for  failure
to respond to the FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) Data Call-in.   However, the
limitations on  sale and distribution of the previous suspension
and SSUROs only affected the registrants.  The recent  April 5,
1988  Suspension Notice includes prohibitions on the sale,
distribution, and use of existing  stocks of the suspended products
which are similar to  those imposed by the U.S. District Court
Order and the resulting Notification of Cancellation described
above.  That is, after the April  5, 1988 Notice of Intent to
Suspend becomes final and effective, no person may distribute,
sell, offer for sale, hold for sale, deliver for shipment,
receive (and having so received)  deliver or offer  to deliver
to any person,  or to  make commercial use or commercial  application
of suspended chlordane or heptachlor products (see Appendix D).

      Please note that all persons  adversely affected by the April  5,
1988  Suspension Notice may request a hearing within 30 days of
publication of  the notice.  The existing stocks provisions of
this  suspension notice which affect persons other  than registrants
will  only take  effect 30 :;ays  after the date of publication in     ,
the Federal Register, or vf'ter completion of the suspension
heari ngs, whi che ver i s later.   OCM will inform the Regions when
the April 5, 1988 chlordane/heptachlor suspension  notice becomes
effective.

     As stated  in the April  5, 1988 Cancellation and Suspension
Notices, the prohibition on sale,  commercial use and commercial
application applies to sales of chlordane and heptachlor
termiticides in any situation, and to all use and  application
of such products in any situation, and to all use  and  app  nations
of such products with the exception of use and application In
accordance with label directions  by individuals (as opposed
to organizations, government agencies, corporations, etc.) on
property owned  by those individuals.  However, this exception  for
individuals shall  not apply to use or application  by individuals
on property which is  owned by  them but which is rented or  leased
to others and 1s occupied or intended to be occupied by human
beings, nor will it apply to new structures under construction
for sale or lease.  Effectively,  this means that the only
non-Velsicol chlordane and heptachlor termiticides that may be
used  after April 14,  1988 are  homeowner products used  on  property
owned  and occupied by the individual user.
-------
                               -3-


     The  attached Revised Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the
Cancellation and Suspension of Chiordane/Heptachlor Termiticides
is  identical to the January 29, 1988 strategy in regard to the
Velsicol  products.  However, this revised strategy calls for
inspections of producing establishments, distributors/dealers/
retailers, and commercial users to assure that non-Velsicol
chlordane and heptachlor termiticides (i.e., both suspended  and
cancelled) are not sold, distributed, or used in violation of
the April 5, 1988 Cancellation Notice and Suspension Order.
Inspections of distributors, dealers, retailers, and commercial
users to  assure compliance with the chlordane/heptachlor suspension
and cancellation will  be conducted by States with Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements, and by EPA 1n States without Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements, as part of their routine inspections.

     The  attached revised strategy also calls for a books and
records inspection of registrants of the suspended chlordane and
heptachlor termiticides to determine the first-line distributors
of those  products.  The books and records inspection are to  be
conducted by States, or Regions in States without Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements, within 60 days of the date of this strategy.
States conducting the books and records Inspections are to transmit
information on the first-line distributors to the Regions where
Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Orders (SSUROs) are to be issued  to
those persons.  Regions are to transmit information on  first-line
distributors located in other Regions to those Regions.  Additionally,
States and Regions are to Issue SSUROs to distributors, dealers,
retailers, and users of suspended chlordane/heptachlor products
as it is  found during the course of routine inspections.  Please
note, registrants of the suspended products have already received
SSUROs in response to the previous FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) suspension
action.  Therefore, sale and distribution of these products  by
the registrant would be a violation of FIFRA §12(a) (2) (I).  Sale,
distribution, commercial use and commercial application of cancelled
chlordane and heptachlor termiticides is a violation of FIFRA
§12(a)(2)(K).

    The attached revised strategy is effective Immediately and
replaces the January 29, 1988 strategy.  Please transmit a copy
of this strategy to the States within your Region immediately.
If you have any questions regarding the revised strategy, please
contact Dan Helfgott of my staff at FTS 382-7825.


Attachments
-------
                                 ADDRESSEES
II
III
VI
       Douglas  D.  Campt     (TS-766C)
       Edwin  F.  Tinsworth   (TS-767C)
       Frederick F.  Stiehl  (LE-134A)
       Mark Greenwood       (LE-132A)
       A.E. Conroy II       (EN-342)
       Connie Musgrove         "
       Ken Shiroishi           "
       Phyllis  Flaherty        "
       John J.  Neylan III      "
       Mike Wood
       Jerry  Stubbs
       Dexter Goldman          "

       Jake Mackenzie
       Western  Regional Compliance Director
Louis F. Gitto, Director
Air Management Division

Barbara Metzger, Director
Environmental Services Div
Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Ernest Regna, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br
Stephen R. Wassersug, Director   Larry Miller, Chief
Hazardous Waste Management Div   Toxic & Pesticides Branch
IV    Winston A. Smith, Director
                                 Richard DuBose, Chief
      Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div   Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br
William H. Sanders III, Dir
Environmental Services Div

William B. Hathaway, Dir
Air, Pesticides & toxic Div
Phyllis Reed, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Robert Murphy, Acting Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br
VII   William  A. Spratlin, Director   Leo Alderman, Chief
      Air and Toxics Division

VIII  Irwin L. Dickstein, Director
      Air and Toxics Division

IX    Jeffrey Zelickson, Director
                                 Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

                                 Alvin Yorke, Chief
                                 Toxic Substances Branch

                                 Davis Bernstein, Chief
      Toxics and Waste Management Div  Pesticides  &  Toxics  Branch
X     Gary O'Neal, Director
      Air and Toxics Division

cc:   Michael Walker       (LE-134P)
      Jane Hopkins         (TS-788)
      Margaret Rostker     (TS-788)
      Phil Gray            (TS-766C)
                                 Anita Frankel, Chief
                                 Pesticides & Toxic Substances  Br
-------
                             REVISED
      COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR THE CANCELLATION  AND  SUSPENSION    3
               OF CHLORDANE/HEPTACHLOR TERMITICIDES

OVERVIEW

      This Strategy calls for monitoring compliance with  the
4-jgust 11, 1987 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)  between  the
Agency and Velslcol Chemical Corporation, the  October 1,  1987
cancellation of Velsicol's chlordane and heptachlor termiticides,
the April 5, 1988 "Chlordane/Heptachlor Termiticides; Notification
of Cancellation and Amendment of Existing Stocks Determination",
and the April 5, 1988 "Chlordane/Heptachlor Termiticides;  Notice
of Intent to Suspend Registrations and to Place Limitations  on
the Sale and Use of Existing Stocks."

      Inspections will be conducted by  States with  Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements, and by EPA Regions in  States without
these agreements, at the registrant, distributor/dealer/retailer,
and user level in accordance with the  neutral  administrative
inspection scheme outlined in this Strategy.  Stop Sale,  Use,  or
Removal Orders (SSUROs) are to be issued to any person who sells,
distributes, or makes commercial use or commercial application
of suspended chlordane or heptachlor products  after the  effective
date  of the April 5, 1988 suspension notice (see Appendix  D  for
the list of these products).  Civil  penalties  are  to be  assessed
against registrants, who have already  received a SSURO,  and  who
sell  or distribute suspended chlordane/heptachlor  products (see
Appendix E for the list of registrants who have received SSUROs).
Finally, SSUROs will be issued, and  civil penalties will  be
assessed to any person who sells, distributes, or makes commercial
use or commercial application of any chlordane/heptachlor termiticide
in violation of the October 1, 1987  or April 5, 1988 cancellation
orders (see Appendix C for list of cancelled products).

BACKGROUND

     On August 11, 1987, the EPA and Velslcol  Chemical Corporation
entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in which Velsicol
agreed to Immediately discontinue the sale and distribution of all
of its termiticide products containing chlordane or heptachlor.
Persons other than Velslcol were not affected by this agreement, and
were  therefore not prohibited from sale, distribution, or use of
existing stocks of Velsicol's termltlcldes under existing labeling.

    Under the terms of the MOU, EPA also granted Velslcol a
conditional  registration for certain uses of  some  of Velsicol's
chlordane and heptachlor products.  Velslcol may only distribute
these conditionally registered chlordane/heptachlor  pesticide
products as Restricted Use Pesticides 1f air monitoring tests
reveal zero exposure from each use,  anT~provi ded certain  uses,
such  as use Inside the home and high pressure  injection,  remain
deleted from the label ("deleted uses",  see Appendix A for deleted
and retained uses).  Regions and States  will  be notified  if and
when  Velsicol has met the terms of the  conditional  registration,
and therefore, when Velslcol may resume  Its sale  of  chlordane
and heptachlor products.
-------
                               -2-


     On October 1, 1987, Velsicol  agreed  to  voluntarily cancel
its chl ordane/heptachl or termiticide  products  which  were not
conditionally registered pursuant  to  the  MOU.   The October 1, 198
Cancellation Order was  published in the Federal  Regi ster on
November 3, 1987 {52 FR 42145).   Under  the Cancellation Order,
Velsicol was still prohibited from  the  sale  and distribution  of
its chlordane/heptachlor termiticides;  however,  existing stocks
provisions were established which  phased  out sale, distribution,
and use of Velsicol's chlordane/heptachlor termiticides by persons
other  than Velsicol.  Between December  1, 1987 and April 15,  1988,
stocks of Velsicol's chlordane/heptachlor termiticides  may be
sold,  distributed, and  used by  persons  other than Velsicol as a
Restricted Use Pesticide (RUP),  and only  in  accordance  with
the use directions found in the  Cancellation Order.   No  sale,
distribution, or use is to be permitted after April  15,  1988.

     On April 5, 1988,  EPA issued  a "Chlordane/Heptachlor
Termiticides; Notification of Cancellation and Amendment of
Existing Stocks Determination".   That notice informed the  public
that, after April  14, 1988, no  person may distribute, sell,  offer
for sale, hold for sale, deliver for shipment, receive  (and  having
so received) deliver or offer to deliver  to  any person,  or to
make commercial use or  commercial  application any non-Velslcol
chlordane or heptachlor product  which has been cancelled  (see
Appendix C for a list of these products).

     Also on April 5, 1988, EPA  issued  a  "Chlordane/Heptachlor
Termiticides; Notice of Intent to Suspend Registrations and  to
Place Limitations  on Sale and Use  of Existing Stocks".   All  of
the chlordane/heptachlor termiticides affected by that Notice were
previously suspended and issued  Stop Sale,  Use, or Removal Orders
(SSUROs) for failure to respond  to the FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B)
Data Call-In.  However, the limitations on  sale and  distribution
of the previous suspension and SSUROs only  affected  the registrants.
The April 5, 1988  Suspension Notice includes prohibitions  on the
sale, distribution, and use of existing stocks of the suspended
products which are similar to those Imposed  by the U.S. District
Court Order and resulting Notification of Cancellation described
above.  That 1s, after  the April 5, 1988  Suspension  Notice becomes
final and effective, no person may distribute, sell, offer for
sale, hold for sale, deliver for shipment,  receive (and having
so received) deliver or offer to deliver  to any person, or to
make commercial use or  commercial  application of suspended chlordane
or heptachlor products   (see Appendix D).

     Please note that while the  original  Suspension Orders which
affected only registrants remains in effect, all persons adversely
affected by the April 5, 1988 suspension  notice may  request  a
hearing within 30  days   of publication of  that notice.  The existing
stocks provisions  of the April  5, 1988 Suspension Notice which
affect persons other than registrants will only take affect  30
days after the date of  publication in the Federal Register,  or
after completion of the suspension hearings,  whichever is later.
OCM will inform the Regions when the April  5,  1988 chlordane/
heptachlor Suspension Notice becomes effective.
-------
                               -3-
 REGULATED  INDUSTRY
     The sole producer of technical  chlordane and heptachlor  in  the
 United States is Velsicol Chemical Corporation.   The October  1,  1987
 cancellation order affects registrants [i.e., Velsicol  and  its
 supplemental registrants (see FIFRA Compliance Program Policy'
 No. 3.9)], distributors/dealers/retailers, and users of Velsicol 's
 chlordane/heptachlor.  The October 1, 1987 cancellation order
 does not affect non-Velsicol  chlordane and heptachlor termiticides.

     The April  5, 1988 chlordane/heptachlor cancellation notice
 affects registrants (effectively, only the non-Velsicol registrants
 of chlordane and heptachlor termiticides), distributors/dealers/
 retailers, and commercial users and commercial applicators  of
 cancelled chlordane and heptachlor products (see Appendix C).
 The April 5, 1988 chlordane/heptachlor suspension notice affects
 all registrants (again, the non-Velsicol registrants), distributors/
 dealers/retailers, commercial users and commercial applicators
 of chlordane and heptachlor products which have already been
 previously suspended because the registrant failed to submit
 data to the Agency pursuant to the FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B)  Data
 Cal1-In (see Appendix D).

     Please note that for purposes of the April  5, 1988 chlordane
 and heptachlor suspension and cancellation notices, the prohibition
 on sale, commercial use and commercial application applies to
 sales of chlordane and heptachlor termiticides in any situation,
 and to all use and application of such products with the exception
 of use and application in accordance with label  directions by
 individuals (as opposed to organizations, government agencies,
 corporations, etc.) on property owned by those individuals.
 However, this exception for individuals  shall not apply to use
 or application  by individuals on property which is owned by them
 but which is rented or leased to others  and is occupied or intended
 to be occupied  by human beings, nor will it apply to new structures
 under construction for sale or lease.  In short,  this means  that
 the only non-Velsicol chlordane and heptachlor termiticides  that
may be used after April 14, 1988, are homeowner products used on
 property owned  and occupied by the individual user.
            >

REQUIREMENTS OF THE AUGUST 11, 1987 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

     As per the August 11, 1987 MOU, Velsicol may not  sell or
 distribute any  of its chlordane/heptachlor termiticides after
August 11, 1987.  Products that remain conditionally  registered
may only be sold and distributed by Velsicol  when the  terms  of
 the conditional  registration are met (OCM will Inform  the Regions
when  this occurs).  Other persons (i.e., distributors/dealers/
 retailers,  users, and non-Vels1col registrants) were  not affected
by this agreement.
-------
    ! !H
Register /  Voi  52  N'o. 2"2  '  Tufsdny. N'ovc-i'pr 3. 196"  /  Notices
    ;;  ..  '  -.^ si j!l bi-n«iilo with
    •• ••• .ri j ,!••••, !t..i:; 50 p s i  d! the
    • .•/.'• .I*.-; .1 coj'Sf- spray nozzle
    • •' •;. r-vur.-iisS-.n;: hor;7onta! bcirrn?:s
    i.'.r.r.rr•'.<• sijos cannot be poured
    ••i: i.j.i UK- virr.c day it has been
    i.-uii-ii .1 v\j!rr-proof cover, such as
    olyethylene shec;:r.g. should bu
    ijccd o-.cr the soil to prevent
    r&$;cr.. Th:s is not necessary' if
    .urd.itiun walls have been msi.illcd
    round  the treated soil.
Vrr'.K.iii Barriers
  Afvr the fourri,it;on walls have been
pouroJ cr buiit but before slabs are
poured, vertical barriers may be
est  il.'l.shrd ir. soil which will be under
the perimeters of  floating or supported
slj.is. around utilities which w;ll
pp"t!r.i:«!  the slab and in other critical
;ii':;is which will be covered by
r;:n; r-.-io. After the final exterior grading
is i  -rrpletcd. vertical barriers may be
crcaifd in bflck-fil!°d soil against
foundation walls or against the outside
of rncnohth:c slab. To produce a vertical
darner, apply ihe emulsion at the ra'.e of
4 c.'llrns per linear fret per foot of depth
from cr.TtJi: tn ihe  top of the footir-. For
r<--:-..-!i!htr. shhs  apply to :he bottom of
Ihi1  uirjrflr.
— I  .A\ rrrssurr rrJdinc and/or
  ;•• r ••:::::» .ir plications  she'jld nc'. be
  -.  :.  bflow the :op of the fcciinj
  txcpp1. whrn the footing is expos?d  j;
  or dlcvr grade. Spend care should
  b^ tdkcn to avoid soil washout around
— When redding, use only low pressure
  (less thar. 25 p.s.i. at the nozzle). I; is
  important that emulsion reaches the
  focti-g. Rod holes should be spaced to
  prcvsde a continuous barrier.
—Trenches need not be wider than 6
  inches.
—Emulsion should be mixed with the
  soil as  it is being replaced in the
  trench. Cover treated soil with
  approximately 2 inches of untreated
  soil.

C.~cw! Space Foundations
  For crawl space foundation* vertical
barriers may be established in the soil
on the outside perimeter of the
foundation using a rate of 4 gallons of
emulsion per 10 linear feet per foot of
depth from grade to the top of the
footing. Application may  be made by
low pressure rodding and/or trenching
to the footing. If the footing is exposed
at or above grade, application should be
nude with special care to avoid wash-
out around the footing
— Do not treat the footing through
  hollow masonry voids.
             — Rod h.iii:» srv.uld I'- 
               inches  nor below thr f^ot.np Thn
               emulsion should be mixed w;ih thr
               soil as  it is being replaced in the
               trench. Cover the treated  soil with
               approximjteiy 2 inches of untreated
               soil.
             —A complete termite barrier may
               require treatment with another EPA-
               registered product to the inside
               perimeter of the foundations and to
               other interior  critical areas.

             Basement Foundations

             Horizontal Barriers
               After exterior grading is completed
             and prior to the  pouring of concrete
             slabs. hor:zoru! barriers may be
             established or. soil which will be
             covered by concrete entrance platforms.
             and in other exterior critical areas
             which w:li be covered by concrete slabs.
             To produce a /.onzontal barrier, apply
             the ermlston at  the rate of 1 gallrr. per
             10 square feet to fill dirt. If fill is washed
             pravul or otiicr coarse material, apply at
             1'/: gallons per 10 square fee'..
             —It 15 IJT-T rtant that the emjision
               reHch.es '.he so:i
             —Applications shj!! be made (with
               pressures less than 50 p.s.i. £'. the
               nozzle) us;ri£  a course spray nozzle
               when establishing horizontal barriers.
             —If concrete slabs cannot be poured
               over soil the same day it has been
               treated, a water-proof cover, such as
               polyethylene sheeting, should be
               placed over the soil to prevent
               erosion.
             —Do not apply to any area  inside the
               foundation wall.

             Vertical Barriers
               After the final exterior grading is
             completed, vertical barriers may be
             created in back-filled soil against
             foundation walls. To produce a vertical
             barrier, apply the emulsion by low-
             pressure  rodding or trenching at the rate
             of 4 gallons per linear feet per foot of
             depth from grade to the top of the
             footing.
             —Low pressure rodding and/or
               trenching applications should not be
               made below the top of the footing
               except when the footing is exposed at
               or above grade. Special care should
               be taken to avoid soil washout around
               the footing.
             —When  rodding. use low pressure (less
               Ihnn 25 p.s.i at the nozzle), it is
               important thtfi emulson roaches the
               footing. Rod holes should be sp;i(,p.tl to
               provide a continuous
— Trenches need not be w.Jcr thjr. C
  inches.
— Emulsion should bo m:\cd w:th '.!•.<'
  soil as it is facing replaced in ttv
  tr^nr.h. Cover irejit-d sell with
  approx;nidtely 2 inches of untreaird
  soil.
Pcs!co:is:rjc:ion

Dilution Instruction fcr Gold Crest
Termide

  Use a .75"* water emulsion for
subterranean termites other than
Coptoier.T.cs spp. Mix 1 gallon of Gold
Crest Tcrmide in 99 gallons of water to
produce at 075ri water emulsion. Uie a
0.75-1.5% wdter emulsion for
Coptoterrr.es spp. where necessary. Mix
1-2 gallons of Gold Crest Terrmde in 90
gallons of water to produce a 0.75-1.5%
water emulsion.

Dilution Instructions for Gold Crest ClOO
and Chlordane 8EC/Termite

  Use a 1% water emulsion for
subterranean termites other than
Copto'.ermes spp. Mix 1 gallon of
product in 95 gallons of water to
produce a 1% water emulsion. Use  a 1-
2^ water emulsion  for Coptote.-mes spp.
where necessary. Mix 1-2 gallons of
product in 95 gallons to produce a 1-2^
emulsion.

Dilution Instruction for Gold C.-est  H-60

  Use a .5"« water emulsion for
subterranean termites  other than
Crptotermes spp. Mix  1 gallon of
product in 59 gallons of water to
prodcuc a .5% water emulsion. Use a 1%
water emulsion for Coptoterir.es spp.
where necessary'- Mix  2 gallons of
product in 59 gallons of water to
produce a 1% water emulsion

Dilution Instruction for Gold Crest C-50

  Use a 1% water emulsion for
subterranean termites other than
Coptotermes spp. Mix 1 gallon of
product in 47 gallons of water to
produce a 1% water emulsion. Use a  2%
water emulsion for Coptotermes spp.
where necessary. Mix 2 gallons of
product in 47 gallons of water to
produce a 2% water emulsion.
   Do not apply this produce into hollow
masonry voids.
   Do not apply this product to soil
beneath the interior of the structure. Do
not apply to the soil beneath a plenum
air space.
   Do not apply emulsion until location
of pipes, water and sewer lines and
 electrical conduits arc known und
 identified.
\
5
-------
                                      Vnl
                                                                                                              42I4H
S.::' C ":<:!: (jrlmr
 • V . r'i  ,,; h.iriir.-b m.v. !«• i-si,, ',.',, In J
.li'iii^ in-' u>.t.,i(if of Ihc fniiii.jjlion bv
I in pri-s ..;:•• mddmg and/or irrnchm;
,ii the rjh- of 4 R.iilons of emulsion per
in iim-.ir frrt Low  pressjic roddiny
•..••nulJ no! extend beyond '.lie lups of
i:;r  fn.i'ir.cs
— When jodding. use only low pressure
  (Irss ;han 25 p s.i. at the no:zie).
— ijr;!l holes in ou!s:de slabs (palios.
  side\\a!ks. etc ! nhout 12 to 30 inchoi
  up.i.'t  io pro'.ice  a continuous
  rhcnrr, .1! bnmer.
— ! or sr.iiiow founiiatior.s. 1 foot or
  less. d;£ a narrow treich
  ;:pprcx;mate!y six inr.hes wide along
  the cutsidc of  the foundation walls.
  Do ret t.'ench  below the bottom of the
  foundation The  emulsior. should be
  iipp'ied Iti the  trench and tlie soil at 4
  ^aliens per TO  linear feet as the  soil is
  replaced m the trench. Cover the
  lrc;i'-d soil with approximately 2
  inches of untreated soil.
— For foundations  deeper than 1 foot
  npply 4 gallons per 10 linear feet per
  foot of depth.
  For basement foundations, outside
perimeter barriers may be applied only
by trcT.chir.c or the excavation
tc-hn:que below ct a rn!e of 4 gallons of
rrr.u'sion per 10 linear feet per foot of
depth to he treated. Where exterior
sijlis arc adjacent to the foundation
wall, drill through the slab along the
outside of the wall at a spacing '.hat
provides application of a continuous
b.irrcr and apply the emulsion just
under the slab.  After drilling, emulsion
may be applied. Apply only at the
lowest pressure that will start  the floxv
of emulsion from an unobstructed rod.
Apply up to 4 gallons of emulsion per 10
linear feet.
  A complete termite barrier may
require application of another  EPA-
registered product under interior slabs.
through hollow masonry voids to the
footing, and to other interior critical
areas.
E\covation Technique
  If treatment i* to be made in difficult
situations such at near wdl* or cisterns.
along faulty foundation  walls,  and
around pipes and utility lines which lead
downward from the structure.
application must be made in the
following manner to avoid intrusion of
termiticidc into water supplies or the
interior of the structure.
— Trench and remove the scil to be
  treated only heavy plastic sheeting or
  similar liner.
—Treat the soil at the rate of 4 gallons
  of emulsion per 10 linear feet per foot
  r.f ilc;i;h nf ld«- 'rrrT-h. M;v the
  C'iMiUi.in MorT.ichly i"'" 'lie *•"•!
  l.if..:1!. i. .ut1 i.  ; 'i vi/ni li^uij fi,>in
  run::. iv uff t.' •• hr.i r.
— Aficr the Jre.r.ed s.i:i hjs lirn. d
  .•idcvjii.ile'v. ri-fldfr t!.e .ml .n il.p
  trench and cover wi:h .•ipi'roxi-i..iely
  2 inches of untreated soil.
         n: Ri.-ftrit.tions
  Rplreatmcnt for subterranean termites
should only be made when there is
evidence of reinfcstation subsequent to
the initial treatment, or there has been
disruption of the chemical barrier in the
soil due to construction, excavation.
l;ir.dscaping. etc. Retreatment shojld be
made as a spot appiicHlion tc these
areas.
  Re'.rentmcnt? may be made to critical
ureas in accordance w-ith the application
techniques described above. This
application should be made as a spot
treatment to these areas. Do not
annually retreat entire premises.
  Copies of the August 11. 1987.
agreement and the October 1. 1987.
supplementary agreement between EPA
and Vclsicol. can bz obtained from the
person listed under FOR MORE
INFORMATION CONTACT:
  Daitfd: Ocli:bcr23. lacr.
Douglas D. Carr.pl.
Director. Oef,cg of P "SUciJe Prvgrcm:.
|FR Doc. 87-25383 Filed 11-2-67. e.J5 am;
BILUHO COM
| OPP- 180747; FRL-3286-5)

California Department of Food and
Agriculture; Receipt of Application for
Emergency Exemption To Use
Hydrogen Cyanamlde; Solicitation of
Public Comment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: EPA has received a request
for an emergency exemption from the
California Department of Food and
Agriculture (hereafter referred to as the
"Applicant") to use the active ingredient
hydrogen cyanamide ("Dormex") to
promote uniform bud break in 18.600
acres of table grapes grown in the
Coachella Valley in Riverside County.
California. Dormex contains an
unregistered active ingredient and.
therefore, in acordance with 40 CFR
166.24. EPA is soliciting comment before
making the decision whether or not to
grant the exemption.
DATE: Comments must be received on or
before November 10. 1987.
ADDRESSES: Three copies of written
comments, bearing the identification
ni'i.i1:.,:  OIT.i.iir.j-." v|. • .;

S.-r\;> , s S. ,.!.,.•; I'rir ... M

(if IVslu	• Pmri jn:>  K..I >:.•


  In pei son. bn:ig comrr.ei'.U U. R:n  2.io.
Cr\st.il MJ|! =2. 1921 Jefferson U.IMS
Highway. Arlington. VA.
  Inform.ilion submitted in nr.y
common! concerning tins notice .i'..iy l>e '
rluimed confidential by  marking jny
part or all of that information ns
"Confidential  Business Information
(CBI)." Information so marked wiii not
be disclosed except in -iccordjnce with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part 2. A
copy of the comment th.it docs contain
C13I must be submitted far incl-sior. :r.
the public record. Information not
marked confidential may be disclosed
publicly by EPA without prior nctico tt;
the submitter. All written comments will
be available for inspection in Rm. 230 at
the address given above from 8 a.m. to 4
p.m.. Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER  INFORMATION CONTACT:
By mail. Libuy Pemberton. Rig:stralior.
Division (TS-767C). Office of Pesticide
Programs. Environmental Protccticr.
Agency. 401 M Street. SVV.. \Vash:np:o.-..
DC 20460.
   Office location and telephone number
Rm. 716. Crystal Mall =2. 192:
Davis Highway. Arlington. VA.
557-1800).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pur.uar.t
 to section 18 of the Federal Insec.tic.Je.
Fungicide, and Roden!:cide Act (F1FRA)
{7 U.S.C. 136p). the Administrator may,
at his discretion, exempt a State agency
 from any provisions of FIFRA if he
determines that emergency conditions
 exist which require such exemption.
   The Applicant has requested the
 Administrator to issue a specific
 exemption to permit the use of an
 unregistered plant regulator, hydrogen
 cyanamide (CAS 420-04-2).
 manufactured as Dormex. by SK'A'
 Trostberg Aktiengesellschaft. tc promote
 uniform bud-break in table grapes
 grown in the  Coachella Valley in
 Riverside County. California.
 Information in accordance with 40 CFR
 Part 166 was  submitted as part of this
 request.
   Approximately 18.800 acres of table
 grupes.  Vitis  spp.. are grown in the
 Coachella Valley. The Applicant
 indicates that California growers rf  ;
 early market  table grapes are f.'icir.g
 economic losses due to increasing
 competition from  foreipr. irr.pcrts.
 particularly from Mcx'co. The Apj^-^r'.:
-------
                              -4-


 REQUIREMENTS OF THE OCTOBER 1. 1987 CANCELLATION ORDER

      The  registrations of Gold Crest Termide, Gold  Crest  C100,
 and  Chlordane SEC Termite were amended by splitting each  registration
 into  two  separate registrations.   A new EPA registration  number
 was  assigned for each of the above End Use products for the  uses
 described in Appendix A as "retained uses".  The remaining  uses
 for  each  of the above products maintained their current EPA
 registration numbers of 876-233,  876-63, and 876-104 respectively.

      The  registrations of .Gold Crest Termide, Gold  Crest  C100,
 and  Chlordane SEC Termite, which  have maintained their  current
 EPA  registration numbers of 876-233, 876-63, and 876-104  have
 been  voluntarily cancelled effective September 30,  1987 along
 with  the  following Velsicol products: Gold Crest C-50 (876-86),
 Gold  Crest H-60 (876-S5), California SLN for crawlspace perimeter
 spray  (Termide) (CA-810012), California SLN for crawlspace
 perimeter spray (C-100) (CA-810012), and Hawaii SLN for crawl-
 space  perimeter spray (C-100) (HI-850003).  The cancellation
 order  also affects Velsicol's supplementally distributed  products
 (the  list of supplemental registrations are in Appendix B).

      The  Gold Crest Termide, Gold Crest C100, and Chlordane
 SEC  Termite products which bear the "retained uses" and have
 been  assigned new EPA registration numbers are not  cancelled.
 These  products continue to be conditionally registered  with
 EPA  but may not be sold and distributed by Velsicol until the
 terms  of  the conditional  registration, as outlined  in the
 August 11, 1987 MOD, are met.  Additionally, the cancellation
 does  not  affect the following Velsicol Chlordane and heptachlor
 products:  Technical Chlordane/ Export (876-280); Technical
 Heptachlor/Export (876-288); and  Technical Heptachlor/Formulation
 of Fire Ant Granular for Cable Closure Only (876-330).   Please
 note, as  per the MOU, except for the Technical Heptachlor/Formulation
 of Fire Ant Granular for Cable Closure, none of the above products
may be sold or distributed by Velsicol in the United States even
though they have not been cancelled.

 Existing  Stocks for Velsicol's Chiordane/Heptachl or Termiticides

     As per the October 1, 1987 cancellation order, persons
other than Velsicol [and its supplemental  registrants(see 40 CFR
 162.6(b)i(4)(111)] may sell, distribute, and use existing stocks
of Velsicol's Chlordane and heptachlor products in any manner
consistent with the existing labeling until November 30, 1987.
 From December 1, 1987 until April 15, 1988, Velsicol's Chlordane
and heptachlor termiticide products will  be restricted use  pesticides
 for  retail sale to and use only by certified applicators or
persons under their direct supervision.   Between December 1, 1987
and April 15, 1988, certified applicators, or  persons  under
their direct supervision, are required to  use  Velsicol's Chlordane
and heptachlor products in accordance with the  use  directions
found in  the cancellation order  (52 FR 42145;  November 3,  1987).
 Sale, distribution, and use of such Chlordane  and  heptachlor
products  will  not be permitted after  April  15,  1988.
-------
                               -5-


      Please  note, the directions for use found in the cancellation
 order  cannot be considered "labeling" unless they accompany  the
 product.  There is no requirement in the cancellation order  that
 these  directions for use accompany the product.   Therefore,  between
 December 1,  1987 and April 15, 1988, unless the directions  for
 use  found in the cancellation order accompanied the product  at
 the  time of  sale, use of Velsicol's chlordane and heptachlor
 products not in accordance with the revised use directions  must
 be considered a violation of the cancellation order and not
 "misuse."  Additionally, unless Velsicol's chlordane and heptachlor
 products have been sold with the revised use directions, sale to
 or use by uncertified persons will be a violation of the cancellation
 order  and not a violation of FIFRA S12(a)(2) (F).

 REQUIREMENTS OF THE APRIL 5. 1988 NOTIFICATION OF CANCELLATION

     The April  5, 1988 Notice of Cancellation announces the
 cancellation of the chlordane and heptachlor products listed
 in Appendix C,  and establishes limitations on the sale and  use
 of existing stocks of these products.  Please note, the products
 affected by this notice were previously voluntarily cancelled at
 the  request of the registrant.

 Existing Stocks	

     It is unlawful for any person to distribute, sell, offer
 for  sale, hold for sale, deliver for shipment, or receive (and
 having so received) deliver or offer to deliver to any person,
 or to  make commercial use or commercial application, cancelled
 chlordane and heptachlor termiticides after April 14, 1988.

 REQUIREMENTS OF THE APRIL 5. 1988 NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUSPEND   ~

     The April  5, 1988 Notice of Intent to Suspend will suspend
 the products listed 1n Appendix D of this strategy for continued
 failure to submit data within the time periods required by  the
chlordane and heptachlor Data Call-in, as contained in the  December
31, 1986 Chlordane and Heptachlor Registration Standards.  All
products affected by this Notice have previously been suspended
for failure to  commit to comply with the terms of that Data Call-in.
However, the previous chlordane/heptachlor suspensions did  not
place  prohibitions of the sale or use of existing stocks of
suspended products by persons other than the registrant.  Any
suspensions resulting from the April 5, 1988 Notice of  Intent to
Suspend will Include prohibitions on the sale and use of existing
stocks of suspended chlordane and heptachlor termiticides.
-------
                               -6-
Existing Stocks
     When the April 5, 1988 Notice of  Intent  to  Suspend  becomes
final and effective for a particular  product  listed  in Appendix D
(either 30 days after publication in  the Federal  Register  or
upon completion of a suspension hearing) no  person may distribute,
sell, offer for sale, hold for sale,  deliver  for shipment,  or
receive (and having so received) deliver or  offer to deliver to
any person, or to make commercial use  or commercial  application,
suspended chlordane and heptachlor termiticides.

COMPLIANCE MONITORING

     Conformance with the August 11,  1987 MOU will be determined
through inspections of Velsicol's establishments to  determine
whether any stocks of chlordane or heptachlor were sold  or
distributed after August 11, 1987.  Please note, there is  no
violation under FIFRA for not conforming with the terms  of an
MOU, however, the Agency would like assurance that the terms of
the MOU have been met.

     Compliance with the October 1, 1987 Cancellation Order
and the April 5, 1988 Notice of Cancellation  and Notice  of
Intent to Suspend will be determined  through  inspections of
producing establishments, distributors/dealers/retailers,  and
users of chlordane and heptachlor termiticides.   Noncompliance
with the October 1, 1987 Cancellation  Order  or the April 5, 1988
Notice of Cancellation is a violation  of FIFRA sections  12(a)(l)(A)
and 12(a)(2)(K).

     The Agency, and States with authority,  are to issue Stop  Sale,
Use, or Removal Orders (SSURO) to any  person  who distributes,  sells,
offers for sale, holds for sale, ships, delivers for shipment, or
receives and (having so received) delivers or offers to  deliver
chlordane and heptachlor termiticides  other than in  accordance
with the October 1, 1987 Cancellation  Order  and the  April  5,  1988
Notice of Cancellation and Notice of  Intent to Suspend.

Neutral  Administrative Inspection Scheme (NAIS)	

     Except for the initial inspections of Velsicol's establish-
ments, all Inspections for violations  of the October 1,  1987
Cancellation Order will take place as part of the Regions' and
States'  routine Inspections.  Inspections of Velsicol's  producing
establisments to assure conformance with the MOU and compliance
with the October 1, 1988 Cancellation Order are to take  place by
April  29, 1988.
-------
                               -7-
      Inspections of distributors/dealers/retailers,  and commercial
 users  to assure compliance with the April  5, 1988 Notice of  Intent
 to  Suspend will also  take place as part of the Regions and States
 routine inspections.  However, within  60 days of the date of
 this  strategy, States, or Regions in States without Cooperative
 Enforcement Agreements, are to also conduct a books and records
 inspection of registrants of the suspended chlordane and heptachlor
 termiticides to determine the first-line distributors of those
 products.  States conducting the books and records inspections  are
 to  transmit information regarding the  first-line distributors  to
 the Regions.  Upon receipt of this information,  Regions are  to
 issue  SSUROs to those persons identified as first-line distributors
 in  their Region.  Regions are to transmit information on first-line
 distributors located  in other Regions  to those Regions, where  the
 SSUROs are to be issued.  Additionally, States and Regions are  to
 issue  SSUROs to distributors, dealers, retailers, and commercial
 users  of suspended chlordane/heptachlor products as they are
 found  during the course of routine inspections.   Compliance  with
 the SSUROs will be monitored in accordance with the Pesticides
 Inspector1s Manual.

     Regions/States will also investigate all tips and complaints,
 as appropriate.

     Please note, registrants of the suspended products have already
 received SSURO's in response to the previous FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B)
 suspension action.   Therefore, sale and distribution of these
 products by the registrant would be a  violation of FIFRA §12(a)(2)(I)
 Sale,  distribution, commercial use and commercial application  of
 cancelled chlordane and heptachlor termiticides is a violation
 of FIFRA §12(a)(2)(K).

 Registrant/Producer Level	

     By April  29, 1988, the Agency/States will schedule and
conduct inspections of Velsicol's establishments to obtain
assurance that Yelslcol has complied with the October  1, 1987
Cancellation Order by not having released products for  shipment
after October 1, 1987.  At this inspection  the Agency/States
will also obtain assurance that Velsicol has abided by  the
 terms  of the August 11, 1987 MOU by not having released  the
 affected products for shipment after August  11,  1987.

     Within 60 days of the date of this strategy, the  Agency/
States will conduct a books and records Inspection of  the non-
 Velsicol chlordane/heptachlor registrants to determine  the  first-
 line distributors of  those products.
     During the course of routine Inspections, the Agency/States
	 obtain assurance that non-Velsicol registrants/producers
have not sold or distributed their chlordane/heptachlor  products
in violation of the cancellation orders, suspension orders,  or
f c 11 n n -
will
have
i n v
SSUROs.
-------
                               -8-


Distributor/Dealer/Retail  Level

     After November 30, 1987,  when  conducting  routine  inspections
at the d1stributor/dealer/retail  level,  inspectors  will  check  to
determine whether Velsicol's chlordane and  heptachlor  termiticide
products are being sold and distributed  in  accordance  with  the
October 1, 1987 Cancellation Order.

     After April 15,  1988, when Agency/States  conduct  routine
inspections at the distributor/dealer/retail  level, they will
assure that remaining stocks of cancelled chlordane and  heptachlor
termitic ides are not  being sold.

     After the effective date of  the suspension order,  the  Agency/
States will conduct routine inspections  at  the distributor/dealer/
re*ailer level to assure that remaining  stocks of suspended chlordane
ana heptachlor termiticides have  not been moved and are  not being
sold.

User Level
     During routine use inspections prior to April  15,  1988,
inspectors will assure that Velsicol's chlordane and heptachlor
is being used only by certified applicators and in  accordance    '
with the use directions found in the Cancellation Order.

     After April 15, 1988, during routine inspections at  the
user level, Agency/States will  assure that any remaining  stocks
of Velsicol chlordane and heptachlor are not being  used,  and
remaining stocks of non-Velslcol cancelled chlordane and  heptachlor
products are not being used for purposes of commercial  use or
commercial application.

     After the effective date of the suspension order,  and during
routine inspections at the user level, the Agency/States  will
assure that remaining stocks of suspended chlordane and heptachlor
are not being used for commercial use or commercial application.
ALLOCATION OP RESPONSIBILITIES	

Office of Pesticide Programs	

0 Will develop and provide OCM with a 11st of those products
  which have been cancelled/suspended.

0 Will notify OCM when registrants of suspended chlordane and
  heptachlor products agree to voluntarily cancel their products.

0 Will notify OCM If and when Velsicol has met the terms of the
  conditional registrations of Gold Crest Termite, Gold Crest C100
  and Chlordane *EC Termite, and therefore when these products
  may be sold and distributed.
-------
                              -9-


Office of Compliance Monitoring
0 Will develop and transmit the Compliance  Monitoring  Strategy
  to the Regions.

0 Will issue SSUROs for non-Velsicol  chlordane/heptachlor
  termiticides suspended under FIFRA  S3(c)(2)(B).

0 Will transmit to the Regions the list of  those  products
  which have been cancelled pursuant  to the October  1,  1987
  Cancellation Order,  cancelled as specified in  the  April  5,
  1988 notification,  or suspended pursuant  to  the  April  5,
  1988 Notice of Intent to Suspend.

0 Will transmit a list of establishments  producing Velsicol's
  chlordane and heptachlor termiticides to  the Regions.

0 Will notify the Regions if and when Velsicol  has met the  terms
  of the conditional  registrations of Gold  Crest  Termite,  Gold
  Crest C100, and Chlordane SEC Termite,  and therefore when  these
  products may be sold and distributed.

0 Will notify Regions  of the effective date of the April  5,  1988
  Notice of Intent to  Suspend Chlordane and Heptachlor Termiticides

Regions	

0 Will provide copies  of the Compliance Monitoring Strategy  to
  States.

8 Will distribute lists of products  to the  States.

0 Will  conduct distributor/dealer/retailer  and user inspections
  in States without Cooperative Enforcement Agreements as part
  of their routine 1nspect1onal program.

0 Will conduct a books and records inspection, in States without
  Cooperative Enforcement Agreements, of non-Velsicol  chlordane/
  heptachlor registrants to determine the first-line distributors
  of those products.

0 Will Issue SSUROs to first-line distributors,  of non-Yelsicol
  chlordane and heptachlor products,  located in their Region.

0 Will transmit Information on first-line distributors located
  in other Regions to  those Regions.

0 Will monitor SSUROs  as per the Pesticides Inspectors' Manual.

0 Will  take enforcement action, Including Issuing SSUROs, as
  appropriate.
-------
                              -10-
0 Will report to OCM quarterly for one  year  on  any  enforcement
  actions taken within their Region,  including  State  actions,
  under the cancellation  and suroension actions.  This  report
  should include any occurrence of non-conformance  with the
  terms of the MOU by Velsicol.  As stipulated  in the January  29,
  1988 Chiordane/Heptachlor Compliance  Monitoring Strategy,  the
  first report is due April  15, 1988.

0 Will notify the States  when Velsicol  has met  the  terms of
  the conditional registration, and therefore when  Velsicol
  may sell the conditionally registered products.

8 Will notify the States  of the effective date  of the chlordane/
  heptachlor suspension.

States	

0 Will conduct inspections by April 29, i988, of  Velsicol's
  establishments that produced chlordane and heptachlor within
  the past 2 years.

0 Will inspect for compliance during routine distributor/dealer/
  retailer and user inspections.
o
  Will conduct a books and records inspection of non-Velsicol
  chlordane/heptachlor registrants to determine the first-line
  distributors of those products.

0 Upon identification from the books and records inspections,
  States will transmit information on the identity of first-line
  distributors to the Regions.

0 Will take enforcement action, including issuing SSUROs, as
  appropriate, provided they have the authority.

e Will report to the Regions quarterly for one year on enforcement
  actions taken for violations of the cancellation order.  This
  report should Include any occurrence of nonconformance with the
  terms of the MOU by Velsicol.  As stipultaed in the January 29,
  1988 Chlordane/Heptachlor Compliance Monitoring Strategy, the
  first report 1s due April 7, 1988.
-------
Establishments  Producing  Velsicol's  Chlordane  and
             Heptachlor  Termiticides
                   00876-IL-001
          Velsicol  Chemical  Corporation
              Box  39A  II linois  HWY  1
                Marshal 1 ,  IL 62441
                   00876-TN-001
          Velsicol  Chemical  Corporation
               1199 Warford  Street
                Memphi s ,  TN  38108
-------
                      APPENDIX A

 (           Retained ana Deleted Uses of
 r       V e 1 s i c o 1 ' s Chlordane/Heptachlor Products
i
       Velsicol  classified  the  following uses of

       ics  end-use  termiticide  produces as

       "deleted  uses":

         a.    post-construction application of
              material  trom within a  structure
              frequented  by humans ("structure");

         b.    post-construction application of
              material  from outside a structure
              to inside or  underneath a structure;

         c.    the use of  pressure rodding for post-
              construction  application of material
              to a  basement-type or crawl-space  type
              structure;

         d.    pre-  or postrconstruction treatment
              of the area underneath  crawl-space
              and post  and  pier type  structures;

         e.    treatment of  voids and  spaces in
              masonry or  block  walls  or areas
              behind veneers;

         f.    applications  by non-certified
              applicators;

         g.    soil-injection pressure rodding at
              pressures greater than  25 psi.


            The  agreement further classified  the

       following uses of  end-use  temiticide

       products  as  "retained uses":

         a.    application to  the  outside
              perimeter of  any  structure  by
              trenching,  or drilling  .through
              sidewalks,  patios,  gr other
              unenclosed  slabs, and applying
              material  to the  soil without
              pressure  (e.g. ,  flow or gravity
              feed);
-------
                  -2-

               APPENDIX  A
  b.    applications by the excavation
       technique to the exterior  of  any
       structure (i.e.. by removing  soil
       next to the foundation,  placing
       on a carp,  treating with
       cerraiticide, and placing back in
       trench after soil dries);

  c.    pre-construction low-pressure
       (maximum 25 psi) vertical  rodding
       (with the application rod  equipped
       with a pressure control  device  to
       prevent higher pressures)  of  the
       perimeter outside any structure;

  d.    post-construction low-pressure
       (maximum 25 psi) vertical  rodding
       (with the application rod  equipped
       with a pressure control  device  to
       prevent higher pressures)  outside
       slab and post and pier type
       structures;

  e.    pre-construction coarse  spray
       surface treatment (maximum 50 psi)
       and low-pressure (maximum 25  psi)
       vertical rodding (with the
       application rod equipped with a
       pressure control device  to prevent
       higher pressures) under  the slab of
       slab type structures.
     The agreement classified one use, the

protection of underground cables, as an

"unaffected use".

     In addition to this classification of

the uses of Veisicol's termiticide products

the agreement included, iater alia, the

rollowing provisions:

0  The retained uses were converted to
   restricted uses as provided  for in
   Sections 3(d) and 4 of F1FRA;
-------
            - J-

        A?3£NOIX A
The registrations of the retained
uses were amended to conditional
registrations, with no sale or
distribution by Velsicol allowed
until certain conditions set forth
in the Conditions of Registration
are met.

No further sale or distribution by
Velsicol of end-use products labeled
for deleted uses was allowed.

Velsicol amended the label of its
manufacturing-use products to provide
that such products could not be used to
manufacture any end-use product (other
than Velsicol products) for sale and
distribution in the United States that
is labeled for use as a subterranean
teraiticide.
-------
                           APPENDIX B

             Supplenental Registrants of Velsicol
               Chlordane/Heptachlor Termiticides
 ;d76-G3053-000192)

 376-00063-000430)
(376-
(376.
(876-
(876-
(376-
(376.
(876-
(876.
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
00063
00063.
00063
00063
00063
00063
00085
00086
00086
00086
00086
00086
•002935)
•005887)
-010370)
•025030)
•034704)
•043227)
•035034)
•000016)
•000192)
•004876)
•005887)
•00:387)
(876-00036-005887)

(876-00086-006723)
(876-00086-010370)
(376-00036-012000)
(376-00036-012000)

(375-00036-034704)
(376-00100-000192)
(876-00104-000430)
(376-00104-001812)

(376-00104-004876)
(876-00104-006723)
(376-00104-025030)
(376-00104-042761)
(876-00233-001927)
(876-00233-006754)
Drexol Chlordane 72. Termite Spray  for
Professional  Termite Use
Durham's Cnlordane Emu Isifiable Consentrate
Insecticide for Use Only By  Professionals
Red-Top Chlordane 8 Spray
Black Leaf 72% Chlordane Emulsifiable Concentrate
Ford ' s Chlordane SEC
Red Panther Chlordane SEC
Pro-Chlordane 8-E
Chloro-800 Emulsifiable Consentrate Insecticide
Di versey 2.5 H
Dragon 451 Chlordane Spray
Dexol Chlordane 45% Termite  Spray (Prof./Termite Use
AG Chlordane 4-EC Termite  Control
Black Leaf 45J Chlordane Termite Killer
Black Leaf 45% Chlordane
Around Bui 1di ngs
Black Leaf 45% Chlordane
Insect icide
Red Wi ng Chiorda ne 4 EC
Ford ' s Chlordane 4 EC
K Mart 45% Chlordane Termite
K Mart 45% Chlordane Termite
Bu i1di ngs
Pro-Chlordane 4-E
Dexol Chlordane Termite Spray
Durham's Chlordane SEC Emulsifiable
Pee Gee 8 1 bs. per gallon  Chlordane
Concentrate
Chlordane-8 Termite Control
Red Wing Chlordane SEC
Red Panther Chlordane
Red Panther Chlordane SEC
Terminix C-H
Orkil 2X
Termite Killer For Use

Emulsifiable Consentrate
                                            Killer
                                            Killer
                                             for Use Around
                                                   Concent rat e
                                                   Emuls i fi a&le
-------
P»B« I:.      \
01/06/88
         s:;?  SALIS ISJ:ZD AS .-.
                                       of  Products  Containing
                                      rdane  and Heptachlor
                                        i si::::*
                                        :••  ?!FEA
COSPAST
WVA: CEEF.ICAL COEP.
4100 HAST  HAS-IH3TOI BLVD
LOS ANGELES    CA 90023

AHVAC C-a:CiL CC2?.
41CC EAST  BASEIH70S 5lVj
LOS HGELES    CA 90023

&KVAC CRHCAI COB?.
41CC EAST  W.S-1SCT08 BtA'D
LOS ASGELES    CA 9C023
IIC'J ERST  »AS-!S;*0)i r'.v?
LOS ABGELES    CA 90C23
A2 CHZC.IC.'.:  COE?.
1514 ELEViSTc  "
METSC.03TH     OH
AS CE-ITiCAL C"5?.
!5:4 ELEVESTr  ST
K-STS«:Tii    OE  456^2

AS C;!-::AL CO-P.
1514 ILEVEST:  S!
tC-STSKITB    OH  45cc2

B 4 G CC-BPM!
1C539 tJCitm  H BOX 20372
DALLAS        TX  75220

BLAC? LEA? PSOtTCTS CO.
66? I STATE ST
ELGI5         11  60128

BLACK LEA? PSODCCTS CO.
667 I STATE ST
              IL  60120
BOSDIB CHSKiCAl CO., HC.
2 mi AVE.
TOEJVILLE     NY  13495
  Ht'IE CHZSICAL  CO., ISC.
2 HI;RZ AVE.
KOS«VILIE     SK  13495

EOHDIJ CSEC.ICAL  CO., ISC.
i «:3I AV:.
TOsfViLLE     NK
                              ??*:::-.!   F£J:I;:T k CEHICAI
                             546!  223
                             548^  226
                             5481  315
                              546!   50
                             7122  12!
                              7122  3
                              ?;::
                              86:2  66
                              5i6?   127
                               ««?  6';
                              4      274
                              4      2?5
                                         CHLCSDASE
                                         CELORDASE
                                         CHLOBDA8E
                                         C£LO?.:'A*i:
                                         CHW3DAS!
                                         CHLOF.DMS
                                         CHLORDA8E
                                         CslOSDASE
                                         CHLOSLANE
ss iss:-:  LI?::A:E ?•;::!<  ?:••


01/06/66     /  /   OS     CA



01/06/88     /   .'   09     CA



01/06/88     /   /   09     CA



01/06/88     /   /   09     CA



01/06/88     /   /   05     OR



01/06/58     /   /  ' 05     OE



Ol/Ob/68     '   /   05     0:



01/06/88     /   /   G6     !X



01/06/88    /   /    05     :L



01/06/88    /   /    C5     IL



01/06/88    /   /    ;2     V.



31/06/83    /   '    <.i     Si
                                                                                      U1/06/S8
                   U     S:
-------
                           APPENDIX B

             Supplemental  Registrants of Velsicol's
               Chlordane/Heptachlor Termi tic ides
(876-00063-000192)

(876-00063-000430)
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
(876-
00063
00063
00063
00063
00063
00063
00085
00086
00086
00086
00086
00086
-002935)
-005887)
-010370)
-025030)
-034704)
-043227)
•035034)
-000016)
-000192)
-004876
•005887)
-005887)
(876-00086-005887)

(876-00086-006723)
(876-00086-010370)
(876-00086-012000)
(876-00086-012000)

(876-00086-034704)
(876-00100-000192)
(876-00104-000430)
(876-00104-001812)

(876-00104-004876)
(876-00104-006723)
(876-00104-025030)
(876-00104-042761)
(876-00233-001927)
(876-00233-006754)
Drexol Chlordane 72% Termite Spray for
Professional Termite Use
Durham's Chlordane Emulsifiable Consentrate
Insecticide for Use Only By Professionals
Red-Top Chlordane 8 Spray
Black Leaf 72% Chlordane Emulsifiable Concentrate
Ford's Chlordane SEC
Red Panther Chlordane SEC
Pro-Chlordane 8-E
Chloro-800 Emulsifiable Consentrate Insecticide
Diversey 2.5 H
Dragon 45% Chlordane Spray
Oexol Chlordane 45% Termite Spray (Prof./Termite Use)
AG Chlordane 4-EC Termite Control
Black Leaf 45% Chlordane Termite Killer
Black Leaf 45% Chiordane
Around Buildings
Black Leaf 45% Chiordane
Insecti ci de
Red Wi ng Chi ordane 4 EC
Ford's Chiordane 4 EC
K Mart 45% Chlordane Termite Killer
K Mart 45% Chlordane Termite Killer
Bui 1di ngs
Pro-Chlordane 4-E
Dexol Chlordane Termite Spray
Durham's Chlordane 8E3 Emulsifiable Concentrate
Pee Gee 8  Ibs. per gallon Chlordane Emulsifiable
Concentrate
Chlordane-8 Termite Control
Red Wing Chlordane SEC
Red Panther Chiordane
Red Panther Chlordane SEC
Termi nix C-H
Orkil 2X
Termite Killer For Use

Emulsifiable Consentrate
                                                   for Use Around
-------
 COMPAI7Y

 Bonide Chemical
Dragon  Cneiuical
Corporation
Rigo Company
Incorporated

Thompson-Hayward
Chemical Company
      APPENDIX C
 CHLORDANE CANCELLATIONS

EPA REGISTRATION NO.

     4-96
     4-218
     4-274
     4-275
     4-287
                          16-96
                          16-116
                          16-122
                          16-124
    70-119
    148-27
EFFECTIVE r

3/17/88
3/17/88
3/17/88
3/17/88
3/17/88
                              4/27/87
                              4/27/87
                              4/27/87
                              4/27/87
                              4/27/8'
                                                  6/01/87
-------
                        -a-
       Industries
Tobacco States Chemical
Company


Chevron Chemical
Company


FI-iC Corporation
143-139

1911-42
192-43
192-132
192-133
226-177
226-184
239-478
239-1232

279-383
279-538
C.J. I-'artin Company      299-171

Residex Corporation    . 373-26
3/ 30. Sc
3/20/85
3 / 3 0 / 8 S
3/30/88
4/27/87
4/27/67
3/25/87
3/25/87

3/07/87
11/01/86

3/25/87

3/25/87
 Imperial  Incorporated
Boy1e-Mi dvay  Inc.

Rocklar.a Chemical
Company Incorporated

Haviland Agricultural
Chemical Company
Federal Chemical
Company Incorporated
Prentiss Drug  &
•Chemical Company

Perk Products '&
Chemical Company

Southland Pearson  &
Company
407-269
407-400

475-192
572-65
595-129
595-321
654-12
654-19
654-67
654-110
655-516


690-53
728-45
728-47
3/25/87
3/25/87

3/25/87


3/25/87
3/25/87
3/25/87
6/01/87
7/01/87
7/01/87
6/01/87
3/25/87


7/01/87
 3/24/88
 3/24/88
-------
                   -o'
Mr A Oil Coir.par.y
Security Lawn and
Garden Products Co.
Faesy i, Besthoff
Incorporated

Chas. H. Lilly Co.

Green Light Company


Velsicol Chemical Co
Miller Chemical &
Fertilizer Corporation
Cre-0-Tox Chemica!
Products Company
Seacoast Labortories
Incorporated


Cotton states Chemical
Company
Land 0'Lakes
Universal Cooperatives
Incorporated
746-53
746-76
746-i 19
769-90
769-511
779-82
802-71
                                                  3.15/87
3/25/87
3/25/87
6/02/87
9. 11/67
869-14
869-188
876-63
876-86
876-100
876-104
876-233
876-281
876-303
876-304
876-305
876-306
876-308
876-309
876-310
904-135
904-223
1066-26
1066-28
1066-29
1159-102
1159-178
1339-74
1339-87
1381-51
1381-83
3/25/87
3/25/87
11/04/87
3/25/87
3/25/87
11/04/87
11/04/87
9/28/87
9/28/87
9/28/87
9/28/87
9/28/87
9/28/87
4/28/87
4/27/87
3/25/87
3/25/87
7/01/87
7/01/87
3/19/88
7/01/87
7/01/87
8/20/87
8/20/87
3/25/87
3/25/87
 1386-26
 3/25/87
-------
Dr.--:t iebach Chemical
Corporat i on
PCX, Incorporated
Griffin Corporation
Triangle Chemical
Co.-,par.y
Terrr.inix Division
of Cook Industries
Incorporated
ELCO Manufacturing Co,

Farmland Industries
Incorporated
'.•.'.R. Grace & Company

FBI-Gordon
Corporation
Hopkins Agricultural
Chemical

Colonial Products
Incorporated
LaRoche Industries
Earl May Seed & Nursery
L.P.

Stephenson Chemical
Company Incorporate
13i6-324
1386-353

1421-23
1598-145
1598-244

1812-242
1812-243
1S42-41
1842-42
1927-5
1927-20
1927-21
1927-49

1941-66
1990-178
1990-179

2124-742
2217-34
2217-98
2393-350
3314-73
3314-74
3442-747
3442-816
3442-846
3442-847

3772-8
4887-19
4887-48
4887-183
     d / 2 0.' 8 ~
     8/20/67

     3/21. So
     4/27/37
     4/27/87

     7/01/87
     7/01 /8T
     5/14/S7
     5/14/87
     2/19/87
     2/19/87
     2/19/87
     2/19/87

     7/01/87
     3/25/87
     3/25/87

     3/28/88
     5/01/87
     5/01/87
     3/25/87
7/01/87
7/01/87
3/25/87
3/25/87
3/25/87
3/25/87

3/25/87
3/22/88
3/22/88
3/22/88
-------
        Chemical ,
Incorporated
Coastal Chemical
Corporation

Chacon Chemical
Corporation

GRO Chemical
Company

Helena Chemical
Company
Octagon Process
Incorported

ArChem Corporation
Forshav Chemical
Company
Voluntary Puchasing
Group, Inc.
B & G Company

Sunniland Corporation

Nationwide Chemical
Products, Inc.


Ross-Daniels, Inc.

Cornbelt Chemical
Company
4931-5
' f~\ *"• i  "
-------
 ?'•::'d's Cac~ical  L
 w~> e r v i c e  inccrporsced
Hac:e:;ca Enterprises

?u.~a Chemical Company

Lre.xei Chemical Company


Flatte Chemical
Cc-pany

Falls Chemical
Cor.p£.ny


Kaw Valley, Inc.


VJilson Laboratories


Cameron M. Bairc

F-'icro-Flo Company
Garden Care  by
Farmingdale,  Ltd.
     10370-40
     10370-116
     10370-144
     10370-145

     11037-7

     11611-4

     19713-214
     19713-215


     34704-1
                          40831-5
                          40631-24

                          44215-7
                          44215-20

                          50383-20
                          50383-29

                          £0415-27

                          51036-30
                          51036-31
     53127-1
     53127-10
                         3, 28/38
                         3 • 2 fa  S £
                         3/23/83
                         3/ 28,63

                         4/27/S7

                         7/17/87

                         3/24,. SS
                         3/24/83


                         4/27/87
                        3/24/88
                        3/24/88

                        9/08/87
                        12/12/87

                        3/24/88
                        3/24/88

                        7/01/87

                        11/13/87
                        11/13/87
                         3/22/88
                         3/22/88
HEPTACHLOR
                                     ^ .T .T^TT n
COMPANY

Thompson-Hayward
Chemical Co.

Velsicol Chemical
Corporation
EPA REGISTRATION NO.
     148-964
     876-101
     876-85
     876-233
     876-308
     876-309
     876-310
                        EFFECTIVE DATE
                         6/01/87
                         4/27/87
                         9/28/87
                         11/04/87
                         9/28/87
                         4/27/87
                         4/27/87
-------
                        -7-
Cre-O-Tox Chemical
Products Corr.pany
Griffin Corporation

Triangle Chemical Co.

Terninix Division of
Cook Industries, Inc.

Stephenson Chemical
Company Incorporate


Redvood Chemical, Inc.

Red Wing Chemical
Ccrpany
                       •
.".r.'hem Corpcraticr.

Forshaw Chemical Company
Chem-Nut, Inc.

Farmco Industries
Incorporated

Micro-Flo Company
1066-28
1066-29
1066-30

1812-77

1342-183


1927-50


4887-59
4387-85

4981-17


6723-8

7122-6

7234-27
7234-31
7234-89

37686-27


46778-1

51036-50
7/01/87
3/19/8 8
7/01/87

7/01/87

5/14/87


4/21/87
3/22/88
3/22/88

 7/08/63
6/07/84

3/17/88

3/18/88
3/18/88
3/18/88

5/08/87


5/12/87

4/27/87
-------
                         APPENDIX  D
                                      N 5 ior; s
 Var.  Waters  &  Rogers,  Inc.
Chapman Chemical
Comipany

Vaccinol Chemical Company
Incorported

AJ-r.7»c Chemical Corporation
          550-106
          550-107
                              1022-502
          1353-4

          5481-223
          5481-226
          5481-50
          5481-315
                                                 EFFECTIVE  DATE

                                                 7/18/87
                                                 7/18/87
                               7/15/87
                                                  7/15/87

                                                  7/17/87
                                                  7/17/87
                                                  7/17/87
                                                  7/17/87
Carolina Chemical
Corporation

'E:ac>: Leaf Products
          5797-88
                                                   7/15/37
Company

U.S. Marketing Distributors
Southern Mill Creek
Products Company






Dettleisach Pesticide
Corporation



5837-67
5687-127
6409-13

6720-2
6720-71
6720-133
6720-176
6720-260
6720-361
6720-363

6754-9
675-3-11
6754-40
6754-64
7/16/87
7/16/67
10/21/87

7/15/87
7/15/87
7/15/G7
7/15/87
7/15/87
7/15/87
7/15/87

7/15/37
7/15/87
7/15/87
7/15/87
Mystic  Chemical  Products
          36272-3
                                                  7/15/87
 COMPANY

 Southern  Mill  Creek
 Products  Company
 Dett]ebach  Pesticide
 Corporation
                      HEPTACHLOR  SUSPDJSIONS
EPA REGISTRATION NO.
     6720-279
     6754-5
     6754-40
     6754-54
     6754-64
                                                  EFFECTIVE DATE
                                                  7/12/87
                                                  7/15/87
                                                  7/15/67
                                                  7/15/87
                                                  7/15/87
-------
P»9< Ic.
01/04/11
        STOP sii's ISS:ZD us
COSWII
          of Products Cbntainiivg
        Tdane and Heptachlor
:r  .. '  :  01 SK:ICB )ic)i2i(B)           -
n» IK.\. w:a FiFai

 ??A  ?.:•:•.I   PEODICT i CSL1ICAL
                                                   SS 1SSCED UPDATE FiiM»  .".».:
Am" CEMICAL CORP.
4100 HAST HASEIICTOI  BlVD
U)S ASG'LES   Cl 9002J


AHVAC CE!HlCtL COEP.
4100 EAST W.SEIRGTOH  BW
LOS &9?El!S   CA SCC2)

iHVAC C5UUC1L COIP.
4100 EAST USEI!IS?OI  Bt.TD
LOS AUGELES   CA 90023

ABVAC CHEMICAL COEP.
4100 EIST USHmroi  3179
LOS UGEUS   Ci 9002)


A! C«H!C!C COS?.
1514 ELSVEITH £7
NB?SRO!)TI    01 15(62

Al CE!!!IC1L C03P.
1514 ElEVHTB ST
POBTSnOOTB    OB 456(2

A3 CSZKlCiL COBP.
1514  ElSVEm ST
fOETSSOOT!    OB (5(62
 B I C CQSPUT
 105)9 UTEMS M 101 20372
 MIIAS   —  Tl 75220-

 BUCK LElf nOMCTS CO.
 6671 rrm ST
 ttGIl         II (0120

 BUO UIP PMOOCTS CO.
 66? i ran ST
 IKO	    1140128

 Bonn cmicu co., lie.
 2 mt in.
 mmui     n iunv

 BOIDIB.cmiCiLCO., IIC.
 2 mu m.
 10IKVILLE     B! U495

 BWOIE CBHICAl CO.. IK.
 2 v:ii m.
 UUVILII     I! !
54b!  22)
5461  226
54S1  )15
5481  50
7122  121
7122  )
 7122  14-
 1(12  16
 5BI7  127
 58«?  67
 4    274
 4    275
          CHLGEDAJE
          CKLORDASS
           CSLOEDil!
           CBLOB5AHE
           CBLCRDMH
           CHICR5I5S
           CBlOBMi!
           CBLOBDME
           CBLOBDMS
           CBIO&9UE
           CfiLOBIlSE
           CELORtASE
                                                    Cl/06/66   /  /   OS    CA
                                                    01/06/S8    /  /   09     CA
                                                    01/06/88    /  /   09     CA
                                                    01/06/88    /  /   09     CA
                                                    01/06/88    /  /   05     OE
                                                    01/06/88    /   / • 05     OE
                                                    01/Ob/8(    /   /   05    OH
                                                    ll/M/M    /  /   06    T!
                                                     01/06/18    /  /   05    I!
                                                     Ol/Ob/88   /  /   05    I:
                                                     11/06/68   /  /   02    5
                                                     91/06/86   /  '   02   I S
                                                    01/06/88    /  /
-------
PlQ* 10.     2
         STOP SALES ISSUED AS THE HSC1T OR SECTIOI  3(cl(2Ml
                         !js::>55 ISSUE? WE-  F:F?.A
siiSIIE C5MICAICC..  I»C.
^ h".-R; AVE.
\:f.«Vi:L:      5: 1 :•<»!•

30SLIE CHEMICAL CO..  IS?.
, •:•: AVE.
                               4     9b
                                           CHL08DARE
                                           CiiLOSDAHE
?? iss?s5 L:??DATE  gsr..;


Oi/'.'6/c?    •   '    (2     NK



01/06/S8    /  /   C2     Si
jOli"" "-'((ICAl CO., ISC.      4     i!8
* iT.F.2 AVE.                                CS10P.DASE
riv/ILlE      SI 1*495

•:A?OLISA CEE»:CAL COB?.        5'?7  86
P... K'i. "i                                CSMBW.SE
               sc 2?*y]


rC! r.V                                   C-LOSMSE


COASTAL CEEf.ICAl CO?.?.         55-49  41
r.v. VY K^                               CaLOBDME
C--:-SV:LLE     NC ^?S34


f-.-:. •:•!( 41-:                               CHLOP.:ASE


COEH S:LT CEERICAL CO.         10107 8
F.-:,e-»4ii'                               CHL03DAS-
*C:?0.t         SE 69(K'l

CBE-0-TOI CHHCtt P50D. CO.   1066  29
BOX 12598                                  CELOGDARE
ffiSPBIS        TB 38112

CP.2-0-TOX COIICii PBOD. CO.   1066  29
BOI 12598                                  HBPTACH108
HE!(?!IS        Tl 38112

DETTEL SAC! PESTICIDE COBP.    6754  11
P.O. BO! 9986                              CSLOBDASE
ATLASTA        GA 30319

DiiTTiL SACE PESTICIDE CORP.    6754  40
••.:. BOX 99:r                              CKL08DANE
ATLANTA        GA 3031?

JETTEL EACH PESTICIDi CORP.    6754  40
P.O. rOX 9986                              SEPTACELOF.
ALTAHTA        GA 30319
                                                                                         91/06/3B     '   '    1-2     R>'
                                                                                         l)i/fl6/3S     /   /    C4     SC
                                                                                                            64     T8
                                                                                         Ol/Ofc/38     /   /    04     SC
                                                                                         G1/E5/88     /   /    07     K
                                                                                         01/C't/J«    /   /    C7      SE
                                                                                         01/06/88    /  /   04     TS
                                                                                         fli/06/86    /  /   04     TN
                                                                                         01/06/88    /  /   C4     GA
                                                                                         'j;/Q6/8S    /  /   04     :-A
                                                                                         0: '06/85    '  /   -4
-------
Pifl* 10.     )
Oi'Oi/88
         STOP SALES ISS't'J AS Ts! USCLT 0$ SECTIOI J(clUHB)
                         isiops ISS?E: WSZE PIFSA
                              EPA MS.I   P80DOCT & CEsRICAL
7CB-AH
DETTEl 5AC:i PESTICIDE  CCE?.    6754  5
?.0. SOX 9?d?                              8KPTAC5LOR
A1TASTA        GA  ::-19

?TTT!1 EACH ?ES?I"IDi  CO?.?.    l.7?4  54
?'.0. JO? ?9tf                              CELC'RDASE
ATLAS:?.        GA  wi8

DETTEL BACE PESTICIDE  CORF.    6754  54
F.O. :?! f1?**                              EEPTACHLOR
ALTASTA        GA  iO?19

riTT-1 ?ACE PESTICIDE'CORP.    6754  64
r.C. 5C-X 99«t                              CSl-OEDMS
ATLANTA        GA  30319

:-?T:L -A": PESTICIDE  CC3P.    6"54  64
?.:.:::• --«•                              EEPTACSLOR
ALTASTA        GA  iv<19


?.C. :•:» *?ct                              CaCBMSE
ATLASTA        3A  J3il»

DE7TEL5ACK CSEKCALS CORP.     14^1  23
j*7e AFPl: VALLEY  ED.                      CEW5DMS
ATLASTA        GA  JCiiJ

:••!•:: ISTIVETRIZS              1=2   132
i45i K. 22bT:i  ST.                          C-LCSDASE
?::?.?.ASCS       CA  9e5ei
DEXCL :s:nSTS!£S
i45i N. 228TH ST.
TC-aaiCE       CA  9C501

:-!CL IIDDSTJIES
145t V. 228TB ff.
T3RSA1CE       CA  90SC1

D!I01- ISDDSTIIES
1450 k. 228TH ST.
TCP.RASCE       CA  9C5C;

DREIEL CSiHICAL COKPASK
i4!? PS8SS1LASIA ST.  50!
•s«HIS        TS  }4iC9
D3ERL CHHICIL CORPH?
2
-------
«:•?*/*»
         STOP SALES us:;? AS T«: «S;LT rs SE:T;OI
                     Ji'S-Essioss ISSUE'' •*:••; F:?RA
FALLS •.•••"ICALS. IRC.
&.?. SOJ 2)45
 •r:.J.T FAIL?    *T' 5?4v'
i .0. :".y ^:4*
;REAT FALL?    KT ??40.<

••:•:•« :•:*:;*!» SERVICE isc.  iuj7c :if
CHLORDAS!
•:•?.:•« CHi'ICAl 4 SERVICE ISC.  UJ7: .44

               «Y

>o?.:s •:«••:«.: i SERVICE isc.  .CJT  14;
io« ?ASA:ESA SLV:.                        CHLV^ASE
PAS.WiSA       TI 775C2

••?.:s :-i«:cAL i SERVICE isc.  :o?7<; 40

?A?A:EVA       ?i


i:: STATE S:-.::T	
C-A-IITTE      .1'.' i*2'::

••RSEAli CHESCIAL CO.           7243  J:
*5'. STATE STREET                           EEPTACELCE
C-ARLOTTE      SC 2*208

FCP.SEAK CHEKIAL CO.           "24:  *9
t-Si STATE STREET                           HPIACSLOS
CHARLOTTE      SC 2*20!!

FOP.SEAK CIOICAL CO.           7234  100
t50 STATE SWEET                           CHLOKASE
CHARLOTTE      1C 28208

POasSM CH2HICAL CO.           7234  101
*5i STATS STREET                           CELOBDMi


FC-S:.AX CHE-LCAL 70.           '234  5
c:'. STATE STREET                           CHLCSDA5E
f2»r:r?TC      ijr 2821'?
                               7234  t.
;< :»;'TT •ir»r.i»;  ;:.-'
» • » * • • •• vl • I * R . v  7- v J .


il.vt/t:    '   '   vl     •:




01:9?.'58    /   /   •.     ».?



•li/Ot/88    /   .'    .c     TX








fli/O-f/M    /   /   06     TI




ei/OS/88    /   /   06     TI
                                                                                                             C4
                                                                      f
                                                                                          1)1/06/38     /   /    C4      HC
                                                                                          01/06/88     /   /    C4
                                              01/06/38     /   *    C4
                                                                                                                    SC
                                                                                          01/06/88     /   /    C4     ST
                                                                                          Gl/Ct'/!!!     .'   /    (4
                                                                  -.-4
»f. STATE STREET
•:HA:TTE      HC
CHLOR^AS!
-------
          srcj SALES  :ss::: AS :-;• E-SVL: 0*  "eric* IT;
                      $US?E55!OSJ IF5.EL '.M:-  -Ir-A

•.-A?.: EN  •:>•£ SY FA?..M.IS;IA'.E
v i;s::s  siv:-.
                                                                                                          '       04
                r  ..i.


          MIL ".II- •?.•::.  •".   *';:•  I
          '.::- :!14 N •''.':.
                                             '.'•LOSJASE
T'I'rA
    -'-N  f.ILL CF.E:.' ?8C'?:.  CO.   *"20  ^*0
     50i!  i/tt 5:1* N 5t7H
                                             CHL-OSDASi
5"liii?.S  HILL CSEiX PF.CD, CO.   o?2u  3«L
?•'.'• 301  1056 55i4 (i SiTE                   CiiT.Or.L'A!iI
TASPA           PL J1601

SC'JTHESS  SILL •.:.:•<  ??.OL). CO.   6720  J*J3
P.;. 50K  L09t  ??.4 s :t::i                   CHLORDAHE
                                                                                               L/C5/8H    '  ;
           ILL ".:!'•' ??."'". C?.   ""'L'1''  ?''
                                             'IHLO:.LASE
                                 '<:?   45
:.. . r '.;!  T;4i
*"•:"'.:          AL .'^G1
-------
         ST.- .;ALE.:  I?S':I  AS  "-.:  -.:?'IT  '•  f:.?"..!»   '  .  :
                     Sv'riS:'. i'1"?  lr:  :.   V;:  •;••'.

•/."•AN*                         "-H •:..!   ••• !  ." :  .'••*'. '.•'.


r'T-i'i: ?:A?i:yi 4  •:•:.         \-    <•
?.:. 5:1 "344                               •::-:::?:AS-
ir:":         »• )...('

?":-r:S5?N 'HZ*.  '.':.. I)i?.      i::"1   1::
;;v ;•;;;                                   :;-:i:-:.':::
"!!".?;• ?*ri!   'J :.::"

ST:?-H"!i?:S CH:*. CO.. ISC.      45:"   1?
;-Y ;••;.;.                                   'HI ir.j'Si
C0:i:0: ?».?.!   GA j!;;?

S::?:iS?C!i CHi*. CO., ISC.      45:'   4;
BOX S'lc:                                   CHll-lAN:
COLLEGE PAS?   GA J'.'Jj1

?T:r:.Z!i5rS ;••?!
50i' v'.::                                   -E'TACr'.O
CCILE':: *A?.y   <•*•. '.- :}'

?::-::!ir:S CH:".  CI.. ISC.      4::"   :;
;;.y »".::                                   H::"A""".;
•M'.l-G: -A?.-   OA :.:::

?':NS::AS: COF.P-ISATI?!!           -4.4   :
... :A- AV:V.E   P.-:.!?!  .rc"                ^I^IANI
5As?:^         •:  -ir:

VACCISvL CHESICAL CO..  ISC.    125]   4
1:2?- S'RT: HI^HIASI'                         li'l'Ir.IA.S:
«:^:I5        TS ::.:5

VAX W.TISS & P.CGSP.S             550   ..-
225t JDNCTIOS AV-S^E                       CEIOEJAS:
SAS JOSE       CA 95:31

VAS WTEHS & ROGERS             55i   ;-.'
2256 JWCTIOT AV!!i:i                       «:::F:?.S:
SAS JOS!       CA 95131

H ?. GRACE 4 CORPANK             2124  H>
P.O.30! 2"7 100  P MIH  ST.                  'T.:?.:AS:
H9?s:s        TS 18103

«::;os:.».'?. isc.               ?Ui? ••
:.:. :-Ii i::"
???IHG:A:E     c:

•ills-f LA55, IS?.
:.•:. -OX 45?'
??:.:SG:.».::     c-
-------
                              Federal  Register / Vol. 52. No.  212 / Tuesday.  November 3. 1IUT  /  Nonce*
                                                                                                               4214'
I"
\
            h'-.i'i'i'i.Trli-rs buil'liiiy .il 401 V Si root
            SV\  . VV.iKhinsinn. L)C.
              The purpose of the mi-ciinj; is to
            ri \a-w th* first draft of the Risk
            !;;in;< ;r..il risk reduction
              Tin.- mi.-cinty is opi:n lo the public. Any
            mcrr.her of the public wishing to attend.
            n:jke brief or.il comments, or submit
            written comments to the Croup should
            notify Mrs. Kathleen Conw&y. Executive
            Secretary, or Mrs.  Dorothy Clark. Staff
            Secretary. (A101-F)  Science Advisory
            Board, by the close of business on
            Friday. November 20.1987. The
            telephone number is (202) 382-2552
            Terry F. Yosie.
            Dirc-J'.fr. Science Advisory Board.
              U.ite: Ocioti-r »3. 19,77.
            |FR Doc. 87-15383 F.lpd 11-1-87; 8 45 nm]
            BIUJNC CODE
1,
IFPL-32B6-1]

Science Advisory Board Research
Strategy Subcommittee Sources,
Transport and Fate Group; Open
Meeting

  Under Pub. L S2-463. notice is hereby
given that the Sources. Transport and
Fate SubRroup of the Science Advisory'
Do.ird's Rescnrrh Strategies
Sjbcnmmittee wi!) met I from 9:00 a.m.
to 4 00 p.m. on December 8lh at the
Hyatt Regency Hotel. International
Parkway (inside the Dallas Fort Worth
Airport), in the Conference Room. The
purpose of the Research Strategies
Subcommittee is to advise the
Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency on the development
of research strategies needed to enhance
the Agency's ability to acquire scientific
and technical information to support
regulatory decision making, and to
identify emerging environmental issues.
The Sources. Transport and Fate
Subgroup will evaluate environmental
contaminants from both a media-
specific and a multi-media basic.
  The meeting ii open to the public. Any
member of the public wishing to attend
or submit written comments should
notify Dr. Terry F. Yosie, Director.
Science Advisory Board, at 202-382-
4126 or Joanna Foellmcr by December 4.
1987.
  Date: October 26.1987.
Terry F. Voile.
Director. Science Advisory Board.
|FR Doc. 87-25391 Filed 11-2-87; 8:45 tm|
BIUJMO COOt tMO-IO-N
IOPP-60011; FRL-3286-t I

Chlordane and Heptachlor
Termiticides; Cancellation Order

AGENCY: tnvironir.i-nt.il Protection
ARoncy (El'A).
ACTION: Order.

SUMMARY: Or, October 1.19B7. EPA
issued an Order accepting the voluntary
cancellation of certain chlordane and
hcptachlor tcrmiticide registrations held
by Velsicol Chemical Corporation, end
limiting the use of existing slocks of
Velsicol's chlordane and heptachlor
termiticide products outside the
company's control on August 11.1987.
Under the terms of the Order, such
stocks may be sold, distributed or used
according to their current labels until
November 30.1987. From December 1.
1967 until April 15.1988. such stocks
may only be sold, distributed or used in
accordance with the Directions for Use
accompanying the Order. No sale,
distribution or use of such stocks will be
permitted after April 15.1988.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
By mail: George LaRocr.a. Registration
  Division (TS-767C), Office of Pesticide
  Programs. Environmental Protection
  Agency, 401 M Street SW..
  Washington. DC 204«0.
Office location and telephone number:
  Rm. 204, Crystal Mail Building «2.
  1921 Jefferson Davis Highway.
  Arlington, VA. (703) 557-2400.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
August 11.1967. EPA and ' 'elsicol
Chemical Corporation (Velsicol) entered
into an agreement affecting Velsicol's
registrations of chlordane and
heptachlor termiticide products [except
for a registration involving underground
cable treatments). Under the terms of
the agreement, certain uses of Velsicol's
tcrmiticide products were deleted from
the label and the remainder of the
registrations were converted into
conditional registrations. Under the
terms of the conditional registrations, no
further sale or distribution by Velsicol of
its affected chlordane and heptachlor
termiticide products was allowed unless
and until Velsicol satisfied air
monitoring requirements specified in the
conditional registrations. The August
llth agreement did not affect existing
stocks of Velsicol's termiticide products
outside of Velslcol's control on or before
that date (which EPA estimated at the
time to be a volume equal to
approximately 2 months average use. or
about 110.000 gallons).
  Portions of the August llth agreement
were challenged by a number of
environmental groups in a federd court
action.
  Til*- (."irt in tiiH' ,i< imn <-\\it••**> .!
i:nnt.'Tn ih.it l-'.i'O, r.i^iii h.ixr
I'niirrL'Strr.i'i'rt tin- .nr. >utv >-i i-v:,  ;:_:
aUii.k* in llut US': •>:' tlii- i-xisiir.^ :'.«. t-*
might r.onlinuL- •.i.ui-lnnlrly VYIu'.r I'.i'A
continues to bci.i.-ve lh.it its rM:n-..i'L
v.;is an uccur.itu one. Li'A .ind Yrisicui
iigrcL-d to supplement the Auuust 11 ih
up content in order lo Hlli'vuito thi:
court's concerns.
  Under the terms of the Supplement.
i.-itifiud on October 1.1967, Velsicol's
r.hlnrdnnc and heptndilor turmiticidc
registrations worn split into product
registrations containing the dc'letctl uses
and product registrations containing the
retained uses. Those registrations
containing the deleted uses were
voluntarily canceled. EPA issued ,m
Order on October 1.1937, accepting tru-
voluntary cancellation and plncing a
two-tiered cap on the use  of existing
stocks of V'elsicol's chlordane anil
heptachlor termiticide products outside
of Velsicol's control on August 11.1907.
These stocks may be sold, distributed
and used in any manner consistent with
their labeling  until November 3U. 1987.
From December 1. MS" until April 15.
1988.  these stocks may be sold,
distributed and used only in accordance
with the specific directions for use
attached to the- October 1st Order. No
use of existing stocks will be  permitted
afier April 15.1960.
   The text of the October 1st Order and
the attached Directions for Use arc set
forth  below:
   In the Mutter of The Voluntary
Cancellation of Certain Pesticide Product
Registrations Held by the Velsicol Chemical
Corporation.

Order Accepting Voluntary Cancellation
and Authorizing Use of Existing Stocks
With Limitations

   As explained more fully below, this
order accepts the voluntary cancellation
of the registrations of certain pesticide
products registered by the Velsicol
Chemical Corporation ("Velsicol") and
imposes limitations on the continued
sale, distribution, and use of existing
stocks of such products. This Order is
issued pursuant to the authority in
section 6(a)(l) of the Federal  Insecticide.
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act.
   On August 11.1987. Velsicol and EPA
entered  into an agreement affecting
Velsicol's registrations of chlordane and
heptachlor products. The  agreement is
memorialized in a Memorandum of  :
Understanding and accompanying
Conditions of Registration and
Monitoring Protocol. Under the terns of
the August 11 agreement. Velsicoi
classified the following uses of its end-
-------
                  Federal Rcj-istnr  / Vol. 52. No.  212 / TiicsJ.iy.  \'n\u:i!., r 3. 1007  /  \olit.i-s
US'- 'i T..:'.. :iic prod.:..is JS
i. ji
   ,i  I•( sl-rr,:,<;tr:iriion ;ip|'hcjtion of
ni  .;. •: ,. f'un. vvi'h;r. .1 strut.lure
(:••-. :> :!:••;] \,\  huffirt's ('structure"):
   I,  ('fist construction apjjiu:.it:on of
rr..!1- :;j! from outside H structure 10
ir.siJc n: underneath a structure:
  c The use of pressure roddir.e for
pos!-to:is'.ruction application of material
In  :i bosen^nl-iype or crawl-space type
sln.'Cturr:
  ri. Pre- or post-construction treatment
of  the area underneath crawl-space and
post and pier type structures:
  e. Tre.i'rr.cnt of voids and spaces in
masonry cr block wahs or areas behind
venders:
  f. Applications by non-certified
er>j..iicdto:s;
  g Soil-injection pressure roddir.g at
pnissurrs greater than 25 psi.
  Thr agreement  further classified the
following USPS of end-use termiticide
products as "retained uses":
  a. Application to the outside perimeter
of any structure by trenching, or drilling
through sidewalks, patios, or other
urvT.closi'd slabs, and applying maierial
in :'.u' si):i without pressure [e.g.. flow or
gr.ivity  ffinli.
   b  App!icat:ons by the excavation
trchr.^ue !o the cxier.j: of any
<.tru:!nrp [i.e.. by  rerr."1. :ng soil next to
i"o foundation, placing on a tarp.
tre..:.r!g vv:!h tcrrrr.tiude. and placing
back :r. trench after soil dries):
   c. Piv-ror.s'.ructior. low-pressure
|n-..i.\imi:rr. 25 psi) vertical rodding (with
the dpp'::a!;on rod equipped with a
pressure control device to prevent
higher pressures) of the perimeter
outside any structure:
   d. Post-construction low-pressure
(maximum 25 psi) vertical rodding (with
the application rod equipped with a
pressure control device to prevent
higher pressures) outside slab and post
enil pier type structures:
   t. Post-construction coarse spray
surface treatment (maximum 50 psi) and
low-pressure (maximum 25 psi) vertical
rodding (with the application rod
equipped with a pressure control device
to prevent higher pre'sures) under the
slab of slab type structures.
  The agreement classified one use. the
protection of underground cables, as an
"unaffected use".
   In addition to this classification of the
uses of Velsicol's termiticide products.
the agreement included, inter c!:a. the
following provisions:
   • The retained uses were converted to
restricted uses as provided for in
sections 3(d) and 4 of F1FRA:
   • The registrations of the retained
usi'S were amended to conditional
rujjist.Mtions. with no suit: or distribution
by Vi-Uicol ;il!:mi;d until crrt.un
conditions set fort!: in the Conations of
Rcyist'ation are net
  • No fiirthrr salt: s:r dir.lriliuli'v; In
VclsiLol of end-use products l.i!» L-d foi
deleted usi.-s w.is aiiuwrd
  • Vclsico! amended the label of its
manufacturing-use products to provide
that such products could not be used to
manufacture any end-use product (other
than Velsicol products) for sale and
distribution in the United States that is
labeled for use as a subterranean
termiticide.
  The agreemcnl became effective
immediately on August IV 1987. In
return for the conditions accepted by
Velsicol, EPA agreed, inter alia, that it
would take no action against existing
stocks  of Velsicol's products then in the
hands of applicators and distributors.
EPA estimated that a volume equal to
opproximately two-months average use
of chlordane  and hep'.achlor termiticides
(or approximately 110.COO gallons) was
in the hands of applicators and
distributors as of August 11th.
  Portions of the agreement between
Velsicol and  EPA have been challenged
in a federal court action brought by a
number of environmental groups
(MCAMP v. EPA. Civil Action No. 67-
1089-LFO. D.D.C.). The court in that
action  has expressed concerns '.hat EPA
may have substantially underestimated
the amount of existing stocks as of
August llth or that some individuals
may have large stockpiles of chlordane
products. While EPA continues to
believe that its earlier estimate of
existing stock was an accurate one. EPA
contacted Velsicol (as well as the
plaintiffs in the federal litigation) to
discuss possible amendments to the
August 11 agreement in order to resolve
the court's concern. Velsicol agreed to
amend the agreement, and on October 1,
1987. Velsicol and EAP ratified a
Supplement to the Memorandum of
Understanding (a copy of which is
attached hereto).
   Under the terms of this Supplement.
VeUicol's chloradane termiticide
registrations have been split into
product registrations containing the
dei: sd uses and product registrations
cor  ming the retained uses. Velsicol
anc ZPA have agreed to the voluntary
cancellation  of certain product
registrations, including those containing
the deleted uses (but not those
containing the retained uses), and have
further agreed to the placement of a
two-tiered cap on  the use of existing
stocks of Velsicol's products outside of
its control before August 11. These
existing stocks may be sold, distributed,
and used in any manner consistent with
their labeling until November 30,1087.
15.
l'ro:n DeC'Tiili.-r 1. 10R* tinlil Apri
V'Ull. thrsf stoics :::;iy IK- so'.;!.
distributed, arul i...i'd only in iKcnrJ.imr
•.M!,LI il;c LOl)(l;!;ni-,.s rf use prosri ihej ill
Appciiiiix A u! this Or.lcr. No use will
be prrmitlcd after April 15.  1908.
  FII'A believes the turms of this
Supplement will allow for an orderly
and efficinnt phase-out of chloridane
use. The Supplement provides sufficient
time for the use of the volume of existing
stocks estimated by EPA to exist in
August of 1907. but will prevent
unlimited use of such  stocks if EPA w;is
substantially incorrect in its estimate or
if individuals possess large stockpiles.
EPA favors a two-tiered approach
because it encourag"c the use of
application methods that are believed to
pose less potential for misapplication
and are believed less  likely to result in
indooT exposure than the uses that will
be discontinued aftjr November 30.  •
19C7.
  EPA finds that implementation  of this
Supplement is consistent with the
purposes of FIFRA and will not have
unreasonable adverse effects on the
environment. EPA has previously
determined that the agreement entered
into on August n, 198". which contained
no limitations on the use of existing
slocks, was consistent w:th the purposes
of the Act. The limitations contained in
this Order will not permit any greater
use of stocks lh;m that which the
Agency has already found to be
acceptable.
  The Agency considers the dates set
forth herein, which were the product of
an agreement between Velsicol and
EPA. to be appropriate for several
reasons. First, the Agency believes the
dates chosen satisfy the concerns that
the Agency may have substantially
underestimated the amount of stocks in
the possession of applicators and
distributors as of Augus' 11.1987 or that
individuals may have large stockpiles.
by establishing a cap on use that would
prevent the use of significantly larger
quantities than the amount estimated to
exist by EPA. Second, these dales allow
for an orderly transition awoy from the
deleted uses (with such uses not  being
permitted after November 30.1937). and
eventually from all other uses (after
April 15.1988). In particular,  they
provide EPA. Velsicol. and the  National
Pest Control Association with an
adequate opportunity to notify
applicators and state enforcement
agencies  of the terms of this Order; the
dates  will not encourage a hurried use of
existing stocks which could lead to
misapplication and greater indoor
exposures: and they will allow for (he
certification of applicators (use of the
-------
                  Federal Register / Vol  52. No. 212 / Tui-"'!••>-.  Novpm'.K-r 3.  IfltT / N'n'.iccs
t-\ -iiin'o slocks vvil! be fl restricted usn
H« set Ic.rth in F1FRA sections 3id) and 4
.if'.-r November 30. 1987). Finally, the
(J.iius reflect iniurmution provided lo
KI'A ih;ii. even though (here may well
hint- I)'-i n only 110.000 gallons of
t-vis'ir.e stocks in the hands of
up;-.lica!nrs and distributors on August
11.1907.  the r.-tte of chlordane use has
decreased sinre ihdt date, and will of
necessity dccrnaso even further after
November 30.1907 when certain uses
wii! no longer be permitted.
  Based  on all the foregoing, pursuant to
riFKA section 6(a)(l):
  1. The  following registrations of
Velsicol's End Use Producls are hereby
cancelled:
  A. The F.nd Use Product described in
Section II.A.2 of the attnched
Supplement (that product currently
assigned EPA Registration Number 876-
233 bearing all uses of Cold Crest
Termide  other than the retained uses).
  D. The End Use Product described in
Section 11.B.2 of the attached
Supplement (that product currently
assigned EPA Registration Number 876-
63 bearing all uses of Cold Crest C-100
other than the reta-.ned uses).
  C. The End Use Product described in
Suction I1.C.2 of the attached
Supplement (that product currently
assigned EPA Registration Number 876-
104 bearing all uses of Chlordane 8EC
Termite other than the retained uses).
  D. Gold Crest C-50 (EPA Reg. No. 876-
G6).
  E. Cold Crest H-60 (EPA Reg. No. 876-
85).
  F. California SLN for crawlspace
perimeter spray (Termide) (CA-810012).
  C. California SLN for crawlspace
perimeter spray (C-100) (CA-810011).
  H. Hawaii SLN for crawlspace
perimeter spray (C-100) (HI-650003).
  2. The  sale, distribution, and use of
existing stocks of any products in the
possession of persons other than
Velsicol on or after August 11.1987
bearing Registration Numbers 876-63.
876-S5. 876-86. 876-104. 876-233, CA-
810011. CA-810012, or HI-650003 is
subject to the following conditions:
  A. Such product! may be sold.
distributed, and used in any manner
consistent with their labeling until
November 30.1987.
  B. Such products may be sold.
distributed, and used from December 1.
1967 until April 15.1988 only in
accordance with the provisions
contained in Appendix 1 to this Order.
  C. Such products may not be sold.
distributed, or used after April 15.1988.
  D. Any such products that have not
been uf.ed on or before April 15.1988
must be disposed of in accordance with
applicable federal, state and local laws.
  It is so ordered this> 1st d.iy of
October. 198?.
t)n:ic!.is U. Campl.
Appendix I — Voluntarily Cancelled
Subterranean Termite Control Products
Directions for Use Between December 1.
1987. and April 15. 1988
Restricted use Pesticide
For Retail Sale to and use Only by
Certified Applicators or Persons Under
Their Direct Supervision
  It is a violation of Federal law to use
this product in a manner inconsistent
with these Directions. This product may
not be used against any pests not named
in these Directions. Apply only to
establish subsurface termite control
barriers specified in these Directions.
  Contamination of public and private
water supplies must be avoided by
following these precautions: Use anti-
backflow equipment or procedures to
prevent siphonage of pesticide back into
water supplies. Do not treat soil beneath
structures that contain cisterns or wells.
Do not treat soil that is water saturated
or frozen. Consult state and local
specifications for recommended
distances of treatment areas from wells.
and refer to Federal Housing
Administration Specifications on new
construction for further guidance.
Preconstruction Subterranean Ternite
Treatment
  Effective preconstruction
subterranean termite control squires
the establishment of an unbroken
vertical and/or horizontal chemical
barrier between wood in the structure
and the potential or existing  termite
colonies in the soil. To meet FHA
termite proofing requirements, follow
the latest edition of the Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) Minimum
Property Standards.
Dilution Instructions for Cold Crest
Termide
  Use a .75% water emulsion lot
subterranean termites other than
Coptotermes spp. Mix 1 gallon of Cold
Crest Termide in 99 gallons of water to
produce a 0.75% water emulsion. Use a
0.75-1.5% water emulsion for
Coptotermes spp. where necessary. Mix
1-2 gallons of Gold Crest Termide in 99
gallons of water to produce a 0.75-1.5%
water emulsion.
Dilution Instructions for Gold Crest CM 00
and Chlordane 8EC/Termite
  Use a 1% water emulsion for
subterranean termites other than
Coptotermes spp. Mix 1 gallon of
product in 95 gallons of water to
produce n 1-  vv.i'.er ?nu:Ui'T.  '.'>,• .\ 1-
Z o wator emulsion fur C'/'''•'•'''""-> *pl;
uhiTL1 nfcr«;:>nry Mix 1-- c.i'.i-T.s >>f
product in 93 potions uf water to
produce a 1-21. w.itrr oR>ul>..in.

Dilution Instructions for GoK! Crrst II-
00
  Use a .5% water emuUion fur
subterranean termites other lhan
Coptotermes spp. Mix 1 gallon of
product in 59 gallons of water to
produce a .5% water emulsion. Use a 1v:
water emulsion for Coptoturnit'.t spp.
where necessary. Mix 2 gallons ol
product in 59 gallons of water to
produce a le-i water emulsion.

Dilution Instructions for Cold CmM C-5U
  Use a 1% iv.iler emulsion for
subterranean termites other than
Coptotermes spp. Mix 1 gallon of
product in 47 gallons of water to
produce a 1% water emulsion. Use a 2**
water emulsion for Coptotermes spp.
where necessary. Mix 2 gallons of
product in 47 gallons of water to
produce a 27i water emulsion.
  Do not apply to soil beneath
structures which will contain subsUb or
intra-slab air ducts. Do not apply to any
area intended as a plenum air space.
Check with builder or contractor or
determine if the design of  the structure
includes these ducts or a plenum.
  Do not apply to any area inside the
foundation wall which will not be
covered by a concrete slab (e.R . bath
traps, inside surfaces of concrete or
block walls above the level of the slab).
Cover these areas during application
with polyethylene or similar material.
Do not treat into or through hollow
masonry voids.

Slab Construction

Horizontal Barriers
  Before footings are poured, horizontal
barriers may be established in footing
trenches. Treatment of the footings
through hollow- masonry voids is
prohibited. Then, after interior grading is
completed and prior to the pouring of
concrete slabs, horizontal  barriers may
be established on soil which will be
covered by concrete floor, entrance
platforms, and in other critical areas
which will be covered by concrete slabs.
  In the case of a single-pour.
monolithic slab which does not have a
separate foundation or footing, an
overall horizontal barrier would be
created before the concrete is poured.
  To produce a horizontal barrier, apply'
the emulsion at the  rate of 1 gallon per
10 square feet to fill dirt. If fill is w;ished
gravel or other coarse materitil. apply at
1'/; gallons per 10 square fret.
-------
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAi

                         WASHINGTON, D.C
                                                          OFFICE OF
                           CCD  Q IQQO              PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
                           ruu  & laoij

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Chlordimef orm - Stocks at Dealer/Distributor Level

                                    £•
FROM:     Phyllis E. Flaherty
          Acting Director
          Policy and Grants Division
          Office of Compliance Monitoring

TO:       Addressees
     Recently, I received a question regarding chlordimeform.
The question was:  "Would a dealer/distributor be in violation
of the Cancellation Order for Chlordimeform if a farmer pays
for chlordimeform prior to February 19 but does not physically
receive the product until after February 19,  1989?"

     Based on discussions with the Office of  General Counsel
and the Office of Pesticide Programs, this action would be  a
violation of the Cancellation Order.  The Cancellation Order
states that no one may sell or distribute chlordimeform after
February 19.  Under the FIFRA 88 amendments,  the definition of
the term "sell or distribute" includes "deliver".  In addition,
the intent of the Order was to require the recall of all  stocks
in the possession of distributors and retailers.

     Please forward a copy of this memorandum to States within
your Region in order to make sure everyone understands that
this is the Agency's position.
-------
          UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                      WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
                           JUN I 91989
                                                       OFFICE or
                                                PISTICIDCI AND TOXIC •U«ITANCll
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Final Compliance Strategy for the Cancellation of
          Chlordimeform

FROM:     John J. Neylan III, Director
          Policy and Grants Division (EN
          Office of Compliance Monitorin

TO:       Addressees

     Attached is the Final Compliance Strategy for the
Cancellation of Chlordimeform.  The Cancellation Order became
effective on February 19, 1989.

     This strategy is effective immediately and calls for
compliance monitoring of the cancellation order through
inspection of producing establishments, distributors,
dealers/retailers, and users of Chlordimeform products.
Inspections of distributors, dealers, and users will  be conducted
by States with Cooperative Enforcement Agreements, as part of
their routine inspections.  In those States in which  the
producing establishments are located, inspections are to be
conducted in order to monitor the recall provision of the
Cancellation Order.  Also, in Regions/States where substantial
use has occurred, States are to specifically target and conduct
inspections at the distributor/dealer level for purposes of
assuring compliance with the Cancellation Order.

     We appreciate the comments submitted on the February 15,
1989 draft of this strategy.  We have incorporated most of these
comments Into the final document.  Attached is a summary of these
comments and OCM's responses.  For your Information,  we have also
attached • copy of the February 8, 1989 FEDERAL REGISTER Notice
entitled, "Final Decision Not to Initiate a Special Review and
Decision and Order of Cancellation.*  Included as appendices to
the Strategy are a list of Chlordimeform pesticide registrants,
products, and producing establishments and a. summary of the
Chlordimeform actions.

     If you have any questions regarding the attached strategy,
please  contact Steve Howie of my staff at FTS 475-7786.

Attachments
-------
                                 ADDRESSEES
II
     Douglas D. Campt
     Edwin F. Tlnsworth
     Anne Lindsay
     Frederick F. Stlehl
     Mark Greenwood
     A. E. Conroy II
     Connie Musgrove
     Mike Wood
     Jerry Stubbs
     Sherry SterlIng
     David DulI
     Ken KanagalIngam
     Bob Zlsa
     John J. Neylan III
     Phyllis E. Flaherty
     Maureen Lydon
                    (H7501C)
                    (H7505C)
                    (H7505C)
                    (LE-134A)
                    (LE-132A)
                    (EN-342)
                       n
                       n
                       n
                       it
                       it
                       it
                       it
                       n
                       it
                       it
     Jake Mackenzie
     Western Regional Compliance Director
Louis F. Gltto, Director
Air Management Division

Barbara Metzger, Director
Environmental Services Division
Ill  Stephen R. Wassersug, Director  .
     Hazardous Waste Management Dlv

IV   Winston A. Smith, Director
     Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Dlv

V    WIlltamH. Sanders III, Director
     Environmental Services Division

VI   William B; Hathaway, Director
     Air, Pesticides & Toxic Division

VII  William  A. Sprat I In, Director
     Air and Toxics Division

VIM Irwln L. Dlcksteln, Director
     Air and Toxics Division

IX   David P. Howekaap, Director
     Air Management Division-

X    Gary O'Neal, Director
     Air and Toxics Division
Marvin Rosensteln, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Ernest Regna, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Larry Miller, Chief
Toxic & Pesticides Branch

Richard DuBose, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Phyllis Reed, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Robert Murphy, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Carl Walter, Acting Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Alvtn Yorke, Chief
Toxic Substances Branch

Davis Bernstein, .Chief
Pesticides & Toxics Branch

Kenneth Feigner, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br
cc:  Michael Walker      (LE-134P)
     Jim Roeloffs        (TS-788)
     John Tlce           (TS-769C)
     Al Heler            (A-107)
-------
 RESPONSE TO ^Q^ff^TS RECEIVED RELATED TO CHr.nRDIMEFORM STRATEGY
COMMENT I;  one Region was concerned how the cancellation order-
treats the end-user who wants to "give away" a small quantity of
chlordimeform to another end-user.

     Another Region wanted to know if a dealer/distributor would
be in violation of the Cancellation Order if a farmer paid for
the chlordimeform prior to February 19, 1989 but did not receive
the product until after that date.

RESPONSE 1;  The Cancellation Order states that no one may sell
or distribute chlordimeform after February 19, 1989.  Under the
FIFRA 88 amendments, the term "sell or distribute" includes
"deliver."  Therefore, such a transfer without exchange of monies
or a prior payment and subsequent distribution would both be
considered a "delivery" and are prohibited by the Cancellation
Order.  Please refer to the memorandum sent to the Regions on
February 9, 1989 from Phyllis E. Flaherty entitled,
"Chlordimeform - stocks at Dealer/Distributor Level," for further
discussion on this subject.


COMMENT 2;  One Region suggested that OCM develop a "Compliance
Monitoring Summary" which would present all EPA cancellations,
etc, in a concise booklet which would list cancellation dates,
effective dates for discontinuation of sales, final date for use
of existing stocks, and any other pertinent facts.

RESPONSE 2:  We have added a summary (see Appendix B) for
chlordimeform which addresses this issue.
COMMENT 3;  One Region felt that the strategy should require
chlordimeform inspections to be targeted instead of allowing the
states to set their own priorities in relation to ongoing state
work.  .The commenters suggested that specific reporting of
inspections or findings should be required to be submitted to
EPA.  The commenter suggested that more responsibility be placed
on the states for some reporting response since inspections,
except for tips and complaints, are routine.

RESPONSE 3s  we have incorporated this suggestion into the
strategy by adding requirements for producing establishment
inspections and affirmative inspections in States with a history
of substantial use of chlordimeform.
-------
COMMENT 4!  One commenter suggested that the States be required
to check the recall provision of the Order at the registrants
production facilities and distributors, and to conduct random
inspections at a specified number of RUP dealers/distributors.

RESPONSE 4:  We have incorporated this into the strategy.  Since
the two registrants are required to conduct a recall down to the
dealer/distributor level, the States should monitor the recall
provision of the cancellation order according to Section 14 of
the Pesticides Inspection Manual (dated August 1987).
Furthermore, the recall action is to be followed up by a visit  to
the companies to check their records to determine if the recall
was successful.
      \
-------
               FINAL COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR THE CANCELLATION
                            •  OF CHLORDIMEFORM
OVERVIEW	

     Chlordimeform is present as the active ingredient in
pesticide products registered for use to control the egg and
larvae stage of Heliothis sop, on cotton.  Chlordimeform
products are also registered as yield enhancers for all cotton
growing areas based on increased cotton yields above that
expected from insect control alone.

     In 1985, the two Chlordimeform registrants, Ciba-Geigy
Corporation (Ciba-Geigy) and Nor-Am Chemical Company (Nor-Am)
were notified of the Agency's intention to commence a Special
Review of pesticide products containing Chlordimeform.  In
January 1986, the draft Registration Standard, which was made
available for public comment, stated that the Agency intended  to
put Chlordimeform in the Special Review process.  Studies with
the unmetabolized parent Chlordimeform indicated that the
compound was not mutagenic; however, metabolism of the parent
compound produced one metabolite considered moderately mutagenic
and another one considered to be strongly mutagenic.

     On January 6, 1989, the Acting Assistant Administrator for
the Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances signed a FEDERAL
REGISTER Notice entitled:  "Chlordimeform:  Final Decision Not
to Initiate a Special Review and Decision and Order of
Cancellation."  The Agency's decision is based on the proposal,
in February 1988, by Ciba-Geigy and Nor-Am, to voluntarily
cancel all Chlordimeform registrations effective February 19,
1989.  The registrants indicated that they intended to terminate
sale and distribution after the 1988 cotton-growing season.
Furthermore, the Order cancels all registrations of pesticide
products containing Chlordimeform as .the active ingredient and
prohibits allxsale and distribution of existing stocks of
Chlordimeform in the possession of registrants, retailers, and
distributors after February 19, 1989.  Additionally, the
registrants are required, by the Order of Cancellation, to recall
all existing stocks down to the dealer/distributor level,
consistent with theii earlier proposal to the Agency.

     The Agency conducted a short term risk/benefit analysis of
the use of existing stocks of Chlordimeform in the hands of end-
users and has concluded that the benefits of one additional year
of limited use outweigh the risks of such use.  Therefore, the
Order allows use of existing stocks in the possession of end
users until October 1, 1989.
-------
                                    -2-
     Compliance with the Cancellation Order will be determined
through inspections of registrants, distributors, dealers,  and
users of canceled products.   Inspections are to be conducted by
States with Cooperative Enforcement Agreements and EPA in States
without Cooperative Enforcement Agreements, as part of their
current routine inspections.   In Regions/States where
substantial use of chlordimeform has occurred, States will
specifically target and conduct inspections at the distributor/
dealer level for purposes of assuring compliance with the
Cancellation Order.  If States receive tips, complaints,  or other
information indicating that use is occurring after October  1,
1989, they should target specific inspections at the user level.
REGULATED INDUSTRY	

     All registrants, producers, distributors, and users of
chlordimeform are subject to the Cancellation Order.   At the
time of the voluntary cancellation, there were two registrants,
eight registrations, and two producer establishments.   A list of
these can be found in Appendix A.

CONDITIONS OF CANCELLATION

     All pesticide products containing chlordimeform were
automatically canceled on February 19, 1989.

Recall	

     The Order requires the two registrants to conduct a recall   .
down to the dealer/distributor level consistent with their
earlier proposal to the Agency, in order to ensure that no
further quantities of chlordimeform become available to end
users.
           \
Existing Stocks	s	

   Sale and distribution of existing stocks now in the
possession of retailers and distributors is not permitted.  Such
sale and distribution was prohibited as of February 19, 1989.
Please note that section 2(gg) of the FIFRA 88 Amendments defines
the term "to distribute or sell" to mean: to distribute, sell,
offer for sale, hold for distribution, hold for sale, hold for
shipment, ship, deliver for shipment, release for shipment, or
receive and (having so received) deliver or offer to deliver.

     Ciba-Geigy and Nor-Am have indicated that they have not
marketed chlordimeform after the 1988 cotton growing season.
Both registrants are required to recall all existing stocks of
chlordiaeforai down to the dealer/distributor level.  The
-------
                                    -3-
 registrants have  also  indicated that they will accept for
 disposal  any  stocks of chlordimeform turned in by end users.
 Persons holding existing stocks of canceled products must
 dispose of them in accordance with the applicable requirements
 of  the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
 Noncompliance with the Cancellation Order or its terms is a
 violation of  FIFRA sections 12(a)(l)(A) and 12(a)(2)(K).

     The  use  of chlordimeform stocks in the possession of end
 users will be allowed  until October 1, 1989;  however, such use
 must be in accordance  with the terms of the cancellation order
 and any label restrictions.

 COMPLIANCE MONITORING

     Producing establishments will be asked to verify by mail
 that production and sale for distribution within the U.S. has
 ceased,   compliance with the Cancellation Order will be
 determined during inspections at producing establishments.

     During routine inspections of dealers and users, inspectors
 are to ensure that the canceled products are no longer being sold
 or distributed or, if  after October 1, 1989, used.  Tips and
 complaints are to be investigated as appropriate.  If a State/EPA
 has reason to suspect  violations, then inspections should be
 specifically  targeted  and conducted to address any potential
 violations.

     Producer establishments are located in Regions 3 and 4;
 therefore Regions 3 and 4 have their lead responsibility for
 monitoring the efforts of Nor-Am and Ciba-Geigy, respectively, to
 recall all existing stocks and to ensure that the results of the
 recall are forwarded to EPA Headquarters.  Recall monitoring of
 existing  stocks will also be performed by Regions working in
 conjunction with the States, with priority placed on areas where
 substantial use has occurred.

 ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES

 Office of Pesticide Programs	

Will develop  and provide OCM with a list of products affected by
 the Notice and their registration status.

Office of Compliance Monitoring	'   	

Will develop  and transmit the compliance Monitoring Strategy to
 the Regions.

Will distribute a list of registrants, producing establishments,
 and products  affected  by the Notice to the Regions.
-------
                                    -4-
Regions	.  	

Will provide copies of the Compliance Monitoring Strategy to the
States.

Will distribute a list of registrants, producing establishments,
and products affected by this Notice to the States.

will conduct inspections in states without Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements as specified in this Strategy.

Will take enforcement actions as appropriate.

Will report information to States which indicates possible non-
compliance with the Cancellation Order, including information on
tips and complaints received.

Will specify recall monitoring provisions to the States.

Will report results of the recall and any violations to EPA
headquarters as where specified in this strategy.

states	,	"

Will conduct inspections and submit reports as agreed upon with
the Regions.

Will monitor the recall provisions of the Cancellation Order as
required by the Strategy.

Will investigate tips and complaints as received.  If States
receive information which indicates possible noncompliance with
the Cancellation Order, they, should investigate to ensure
compliance.,

will take enforcement actions, as appropriate.

In addition, States should address the chlordimeform cancellation
Order in their priority setting process for FY 90, as
appropriate.                               "
-------
                                     APPENDIX B
             COMPLIANCE STRATEGY SUMMARY FOR CHLORDIMEFORM CANCELLATION
AFFECTED ENTITY
Registrants/Retailers/
Distributors
Registrants
Registrants
Users
Users
REQUIREMENTS
Existing Stocks
(Sale and Distribution)
Recall
Disposal
Existing Stocks
(Use)
Disposal
EFFECTIVE
DATE
2/19/89
*
*
10/1/89
10/1/89***
. AUTHORITY
Order
Order
**
Order
**
* No effective date mentioned in the FR  Notice.
** Applicable Federal,  State, and Local  laws
    Must be disposed of after this date  but no time frame in FR Notice.
-------
 6242
Federal Regfrtar / Voi K N0.'s>' WtdnM
 registrants of technical chlordimebm   -
 and chiordimeform hydrochlorlda,
 ChJordimefonn. an Insecticide, is aeed
 on cotton to control Htliothit ipp.   .  '
 & Legal Background         '  .^^,.
   A pesticide product may be sold or
 distributed in the United State* only tf it
 to registered or exempt from registration
 under the Federal Insecticide. Fungicide
 and Rodenticide Act (rTFRAJ. at
 amended (7 U.S.C 138 * wo.). Before a*
 product can be registered it must he-
 shown thst il can o* used without
 "unreasonable adverse effects oo •*
 environment" (FIFRA section 3(c)(5)J.
 The term "unreasonable adverse effect*
• oa th* environment" Is defined m FIFRA
 section 2(bb) as "any unreasonable riak
 to man or the eavtnnmenU taking mte
 eccount th* economic social, and
 environmental costs and benefit of th*
 us* of any pestidde."The burden of
 proving that a pesticide meets this
 standard for registration is. it all ttmee,
 oo the proponent of initial or continued
 registntion. If at any time the Agency
 determines taat a pesticide no longer
 meets this standard, the Administrator
 may cancel this registration under .
 section Oof FIFRA.             :"....
   The Special Review process provide*
 a mechanism to permit public
 particrpetfoa m EPA's deliberation*
 prior to issuance of any Notice of Final
 Determination describing the regulatory
 action which the Administrator ha*
 selected. The Special Review procesa,
 which wet previously called th*
 Rabuttable Presumption Against
 Registration (RPAR) process, I*
 described in 40 CFR Part 154. published
 a the Federal Register of November if.
 1985 (50 FR 49015).
   The Special Review process I*
 commenced by the Issuance of a
 preliminary notification to  registrant*
 aad applicants for registration pursuant
 to 40 CFR 154.21 that the Agency la
, considering commencing t Special
 Review. If the Agency determine*, after
 Issuance of a notification pursuant to 40
 CFR 154-21. that It will not conduct a
 Special Review, it It required under 49
 CFR 154.23 to issue a proposed decision
 to be published la the Federal Register.
                                                                     tfoa require* that a period of
                                                                  man 30 days be provided for
                                                           .  .   comment on the proposed
                                                           eJsdaioo act to conduct a Special
                                                           l**jaw. Subsequent to receipt aad
                                                          • erefaaUon of comments oa the proposed
                                                          . decMua not to conduct a Special
                                                           Rvrirw, the Administrator is required
                                                           ay 4$ CFR 154.29 to publish in the
                                                           Federal Register his final decision
                                                           regarding, whether or not a Special
                                                           Review will be conducted.

                                                           C Sigulalory Hiiteiy

                                                            CMordimeform was first registered in
                                                               for use on apples. Between 1988
                                                              1978 us* on several more crips was
                                                                     including cotton. In 1978 the
                                                           registrants voluntarily withdrew
                                                           chiordimeform from the market based
                                                           aa results of a chronic mouse study
                                                           showing that chiordimeform caused
                                                           aaafignant humors,
                                                            CUordimeform was reintroduced to
                                                           ID* market in 1978 with only the cotton
                                                           es* on the label At mat time, extensive
                                                           protective clothing measures wen
                                                           reqmJred a* well as requirements for
                                                           arfidng and loading in closed systems,
                                                           redaced application rates, restricted ate
                                                           cleasiflcatioa and mining for workers.
                                                           Registrants were also required to
                                                           Implement a worker urine monitoring
                                                           program. Following th* reintroduction of
                                                           chiordimeform. the Agency received
                                                           additional positive mouse cancer studies
                                                           aa chiordiaeform and its metabolites.
                                                            Oo September 15.1985. the Agency
                                                           issued a preliminary notification to the
                                                           registrants of chiordimeform. pursuant
                                                           to 49 CFR 154.21. based on evidence that
                                                           chiordimeform caused rumors in
                                                           laboratory animals. On January IS. 1986.
                                                           a draft Registration Standard for
                                                           ddordimeform was issued for public
                                                           comment This document notified the
                                                           pabac that the Agency would initiate a
                                                           Special Review and invited comment*
                                                           from registrants and other Interested
                                                           parties. Public comment on the draft
                                                           Registration Standard was initiated
                                                           because then was a substantially
                                                           eooplete chronic health and teratology
                                                           data  base for chiordimeform (40 CFR
                                                           153J4). The Agency decided not to issue
                                                           a Federal Register notice merely
                                                           anaeundng initiation of a Special
                                                           Review but to proceed directly to a
                                                           combined Notice of Initiation of Special
                                                           Review aad Preliminary Determination.
                                                           A Notice of Preliminary Determination
                                                           eats forth both the risks and the benefits
                                                           of (he chemciaL analyze*, the risks and
                                                           benefits, discusses regulatory  options
                                                           for redadaf risk, aad proposes a
                                                           regulatory action. The Agency was
                                                           preparing a combined Notice of
                                                           taitiattoo of Special Review and
-------
                  Federal leggier / Vol 54.  Ho. g I Wednesday. February 8, 1989 / NoHcW
                                                                                                           1243
 Preliminary Determination whan, prler
 to fonnal initiation of • Special Review,
 on Febn^l* 198ft, aba-Cetfy and
 Nor-Am. tht only registrants «f    .::  *:
 chJordimeform, requested vohmtary
 cancellation of All ifpuifn'its rnnts.lnlrsj
 chlordimeform, effective February it,
 1969. Both companies announced their
 intent to discontinue sale tad
 diitrbution after the 1900 cotaaav
 growing ictton. about October 1. 1909;
 they indicated that they expected
 existing stocks, (boat die same amount
 tf they told in 1967, to be used up in the
 1988 growing tenon. Both companies
 also stated that they would recall any
 uauied itockj  down to the uaer level
 and would ditpose of these recalled
 «tock*. Both companies requettad
 immediate withdrawal of all tofermact*
 except for cotton: they requested ihe
 withdrawal of the cotton related
 toieranccf effective December 91. HBO.
 The Agency ha* approved aaeodmeaai
 lubnu'tted by both companies which
 place a termination daU o/Febrsory tt,
 I960 on  their chlordimafom
 registrations.
  The Agency ha* alao discussed wtTk
 the National Institute of Occupational
 Safety and Health (N1OSH] and various)
 State health agencies, a possible
 program to contact agricultural and
 factory workers expoeed to sigBifieat
 level* of chlordimeform in the pad The
 purpose of ntch notification woold be to
 inform worker* of their increased risk of
 bladder cancer, and to encourage fan
 to *eek medical attention, rach aa
 cancer screening testa,  which would
 allow early detection and treatment. Me
 deciiion haa been made yet to ponae •
 notification program.
  thi* Notice announce* that for to
 reaton* explained m the September tt\
 1988, Federal Refiater Notice (S3 FR
 36422) and summarized la Unit IV of this
 Notice, the Agency will not tnidata the
 Special Review bated on the companies'
 voluntary cancellations. The Agency ha*
 cancelled Cibs-Geigy's and Nor-Aa's
 chlordimeform registration*, effacd**
 February 19,1989. The September If,
 1888. proposed notice rantasnad a
 prohibition against the safe. dfaMbejttoa
 and use of existing stocks after February
 19.1969. Thij notice amoancn fPA"»
 decision to prohibit salt aad dUtribottoa
 after Pebraary 19. 1SB9. tnrt to allow the
use of existing stoeka m the po* session
of end users, ontil October t,1Ma\
based on comments and mforauttoa
received from asea. sUte eCBdala, asai
researchwa. which the Afeacy oa«d to •
risk/benefit analymi* of the snort  taaai
use of chlofdimeform •»«*! Ocaobar t»  ''
19a0. The raaaocs Cw gnntinf tfck
provision are also discnsaed m Uiet IV.
 A. Cbeoguuc Kill   '.'•  •    -•    '
  A prrrale sjoHficatfoa. issaed pursuant
 to 40 CFR U42L whJch begu the pn»
 Special Reriew procesa, was seat to
 chlordaaeform reglftrants because of
 Agency concerns that chlordimefarai
 exceeded the risk criterion far
 oncogenicity now specified in 40 CPR  '
 !M.7(aX2). This concern was
 specifically based on four eao«w '
 oncoMaitity studies which demonstrate
 significant dose-felalad increases to
 tumor rates in male and female mice.
 These studies are discussed at lengv n.
 the draft Chlordimeform Registration
 Standard, which can be obtained from
 the eddres* given above for
  After the private aolfllcation to     -  •
registrant* the Agency received  •
preliminary findings from •  '
retrospective mortality study of German
production workers which snugs its 4-
cblor-o-tolaidiae (S-CAT). • nMtaooRto
of chlordimeform which has beta
detected in the orina of exposed  •'
agricultural workers, may todvet
baiddar cancer in humans. The
metabolite S-CAT belongs to a class of
organic chemkale, the substituted
                tbers of which have.
been isVntified as <
  Based on animal data. fcTA and
previoajly ooochided that there •
surBdent experioeoul evidence to
classify chlordimefonn as a Bt or
probable human carcinogen, porsoant to
Agency eardnogeB assessment
gsideliaes. The rnnaan data from 
-------
 6244
               -.         .
/ Vol 54, No. » /  Wednesday. February * 1909 / Noffcrt
 then an significant stocks of  .. •', . >>; ,-•
 chlordimeform (thought to ba withtn % ^
 range of 10 to 25 percent of a normal   ,
 year's supply; that Is, 100.000 to 280000
 pounds) remaining ia the hands of end
 users. Thenrore. In light of the larger
 than expected stocks of chlordimeform
 in the hands of end users and tn hght of
 the comments of State pestidde offidals
 and user groups, the Agency has
 conducted s risk/benefit analysis of
 allowing the use of sxiiting stocks of
 chlordimefonn in 1989. This risk/benefit
 analysis appears In the following Unit
 QLB.
 A. Agtncy'i Retponu to Comments
  Comments wera received bom the
 following organizations and stats
 regulatory agendes:
 Arizona Agricultural Chemical
  Assodstion (1)
 Arizona Commission of Agriculture and
  Horticulture (2)
 Arizona Cotton Growers Assodstion (3)
 Arizona Farm Bureau Federation (4)
 Agricultural Council of Arkansas (5)
 Arkansas Stats Plant Board (6)
 Assodation of America Pastidda
  Control Offidals (7)
 Georgia Agricultural Chemical ' "
  Assodation (8)
 Georgia Cooperative Extension Service
  (•)
 Georgia Department of Agriculrun (10)
 Helens Chemical Corporation (11)
 Louisiana Agricultural Aviation
  Assodstion (12)
 Louisiana Cooperative Extension
  Service (13)
 Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation (14)
 Mississippi Cooperative Extension
  Service (15)
 Mississippi Department of Agricultun
  and Commerce (16)
 National Agricultural Aviation
  Assodation (17)       '     •
 National Cotton Council (18)
 North Carolina Faun Bureau Federation
  (19)                     \ .
Sundance Farms (20)
Trans-Peco* Cotton Assodation (21).
  In addition, numerous comments wara
 received from individual cotton gfowan
 and pestidde applicator*. Thaaa latter
comments an substantially tha same aa  •
those comments made by state
regulatory offldala, and an uswand to
the responses to the state regulatory
officials.              .            .  ••
  1. Comment One commenter (!) states
that the Agency doas not have legal
authority to prohibit use of a voluntarily
canceled pestidde, and that tha
Agency's proposal to not allow osa of
existing stocks Is not consistent with an
earlier proposal to allow use with
restriction*.             -     •• -    -
      X|wnc7> AasponM: b determining, j
   ,6s suras of stocks of periddea.    .  .
    voluntarily canceled pursuant to section
    •(ft. to Administrator may or may not
    permit the sale and use of existing  •••>•;
    stocks. Tha Agency is not prevented -   '
    from changing its position on use of
    existing stocks, where such can be
    Justified under FIFRA. especially when
    new conditions become relevant
    .  2, Comment Several commenten (6.7.
    0, 9.14. and 17) stated that it would be
    difficult to locate any remaining stocks
    of chlordimeform, especially if these
    stocks ara in the hands of end users,
      Agtncy't Ruponiv Tha Agency doaa
    not agree that It will be particularly
    difficult to locate existing stocks of
    chlordimeform. Both registrants have
    already contacted their dealer/  .
    distributor networks about the recall of
    chlordimeform. and have agreed to
    publicize the recall in appropriate
    newspapers and agricultural Journals la
    order to reach end users. la addition, tha
    Agency notes that chlordimeform is a
    restricted use pesticide, and that
    therefore records of chlordimeform salsa
    have been required to be kept
      X Comment Several commenten (12.
    J. 8, a, 7,10, U111117,1ft, and 21)
    stated that then is no means by which
    to dispoee of chlordimeform. or that uaa
    of existing stocks of chlordimeform
    would pose lass risk than transportation
    and disposal or that allowing use of
    chlordimeform would allow it to remain
    fat the hands of people trained in proper
    safety procedures.
      Agency '$ Retfoni* The Agency
    agrees that disposal of existing stocks of
    chlordimeform is a serious matter.
    however, tha Agency does not agree that
    then is no method available to dispose .
    of chlordimeform. It is possible to
    ioc!aarate chlordimeform. and it is this
    method of disposal that registrants have
    agreed to use, not burial in landfills. Tha
    Agency also does not believe that
    allowing personnel employed by tha
    registrants to ship and handle
    chlordimeform la order to dispose of It is
    Intrinsically riskier than allowing it to
    ba used OR through many years of
    registered use. personnel trained ia
    proper safety procedures have shipped
    •tw< handled chlordimeform la Quantities
    larger  than those expected to ba
    tavohrad la tha recall Appropriate
    protective clothing and other safety
    measures can ba employed to mitigate
    risks.         .          .. •     •    '
      4. Comment One commenter (11)
    states that then an no funds sat asida
    to Indemnify users who hav* remaining
    stocks of chlordlmefomv
      Agency'i Response: Section 18
    indemnification provisions an not
    involved ia this situation. A voluntary
                                                                            caocauation occurred hen- Than was
                                                                            us tauniaant hazard suspension as la
                                                                            required as one of the prerequisite* for
                                                                            •action 18 to ba triggered.
                                                                              8. Cematat Some commenten (41
                                                                            10k 14. and 18] expressed concern that
                                                                            stocks of chlordimeform remaining ia
                                                                            the hands of end usen an not likely to
                                                                            be turned in for disposal: aa a result
                                                                            then will be illegal use of
                                                                            chJordimefora. probably by ground
                                                                            application, which poses higher risks
                                                                            than the serial applications that would
                                                                            occur" if existing stocks of chlordimeform
                                                                            wen to be used up. Furtbermon. they
                                                                            comment that aerial applicators will
                                                                            have to turn away customers who want
                                                                            to have chlordimeform applied aerially.
                                                                              Agency's Respcnie: The Agency is
                                                                            aware of the possibility that not all
                                                                            remaining stocks of chlordimeform may
                                                                            ba nturned. and then, in the absence of
                                                                            an existing stocks provision, these
                                                                            stocks may be diverted to riskier ground
                                                                            application. However, the Agency
                                                                            believes that the efforts of the
                                                                            registrants to publicize the recall would
                                                                            result in at leaat some stocks being
                                                                            Nturned by users. If use sfter the date of
                                                                            cancellation wera illegal, the Agency
                                                                            would expect states to vigorously
                                                                            enforce tha prohibition against use of
                                                                            existing stocks. The Agency agree* with
                                                                            tha commenten that aerial applicator*.
                                                                            because of their extensive licensing
                                                                            proceduns. ara more likely to comply   .
                                                                            with the prohibition against continued
                                                                            use of chlordimeform. and that this
would possibly lead to less business for
affected aerial applicaton during 1969.
If tha aerial applicators wen not to
refuse such business snd undertook
illegal application*, in addition to
possible penalties, such illegal activity
would jeopardize such aerial
applicator's license and certification.
  «. Comment Several comments (2.3.
4. IX14,16.17.18. and 20) concerned
tha benefits of chlordimeform. arguing
that then an no alternative pesticide*
with which to replace chlordimeform, or .
that use of chlordimeform will delay
development of resistance to tha
pynthrpid insecticides.
  Agency'» Responu: The Agency
agrees that chlordimeform does have
benefits, and that these benefits will be
foregone if use of existing stocks is not
permitted. However, the Agency notes
that than an alternative pestiddes
registered for oviddal control of
Htliothit app. (methomyl and
thlodkarb). The Agency further notes
that ao data have bean provided to
show that chlordimeform delays
resistance to tha pyrathroid Insecticides.
  7. Summary of Goaumatr Comments
generally concerned tha practicality of
-------
                 Faderd
Voi K~No.'lB /Wednesday, February 8, 1989  / rotten
                                                                                                          •245
 retrieving and disposing of remalnm*  *
 stocks of ehJoidimefbm me rtsksof  J'
 ditpoMl and of minM of &SM stock*
 •nd the benefits of theM stocks. The
 Ageftcy don not find ay of ma
 comment* to bt compeflmg to aDowtasj
 or disallowing the OM of remaining  -
 stocks. However, in oonskfcretion of fee
 concern for the UM or BOBBM of
 remaining stocks ai expressed la  theM
 comments, EPA has conductedu
 analysis of the short-term risks ad
 benefit* regarding the possible UM of
 existing stock* of chJordimetorm in T9B9.

 B. Risk/Benefit Ajialytii of Allowing
 Uie ofExJiting Sloelu
 \. Risk* of UM of Existing Stock*  of
 ChJordimetorm
   to order for the Agency to aDow the
 use of exiiting stock* of products
 cancelled as • result of • risk/benefit
 finding. EPA most determine thai  tot
 benefit* of the UM of any existing stocks
 outweigh the risk* of such UM for the)
 period of nse. Chlordimefono
 registration* were not cancelled M •
 result of an Agency risk/benefit finding,
 but instead were cancelled TotaBtanljr
 by the registrant*. Nevertheless, tht
 Agency believe* a risk/benefit analysis
 for existing stocks 1* appropriate la this
 case because the Agency had iMoed •
 Preliminary Notification to At
 registrant* and w»s to the piaona of
 preparing a Notice of Initiation «f
 Special Review and • Preliminary
 Determination at the tine the voluntary
 cancellation was filed. Tbe Incremental
 risk of allowing an additional ye«r of   •
 DM of the existing stock* of
 chlordimefonn is calculated by drvidtag
 the lifetime risk by 70, and by dividing
 this result by tome factor renreaenHaf
 the reduced amount of chlordimefonn to
 be used The Ufetfme risk already
include* an adjustment for IS yean «f
exposure during an assumed Itfsspaa of
70 year*, because occupatioaal
exposure* are assumed to be V yearv
This  calculation assumes mat risk Is
directly proportional to the total <
of pesticida handled over tiaa. ..

                   "   .    "  T«aul-
    n a typfca! year, start 1 afflfoa to t  *
  mifiton poonda of chlcrdlmeform an
  reportedly used Based on tpedfle
  information received through the puMhu
  comments, (be Agency belieres that
  from 10 to 25 percent of mis amount of
  chlordimefonn remains available for as*
  In 1988. The»e assumptions are based on
  a limited survey of Alabama pesticide
  distributors, which confirm earlier
  estimates by State regulatory officials
  and the registrants. However, comments
  and other Information available to lha
  Agency Indicate that there may be much
  larger stocks of chlordimefonn  .
  remaining In the hands of end users; the •
  Agency cannot fully evaluate the
  accuracy of any of theM estimates.
  because insufficient Information has
  been submitted on the design of ma
  surveys used to reach these estimates.
  Therefore, tha Agency has calculated
 •risks and benefits not only for the If
  percent and 25 percent •"••i"<"g stocks
  assumption, but also on the wont case
  assumption, that la. (hat there is an
  entire typical year's supply af
  chlordlmcfann *•'"•''"'"• Jn «x
  cad UMTS. Tha Agency has reoaiwed
  little Specific 
-------
 !BenefiUofUseofExi*(lntStodc*Qff; 4
 Chlordimefoni.   .-..,. r  ••'."*•'o<.;-«
   The possible benefit* froea  -  >s-r.o
 chlordimeform eocrae indirectly from *»
 contribution to reducing Insect    •  f ••»
 Rsistonca^to the pyrethroid insecticide*,
 and directly from It* affect* on cotton
 yields, through it* cootroi of Av/fotDJ*
 tpp. The svailable data do not allow a
 definitive estimate of the magnitude of
 yield losses that could result from not  .
 using cnlordimefonn in 1908. Limited   .
 data indicate possible yield reduction*  -
 of 5 to 10 percent, or an average of ?&
 percent on treated acres, about the same
 as the loss estimate developed by USDA
 in its preliminary  benefits assessment, If
 other pesticide* are used In place of
 chlordimefonn.
   Using a range of 0 to 7 percent IOM on
 28 percent of the harvested cotton
 acreage (that Is. 100 percent of th*
 annual usage before cancellation), th*
 loss in benefits range* from SlO to $220
 million. Using a range of 0 to 7 percent
 yield toe* on 7 percent of die harvested
 cotton acreage (that la. 29 percent of th*
 annual usage before cancellation), tb*
 loss in benefits ranges from S3 million to
 SS4 million. Using a range of 0 to 7
 percent yield loss  on 2.0 percent of th*
 harvested cotton acreage (that is. 10
 percent of the prior annual uagejrtb*
 loss to benefit* ranges from Si million to
 $22 million. The low end of the rang*
 reflect* the greater coat of alternative
 pesticides, most likely to be methonyi
or thiodicarb in this case. The upper end
 of the range reflect* th* possible greater
efficacy of chlordimeform over
 alternative*. These benefit estimate* are
based on the small amount of data on
yield losses, and may
underestimate actual
                    over or
                   benefits.
. 3. Risk/Benefit Analysis of Use of
 Existing Stocks of Chlordimefonn
   Making the wont case assumption
 that 100 percent of a normal year**
 supply of chlordimeform remain* in the;
 hands of users, that la, 1 million pound*.
 th* incremental risk from one additional
 year1* use of chlordimeform to mixer/
 loaders is in th* 10~4 to 10"• range, and
 to applicators i* 10~*. A* shown In Table
 2. individual risk* from on* more year of _
 use under any of th* probabl* as*
 scenarios are low. The Incidence of  •__
 cancer in the exposed group, a*   .  *'_
 predicted by this assessment would b*
 negligible, because of the small number
 of applicators and mixer/loaders who •
 handle chlordimeform. Benefits under
 the various scenario* range from SI to
 S220 million. Given the minimal risk and
 ma possible substantial benefit*, th*	
 Agency conclude* that the 0*0 of
 existing stock* of chlordimefonn In th*
                                            growing MUOB doe* oof MOT ^ '.-
                                           ••enabled*!*. However, because; ^
                                              nek from M year* of   .,<, ^..^
                                       occupational exposure I* high, estimated
                                       to be l to a ion, and becaua*    -;..-,£
                                       epidemJoJoftcal data suggest •     .-  ,1
                                       correlation between exposure to the V
                                       CAT metabolite of chJordimefonn and
                                       excess incidence of bladder cancer, the
                                       Agency believes long term risks would
                                       be unacceptable.               ;.,.'.
                                         The Agency la requiring th*'   •' '•''
                                       registrant*, Qba-Ceigy and Nor-Am, to
                                       conduct their recall program* down to
                                       th* dealer/distributor level In order to
                                       be sure that no further quantities of
                                       chlordimefonn become available to and'.
                                         A* mentioned previously, the EPA ha*
                                       held discussions with other Federal and
                                       Slate agencies regarding the possibility
                                       of notifying factory and agricultural
                                       workers who were exposed to
                                       significant levels of chlordimeform over
                                       long periods of time of their elevated
                                       risk of bladder cancer. EPA believe*
                                       that factory workers' level of exposure
                                       to chlordimefonn was substantially
                                       higher than mat to mixer/loaders or
                                       applicator*, possibly resulting in a*
                                       much a* two orders of mconi tad*
greater risk Thus. EPA believes H a?
reasonable to aOow limited exposure of
mixer/loader* and applicators for aa
additional year. Nevertheless, EPA
support* the voluntary urine monitoring
program offered by the registrant* to •
mixer/loaders and applicator*.
IV. Agency'* final Dedsioo Regarding
Special Review
  All cUordimefonn registration* have
been amended so that they terminate
February 10. 1980, The Agency received
no comment* objecting to It* proposed
decision not to initiate a Special Review
of chlordimeform. Therefore, ihe Agency
will not initiate a Special Review of the
use of chlordimeform oo cotton. The
only (MO* resulting from the Agency**
proposal we* the objection to the
prohibition of the use of existing stock*
IB torn    .       ..      .    ......
  The agency ha* conducted a short
(arm risk/benefit analysis of thc.use of
        f Infirm gf chlordlfflefomi to *fat
                                       hand* of end users and concluded that
                                       tfkt benefit* of one additional year of  -
                                       Halted o*e outweigh the risk* of such
                                       ••a. Therefore, the use of chlordlmefomi
                                       •ttcfca En die possession of end user*
                                       will be permitted until October 1 1008.
                                       Such u*e must be in accordance win all
                                       label restrictions. Any further sal* or
                                       distribution of existing stock* or    ? .""
                                       recalled stock* by registrant*.     ;•"•''   -:
                                       distributors, or retailers Is prohibited
                                       after February 10. 1880. AD use of
                                       chlordimeform after October 1 1080, fa)  '"
ffoUbNed, Boa njUtrut* indicated
•Of hr*oot marketed chlordimsform
after the IOM cotton season, around th*
beginning of October 1908. Both
registrant* also Indicated that dtty wifl
recall afl existing stocks of
chlordimeform down to the dealer/
distributor Wvel and will accept for
dUposal any stocks of chlordimefonn
turned in by end user*.
  While the Agency has serious
concents about the long-term risk*
associated with chlordimeform us* on
cotton, it will not Initial* • Special
Review of chlordimefonn because all
use. and therefore exposure, will end at
die end of the 19M cotton-growing
season. Th* cancellation* will become
effective automatically on February 10.
1009. The Agency has acted In reliance
on the voluntary cancellation by
proposing revocation of non-cotton
tolerance* and by not initiating  a
Special Review.
  Th* Agency haa other tools that may
be available to it under FIFRA to take
regulatory action regarding
chjordimefonn, Including initiation of
Special Review and subsequent
initiation of cancellation proceeding*.
immediate Initiation of cancellation  . .
promfdingSi suspension, and emergency
suspension. A* compared with initiation
of Special Review followed by initiation
of cancellation proceedings, or
Immediate initiation of cancellation
proceeding*, the action  announced here
reduce* risks faster than would occur
under those other more  time-consuming
approaches. Finally, th* Agency doe*
not believe that th* appropriate test* for
either suspension or emergency
suspension have been met

V.fttbhc Record

  Th* Agency ha* established a public
record (public docket *30000/32J for the
chlordimeform Special Review. Thi*
public record includes:
  l.Tm* Notice,
  2. The draft Registration Standard.
  1 Any other notice* pertinent to the
chlordimefonn Special Review.
  4 Documents and copies of written
oomnMints submitted to th* Agency in
response to the pre-Special Review
registrant notification, the draft
Registration Standard, this Notice, and
any other notice regarding
chlordimeform submitted at any time
during the chlordimeform Special
Review process by any person outside
                                                                             1   I, Analysis of comments received m
                                                                              response to me draft Registration
                                                                              Staadard and the preliminary
                                                                              notification to regJstruts.
-------
Fed«f»J
                                  / Vol
                  , , r^a^.f--
-------
 jr—"t,

i f±  *i
      "J    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

       ^                WASHINGTON, DC. 20460
                                                          or net Of
                                                   PBtTICIDCS *NO TOXIC iU«»TANCt%
 MEMORANDUM


 SUBJECT:  Final Compliance Monitoring
           Strategy for Compound 1080 Livestock
           Protection Collars

 FROM:     A. E. Conroy II, Director
           Office of Compliance Monitoring (EN-342)

 TO:       Addressees

      Attached is the final Compliance Monitoring Strategy for
 Compound 1080 Livestock Protection (LP)  Collars.  This
 document reflects the strategy for monitoring compliance with
 the provisions of the labeling for registered Compound 1080
 LP Collars.

      Note that only one federal pesticide registration has been
 issued (EPA Registration Number 6704-85) for Compound 1080 LP
 Collars, that being to the U. S. Department of the Interior,
 Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).  The registration was issued
 conditionally under section 3(c)(7) of the Federal Insecticide,
 Fungicide and Rodenticide Act.  To date, FWS does not intend  to
 train or certify LP Collar applicators,  or to distribute LP
 Collars to rancher applicators.  The FWS will assist in State
 training programs, but expects most LP Collar use to proceed.
 without FWS Involvement.  Wyoming is currently seeking a separate
 registration for the LP Collars.  Copies of the Cancellation
 Order and the subsequent documents are available upon request.

      The Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM) received the
 following comments on the draft strategy.
 —     m
      One Regional Office suggested that  when state governmental
 agencies are the registrants of LP Collars, EPA should maintain
 the responsibility for producing establishment and agent
 Inspection? so the States are not placed in a position of
 having to regulate themselves.  OCM agrees with this and has
 modified the strategy accordingly.
-------
                              -2-
     One Regional Office ..requested that the Regions submit annual
rather than quarterly Inspection/violation reports to OCM because
quarterly reports are not necessary.  OCM has considered this
comment and has retained the quarterly Regional  reporting.  This
reporting 1s needed due to the. sensitivity of the issue and the
new approach to pesticide use imposed by the courts.  Therefore,
we need to closely monitor the use of the LP Collars during the
period of conditional registration.

     One Regional Office requested that each appropriate group
notify OCM/Regions/States when any registrations change including
changes in the registrants and agents thereof.  OCM has
considered this comment and has  modified the strategy
accordingly.

     One Regional Office suggested that the strategy Include a
statement for States to develop  amendments to State plans to
Include LP Collar certification  and coordinate the activity with
the Regional Office.  OCM agrees with this comment and has
modified the strategy so that States shall develop such
amendments when it 1s appropriate.

     Thank you for your comments on the draft strategy.   If you
have any questions concerning this strategy, please call Richard
Green of my staff at (FTS) 382-5567.

Attachment
-------
Addressees
Douglas Campt    (TS-766C)
Phil Gray        (TS-767C)
Jim Lamb         (TS-788)
Terrell Hunt     (LE-134A)
Stan Abramson    (LE-132A)
Ken Shiroishi    (EN-342)
John J. Neylan III  "
Dexter Goldman      "
Phyllis Flaherty
John Martin
Ralph Turpin        "
Mike Wood

Dr. John Mackenzie
Western Regional  Compliance Director

A. Charles Lincoln
Eastern Regional  Compliance Director

Louis F. Gitto, Director
Air Management Division, Region I

Barbara Metzger,  Director
Environmental Services Division,  Region  II

Stephen R. Wassersug, Director
Hazardous Waste Management  Division, Region  III

Winston A. Smith, Director
Air, Pesticides and Toxics  Management Division,  Region  IV

William,H. Sanders III, Director
Environmental Services Division,  Region  V

William B. Hathaway, Director
Air, Pesticides and Toxics  Division, Region  VI

William A. SpratUn, Director
Air and Topics Division, Region VII

Irwln L. D1ckste1n, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region VIII

Harry SeraydaHan, Director
Toxics and Waste Management Division, Region IX

Gary 0'Neal, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region X

cc:  Regional Pesticides and Toxic Substances Branch Chiefs
-------
   FIFRA COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY



                   FOR



COMPOUND 1080 LIVESTOCK PROTECTION COLLARS
     ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY





OFFICE OF PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES





     OFF'ICE OF COMPLIANCE MONITORING
-------
            FIFRA COMPLIANCE MONITORING  STRATEGY  FOR
           COMPOUND  1080,. LIVESTOCK  PROTECTION  COLLARS
 Office  of  Pesticide  Programs
 Office  of  Compliance Monitoring
 Regional  Offices
 Office  of  Training and Technical Support
  States
                                                             PAGE
REGULATED INDUSTRY
MFIITO&I AUHINIStRATlVE I_NbPE
 7
 6
8-9
 9
 9 '
-------
             FIFRA COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY FOR
             COMPOUND 1080 LIVESTOCK PROTECTION COLLARS
 OVERVIEW
      The  following points highlight the inspection activities  and
 major  new  requirements.

 0     State/EPA inspectors will conduct annual inspections of
      producing establishments, registrants, and agents thereof
      as long as registrations are conditional and thereafter
      according to the routine pesticide inspection scheme.

 0     State/EPA inspectors will conduct use and records
      inspections of applicators according to the schedule herein.

 0     Specific certification is required to use Compound 1080  LP
      Collars.  States must amend their State plans to include
      specific Compound 1080 LP Collar certification in order  for
      the LP Collars to be used within the State.

 0     Applicators are required to keep records and report certain
      information.  Applicators are required to inspect each LP
      Collar in use on a weekly basis.

 0     Warning signs are required to be posted.

 0     Registrants and agents thereof are required to keep records.

 BACKGROUND

      The Livestock Protection (LP) Collar (also called the "toxic
 collar") for protecting sheep (Ovls spp.) and goats (Ca'pra spp.)
 from  depredating coyotes consists of a flat rubber container
 holding a  liquid toxicant which 1s attached with straps around
 the throat of a sheep or goat.  Sodium Monof1uoroacetate,
 commonly called Compound 1080, 1s the only pesticide registered.
 in the United States (U.S.) for use in LP Collars.  Compound
 1080, once Ingested (or absorbed through open wounds) in lethal
 doses, causes loss of cardiac or respiratory function and
eventually, death.

     On March 18, 1972 (37 FR 5718) the use of Compound 1080
 for pcedator control was cancelled and suspended.

     Administrative Law Judge Spencer T. Nlssen, in a 1982
 decision a/id Lee M. Thomas, who was designated by the
 Administrator to rule on his behalf in a 1983 decision/1,
 allowed for applications for registration of Compound 1080 in LP
Collars subject to certain restrictions described herein.  These
 decisions constitute modifications of the terms and conditions
of the 1972 Cancellation Order.

 /I  Initial (FIFRA Docket No. 502, October 22, 1982) and final
    decision (49 FR 4830, February 4, 1984) in the matter of
    "Notice of Hearing on the Applications to Use Sodium
    Fluoroacetate (Compound 1080) to Control Predators."
-------
                               -2-
     On July 11, 1985 the Office of Pesticide Programs  (OPP)
issued the first registration (EPA Registration  Number  6704-85)
for Compound 1080 LP Collars to the Fish and Wildlife  Service.
Federal Registration Requirements under FIFRA Section  3

     The requirements listed below (numbers  1-18)  appear  verbatim
in the technical bulletin which are part of  the  accepted
labeling.  Only the numbers with asterisks  appear  in Judge
Nissen's initial decision which are part of  the  Cancellation
Order.  In comparing attachment C of the initial  decision
(affirmed by the final  decision) with the asterisked numbers
below, note that some of the language in the initial decision  is
less restrictive.  However, Judge Nissen indicated that  to  effect
a practical program, EPA could use its discretion  to  impose more
stringent modifications to his requirements  if it  was  deemed
appropriate.  Please note that these requirements  reflect  the
label on the one registered product and that other products
registered for this use in the future may not have the same
requi rements.

1.*  Use of Livestock Protection (LP) Collars shall conform to
all applicable Federal, State and local regulations.

2.*  LP Collars shall be sold or transferred only  by  registrants
or their agents/2, and  only to certified LP Collar
applicators.  LP Collars may be used only by specifically
certified LP Collar applicators or persons  under their direct
supervision.

The certified applicator 1s responsible for assuring  compliance
with all restrictions.   The certified applicator will  determine,
in accordance with label directions, when and under what
circumstances LP Collars will be used.  The certified  applicator
will either apply LP Collars or be physically present  where
collarsxare applied by  a noncertified person.  However,  the
noncertified person who has received instructions  from the
certified applicator may store LP Collars,  check LP Collars in
the field, remove LP Collars, repair or dispose of damaged LP
Collars In accordance with use restrictions, retrieve  LP Collar;,
lying In the field, and properly dispose of contaminated material
and animal carcasses.
12  As a condition of registration, the registrant must submit to
    OPP the names of agents.
-------
                               -3-


 3.*   Certification of applicators shall be performed by
 appropriate  regulatory agencies.  Prior to certification, each
 applicator shall receive training which will  include, but not
 limited  to:

 (a)   training in safe handling and placement  of LP Collars;
 (b)   training in disposal of punctured LP Collars, contaminated
      animal  remains, and contaminated vegetation and soil;
 (c)   instructions for practical treatment of  Compound 1080
      poisoning in humans and domestic animals;
 (d)   instructions 1n recordkeeping.

 4.*   At  their address of record, registrants  or their agents
 shall  keep records of all LP Collars sold or  transferred.
 Records  shall include name, address, and state where LP Collar
 certification was issued, certification number of each recipient,
 and dates and numbers of LP Collars sold or transferred.

 5.*   Each certified applicator shall keep records of use and the
 results  of use in accordance with State and Federal regulations
 for a  period of not less than two years following disposal or
 loss  of  LP Collars.  The records shall Include, but are not
 limited  to:

 (a)   the number of LP Collars attached on livestock;
 (b)   the pasture(s) where collared livestock  were placed;-
 (c)   the dates of each inspection, attachment, and removal;
 (d)   the number and locations of livestock found with
      ruptured or punctured LP Collars and the apparent cause
      of  damage;
 (e)   the number, dates, and approximate location of LP
      Col lars 1 ost;
 (f)   the species, locations, and dates of all suspected
      poisonings of humans, domestic animals or nontarget wild
      animals resulting from LP Collar use.
          \             '
 6.*   Any suspected poisoning of threatened or endangered species
 must  be  reported within 3 days to EPA as must each accident  or
 injury to humans, domestic animals, or nontarget wild animals
 from  LP Collar use.

 7.*   Only the registrant or the manufacturer 1s permitted to
 fill  LP Collars with Compound 1080 solution.   Compound 1080
 solution m»y not be removed from LP Collars and used for any
 other purpose..

 8.* LP Collars shall only be used to take coyotes within fenced
 pastures no  larger than 2,560 acres (4 square miles).  But where
 average  annual precipitation does not exceed  20 Inches and
 vegetation 1s sparse, consisting only of short to mid-height
 grasses  and  scattered shrubs, collars may be used up to a
maximum  of 10,000 acres (16 square miles) in  size.
-------
                               -4-
     Fenced pastures Include the grazing land that  1s  enclosed  by
livestock fencing.  This" 1ncludes wire or other man-made  fences
such as rock walls, and natural  barriers such as escarpments,     '
lakes, and large rivers that will prevent escape of livestock.
Collars shall not be used on unfenced, open range.

     In no case shall the applicator place collared livestock  in
any pasture where compliance with other use restrictions  such  as
monitoring is impossible; in fenced pastures larger than  10.UOO
acres; or unfenced open range.

9.  IP Collars shall be used only where losses of  sheep or  goats
due to predation by coyotes are  occurring or, based upon
experience, where coyote predation can reasonably  be expected  to
occur.

10.* Where LP Collars are in use, each logical point of
access (i.e., roads, gates, and  trails) shall be conspicuously
posted with a bilingual (English/Spanish) warning  sign not  less
than 8" x 10" in size.  Such signs shall be inspected  weekly  to
insure their continued presence  and legibility, and will  be
removed when LP Collars are removed.  The signs will have a
minimum type size for DANGER-POISON of 24 point (1/4 inch)  with
remaining text at least 18 point (3/16 Inch).

11.* Each LP Collar 1n use shall be inspected by the applicator
at least once every seven days and LP Collars adjusted if
needed.

If any collared animal 1s not  located in two consecutive
checks, an Intensive search for  the animal 1s required.

In addition, if more than three  collared animals cannot  be
located during any one check,  an Intensive search for  the
animals is required.

If more than nine collared animals cannot be located during
any 60\day period, remove all  LP Collars from animals  and
terminate use of collars.  Do  not resume use until  adequate steps
are taken to prevent further excessive loss of LP Collars.

12.* Damaged, punctured, or leaking LP Collars shall be removed
from the field fop repair or proper disposal.  Damaged LP Collars
shall  be placed Individually in  leakproof containers while
awaiting repair or proper disposal.  Authorized LP Collar repairs
are limited to minor repairs of  straps or fastenings.   Leaking
or punctured LP Collars must be  properly disposed.
-------
                               -5-
 13.* Dispose of Compound 1080 wastes (punctured, leaking,  or
 otherwise irreparable, damaged IP Collars; contaminated leatner
 clothing, animal remains, wool, hair, vegetation, water, and
 soil) under three feet of soil, at a safe location,  preferably
 on  property owned or managed by the applicator and at least  1/2
 mile from human habitations and water supplies.  No  more than  10
 LP  Collars may be buried in any one hole.  If buried in a  trench,
 each group of 10 LP Collars must be at least 10 feet apart.

 Alternatively, contact your State Pesticide or Environmental
 Control Agency or the Hazardous Waste representative at the
 nearest EPA Regional Office for guidance in disposing of wastes
 at  approved hazardous waste disposal facilities.

 When snow or frozen ground make on site disposal impractical,  up
 to  one cubic foot of wastes may be stored in a leakproof
 container, in a dry, locked place for up to 90 days.

 Triple rinse metal  and plastic containers with water.  Then
 puncture and dispose of container and rinsate as above.

 14.* All persons authorized to possess and use LP Collars
 shall store them under lock and key 1n a dry place away from
 food, feed, domestic animals, and corrosive chemicals and  in
 outbuildings or outdoor storage areas attached to, but separate
 from, human living quarters.

 15.  The number of LP Collars used shall be the minimum,necessary
 for effective livestock protection.  For pastures of the
 following size classes, do not use more LP Collars than the
 number indicated:

                Size (acres)    Number of Collars

                  up to  100             20
                 101 to  640             50
                 641 to  10,000         100

 16.  Each applicator shall have a 1-ounce bottle of  syrup  of
 Ipecac available when attaching, inspecting, removing, or
disposing of LP Collars.

 17.  No contaminated animal shall be used for food or feed.

 18.  The tse of 1080 LP Collars may not be used in the following
areas due to potential adverse effects to endangered species.

        Counties

        Fresno, Kern, King, Los Angeles, Monterey, San Benito,
        San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Tulare, and Ventura
-------
                               -6-
The 1080 LP Collar may not be used in the following areas  without
written approval from the nearest U.S. F1sh and Wildlife  Service
(FWS) Office (Endangered Species Specialists).  If the FWS or  the
user determines that the- use of the LP Collar may adversely
impact an endangered species in the specific areas requested,
the collar may not be used in these areas.  Written approval
must be obtained annually.
State   Counties
CA      Alameda, Contra Costa, Merced,
        San Joaquin, Santa Clara, and
        Stani slaus

ID      Bonner, Boise (north of State
        Highway 21), Boundary, Clearwater,
        Custer (north of local road
        running from Sun Valley to Chilly
        and a corresponding line running
        northeast from Chilly to
        Patterson), Fremont, Idaho,
        Lemhi, Shoshone, and Valley

MT      Beaverhead, Carbon, Flathead,
        Gallatin, Glacier, Lake, Lewis
        and Clark, Lincoln, Madison,
        Missoula, Park, Pondera, Powell,
        Sanders, Stillwater, Sweet Grass,
        and Teton

WA      Pend Orellle, Okanogan, (Nat'l
        Park and Forest Land), Skagit,
        and Whatcom

WY      Fremont, Hot Springs, Park, Sublette,
        Teton and Yellowstone Nat'l Park
                                       Nearest FWS  Office
                                       and Phone  Number

                                        Sacramento,  CA
                                        916-484-4935
                                        Boise,  ID
                                        208-334-1806
                                        Helena, MT
                                        406-449-5225
                                        Boise,' ID
                                        208-334-1806
                                        Helena, MT
                                        406-449-5225
Because of possible adverse. Impacts on the Eastern Timber Wolf,
the nearest FWS Endangered Species Office must be notified before
LP Collars are used 1n these areas.
MI


MN
WI
Keweenaw (Isle Royal) and
entire upper peninsula

A>tkin, Becker, Beltrami,
Carlton, Cass, Clearwater,
Cook, Crow W1ng, Hubbard, Itasca,
Kittson, Koochiching, Lake,
Lake of the Woods, Mahnomen,
Marshall, Pennlngton, P1ne,
Roseau, and St. Louis

Douglas, Florence, Lincoln,
Oneida , and Price
Twin Cities
612-725-3576

Twin Cities
612-725-3576
Twin Cities
612-725-3576
-------
                               -7-

REGULAtEi)  INDUSTRY         ~~~I
 0    Registrants of federally registered LP Collars
     containing Compound 1080.

 0    Agents under the control of registrants described
     above which sell or transfer Compound 1080 LP Collars  -
     (registrants are required to submit names and addresses  of
     their agents to OPP after registration's issued).

 0    Certified applicators and persons under their direct
     supervi sion.

 NTUTRTl'ADMINISTRATIVE INSPECTION SCHEME

     For each Compound 1080 Collar registration issued,  State/EPA
 inspectors will inspect annually all  producing establishments,
 registrants, and agents thereof which distribute, sell,  offer
 for sale, ship, deliver for shipment, or receive and (having  so
 received) deliver or offer to deliver the products.

     In States where Compound 1080 LP Collars certification is
 issued, State/EPA inspectors will conduct use and records
 inspections of applicators who have received certification  for
 Compound 1080 LP Collars during that  year and who have also
 purchased LP Collars.  State/EPA inspectors can obtain
 information regarding applicators' purchases from registrants or
 their agents.  These inspections should cover as many applicators
 as possible so long as the annual number of Inspections  does  not
 exceed a maximum of 10% of the annual resources allocated  for
 use inspections.  Any applicators which were not inspected  during
 the year they were certified shall be targetted for inspection
 the following year until all applicators are eventually
 inspected.  Use on federal property shall be Incorporated  into
 the targetting scheme.

     These inspections shall continue annually as long as  any
 registrations remain conditional for  the submission of data
 described 1n the original  registration notice.  Thereafter,
 Inspections will be performed upon request from OPP and  as  part
of the Region/State routine pesticide Inspection scheme.  Tips
and complaints will receive highest priority for Inspections.

 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT & ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITY

Office offPestldde Programs (OPP)	

 OPP's Registration Division (RD) shall:

o    Provide OCM with copies of labels for each Compound 1080 LP
     Collar registration and names and addresses of registrants
     and agents thereof.  Also, OPP will provide OCM a copy of
     the original registration notice Including any conditions
     of registration and will provide OCM with any changes in
     registrations changes in registrants or agents thereof.
-------
                               • 8-


Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCH)
OCM wi 11 :
     Provide copies of labels for each Compound  1080  IP  Collar
     registration, registration notices,  and  names  and addresses
     of registrants and agents thereof to the Regions  for
     distribution to the States.

     Notify Regions when any Compound 1080 IP Collar
     registrations change including changes in registrants  and
     agents thereof.
Regions
The EPA Regions will:

0    Assure that States participating in the F1FRA Cooperative
     Enforcement Agreement Program conduct producing
     establishment, agent, and use inspections for compliance
     with the labeling 'requirements.

0    When State governmental  agencies are the registrants  of
     Compound 1080 LP Collars, EPA will  conduct establishment
     and agent inspections for those  products (I.e.,  Wyoming).

0    Conduct use and records  Inspections of certified applicators
     (who have received Compo'und 1080 LP Collars), registrants,
     and agents thereof for compliance with the labeling
     requirements in States without primacy.

0    Provide copies of labels for each Compound 1080  LP Collar
     registration, registration notices, and names and addresses
     of registrants and agents thereof for distribution to the
     States or field inspection offices.

0    Distribute 11st of establishments which produce  Compound
     1080 LP Collars to the States.

0    Conduct Import Inspections (1f appropriate).

0    Develop a 11st of registered Compound 1080 LP Collar
     producing establishments and distribute to the States.

0    Report lists of EPA/State Inspections/violations for
     Compound 1080 LP Collars to OCM quarterly.

0    Take appropriate enforcement action for violations in States
     without primacy and in response to State referrals.
-------
                               -9-
0    Submit to OPP any reports of suspected poisoning of
     threatened or endangered species immediately after the
     report is received.

0    Take the lead in the development of the EPA programs  to
     certify Compound 1080 LP Collar applicators.

0    Refer any Compound 1080 LP Collar Incident reports to the
     States for followup action.  Allegations or indications  of
     Compound 1080 LP Collar misuse shall  be tracked  as
     significant cases under F1FRA §27.

0    Review any changes 1n State plans to  Include Compound 1080
     LP Collars and solicit assistance as  needed from OPTS.

Office of Training and Technical Support (in OPTS)	

0    Provide assistance to Regions in amending State  plans to
     include certification of Compound 1080 LP Collar applicators.

States	;	:	

Participating States Mill:

0    Develop amendment to State plans to Include certification  of
     Compound 1080 LP Collar applications  in coordination  with
     the EPA Regional office, as appropriate.

•    Conduct certification and training for LP Collar
     applicators provided State plan for certification 1s
     approved, as appropriate.

0    Develop a training program for LP Collar applicators
     coordinated with U.S. Department of Agriculture, Science and
     Education Administration (SEA), and the Regional EPA  Offices.

0    Conduct use and records Inspections of agents* of
     registrants and certified applicators (who have  received
     Compound 1080 LP Collars) for compliance with the labeling
     requirements and any SSURO Issued within the State.

0    Conduct producing establishment Inspections*.

0    Takt enforcement actions for violations or refer violations
     to EPA.

0    Conduct Import inspections as requested by the Regional  EPA
     office.
     EPA will conduct producing establishment and agent
     Inspections for Compound 1080 LP Collar registrations when
     State governmental agencies are the registrants.
-------
          UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                      WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                            OCT 20
                                                        OFFICE OF
                                                 PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Final Compliance Monitoring Strategy
          for Daminozide

FROM:     A. E. Conroy II, Director
          Office of Compliance Monitoring (EN-342)

TO:       Addressees
     Attached is the final Compliance Monitoring
for the plant growth regulator daminozide (ALAR)
preliminary strategy was transmitted for comment
1985.  This final strategy reflects data call-in
modification requirements but does not include a
intent to cancel as was originally described in
strategy.
 Strategy
   The
 in November
 and label
 notice of
the preliminary
     The Assistant Administrator for the Office of Pesticides
and Toxic Substances stated on January 22, 1986 that the
continued use of daminozide would be permitted provided the
registrant (Uniroyal) submitted certain data, modified the
labeling for one product, and agreed to a production limit for a
newly registered product for use on grapes only.

     Uniroyal has submitted and the Agency has accepted the
revised labeling (attached).  The Agency has also registered a
new product for grapes.  Uniroyal has agreed to provide data
which are based upon an established schedule which is tracked by
the Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM).
     Thank you for your comments on the preliminary
If you have any questions concerning this strategy,
Richard Green of my staff at (202) 382-5567.
    strategy.
    please call
Attachments
-------
                      DATA CALL-IN SCHEDULE


DATA TYPE                                     SCHEDULED DUE DATE

Plant Metabolism Study                              08/31/87

Livestock Metabolism Study                          08/31/87

Livestock Feeding Study                             08/31/87

Crop Feeding Trials                                 05/31/87

Storage Stability Study                             08/31/87

Degradation of UDMH to Daminozide                   08/31/87

Isotope Dilution Method for UDMH                    08/31/86

UDMH Analytical Method                              11/30/86*
 * 4 months extra time provided to Uniroyal if
   data cannot be evaluated by the round robin method

Daminozide Analytical  Method                        11/30/86

Comparison of UDMH Methods of Analysis              05/31/86

Market Basket Surveys                                07/15/86,
                                                    10/15/85,
                                                    02/15/87

Greenhouse Worker Exposure Study                    12/31/86

Dislogable Residue Study                            12/31/86

Glove Permeability Study                            12/31/86

Metabolism Study                                    02/14/87

Dermal Absorption Study                             12/15/86

Mammalian Cell Gene Mutation Study                  12/15/86

Mammalian Cell Chromosomal Aberration Study         12/15/86

Bacteria DNA Repair Study                           12/15/86

UDMH Rat 12 Month Sacrifice Data                    01/15/88
         Final Report                                05/15/89

     Mouse 8 Month Sacrifice Data                   07/15/87
     Mouse 12 Month Interim Report                  01/15/88
     Mouse Final Report                             05/15/89


NOTE: Dates may change due to OPP/OCM approved requests for
      schedule modification
-------
Addressees

James Lamb       (TS-788)
Terrell  Hunt     (LE-134A)
Deeohn Ferris    (LE-134P)
Stan Abramson    (LE-132A)
Ken Shiroishi    (EN-342)
John J.  Neylan III   "
Dexter Goldman      "
Phyllis  Flaherty
John Martin
Ralph Turpin        "
Mike Wood

John Mackenzie
Western  Regional Compliance Director

A. Charles Lincoln
Eastern  Regional Compliance Director

Lou's F. Gitto, Director
Air Management Division, Region I

Barbara  Metzger, Director
Environmental Services Division,  Region  II

Stephen  R. Wassersug,  Director
Hazardous Waste Management  Division, Region  III

Winston  A. Smith, Director
Air, Pesticides and Toxics  Management Division,  Region  IV

William  H. Sanders  III, Director
Environmental Services Division,  Region  V

William  B. Hathaway, Director
Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Division, Region  VI

William  A. Spratlin, Director
Air and  Toxics Division, Region VII

Irwin L. Dickstein, Director
Air and  Toxics Division, Region VIII

Harry Seraydarian,  Director
Toxics and Waste Management Division, Region  IX

Gary 0'Neal , Di rector
Air and  Toxics Division, Region X

Regional Pesticides and Toxic Substances Branch  Chiefs
-------
     FIFRA COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY






                     FOR






              DAMINOZIDE (ALAR)
       OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE MONITORING





  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES





UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
    FIFRA COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY FOR DAMINOZIDE (ALAR)
REQUIREMENTS
FEDERAL REGISTRATIONS UNDER FIFRA §3
EPA required the Uniroyal  Chemical  Company to:

0   Delete grapes from the ALAR 85 product label (EPA
    Registration Number (Reg. #) 400-79, amended label  accepted
    February 24, 1986).  A new product with a production volume
    limit was registered on January 30, 1986, for use only on
    Concord like grapes (grapes not intended for raisins)  under
    EPA Reg. # 400-430.

0   Amend EPA Reg. # 400-79 to reduce the application rate on
    apples from 8 Ibs/acre to 4 Ibs/acre for spring treatment
    and 3 Ibs/acre for later treatment.  However, the 8 Ibs/acre
    rate was permitted for trees not expected to bear fruit that
    year provided apples produced from the treated trees are not
    harvested (included in February 24, 1986 EPA approval).

0   Amend EPA Reg. # 400-79 to contain an advisory cautioning
    against the use of daminoztde treated apples in apple  sauce
    (advisory accepted by  OPP as part of labeling on 2/24/86).

0   Comply with FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) data requirements or  have its
    products subject to suspension/cancellation.  Uniroyal  is
    the sole registrant of the active FIFRA §3 registrations
    (see attached data call-in schedule).

EXISTING STOCKS PROVISIONS FOR THE  REGISTRANT AND OTHER PERSONS

Uniroyal may not legally distribute, sell, offer for sale, hold
for sale, ship, deliver for shipment, or receive and (having so
received) deliver or offer to deliver product containers bearing
EPA Reg. # 400-79 which are-owned by, controlled by, or in the
custody of Uniroyal  after  February  24, 1986, unless the product
bears  the EPA approved amended label accepted on that date with
grapes deleted  and apple dosages amended.  Noncompl i ance with
this provision  is considered a violation of FIFRA §12(a)(l)(B)  or
§12(a)(l)(E).

Other  persons may legally  distribute, sell, offer for sale, hold
for sale, ship, deliver for shipment, or receive and (having so
received) deliver or offer to deliver product containers bearing
EPA Reg. # 400-79 which conform to  the last label accepted by
EPA (with apples and grapes) prior to the February 24,  1986
amended label until  supplies are exhausted.


*    Butanedioic acid mono 2 ,2-dimethylhydrazide is commonly
called daminozide and also recognized under the trade name ALAR.
-------
                               -2-


IfETuTFTTo^lTDuTfRY
Number of federal  registrants with active daminozide products - 1
(Uniroyal Chemical  Co.)

Number of Producer Establishments - 1 (1984 FIFRA §7 reporting
i nfo rmation)

   EPA Establishment Number 7874-LA-001
   Uniroyal  Chemical Co.
   Geismar,  LA  70734

Number of products affected by this regulatory action - 2

   Product Name       EPA Registration Number

   ALAR 85                 400-79
   ALAR for  Grapes         400-430

NEUTRAL ADMINTSTRATIVE INSPECTION SCHEME

     The Region will negotiate with the  the State of Louisiana
to conduct in FY 87 an establishment inspection for EPA
Registration Number 400-430.  Thereafter, they will conduct  an
establishment inspection every two years for EPA Reg. No. 400-430
until  the production volume limitation is removed from the
registration requirements.   Because Louisiana will  not know  the
production volume  limitation, information obtained  on quantities
produced/distributed is  to  be forwarded  to the Regional office
for review.   EPA will review the FIFRA §7 annual reporting
information  and FIFRA §8 data regarding  movement of pesticides
to assure compliance with this limitation.  If needed for CBI
reasons, EPA inspectors  will conduct establishment  inspections
upon request to verify compliance with this limitation.  OPP
will notify  OCM when the production volume limitation is removed.
OCM will inform Region 6 who will in turn notify the State of the
same information.

     Note: A production  volume limit has been imposed on EPA
Registration Number 400-430 (ALAR 85 for Grapes) as a condition
of registration.  This limitation appears in the FIFRA §3(c)(7)
registration notice for  the product.  Such information is
considered confidential  under FIFRA §7.

     For EPA Reg.  No. 400-79, the Region will  negotiate with the
State of Louisiana to conduct an establishment inspection once
in FY 87 and thereafter  according to the routine pesticide
inspection scheme.
                                        .-
     EPA/State inspectors will conduct use inspections according
to the routine pesticide inspection targetting scheme.

     Tips and complaints will receive highest priority for
i ns pections.
-------
              SUPPLEMENTARY ALAR PRODUCT INFORMATION


0  Number of active FIFRA §3 registrations  for daminozide - 7

   Product Name                    EPA Registration Number

   B-Nine                                  400-069
   ALAR 85                                 400-079
   ALAR a Plant Growth Regulator           400-099
   KYLAR 85 a Plant Growth Regulator       400-103
   B-Nine SP                               400-110
   ALAR Technical                           400-117
   ALAR for Grapes                         400-430

   NOTE:  SAD 85 a Plant Growth Regulator,  EPA Registration
          Number 2749-191 (Aceto Chemical  Co., suspended
          5/18/84)

0  Number of FIFRA §24(c) registrations for daminozide -  1

   ALAR 85 (FIFRA §24(c) SLN Number CA-800035 using EPA
   Registration Number 400-79)

   The FIFRA §24 (c) registration i s> subject to suspension or
   cancellation if the FIFRA §3 registration is suspended or
   cancelled.  The only FIFRA §24(c) registration uses a  FIFRA
   §3 product registered under  Uniroyal.

0  Intrastate Products - 3

   Product Name   EPA Intrastate
                  Registration  Number

   ALAR 85        400-6461
   ALAR 85        400-6466
   KYLAR 85       400-6533

   The intrastate  products are  subject to  denial  if Uniroyal
   fails to comply with the FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B) data requirements.
   Uniroyal  is the sole submitter of the intrastate applications
   for FIFRA §3 registration.
-------
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                     WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                            14
MEMORANDUM
                                                       OFFICE OF
                                                PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
SUBJECT:
FROM:
TO:
Compliance
Halt Sales
Daminozide
           Strategy for the Agreement to Voluntarily
           of Food-Use Pesticides Containing
John J. Neylan III, Director
Policy and Grants Division           _
Office of Compliance Monitoring (EhK342)

Addressees
     Attached is the Compliance Strategy for the Agreement to
Voluntarily Halt Sales of Food-Use Pesticides Containing
Daminozide signed on June 2, 1989, by Uniroyal, Inc. and EPA.
The strategy sets forth the terms of the agreement, the dates
by which certain activities must be carried out by Uniroyal and
the Agency, and how the Agency Intends to monitor compliance
with the terms of the agreement.  Compliance monitoring will be
directed at Uniroyal to determine compliance with the terms of
the agreement and at distributors and dealers to ensure that
amended labeling has been placed on those products which may be
relabeled.  Growers may be visited in order to determine If
they are aware of the recall and their rights under the recall
and reimbursement program.

     If you have any questions concerning the strategy, please
contact David Stangel of my staff at 382-3477.
Attachment
-------
                                  ADDRESSEES
ft
 IV
 VI


 VII


 VIM


 IX


 X
      Douglas D. Campt
      Edwin F. Tlnsworth
      Anne Lindsay
      Frederick F. Stiehl
      Mark Greenwood
      A. E. Conroy 11
      Connie Musgrove
      John J. Neylan I I I
      David DulI
      Mike Wood
      PhylI is Flaherty
      Jerry Stubbs
      Maureen Lydon
      Ken Kanagal ingam
      Bob Zisa
      Sherry Sterling
      Jake Mackenzie
      Western Regional  Compliance Director
                     (TS-766C)
                     (TS-767C)
                     (TS-767C)
                     (LE-134A)
                     (LE-132A)
                     (EN-342)
                       it
                       it
                       ti
                       it
                       n
                       it
Louis F. Gitto, Director
Air Management Division

Barbara Metzger, Director
Environmental Services Division

Stephen R. Wassersug, Director
Hazardous Waste Management Div

Winston A. Smith, Director
Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div

William H. Sanders  III, Director
Environmental Services Division

William B. Hathaway, Director
Air, Pesticides 4 Toxic Division

William  A. Sprat!In, Director
Air and Toxics Division

Irwin L. Dlcksteln, Director
Air and Toxl'ca Division

David P. Howekamp, Director
Air Management Division

Gary O'Neal, Director
Air and Toxics Division
Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

Ernest Regna, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

Larry Mi Iler, Chief
Toxic 4 Pesticides Branch

Richard DuBose, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

PhylI is Reed, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

Robert Murphy, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

Carl Walters, Acting Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br

Alvin Yorke, Chief
Toxic Substances Branch

Davis Bernstein, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxics Branch  .

Kenneth Feigner, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxic Substances Br
      Michael  Walker
      Jim Roeloffs
      John Tice
                    (LE-134P)
                    (TS-788)
                    (TS-769C)
-------
   COMPLIANCE  STRATEGY  FOR  THE  AGREEMENT  TO  VOLUNTARILY  HALT
       SALES OF  FOOD-USE  PESTICIDES  CONTAINING  DAMINOZIDE
                                                        JUN I 4 1989
OVERVIEW
     Daminozide is the active ingredient of Alar, a product
produced by Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc.  The chemical  is a
plant growth regulator and affects vegetative growth, flower
bud initiation, fruit set and maturity, preharvest fruit drop
and market quality of fruit at harvest and during storage.  The
main use for Alar is on apples.  However, it is also registered
for use on pears, peaches, nectarines, prunes,  sweet and sour
cherries, grapes , brussels sprouts, cantaloupes, tomato
transplants, peanuts and non-food uses.  Uniroyal is the sole
registrant for daminozide and holds 6 registrations.

     Daminozide is under Special  Review by EPA  because certain
oncogenicity studies indicated that the chemical and its
breakdown product UDMH (unsymmetricaI  dimethyIhydrazine) may
pose a carcinogenic risk.

     On June 2, 1989, Uniroyal and EPA entered  into an
agreement whereby Uniroyal agreed in writing to voluntarily
halt sales of food-use products and conduct a recall of all
products down to the user level.   Uniroyal will submit an
application for amended registration of all products.  The
amendment will place a condition  on the registration that  until
there is a final determination on daminozide, Uniroyal  will
sell no daminozide food-use products and will conduct a
voluntary recall of all daminozide products.  EPA will  Issue an
export notification describing the status of daminozide
registrations.  EPA agreed to postpone the Science Advisory
Panel's consideration of the Agency's draft Notice of Intent to
Cancel in July 1989, until the Panel's next meeting in
December, 1989, in part, in order to assess an  interim report
on the studies Uniroyal is conducting.  The agreement is in
effect until a final determination on daminozide has been  made
and any hearings requested have been completed.
REQUIREMENTS OF THE AGREEMENT	

   - On Joi»e 2, 1989, Uniroyal  will  halt all  sales of
     daminozide products bearing food uses.

   - By June 7, 1989, Uniroyal  will  submit an application for
     the amendment of all  daminozide registrations. Uniroyal
     will  amend both its B-Nine daminoz.ide labels to delete the
     tomato transplant use, thereby  making it a non-food use
     product and to relabel all B-Nine stocks in its posse-
     ssion.
-------
                               -2-
     By June 9, 1989,  Uniroyal  will  notify all  dealers and dis-
     tributors of the  recall  and reimbursement  program.

     By June 21,  1989,  EPA will  approve Uniroyal's application
     to amend its B-Nine and  B-Nine  SP labels.

     EPA will issue a  Stop Sale, Use or Removal  Order (SSURO)  to
     Uniroyal, pursuant to the  agreement,  for all  registrations
     with food uses.

     By June 16,  1989,  Uniroyal  will notify all  persons  on their
     grower mailing list of the  recall and reimbursement
     program•

     By July 12,  1989,  Uniroyal  will provide labeling stickers
     for B-Nine and B-Nine SP products to  dealers  and
     distributors.  Uniroyal  will  instruct dealers and
     distributors to relabel  all stocks by August  20, 1989.

     Uniroyal will provide to EPA,  pursuant to  FIFRA §3(c)(2)(B),
     records demonstrating compliance with the  provisions  and
     schedule of  the recall and  reimbursement program.
COMPLIANCE MONITORING	

Inspect ions

   - Compliance monitoring of  this agreement will  be directed
     mainly at Uniroyal  and its efforts to comply  with  the terms
     of the agreement.

   - The Office of  Pesticide Programs (OPP), OCM,  and Region  I
     will  monitor the recall and reimbursement program  and
     Uniroyal's adherence to the terms of  the program.

   - States are to  inspect, within 4 months after  the date this
     strategy Is issued,  any establishment which  produced
     Daminoztde within  the past 3 years.  Followup inspections
     are to be conducted  upon  request.

   - As parrot routine comprehensive Inspections, Regions and
     States^Jshou I d  assure compliance with  the terms of  the
     agreeiwfnt and  monitor .the relabeling  of the  B-Nine products.

   - In those States where Daminozide has  been used in  the past,
     inspections will be  specifically targeted for the  purpose  of
     determining If relabeling of B-Nine products  has occurred.
     These inspections  may also be comprehensive  In nature to
     address compliance with other sections of FIFRA.  The number
     of inspections to  assure  compliance with the  agreement will
     be determined  by the States and Regions.  When lists  of
     Uniroyal distributors and dealers become available,  these
     will  be provided to  the Regions and States.
-------
                              -3-
   - The Compliance Division of  OCM will  be requesting
     inspections at sites where  the product is being
     consolidated as a result of the recall.   The number  and
     frequency of inspections will  be determined  from
     information the Agency receives related  to the recall.
     Inspections at sites where  Daminozide has been
     consolidated should verify  compliance with FIFRA section
     17(a)(1)  regarding export labeling requirements, storage
     conditions, and FIFRA section  8 records.   Inspectors
     should document the destination and  amount of  exports.
     States are to report this information to  the Regional
     Office.

   - States may conduct inspections of  growers to determine  if
     they are  holding any daminozide products, and  if they  are,
     whether they had been contacted by Uniroyal  and made  aware
     of their  options for recall  and reimbursement  of the
     stocks they are holding.

   - Tips and  complaints will be priority inspections.

CompIi ance

   - The Office of Compliance Monitoring  (OCM) will issue  a
     Stop Sale, Use or Removal Order (SSURO)  to Uniroyal
     pursuant  to the agreement.   The SSURO will allow Uniroyal
     to move stocks of daminozide products only for the
     purposes  of recalling or relabeling  them.

   - After August 20, 1989, Regions and States will issue
     SSURO's for those B-Nine and B-Nine  SP products which  do
     not bear  amended labeling and  take action against those
     distributors selling such misbranded products.  In
     addition, States and Regions will  notify  Region I when
     this occurs so that they may take  appropriate  action
     agaInst UnIroyaI .

   - The name  and address and telephone number of any grower
     who has not been contacted  by  Uniroyal  should  be forwarded
     to Ukfroyal and the Chief,  Compliance Branch,  OCM so  that
     Un(royal  can contact the grower and  OCM  can  followup.

   - When Regions and States encounter  a  distributor or  dealer
     who has continued to sell products rather than participate
     in the recall and reimbursement program,  the Inspector
     should determine the reason why they are  continuing  to
     sell and  the Region will forward this information to  the
     Chief, Compliance Branch, OCM  for  consideration in
     evaluating the effectiveness of the  recall program.
-------
                              -4-
Reports
   - States are to report within two weeks  of  discovering  any
     violations of the agreement to the Regional  Office.
States are
Daminozide
                to include Information  on  the number  of
                inspections and  violations found  as  part  of
     their quarterly reports to  the Regions.
     Regions are to send information  on  inspections  and
     violations to the Director of  the Compliance  Division
     quarterly.  Violations of  the  agreement should  be reported
     immediately along with supporting documentation.
-------
             LIST OF UN I ROYAL DAMINOZIDE PRODUCTS
EPA Reg. No.

400-69

400-79

400-99

400-103

400-110

400-117



Intrastates

400-06461

400-06466

400-06533

CA 800035
 Name

B-Nine

Alar 85

Alar

Kylar 85

B-Nine SP

A Iar Techn icaI
- Not affected by the
  Agreement
Alar 85

Alar 85

Kylar 85

California State Registration
Uniroyal  intends to relabel  both B-NIne and B-Nine SP products.

OPP believes that all  the Intrastates are now cancelled.
-------
 fc
 w
       'o
       5     UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

       /                    WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

V   "
                      STOP  SALE, USE, OR  REMOVAL ORDER           JUN I  3 1989


 CERTIFIED MAIL                                                         OFF.CF. OF
 RLIURN  RL-CL-lrM  REQUESTED                                      P«T,C,DES ANDTOX.CSU,

 Mr.  James A.  Wylie,  Jr.
 Vice President  and
   General Manager
 Crop Protection Division
 Uniroyal  Chemical  Co.,  Inc.
 74 Amity  Rd.
 Bethany,  CT  06525

 Reference:  DAMINOZIDE - Food Use  Products  Including But Not Limited To
            EPA  Reg.  Nos. 400-69,-79,-99,-103, and -110

      By the authority vested in me  pursuant  to Section 13(a) of the Federal
 Insecticide,  Fungicide, and  Rodenticide  Act  (FIFRA), as amended (7 U.S.C.
 §136k(a)),  and  in accordance with the  enclosed June 2, 1989, "Agreement Between
JJniroyal  Chemical  Company, Inc.,  and the United States Environmental Protection
wency  For Voluntary Halt  of Sales  of  Food-Use Pesticides Containing Daminozide",
hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement",  you are hereby ordered not to
 distribute, sell,  offer for  sale,  hold for sale, ship, deliver for shipment,
 receive and (having  so  received)  deliver or  offer to deliver, remove, or use
 the pesticide(s)  listed above, or any  other  pesticides under your control,
 ownership,  or custody that are subject to  the "Agreement".

      This order pertains to  all quantities of the above-mentioned pesticide(s)
 within  the  control,  ownership, or custody  of your company, wherever located,
 and thus  prohibits the  sale  of daminozide  registered for food uses in the
 United  States by  Uniroyal  and any Uniroyal subregistrant.  The pesticide(s)
 may not be sold,  offered for sale,  held  for  sale, shipped, delivered for ship-
 ment, received  and (having so received)  delivered or offered for delivery,
 removed or used other than in accordance with the provisions of this order o,r
 of further  Stop Sale, Use, of Removal  Orders as may be issued in connection
 with the  pesticide(s).

      Notwithstanding the, provi sions of this  Stop Sale, Use, or Removal  Order,
 you may distribute,  sell,  offer for sale,  hold for sale, ship, deliver for
 shipment, receive  and (having so  received) deliver or offer to deliver, remove,
 or use  the  pesticide(s) affected  by this order which are under your control,
 ownership,  or custody provided it is for purposes of consolidation in one or
 more locations, in order to  implement  a  product recall.  Specifically,  in
 accordance with the  aforementioned  June  2, 1989 "Agreement", Uniroyal will
 recall  from all  distributors, dealers  and  subregistrants all stocks and
^nventories of  daminozide  products  registered for food uses, including stocks
Returned  by growers.
-------
                                   - 2 -
     In addition, the information cited on page  5,  paragraph 4,  Review of  Records,
of the "Agreement" must be reported in writing to the EPA  Representative listed
below beginning on July 1, 1989 and quarterly thereafter until  such  time as
Uniroyal  has demonstrated to the Agency that the recall  has  been completed or
the "Agreement" terminates as stated on page 8,  paragraph  8, Duration  of Agreement.


EPA Representative:  Ms. Sherell A. Sterling (EN-342)
                     U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency
                     Office of Compliance Monitoring
                     401 M Street,  S.W.
                     Washington, DC  20460
                     Phone # 382-7835


     Any  person violating the terms or provisions of this  order shall  be
subject to the civil  or criminal penalties prescribed in Section 14  of the
Act (7 U.S.C.§1361).
                                        Michael  F.  Wood,  Director
                                        Compliance  Division (EN-342)
Enclosure
-------
        AGREEMfiTTt1 BETWEEN UNIROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,  INC.
                      AND THE UNITED STATES
                 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                  FOR VOLUNTARY HALT OF SALES OF
            FOOD-USE PESTICIDES CONTAINING DAMINOZIDE
      WHEREAS, on May 12, 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection
          ^
Agency ("EPA") issued a Notice announcing the Agency's

preliminary determination pursuant to the Federal Insecticide,

Fungicide and .Rodenticide Act  ("FIFRA") to cancel all food-use

registrations for daroinozide, and indicating that a draft Notice

of Intent to Cancel had been forwarded with appropriate

supporting documents to the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel
                                                              JM.
("SAP") for its review; and


      WHEREAS, following the SAP's review and the evaluation  of

comments on the Notice of Intent to Cancel by the U.S. Department

of Agriculture and public comments, the Agency will issue a Final

Determination whether the registration should be cancelled; and


      WHEREAS, the SAP Ls tentatively scheduled to review such

matters at its July, 1989 meeting; and


      WHEREAS, the SAP is to consider at such meeting, among

other materials* interim results of a two-year drinking water

oncogenicity study of the daminozide metabolite UDMH on mice  and

rats which EPA required Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc.

( "Uniroyal"f "to perform "pursuant to a FIFRA § 3(c)(2)(B) Data

Call-in Notice issued in 1986  the final report of which is due in

September, 1989, and interim results of an additional
-------
                              - 2 -
oncogenicity study on mice which EPA required Uniroyal to perform


on March, 1.987, the final report on which is due in January,


1990; and



      WHEREFORE, in order to allay public confusion and concern


regarding the safety of daminozide food-use products and the


consumption of apples and other foodstuffs caused by publicity


related to daminozide and this regulatory action,. Uniroyal hereby


voluntarily agrees, on the terms described below,- to halt the


sale of food-use pesticides containing daminozide, and to treat


such food-use registrations as "suspended" within the meaning of


FIFRA § 12(a)(l)(A), pending the full review of the matter by the
                                                               x-

SAP and the completion of the Agency's Special Review process,


including any FIFRA § 6 cancellation hearing.



                        Terms  of Agreement



      1.   Immediate Halt to Sales.  Uniroyal agrees voluntarily


to halt all sales of all its products containing daminozide for


all food uses.  In order to implement this Agreement, Uniroyal


and EPA agree that all food-use registrations of pesticides


containing daminozide shall be treated as "suspended" for


purposes of FIFRA S 12(a)(l)(A).  To accomplish this, Uniroyal


will submit,-within five-days of the execution of this Agreement,


an application for an amendment to all such registrations.  The


amendment will place a condition on the registrations requiring
-------
                              - 3 -
that from the date on which the application is granted until the
date on which EPA issues a Notice of Final Determination of
Intent to Cancel the Daminozide Registrations, or the termination
of any FIFRA § 6 cancellation hearing challenging such action,
whichever occurs later: (1) no daminozide food-use products will
be sold by Uniroyal for use in the United States; and
(2) Uniroyal will conduct a voluntary recall, as described in
paragraph 2 below, of all such daminozide products.  Simultaneous
to its issuance of the amended .conditional registration, EPA will
issue a "Stop-Sale, Use or Removal" Order to Uniroyal regarding
all food-use registrations of daminozide, and Uniroyal agrees not
to challenge the validity of such "Stop Sale, Use or Removal" "
Order.

      It is the understanding of EPA and Uniroyal that the above
measures will prohibit the sale of daminozide registered for food
uses in the United States by Uniroyal and any Uniroyal
subregistrants.
      2.   Voluntary Product Recall.  Uniroyal voluntarily wi^
recall from all""distributors, dealers and subregistrants all
stocks and inventories of daminozide products registered for food
uses, including stocks returned by growers.   (See paragraph 5.)
Uniroyal specifically agrees as part of its voluntary recall
effort to notify by letter, to be mailed within one week of the
execution of this Agreement, all distributors and dealers known
-------
by Uniroyal to be direct Unir*byal damlnozide customers, and any
subregistrants .•  Uniroyal agrees in such letters to indicate that
Uniroyal has agreed voluntarily to halt all food-use sales of
daminozide," and to recall all outstanding stocks and inventories
from any source through distributors and dealers and to reimburse
the owners of such products at the invoice price or, if no
invoice is available, the prevailing price at time of purchase.
In addition, Uniroyal agrees to mail to all persons on its grower
mailing list (to be provided to EPA pursuant to paragraph 4
below), within two weeks of the execution of this Agreement,  —•
letters indicating that Uniroyal has agreed voluntarily to halt
all food-use sales of daminozide, and that Uniroyal has agreed^
voluntarily to recall all outstanding stocks and inventories from
any source through distributors and dealers and to reimburse the
owners of such products at the invoice price or, if no invoice is
available, the prevailing price at the time of purchase.      .
Uniroyal agrees to allow EPA to review and approve the text of
these letters prior to their release.  Uniroyal also agrees as
part of such recall to pay all reasonable costs of transporting
the stocks and Inventories to a site or sites, to be designated_
later, where the product will be repackaged and/or relabeled for
subsequent sale (or storage for subsequent sale) for non-food
uses, or for export as otherwise permitted by law.  Uniroyal
agrees to implement the recall and reimbursement program
described in this Agreement as expeditiously as possible.
-------
                              - 5 -
      3.   Amendment of Uniro'yal's "B-Nine" Label.  In
conjunction with the provisions of paragraph 2 above, Uniroyai
agrees to amend its B-Nine daminozide label, which is primarily a
non-food-use product, to delete the tomato transplant use from
the label, and to relabel (with a sticker or other means) any
B-Nine stocks in Uniroyai's possession to delete the tomato
transplant use.  With respect to any stocks or inventories in the
possession of distributors or dealers, Uniroyai agrees to issue
to such distributors and dealers within three weeks of EPA's
approval of the amendment appropriate labeling stickers for the
deletion of the tomato transplant use, and agrees to inform the
distributors and dealers that such labels should be affixed to
                                                              *•
all B-Nine products within the channels of trade no later than 60
days after EPA's approval of the amendment.  EPA agrees that it
will act promptly on Uniroyai's application to so amend the
registration, and in any event to grant permission to delete the
use no less than three business days from EPA's receipt of
Uniroyai's application.

      4.   Review of Records.  In recognition of the needs and
benefits of EPA's ability to monitor progress of Uniroyai's
voluntary recall efforts, Uniroyai agrees that, for purposes of
this matter, the following are "data" within the meaning of FIFRA
§ 3(c)(2)(B) and are subject to call-in by EPA pursuant to that-
provision:  records demonstrating daminozide sales by Uniroyai
-------
                              - 6 -
directly to distributors, dealers and subregistrants in  1988 and
1989, including'such records as necessary to determine the
identity of all purchases and the amounts purchased; records
demonstrating compliance with the provisions and schedule of the
recall and reimbursement program, including details of the recall
of such products from all direct Uniroyal customers (which may
include distributors, dealers and subregistrants) and such
records as necessary to determine the identity of all parties
returning daminozide products to Uniroyal and the amounts
returned; records indicating the amounts of daminozide product's
relabeled as B-Nine; and records regardi/v.y all sales of  B-Nine
products, including quarterly reports of current and future
B-Nine sales, records demonstrating historical sales for B-Nine
products and the approximate levels of B-Nine stocks and
inventories presently available in the distribution chain in
June, - 1-989, as well as such prospective records as necessary to
demonstrate the identities of all Uniroyal direct cu  :omers
purchasing B-Nine and the amounts purchased.  The quarterly
reports are being provided to allow EPA to monitor B-Nine sales
in order to ensure that persons not a party to this Agreement do
not divert B-Nine unlawfully to food use.
      Uniroya-i further agrees that all records indicating
satisfaction of the recall requirements under this Agreement
-------
                              - 7 -
shall be considered "reports" within the meaning of FIFRA
§ 12(a)(2)(N).

      5.   Us.er. Notification.  In addition to the notification
described in paragraph 2 above, Uniroyal agrees within two weeks
of the execution of this Agreement, to send to the organizations
listed below a letter, for distribution to their members,
indicating that Uniroyal has agreed with EPA voluntarily to halt
all food-use sales of daminozide and to recall all outstanding
stocks and inventories from any source through distributors and
dealers and to reimburse the owners of such products at the
invoice price or, if no invoice is available, the prevailing
price at the time of purchase.  The letters will explain the
reasons for this action and urge the growers to cease using the
product immediately.

      The associations to which Uniroyal agrees to send this
letter will include at least the following:  (1) International
Apple Institute; (2) New York - New England Apple Institute;
(3)  Processed Apple Institute; (4) National Food Processors •
Association; (5T Washington State Apple Commission; and (6) the
National Peanut Council.  In addition, Uniroyal agrees to send
the. same or a similar letter to the lead land grant university in
each major apple-growing state within the same two-rweek period.	
Uniroyal agrees to allow EPA to review and approve the text of
-------
                              - 8 -
                           *
the letters required by this paragraph or to use the same letter


described in paragraph 2.




      6.   ^Export Notification.  EPA will issue an export


notification regarding the status of daminozide registrations.


The export notifications will explain that Uniroyal has agreed


voluntarily to halt sales, and that in order to implement this


Agreement, EPA and Uniroyal have agreed to treat -the food-use


registrations as "suspended" for enforcement purposes.  EPA


agrees to provide Uniroyal by telecopy with the text of such


notifications, after they have been finalized and cleared for


issuance, but five days prior to their issuance, in order that
                                                              s~

Uniroyal may notify affected customers.  This is expressly


understood not to imply a right to edit or change the text of


such notifications, which will be drafted independently by the


Agency.




      7.   SAP Review.  EPA agrees to postpone the SAP's


consideration of the Agency's Draft Notice of Intent to Cancel


until the SAP's December, 1989 meeting.  EPA further agrees to


suspend the "five-minute rule" which ordinarily limits to five


minutes a registrant's opportunity to make oral presentations to


the SAP.  Instead, both EPA and Uniroyal shall receive thirty


minutes to make oral presentations, as supplemented by written


materials, with the further understanding that the decision to


extend the period for oral presentations is in the sole
-------
                               -  9  -
 discretion of  the  SAP.   In  addition,  the  Agency agrees  to  reserve
 at least  one  full  day for the  SAP's  consideration  of  daminozide.

       8.    Duration of  Agreement.  This Agreement  shall  not
 expire and will  remain  enforceable until  the  completion  of the
 SAP review and EPA's issuance  of  a Final  Notice of Determination
 to Cancel the  Daminozide Registrations, and any FIFRA §  6
 cancellation  hearing initiated as a  challenge thereto,  or  a
 decision  by the  Agency  upon its review of the SAP  comments to
 withdraw  its  Draft Notice of Intent  to Cancel,  except that    _
 Uniroyal  and  EPA hereby agree  that either party can request
 reconsideration  of this matter upon  the completion of the  SAP  ,
 review and as  a  result  of any  such reconsideration may  mutually
 agree  to  terminate the  Agreement  earlier.  EPA and Uniroyal
 anticipate that  the SAP review and the decision whether to issue
 a  Final Notice of  Determination to Cancel or  to withdraw the
 Draft  Notice of  Intent  to Cancel  will be  accomplished by the
 Agency no later  than March,  1990, and that any FIFRA §  6
 cancellation  hearing initiated by Uniroyal as a challenge  thereto
 will be completed  by September, 1991,  and that the Agency will
 use its best efforts to accomplish these  goals within the  spirit
 and intent of  this Agreement.

~      9"."    Limited Purpose  of  Agreement.   Uniroyal by this
 Agreement does not admit or concede  that  daminozide or  its
 metabolities  present a  significant risk of cancer, or an
-------
                              -  10  -
                             *

unreasonable adverse risk to health or the environment within the
meaning of FIFRA § 3(c)(5), or that any tolerances for daminozide
established" under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act are
inappropriate or should be reduced or revoked.

      EPA by this Agreement does not modify or in any way recant
its preliminary determinations concerning daminozide or its
metabolities as expressed in the Preliminary Determination to
Cancel Certain Daminozide Product Registrations published at
54 Fed. Reg. 22,558 (May 24, 1989).  In, addition, EPA
specifically reserves the right to take any appropriate action
under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.

      10.  Change in Circumstances.  Uniroyal agrees that nothing
in this Agreement limits EPA's authority to take appropriate
regulatory action against daminozide or its metabolites under any
of its statutory or regulatory authority if, in EPA's judgment,
changed circumstances or new information indicate that such
additional measures are necessary.   EPA agrees that nothing in
this Agreement limits the rights of Uniroyal to challenge such
additional actions.

      11..- Enforceability.  Uniroyal acknowledges the
enforceability of this Agreement pursuant to FIFRA §§ 3(c)(2)(B),
12(a)(l)(A), 12(a)(l)(I) and 12(a)(2)(N), and agrees that it will
-------
                            .  -  11  -
                            *


not challenge or encourage or assist any party to challenge the

validity of this Agreement in any forum.
James A.  Wylie, Jr,
vice President and
  General, Manager
Crop Protection Division
Uniroyal  Chemical Co., Inc
Victor J/yKimm
Acting Assistant Administrator
  for Pesticides & Toxic
  Substances
United States Environmental
  Protection Agency
       (Date)
                                                    2,
               (Date)
-------
              UW I CL-» 3 J M I C.3 C.NVlKVJINIVItlN I ML. t'HU I tC I lOlN

                               WASHINGTON. O.C.  20460
                                   NQV   7  879
                                                              OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
  MEMORANDUM

  SUBJECT:  CBCP Suspension Order Enforcement Strategy

  TO:       Enforcement Division Directors
            Pesticides Branch Chiefs

Background

       On September ^f-d^77/-^e-Administrator--announced'his--«tent-ion-to--take ••••-
  two separate suspension actions with respect to pesticide products containing
  dibromochloropropane (DBCP).  These actions were taken pursuant to his autho-
  rity under Section 6(c) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide  and Rodenticide
  Act, as amended (FIFRA).  On October 21, 1977, because no registrants invoked
  their right to a hearing pursuant to Section 6(c)(2), the Administrator
  issued a Suspension Order concerning DBCP products.  The order was based on
  the findings that DBCP is carcinogenic and also found to damage human repro-
  ductive functions and may cause sterility in males.  The October 27,  1977,
  Suspension Order therefore proposed two separate actions: (1)  the
  "Unconditional" or "Specific Food Use" Suspension of all products registered
  for use on nineteen (19) specific food crops in which DBCP  residues-occurredy-
  or appeared likely to occur in the edible portion of the treated crop; and
  (2) A "Conditional" Suspension of DBCP products registered  for all other end
  uses.  The conditionally suspended uses were:  cotton, soybeans, citrus, grapes,
  pineapples, peaches, nectarines, plums, almonds, commercial okra, commercial
  lira beans, commercial snap beans, commercial southern peas, berries  (black-
  berries, blueberries, loganberries, dewberries, boysenberries, raspberries),
  strawberry nursery stock, apricots, cherries, figs, walnuts, bananas, turf
  (commercial and residential) and ornamentals (commercial and residential).   For
  the conditionally registered uses it was thought that risks to applicators
  could be sufficiently reduced on an interim basis by placing restrictions on
  the product, such as, limiting use to certified applicators using respirators
  and protective clothing.

       On July 18, 1979, the Administrator announced his intention to suspend
  all remaining uses of pesticide products containing dibromochloropropane
  (DBCP).  This Notice of Intent to Suspend is based on additional information
  showing that the conditional suspension is not adequate to  reduce the risks
  associated with continued use of DBCP, and in turn prevent  an  imminent hazard
  during the time required to complete full scale cancellation proceedings which
  are now pending pursuant to Section 6(b) of FIFRA.  The new findings  reveal
  that DBCP residues may occur even in crops which are not grown in contact with
  or in close proximity to treated soil; that treatment with  DBCP may result  in
  contamination of water supplies, including drinking water sources; and that
  application of DBCP may result in ambient air levels of DBCP at sites outside
  the application area and may result in ambient air levels of DBCP at  the site
  of application several days after application.
-------
                                -2-
    Pursuant to Section 6(c)(2) of ETFRA, each  registrant of a DBCP product
was given the opportunity to request an expedited  hearing on the question
of vhether an imminent hazard existed.  Three registrants requested such a
hearing and following these proceedings the Administrative Law Judge presiding
on the issuef ruled that an imminent hazard did in fact exist and recommended
to the Administrator that all remaining uses of pesticide products containing
dibromochloropropane be suspended.

     On October 29, 1979, the Administrator issued a Suspension Order suspend-
ing all products containing dibromochloropropane with  the exception of those
products bearing directions for use on pineapples.   This usage was strictly
limited to the State of Hawaii.

     A copy of the Notice of Intent to Suspend, the Recommended Decision by
Administrative Law Judge, Gerald Harwood, the Suspension Order, a copy of
the recall letters sent to registrants of DBCP  products, and a list of reg-
istrants and registered DBCP products are enclosed.

     This memorandum represents EPA's Enforcement  Strategy to be used in
relation to this Suspension Action.

Enforcement Policy                                   	. .    ...  ..

     The Agency intends to ensure that the Administrator's Order is strictly
complied with by all affected persons, including manufacturers, foemulators,
registrants, wholesalers,,.retailers and..users,..-	,

         On November 5, 1979, the Pesticides and Toxic Substances Enforce-
         ment Division notified by certified mail  all  registrants and/or
         producers of products containing DBCP  requesting that they:

            a. remove from sale down to and including  the retail level
               all existing stocks of products  bearing suspended uses;

            b. recall those products which do not  bear  directions for use
               on pineapple;

            c. relabel with interim or amended  labeling those products
               bearing directions for use on pineapple.

         The interim labeling we proposed would bear the statement "For
         Sale for Use on Pineapples in Hawaii Only".  No product may
         be legally shipped after March 1, 1980, without approved amended
         labeling.  Those products in the state of  Hawaii bearing directions
         for use on pineapples shall be removed from sale until they have
         been relabeled with interim or approved amended labeling.  Under
         no circumstances shall relabeled products  be  sold at the retail
         level in any state other than Hawaii.
-------
                                -3-
ElRrcement Procedures

     1.  After initial contact with  the  registrant,  an inspector from the
   ~    Regional Office or State  should visit affected registrants to
         discnan the recall action and monitor the steps taken to comply
         with the recall.  Proper  storage of recalled products should
         be stressed.  See Section 14 of the Pesticides Inspection Manual
         for information on procedures to be followed in monitoring the
         reran.

     2.  If a firm refuses to recall its products, the Regional Office in
         cooperation with the States shall issue Stop Sale, Use or Removal
         Orders and/or seizures  to effect removal of the products from the
         channels of trade.

     3.  When necessary the Regional Offices and States will take
         appropriate enforcement action  against those persons found
         in violation of the DBCP  Suspension Order.

     Regional Offices shall request  States to identify and recall products
bearing intrastate labels since  intrastate products  represent a major share
of those registrations which are currently active.  The Regions should also
inform the States that only products bearing federal registrations were
     recall letters by PTSED.  Those Hawaiian intrastate products bearing
           for use on pineapples may be  relabeled if the state so wishes.
Use of Existing Stocks and Disposal                   .  ___    . ...... ______

     As stated in the Administrator's  Suspension Order,  the use of existing
stocks of DBCP (except those products  bearing directions for use on pineapples
in Hawaii) is prohibited and would be  in  violation of the Suspension Order and
subject to enforceaient action.  Persons desiring to dispose of stocks of DBCP
products should be apprised that  they  may arrange with the appropriate regions
to ship their products for disposal.   This may include returning the product
to the supplier, or disposal in accordance with directions provided by the
Office of Solid Waste.  Disposal  questions may be referred to Mr. Ray Krueger
(202-472-9403).

Export '

     DBCP products may be exported.  Exportation must be in accordance with
FIFRA Section 17 (a) which includes a requirement that the product must      .  /
bear specific labeling.  Registrants exporting DBCP products affected "
by the Suspension Order should also be cautioned in relation to the
stipulation signed by the Department of State concerning the utilization
of U.S. funds for O.S. AID regulation  entitled "Pest Management Program,
Interim Pesticides Procedures" , published in  the Federal Register on
January 7f 1976.  The notice states that  AID  will not provide assistance
    the procurement or use of a pesticide which has been finally suspended
   'cancelled by EPA.
-------
 Indemnification
      The Office of Enforcement has been advised by the Office of* General Counsel
 that registrants of DBCP products would not be eligible to make any claim for
 an  indeminity payment until the registration of their pesticide is canceled,
 (See section 15(a) of FIFRA).   Any questions concerning indemnities should '
 be  directed  to Mr. Mitchell Bernstein, Office of General Counsel (202-426-9448).
 Inquiries
    .  Should  you have any questions concerning any facet of this memorandum and
J±e- DBCP Suspension.£rder,-pleas^^
                                       A.  E.  Conroy EC,
                                    Pesticides and Toxic substances
                                          Enforcement Division
Enclosures
-------
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                           OCT  7
       OFFICE OF
PKSTICIUES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Compliance Strategy for the
          Emergency Suspension of Dinoseb

FROM:     A. E. Conroy II, Director
          Office of Compliance Monitoring

TO:       Addressees
     On October 7, 1986, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) sighed an Emergency Suspension Order
immediately suspending the registrations of pesticide products
containing dinoseb or any of its four salts.  This Emergency
Suspension Order prohibits the continued sale, distribution and
use of all dinoseb products after October 7, 1986.  On the same
day, the Administrator signed a Notice o* Intent to Cancel and
Notice of Intent to Deny the registrations of all dinoseb products

     Attached is the Final Compliance Strategy for the Emergency
Suspension and Cancellation of Dinoseb.  Please transmit a copy
of this Strategy to the States.  Please note that because of the
nature of this action, this Compliance Strategy is immediately
effective.  If you have any questions or comments regarding the
Strategy, contact Dan Helfgott (EN-342, FTS 382-7847) of my
staff.

     Thank you for your cooperation.
Attachment
-------
                            ADDRESSEES
II
IV


V


VI
Douglas D. Campt (TS-766C)
Victor Kimm      (TS-788)
Jim Lamb         (TS-788)
Terrell Hunt     (LE-134A)
Stanley Abramson (LE-132A)
John Seitz  :.  ,   (EN-342)
Ken Shiroishi
Phyl1i s Flaherty
John Martin
John J. Neylan III
Ralph  Turpin
Mike Wood
Dexter Goldman      "

Jake Mackenzie
Western Regional  Compliance Director

A. Charles Lincoln
Eastern Regional  Compliance Director

Louis  F. Gitto, Director
Air Management Division

Barbara Metzger, Director
Environmental  Services Div.

Stephen R. Wassersug, Director
Hazardous Waste Management Div.

Winston A. Smith, Director
Air, Pest. & Toxic Mgmt Div.

William H. Sanders III, Director
Environmental  Services Div.

William B. Hathaway, Director
Air, Pesticides & Toxics Div.
VII  William A.  Spratlin, Director
     Air & Toxics Division

VIII  Irwin L. Dickstein, Director
     Air & Toxic Subs. Division

IX   Jeffrey Zelikson, Acting Director
     Toxics & Waste Management Div.

X    Gary 0'Neal , Di rector
     Ai r & Toxi c Division
Gerald M. Levy, Chief
Office of Pesticides & Toxic Sub

Ernest Regna, Chief
Pesticides & Toxics Sub.  Branch

Larry Miller, Chief
Toxic & Pesticides Branch

H. Kirk Lucius, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Subs.  Branch

Phyllis Reed, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Subs.  Branch
Norman E. Dyer, Chief
Pesticides 4 Toxics Subs. Branch

Leo Alderman, Chief
Toxics & Pesticides Branch

Alvi n Yorke , Chief
Toxic Substances Branch

Richard Vaille, Chief
Pesticides & Toxics Branch

Anita Frankel , Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Subs. Branch
     Sue Vogt       (TS-788)
     Deeohn Ferris  (LE-134P)
-------
                  COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR THE
       T 1985     EMERGENCY SUSPENSION OF DINOSEB
OVERVIEW
     On October 7, 1986, -the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) signed an Emergency Suspension Order
immediately suspending the registrations of pesticide products
containing dinoseb (2 sec-butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol ) or any of
its four salts.  This Emergency Suspension Order prohibits the
continued sale, distribution and use of all dinoseb products
after October 7, 1986.  At the same time, the Agency also
issued a Notice of Intent to Cancel and Notice of Intent to
Deny all registrations of pesticide products containing dinoseb.
These actions are also applicable to intrastate products for
which an application for federal registration has been submitted
and FIFRA §24(c) Special Local Needs Registrations.

     Both of the October 7, 1986 regulatory actions are based
on data which shows that dinoseb exposure causes developmental
toxicity (including frank teratogenic effects), reproductive
toxicity, acute toxicity, cataractogenic potential, immunotoxicity
and oncogenicity (from parent compound  and nitrosamine contaminants).
The developmental toxicity effects are  the largest concern since
data indicate an immediate risk potential for fetuses of pregnant
women exposed to dinoseb.

     The Agency and States will  assure  compliance with the
Emergency Suspension Order and Cancellation Order by issuing
and monitoring Stop Sale, Use or Removal Orders (SSURO) and
Formal Recall requests, conducting inspections at the producer,
retail and user levels as well as investigating tips and complaints.
The inspections are to assure that suspended or cancelled
products are not being used or moved in commerce.

REQUIREMENTS

     The October 7, 1986 Emergency Suspension Order states that,
effective immediately, no person in any State may distribute,
sell, offer for sale, hold for sale, ship, deliver for shipment,
or receive and (having so received) deliver, offer to deliver,
or use all dinoseb products.

     The Emergency Suspension of dinoseb products is effective
immediately regardless of whether or not the registrant requests
an expedited hearing.  The Order will remain in effect until
completion of the hearing and issuance  of a final order on the
i 3sue of suspension .

     If the Agency does not receive a timely and valid request
for a hearing concerning the Agency's determination that an
imminent hazard exists, the suspension  of a dinoseb product
will become final by operation of law,  will not be reviewable
by any court, and will remain in effect until a final order is
issued concerning the proposed cancellation of that product.
-------
                              -2-
     The Agency also issued on October 7, 1986, a Notice of
 Intent to Cancel the registrations of all pesticide products
containing dinoseb.  The Notice allowed affected registrants
 30 days to request a hearing on the proposed cancellation or
 have their dinoseb product cancelled.  Submission of a request
 for an expedited hearing concerning the emergency suspension
 of a particular dinoseb product will not prevent cancellation
 of that product in the event no cancellation hearing is requested
 by the registrant.

 Regulated Industry
     The Emergency Suspension Order affects all pesticide products
containing dinoseb or any of its four salts, including those in
the possession of registrants, distributors, and users.  There
are 64 registrants located in 25 States, including one importer.
There are 181 products (100 federally registered products, 81
intra-state products), made from 6 formulations of dinoseb.
Current FIFRA and TSCA Enforcement System (FATES) data indicate
there are 15 establishments which produced a pesticide product
containing dinoseb in 1985.  Appendix I contains a list of
registrants and producers.  Appendix II contains a list of
producer establishments.

     Dinoseb (including the four salts of dinoseb: al kanol ami ne,
triethanolamine , ammonium and sodium) is registered as a herbicide,
desiccant, fungicide, and insecticide.  The principal use is
to control broadleaf weeds as a contact herbicide at preemergence
and postemergence.

     The major use sites by volume include: soybeans (40 percent),
cotton (15 percent), potatoes (16 percent), peanuts (2 percent),
alfalfa (4 percent), snap beans (2 percent), peas (2 percent),
grapes (2 percent), and almonds (1 percent).  Other use sites
include: forage legumes, small grains, fruit and nut orchards,
berries, cucurbits, hops, onions, garlic, ornamentals, conifers,
and noncrops (such as rights-of-way and aquatic drainage ditches).

     The common trade names of dinoseb are: DNBP, ONOSBP, "dinitro",
dinoseb (F-ISO),  Caldon, Sinox, Vertac General  and Selective
Weed Killer, Basanite, Chemox General and PE, Chemsect, Dinitrex,
Dinitro-3, Dinitro General, Drexel Dynamite 3,  Dynamite,
Elgetol  318, Gebutox, Hel-Fire, Kiloseb, Nitropone C, Subitex,
Unicrop DNBP, Vertac Dinitro Weed Killer 5, Dynanap, Premerge Plus
with Dinitro, and Klean Krop.
WTRTTTCir
     The Office of Pesticide Programs will contact affected
groups as outlined in the attached Communication Strategy.
-------
                              -3-
COMPL IANCE' "MON ffOR ING"
     The Agency sent each registrant a package, by certified
mail, containing the Emergency Suspension Order, Notice of
Intent to Cancel, SSURO, and a Formal  Recall letter.  The Formal
Recall letter requested the registrants to determine the locations
of affected products and amount at each location, effect the
return of the recalled products to their company and inform
the Agency of their inventory of all dinoseb products.  In the
event that the certified mailing is returned to the Agency
and subsequent attempts to deliver the package are unsuccessful,
OCM will  ask the Regions to locate the registrant and deliver
the package.

Neutral Administrative Inspection Scheme (NAIS)	
     Regions/States will  conduct inspections of registrants
and producer establishments within 30 days of the suspension
action.  Producer establishment inspections (PEI's)  are conducted
to assure that producers  and registrants are not using, distributing,
selling, offering for sale, holding for sale, shipping, delivering
for shipment, or receiving and (having so received), delivering
or offering to deliver, to any person suspended or cancelled
dinoseb products.  During PEI's, inspectors are to collect
information from the producers on the names and addresses  of
all consignees of their product within the last 18 months,
if this information has not already been obtained as part  of
the response to the Recall.  Information on the names and
locations of dinoseb dealers may also be obtained by contacting
the registrant's main business office.  Regions should provide
States with a list of dealers based on the information obtained
through the response to the Formal  Recalls and the PEI's.

     Regions/States will  also conduct dealer and user inspections
in order to determine compliance with the emergency  suspension
order, cancellation order, and SSURO's.  Assuring geographic
distribution, Regions/States are to randomly inspect 10 percent
of the dealers.  These inspections should be completed within
90 days of the suspension.  States should issue SSURO's under
State authority, or have  Regions issue SSURO's, to dealers
found holding or selling  suspended products as well  as taking
enforcement actions as appropriate.

     Users of dinoseb may be identified through the  major  uses
of dinoseb as outlined in the Regulated Industry section of
this Strategy.  Inspectors should examine records of sale,  if
they are available, in order to further identify users.  Regions/
States will conduct use inspections based on this information.
-------
                              -4-
     Regions/States should respond to all tips and complaints
regarding possible violations of the dinoseb suspension/cancell-
ation order as soon as possible.

     Regions will follow-up and track the Formal  Recall following
the procedures outlined in section 14 of the Pesticides Inspection
Manual .
Office of Pesticide Programs/Registration Division (OPP/RD)   "

0 Will mail  copies of the Emergency Suspension Order and
  Notice of Intent to Cancel  to trade associations, and other
  Federal and State Agencies.

0 Will maintain a list of registrants affected by the Emergency
  Suspension Order and provide this information to OCM.

0 Will send copies of certified mail  receipts, or a list of
  the dates they were received by the registrants, to OCM and OGC.

0 Will contact OCM regarding  undel i verabl e or missing certified
  mail receipts within 15 working days from the date of the mailing

Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM)	

0 Will prepare Stop Sale, Use or Removal  Orders (SSURO).

0 Will prepare Formal Recall  letters.

0 Will send by certified mail a package to each affected registrant
  containi ng :

      1) A  copy of the Emergency Suspension Order.

      2) A  copy of the Notice of Intent to Cancel.

      3) A  SSURO for the products covered by the October 7, 1986
         Emergency Suspension Order.

      4) A  Formal  Recall letter.
-------
                               -5-
0 Will prepare and transmit the Compliance Monitoring  Strategy
  to the Regions.

0 Will notify the Regions regarding undeliverable or missing
  certified mail  receipts.

0 Will provide a list of all registrants and  user groups  affected
  by the Emergency Suspension Order, those persons issued
  SSUROs, those registrants with cancelled dinoseb products,
  and additional  pertinent  information to  the Regions.

0 Will keep the Assistant Administrator of OPTS informed  on
  the status of the Formal  Recall, inspections, and enforcement
  actions for one year.  These reports will  be based on monthly
  status reports  from the Regions for the  first three  months,
  and quarterly reports for the next three quarters.

Regions              		
0 Will  provide to OCM the name of a Regional  Contact  person.

0 Will  coordinate with States in the implementation  of this
  Strategy.

0 Will  provide a list of producer establishments of  dinoseb
  products to the States.

0 Will  provide States with copies of materials  received from  OCM.

0 Will  conduct inspections in States without  Cooperative
  Enforcement Agreements.

0 Will  issue SSURO's for any suspended  stocks found.

0 Will  take enforcement action as appropriate.

0 Will  follow-up and track the Formal  Recall.

0 Will  report to OCM for one year on the status  of the Formal
  Recall, the number and type of inspections, and the number
  and type of violations found by the Regions/States.  This
  reporting will be monthly for the first three  months and
  quarterly for the remaining three quarters.

0 Will  attempt to deliver the Emergency Suspension Order to
  those registrants that Headquarters was unable to  notify  by
  certi f i ed ma il .
-------
                              -6-
0 Will  conduct inspections.

0 Will  issue SSURO's under State authority,  or have  Regions
  issue SSURO's,  for any  suspended  or  cancelled  stocks  found.

0 Will  take enforcement action,  as  appropriate,  provided  they
  have  the authority.

0 Will  report to  the Regions  on  actions  taken  under  the
  emergency suspension.

0 Will  report to  the Regions  for one year on the number  and
  type  of inspections  and violations found  by  the State.   This
  reporting will  be monthly  for  the first three  months  and
  quarterly for the remaining three quarters.
-------
                           APPENDIX 1


                DINOSEB REGISTRANTS AND PRODUCTS

                          REGION I (2)


Staples C W Inc.'
PO Box 328
Presque Isle, Me  04769
EPA Reg. No: 1345-004

Uni royal Chemi cal
Division of Uni royal, Inc.
74 Amity Rd.
Bethany, Ct  06525
EPA Reg. No: 400-075 ,-100 ,-138 ,-139,-140,-147,-153,-158,-174,-190,-235,
-302,-327


                         REGION II (6)


Agway, Inc.-Crop Services
Chemical Division
PO Box 4741
Syracuse, NY  13221
EPA Reg. No: 8590-026

American Hoechst Corporation
Rt. 202-206 N.
Summerville, NJ  08879
EPA Reg. No: 8340-010

Blue Spruce Company
50DivisionAvenue
Millington, NJ   07946
EPA Reg. No: 1439-175 ,-190,-231,-235

N.Y.S. College  of  Agriculture and Life Science
Cornell University
Attn.-Dr. Dewey
Ithaca, NY  14853
EPA Intrastate  Accession No: 38655-10431

Trans Chemical  Industries, Inc.
150 Meadowlands Parkway
Secaucus, NJ  07094
EPA Reg. No: 9618-013

White House Company
8 Kingstand Ave.
Harrison, NJ  07027
EPA Reg. No: 3951-112
-------
                              -2-


                         REGION  III (4)
BFC Chemicals
PO Box 7495 ...
3509 Sil verside -Rd.
Wilmington, De  19803
EPA Reg.  No: 45639-118

FMC Corp.
Agricultural Chemical Group
2000 Market St.
Philadelphia, Pa  19103
EPA Reg.  No: 279-1841 ,-1854, -1855 ,-1859 ,-2836,
EPA Interstate Accession No: 279-3898, -4037

Royster Company
PO Drawer 1940
Norfolk,  Va  23501
EPA Reg.  No: 4904-334

S.N.P.E.  Stevens Et Al
1911 Jefferson Davis Hwy.
Suite 600, Crystal Mall  #1
Arlington, Va  22202
EPA Reg.  No: 35134-001
                         REGION IV  (17)
Cedar Chemical
Suite 2414 Clark Tower
5100 Poplar Ave.
Memphis, Tn  38137
EPA Reg. No: 56077-003 ,-004 ,-005, -Oil ,-012, -013 ,-014 ,-015 ,-016
-021, -023, -024, -025
                             v •
Cleveland Chemical Company
PO Box 820
Cleveland, Miss.  38732
EPA Reg. No: 8867-025

Drexel  Chemical Company
2487 Pennsylvania St.
PO Box 9306
Memphis, Tn  38109
EPA Reg. No: 19713-023 ,-028 ,-033, -078, -082, -1 10, -203
-------
                              -3-
Griffin Corporation
Attn.-Linda C. Elliot
PO Box 1847
Valdosta, Ga  31601
EPA Reg. No: 1812-118

Helena Chemical  Company
Clark Tower Suite
5100 Poplar Ave.
Memphis, Tn  38137
EPA Reg. No: 5905-217,
EPA Intrastate Accession No:-7584 ,-7585,-7586,-7587 ,  -7588,
-7593,-7599,-7600,-7601,-7602,-7887,-7888,-7889,-7890, -7891,
-7892,-7893,-7894,-7895

IDA, Inc.
PO Box 9483
2487 Pennsylvania St.
Memphis, Tn  38109
EPA Reg. No: 45115-028,-047,-052

Landia Chemical  Company
P.O. Drawer AO
Lakeland, Fl  33802
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 9859-5637

Laroche Inc.
1100 Johnson Ferry Rd. NE
Atlanta, Ga  30342
EPA Keg. No: 3442-669

Micro-Flo Company
Rt. 1-Box 190
Sparks, Ga  31647
EPA Reg. No: 51036-054,-068

Riverside Chemical Company
Riverside Terra  Corp.
PO Box 171376
Memphis, Tn  38117
EPA Reg. No: 9779-001,-186

Security Chemical  Company
PO Box 938
Fort Valley, Ga   31030
EPA Reg. No: 769-365

Southern Agricultural- Insecticides Inc.
PO Box 218
Palmetto, Fl  33561
EPA Reg. No: 829-197
-------
                              -4-
Stevens Industrial Inc.
N. Main St.
PO Box 272
Dawson, Ga  31742
EPA Reg. No: 2459-213

Superior Fertilizer and Chemical Company
PO Box 1021
Tampa, Fl   33601
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 3122-7195

Union Carbide Agricultural Products Co.
Office of  Regulatory Affairs
PO Box 12014
T. W. Alexander Dr.
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
EPA No: 264-363
Valley Chemical Company
PO Box 1317
Greenville, Ms  38702
EPA Intrastate Accession
            No: 1063-3299
Vertac Chemical Company
Suite 2414 Clark Tower
5100 Poplar Ave.
Memphis, Tn  38137
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 39511 -6817,-6818,-6819,-r820,-6821,
-6822,-6823, -6824,-6825,-6826,-6827,-6828,-6829,-6830 ,-6831 ,-6832 ,
-6833, -6834,-6835,-6836,-6837,-6838,-6839,-6849,-6850,-6851,-6853
                          REGION V  (1)
Universal Cooperatives Inc.
Farm Chemical Division
PO Box 460
7801 Metro Parkway
Minneapolis, Mn  55440
EPA Reg. No: 1386-478,-582
                         REGION VI  (7)
Ag-Chemical  Services, Inc
PO Box 1263
McAllen, Tx
EPA Reg. No:
78501
37790-8343
-------
                               -5-
 Ansul  Chemical  Company
 P.O. Drawer  1165
 Weslaco,  Tx   78596
 EPA  Intrastate  Accession  No:  6308-3010,-3011,-3012 ,-3013 ,-3014

 Apollo  Enterprises  Inc.
 Route  1
 Alteimer, Ar    72004
 EPA  Reg.  No:  13166-013

 DH  Industrial Supply Company
 PO  Box  472
to wie,  Tx  76230
 EPA  Reg.  No:  3797-004

 Micro  Chemical  Company
 PO  Box  711
 Winnsboro, La   71295
 EPA  Reg.  No:  4841-050

 Retzloff  Chemical Company
 PO  Box  45296
 Houston,  Tx   77045
 EPA  Reg.  No:  7472-007

 Wi1  son  Lee &  Company
 Wilson, Ar   72395
 EPA  Reg.  No:  9220-001
                         REGION VII  (4)
The Cropmate Company
320 Embassy Plaza
Omaha, Ne  68114
EPA Reg. No: 1145-095

Hi-Plains Sprayers, Inc.
710 S. Smokey Hill
Oakley, Ks  67748
EPA Accession Number No: 35965-3007

Kaw Val1ey , Inc .
18.01 South 2nd St.
Leavenworth, Ks  66048
EPA Reg. No: 44215-087,-088,-089,-90,-1 25

Platte Chemical Company
150 South Main
Fremont, Ne  68025
EPA Reg. No: 34704-176,-244,-245,-246,-253
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 34704-3860
-------
                              -6-


                    REGION VIII  (1)
Schall Chemical Inc.
120 N.' '^r oadway
Montevista, Co  81144
EPA Reg. No: 3468-010
                         REGION IX  (18)
AFC Company
PO Box 207
Edison, Ca   93220
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 37177-8221

Arizona Agrochemical Company
ChemicalDistributors
PO Box 21537
Phoenix, Az  85036
EPA Reg. to:  1526-480,-494

Bakersfield Ag Chemical  Inc.
Rt. #1 Box 858
Bakersfield, Ca.  93308
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 11369-8775,-8793

B r i t z Inc.
PO Box 9050
Fresno, Ca  93790
EPA Intrsstate Accession No: 10951-9810

Brown & Bryant Inc.
PO Bin T
Shafter, Ca  93263
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 11373-6981

Gowan Company
PO Box 5696
Yuma, Az  85364
EPA Reg. No: 10163-028
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 10163-6122

J.R. Simplot Co.
Agriculture Chemical Dept.
PO Box 198
Lathrop, Ca  95330
EPA Reg. No: 7001-077,-327
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 7001-4378,-7746
-------
                              -7-
Newell Chemical Company
1BA Brea Agricultural Service
1905 N. Broadway
Stockton, Ca  95205
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 36998-4464

Puregro Company
1276 Halyard Drive
West Sacramento, Ca  95691
EPA Reg. No: 1202-205,-244

Rockwood Chemical  Company
PO Box 34
Brawley, Ca  92227
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 10226-3751

Russell Chemical Company
PO Box 939
Brawley, Ca  92227
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 11159-7329
Di noseb

Santa  Paula Chemical Company
18115  E. Telegraph Rd.
Santa  Paula, Ca  93060
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 43906-7330

Simplot, J.R. Company
Minerals and Chemical Division
PO Box 198
Lathrop, Ca  95330
EPA Reg. No: 11682-011 ,-012

Soil  Service, Inc.
PO Box 1817
Salinas, Ca  93901
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 6973-3597

Stauffer Chemical  Company
1200 S. 47th St.
Richmond, Ca  94804
EPA Reg. No: 476-1971

Van Waters & Rogers
Agricultural Dept. (Namco)
2256 Junction Ave.
San Jose, Ca  95131
EPA Reg. No: 550-070
-------
                              -8-
Western Farm Services,  Inc.
C/0 Shell Chemical Co.
3075 Citrus Circle, Suite  195
Walnut Creek, Ca  94598
EPA Reg. No: 11656-00.1
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 11656-5767

Wi1 bur Ellis Company
191 W. Shaw Ave. , Suite 107
Fresno, Ca  937U4
EPA Keg. No: 2935-353,
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 2935-6592,-6593,-6594,-6636,-6661
                          REGION X  (3)
Feed Services Inc.
PO Box 430
Caldwell, Id  83605
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 10914-9304,-9326

Pacific Supply Cooperative
1200 SW Main
Portland, Or  97205
EPA Reg. No: 483-142

Wood Industries
PO Box 1016
Yakima, Wa  98907
EPA Intrastate Accession No: 682-5596
                    FOREIGN PRODUCERS   (1)
Marks & Company Ltd. A H
Wyice Bradford Rd. 12-9EJ
Yorkshire, England
EPA Reg. No: 15440-001
-------
                              -9-


                          APPENDIX II

                DINOSEB PRODUCER ESTABLISHMENTS*
REGION I  (0)

REGION II  (0)

REGION III  (0)

REGION IV  (4)

Drexel Chemical Co
Tunica Industrial  Park
Tunica, MS   38676
Produces: Sodium dinoseb, Triethanolamine dinoseb,  Dinoseb

Platte Chemical Company, Inc.
North Raceway Road
Greenville, MS   38701
Produces: Alkanolamine dinoseb, Dinoseb

Uniroyal  Chemical
214 Hest Ruby Ave.
Gastonia, NC   28053
Produces: Sodium Dinoseb

Vertac, Inc., Vicksburg Plant
PU Box 3, Rifle Range Road
Vicksburg, MS   39180
Produces: Alkanolamine dinoseb, Ammonium dinoseb,  Dinoseb

REGION V  (3)

ADI Distributors Inc.
430 West Carmel Drive
Carmel , IN   46032
Produces: Sodium dinoseb

ADI Distributors Inc.
8558 Industry Park Drive
Piqua, OH   45356
Produces: Sodium dinoseb

Sweetser Service Cr., Inc.
215 W. Franklinn St., PO Box 188
Sweetser, IN   46987
Produces: Sodium dinoseb
* According to 1985 FATES data.
-------
                              -10-
REGION V  (0)

REGION VI  (0)

REGION VII  (2)

Macon Exchange Bulk Pert Plant
Highway 63 North
Macon, MO   63552
Produces: Sodium dinoseb

SCF, Inc.
PO Box 101
Levasy, MO   64066
Produces: Sodium dinoseb

REGION VIII  (0)


REGION IX  (5)

Arizona Agrichem - Kyrene Prod. Plant
6751 W. Galveston
Chandler, AZ   85224
Produces : Di noseb

FMC Corp., ACG, Attn.: Delia D. McGoey
Box 1669 2501 Sunland Ave.
Fresno, CA   93717
Produces: Ammonium dinoseb

Helena Chemical Company
1075 S. Vineland (PO Box 305)
Kerman, CA   93630
Produces: Dinoseb

Occidental Chemical Company
16777 S. Howland Avenue
Lathrop, CA   95330
Produces: Dinoseb

United Agri  Products
PO Box 2357 (3173 So. Chestnut)
Fresno, CA   93745
Pr'oduces:L)inoseb

REGION X  (1)

J.R. Simplot Company DBA Sim-Chem
E of Boise,  Exit 74, Simco Rd.
Mountain Home, ID   83647
Produces: Dinoseb
-------
                    COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY
                          FOR DINOSEB
 BACKGROUND;

     The Agency has been reviewing  all  available dinoseb  data  as
 part of the  reregistration  process.  In conjunction  with this
 review, a Data Call In Notice  (DCI)  requesting ground  water and
 toxicology studies was issued  on June  13, 1984.   In  response
 to this DCI,  two teratogenicity studies were submitted  in May,
 1986 which demonstrated that dinoseb causes developmental
 toxicity in  laboratory animals and may pose a risk of  birth
 defects in pregnant women.  This risk  is greatest for  those
 women exposed at the dinoseb application site.

     EPA has'  also reviewed reproduction studies which indicate
 that dinoseb  has the potential to cause male sterility.

     Dinoseb  is a contact herbicide widely used to control broad-
 leaf weeds.   Cotton, potatoes, and soybeans comprise 71% of the
 chemical use.   Additional uses include: alfalfa, almonds,
 grapes, peanuts, peas, snap beans, and ornamentals.
"ACTION  BEING  TAKEN;

     After  considering  a range of regulatory options to mitigate
 exposure  to dinoseb,  the Agency has decided to emergency suspend
 all  registrations.   In conjunction with this action, a Notice
 of  Intent  to  Cancel  all dinoseb registrations is being issued.

     The Administrator  has determined that continued registration
 of  dinoseb poses an  imminent hazard during the period in which
 administrative hearings could delay the effectiveness of the
 cancellation  of these  registrations.
                     * /,
 MESSAGE;

     The Agency has determined that use of products containing
 dinoseb is an imminent hazard to human health due to significant
 exposure  to applicators, particularly pregnant women.  This
 regulatory decision  will eliminate all risks to applicators,
 bystanders, and field  workers.  There is no dietary exposure
 of  concern.         "  .                 •                 .

     Numerous  alternatives exist for most use sites of dinoseb.
 Paraquat  and  diquat  are considered to be the two major
 alternatves.   ICI Plant Protection Division (Great Britian) is
 the major  producer of  these two chemicals. _.^.
-------
                           Dinoseb
                 Telephone Notification List
  RESPONSIBLE PARTY
   Mike McDavit
  Jill Collins
 Cathleen Mclnerney
  PERSON TO BE CALLED         PHONE*

  WITHIN EPA

  Jim Lamb (OPTS)             382-2892
  Jan Peck (OPTS)             382-2906
  Cathleen Mclnerney (OPP)    557-7102
  Jill Collins (OPA)          382-4355
  Larry Cook  (OGC)            382-7505
  Al Jennings (OPPE)          382-4005
  Gus Conroy  (OCM)            382-3807
  Joy Wilson  (AA/OEA)         382-5654
  Alan Seilen (OIA)           382-4875
  Richard Longmire  (OPP)      557-9351

  Bill Prendergast  (OCL)      382-5200
  Al Heier (OPA)              382-4374
  Andy Robart (OPPSL)         382-4454
  Priscilla Flattery (OPA)    382-4387

  Phil Gray (OPP)             557-7096
  John Ulfelder  (OA)          382-7960
                         EPA REGIONS
        (to be called two days prior to announcement)
Susan Wayland


Priscilla Flattery
 Regional Division Directors
 (conference call; OCM to attend)
'f
 Regional Public Affairs Officers
 Cathleen Mclnerney
   .- ,0MB

 Carlos Tellez, OMB
395-7340
-------
                                -2-  ' "
RESPONSIBLE PARTY          PERSON  TO BE  CALLED             PHONE »


                            CONGRESS

Bill Prendergast            Gary Mitchell,                 225-2342
                            Tim Galvin,                    225-4452
     "         '•.•'•-."         Skip Stiles,                   	
                            House  Agriculture
                            Subcommittee Staff

                            Mario  Castillo,                225-2171
                            House  Agriculture
                            Committee Staff

                            Chuck  Connor,                  224-6901
                            Senate Agriculture
                            Committee Staff

                            Ron Outen,                     224-7814
                            Senate Environment &
                            Public Works Committee
                            Staff
                               STATES
            (to be  called one day  prior  to  announcement)
   Phil Gray            .    L.O.  Nelson,
                            SFIREG/AAPCO
                            Indiana
                            Bob Ehart,                     	
                            Wisconsin

                            Rodney Awe,                (208) 334-3243
                            Idaho
                            Robert McCarty,                	
                            Mississippi                    •  .
                        »/,
      "t                    . Art Losey,                     	
                            Washington


  Mike McDavit             Clare Berryhill,           (916) 322-6315
       "•                     CA Dept.  of  Food & Agriculture

      "     '          ''     Bob Batteese
                   ; .      .  Maine                     (207) 289-2731

                            Kay Evans                 (207) 289-3871
                            Maine  .

                            Jeffrey Carlson,   >£      (617) 727-2863
                            Massachusetts
-------
                                -3-
R2SPONSIBLE  PARTY

   Mike McDavit


 Region I
 Region  II
 Region  III
 Region  IV
 Region V
 Region VI
 Region VTI
 Region VIII
  Region IX
PERSON TO BE CALLED

 Van Kozak,
 Texas,Dept. of Ag.

 Vermont
 New Hampshire
 Connecticut
 Rhode Island

 New York
 New Jersey
 Puerto Rico

 Pennsylvania
 West Virginia
 Virginia
 Maryland • •
 Delaware

 North Carolina __
 South Carolina
 Georgia
 Florida
 Alabama
 Tennessee
 Kentucky

 Ohio
 Michigan
 Illinois
 Minnesota

 Arkansas
 Louisiana
 Oklahoma
 New Mexico

 Iowa
 '•Missouri
 Kansas
 Nebraska

 North Dakota
 South Dakota
 Montana
 Wyoming   .
 Colorado
 Utah

 Arizona
 Nevada
 Hawaii
TELEPHONE S

(512)463-7545
  Region X
  Oregon
  Alaska
-------
                               -4-
RESPONSIBLE" PARTY
  Andy Robart
  PERSON TO BE CALLED

        ' STATES

 .   .  J.B.  Grant,  NASDA

      Bob Jackson,  ASTHO

      Jim Solyst,  NGA
TELEPHONE
         628-1566
  Mike McDavit
      .11-
INDUSTRY and USER GROUPS

     John Baize,
     American Soybean
     Association

     Dr.  James Brown,
     National Cotton Council
                  _!•
     Harold Collins,
     National Agriculture
     Aviation Association

     Jack Early,
     National Agriculture
     Chemicals Association

     Ralph Engle,
     Chemical Specialties
     Manufacturers Association

     Tom Ford,
     National Potato Council

     David Hamilton
     American Association of
  . ..  Nurserymen

     Robert Keeney
     United Fruit and
     Vegetable Association

     Robert Kirshner
     National Forest Products
     Association

     Dave Lambert
     American Seed Trade
     Association
         554-7804


     901/274-9030




           546-5722




         •  296-1585




           872-8110




       303/589-4787
            /

           789-2900




           836-3410


              *

           797-5800
-------
  SPONSIBLE PARTY
                             -5-
  PERSON TO BE CALLED
                           INDUSTRY
  Mike McDavit
  Denise Larr,
  Pesticide Producers
  Association

  Mark Maslyn,
  American Farm  Bureau
     429-8405
                                                          484-2268
      FARMWORKER/LABOR/AGRICULTURE/ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS
Richard Longmire
  Andy Robart
 Fernando Cuevas,
 Farm Labor Organizing
 Committee
305/887-2949
                        Rebecca Harrington,          512/474
                        United Farm Workers (AFL-CIO)
                        Chip Hughes,
                        East Coast Farm Worker
                        Support Network
                                      5010


                              919/682-3818
 Ralph Lightstone,
 California Rural Legal
 Assistance

 Dr. Marion Moses,
 United Farm Workers  (AFL-CIO)

 Baldemar Velasquez,
 Farm Labor Organizing
 Committee

 David Cavenaugh,
"National Association of
 Community Health Centers

 Maureen Hinckle,
 National Audubon Society

 Diane Baxter/
 National Coalition Against
 the Misuse of Pesticides
916/446-1416



415/731-6569


419/243-3456



    833-9280



    547-9009


    543-5450
-------
 RESPONSIBLE PARTY
     -6-

  ' PERSON TO BE CALLED
       .: AGRICULTURE /ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS
Andy Robart
Lawrie Mott,
Natural Resources
Defense Council/ SF

Ellen Silbergeld,
Environmental Defense
Fund

Norm Dean,
National Wildlife
Federation

Neil Fitzpatrick,
Audubon Naturalist
Society of the Central
Atlantic States, Inc.

Shirley A. Brigge,
Rachel Carson
Council, Inc.
                     National Parks and
                     Conservation Assn.

                     Geoffrey Webb,
                     Friends of the Earth

                     Michael Clark,
                     Environmental Policy
                     Institute

                     Lucky Wentworth,
                     Izaak Walton League
                     of America

                     "Douglas Wheeler,
                     Sierra Club

                     Bob Fredrick,
                     National Grange

                     Paul Sacia,
                     National Farmers Union

                     Pat Quinn,
                     National Council of
                     Agricultural Employers
     PHONE #
415/421-6561
                                                       387-3500
                                                        797-6800
                                                        652-9198
                                                       652-1877
                                 547-5330



                                 528-1818






                                 628-3507


                             554-1600


                             554-6400
-------
                              -7-


1CESPONSIBLE  PARTY        PERSON TO BE CALLED           PHONE 3


                   AGRICULTURE/ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS

 Andy Robart   '     '     Randy Jones,                  659-1525
                          National Council of
                          Farmer Cooperatives

     t "                    Larry Silverman,              	
                          American Clean Water
                          Association

     "                    Lois Ellison,                 	
                          American Lung Assn.

     "                    Katherine McCarter,           	
                          American Public Health
                          Association
                           •

     "          •          Bambi Young,    _              	
                          Center for Science in
                          the Public Interest
                          Consumer Federation of
                          America

                          Rose Audette,
                          Environmental Action

                          Phillip Reed,
                          Environmental Law
                          Institute

                          Sydney Wolf,
                          Health Research Group

                          Nancy Neuman,
                          League of Women Voters
                          Migrant Legal Action
                          Program

                          Nat Williams,
                          Nature Conservancy

                          Joan Claybrook,
                          Public Citizen
-------
                             -8-
RESPONSIBLE PARTY
  Andy' Robart
PERSON TO BE CALLED

Dianne Barzman,
Public Voice for Food
•and Health Policy

Paul Portney,
Resources for the
Future

Larry Jahn,
Wildlife Management
Institute

Debbie Berkowitz,
Food and Allied Services
Union

George Koch,
Grocery Manufacturers
Association    -*

Charlie Mack,
Food Industry Assoc.
Executives

Harry Sullivan,
Food Marketing Institute

Robert Fersh,
Food Research and Action
Center

Melanie Miller,
National Peanut Council

Robert Keaney,
United Fruit Growers
 TELEPHONE *
                        Florida Fruit &
                        Vegetable Assn.
                                              (305
                        Jack Cooper,
                        National Food Processors
                        Association

                        Erik Jansson,
                        National Network to
                        Prevent Birth Defects
  737-7200



  337-9400



  296-8951



  452-8444


  393-5060



  775-0450


  836-3410


)  984-1351



  639-5900



  543-5450
-------
RESPONSIBLE PARTY
                              -9-
PERSON TO BE CALLED
                        OTHER'FEDERAL AGENCIES
 TELEPHONE *
  Phil Gray
 Cathleen Mclnerney
 Charles Smith,
 Pesticide Assessment
 Program/USDA

 Jim Parochetti,
 Cooperative Extension
 Service/USDA

 Ken Williams,
 Office of Migratory
 Birds,  Fish and
 Wildlife Service,

 John Wessel,
 FDA
 USDI

 Larry Kline,
 Office of Endangered
 Species, UDSI

 Sanford Miller,
 Bureau of Foods/HHS

 John Wood,
 APHIS/USDA
    447-4751
                                                       447-6506
    235-2760



    245-8850


    436-8896
        INTERNATIONAL AGENCIES and FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS
 Alan Seilen
Cathleen Mclnerney
 Pep Fuller,
 U.S. Trade Representative
 St
 Tom Wilson,
 U.S. State Department

 Carroll Collier,
 Agency for International
 Development

 Wayne Ormrod,
 Plant Products -and
 Quarantive Directorate,
 Agriculture Canada

 Pierre Mineau,       .,.-
 Canadian Wildlife
 Service
613-995-7900
                                                   819-997-6121
-------
                             -10-
MAILINGS;

     The Registration Division (RD) will mail copies of the
document to pesticide registrants (the FR notices will be
mailed prior to publication).  RD will also mail the document
to trade organizations, EPA Regions, other Federal agencies,
State officials and key EPA employees.  The Office of External
Affairs will send copies to Congress, environmental groups,
and intergovernmental groups, as appropriate.
-------
Friday
February 17, 1989
Part IV
Environmental

Protection Agency

Dinoseb Pesticide Products; Procedures
for Submission of Claims for
Indemnification and Requests for
Disposal; Amended and Final Notice
-------
 7372
Federal Register / Vol. 54.  No. 32 / Friday. February 17, 1989 / Notices
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

[OPP-150003A; FRL-3523-3!

Dinoseb Pesticide Products,         •:
Procedures for Submission of Claims
for Indemnification and Requests for
Disposal; Amended and Final Notice

AGENCY: Environir.ent.-il Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final notice; procedures for
requesting indemnification and disposal
for pesticide products containing
Dinoseb.

SUMMARY: This Notice amends an April
15  19U7. Fe^-ral Register Notice by
announcin   ml EPA :s again accepting
claims for *.j t«mnification and/or
requests fo.  disposal for all suspended
and cancelled dinoseb-containing
pesticides under sections 15 and 19 of
the Federal Insecticide. Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 m
and q (prior to the FIF11A amendments
of 1988). On June 9. 3.938. the EPA
Administrator issued a Final Order
which concluded the cancellation
hearing on dinoseb, cancelled the
registrations of all remaining dinoseb
products, and provided for limited use of
existing stocks under certain specified
conditions. This Notice provides
information on eligibility and
procedures to owners of dinoseb stocks
who may wish to seek indemnification
for losses suffered as a result of
regulatory actions taken by EPA and/or
Federal disposal assistance.
DATES: Claims and requests filed in
response to this Notice for products
which may not be used on caneberries
in Washington and/or Oregon, must be
submitted by June 19,1969. to be
considered  bairns end requests for
products wt ;:.ii may be used on
caneberries in Washington and/or
Oregon should not be submitted until
after June 15,1989. These latter claims/
requests must be submitted before
August 15,1983, to be considered.
ADDRESS: All claims and requests filed
in response to this Notice should be
mailed to: Resource Management and
Evaluation Branch (TS-757C), Office  of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20400, Attpntion:
Stanley Cook.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
By mail: Stanley Cook. Resource
  Management r.nd Evaluation Branch
  (TS-757C). Office of Pesticide
  Programs, Environmental Protection
  Agency. 401 M Street SW..
  Washington, DC 204GO
                    Office location and telephone number:
                      Room 1002, CM*2.1921 Jefftrson
                      Davis Highway. Arlington. VA, 1-000-
                      DIN-OSEB {in"Maryland call 1-800-
                      331-3704).
                    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is
                    issuing this amended Notice because uil
                    suspended dinoseb registrations have
                    now been cancelled, and holders of
                    stocks of these products may be eligible
                    for indemnification and/or Federal
                    disposal assistance. This Notice
                    discusses how claims for
                    indemnification and requests fur Fr.uura!
                    disposal should be prepared and
                    submitted to EPA. It also instructs
                    persons who responded to the April 15.
                    19G7, Notice how to affirm, amend, or
                    withdraw a previously submitted claim
                    and/or request, or to submit a claim for
                    indemnification and/or request for
                    disposal assistance for previously
                    ineligible products.
                      This Notice establishes two time
                    periods with separate deadlines for
                    owners to submit claims for
                    indemnification and/or requests for
                    disposal. Owners of products which
                    may not be used in 1989 on caneberries
                    must file claims/requests during the first
                    time period. Owners of products which
                    may be used on caneberries must file
                    claims/requests during the second time
                    period. Procedures for filing claims/
                    requests are discussed in Unit II. of this
                    Notice. Unit II. B. lists products for
                    which claims/requests may be
                    submitted during one of these two time
                    periods.
                      This Notice also discusses the interim
                    storage, transportation, and disposal of
                    dinoseb stocks. EPA has awarded
                    contracts to two waste management
                    firms for the disposal of dinoseb. It is
                    the responsibility of the holder to store
                    the dinoseb safely and transport it to
                    EPA's designated facility when EPA is
                    ready to receive the stocks.

                    I. Background
                    A. Legal Standard
                      Section 6 of FIFRA authorizes the EPA
                    Administrator to take certain actions .to
                    prohibit sale, distribution, and use of
                    pesticide products that pose
                    unreasonable adverse effects to human
                    health or the environment. If use of a
                    pesticide poses a risk that outweighs the
                    benefits of continued use, the pesticide's
                    registration may be cancelled and/or
                    suspended. If action is necessary to
                    prevent an imminent hazard to human
                    health or the environment, the
                    Administrator may announce his intent
                    to suspend a pesticide registration at the
                    some time he issues a Notice of Intent to
                    Cancel. If an emergency exists which
                    does not permit the Administrator to
hold a hearing before suspending a
pesticide registration, he may issue |
Emergency Suspension Order which'
immediately halts ail use, Sole, and
distribution of the pesticide. Adversely
affected persons may request, within
certain time frames, a hearing to
challenge EPA's suspension. After an
opportunity for a expedited hearing, a
Final Suspension Order can be issued.
Abo in accordance with section 6 of
FIFRA, a Notice of Intent to Cancel urui
deny registrations provides that a
pesticide product would be cancelled 30
days after publication of the
cancellation notice or its receipt by the
registrant unless the registrant or other
adversely effected  s:son requests a
hearing to contest the cancellation of
that registration.
  Prior to its amendment in December
1988. section 15 of FIFRA required the
Administrator to make indemnity
payments to owners of pesticides
suspended and cancelled under section
6 who suffered losses by reason of the
Agency's actions. The statute provided
that indemnification is payable to any
person under the following conditions:
  1. The Administrator suspended the
registration to prevent an imminent
hazard.
  2. The registration was subsequent
cancelled.
  3. The person owned some quunti?
the pesticide immediately before the
suspension.
  4. The person suffered losses by
reason of the  suspension or cancellation.
Under section 15(b), the amount of
indemnity payment was to be
determined on the basis of the cost of
the pesticide owned by the person
immediately before thr suspension, but
could not exceed the pesticide's fair
market value at that time.
  Also prior to the 1S88 amendment;,.
section 19[a) of FIFRA and the.
regulations promulgated pursuant to it «t
40 CFR Part 165 required Administrator
to accept at convenient locations for
safe disposal  these pesticides the
registrations of which have been
suspended and cancelled as specified in
section 6(c), if requested by the owner of
the pesticide. However, before the
owner of a pesticide requests such
acceptance, he/she must make every
reasonable effort to return the material
to the manufacturer, distributor, or other
agents capable of relabeling, recovering.
recycling, or reprocessing the muterin.l
(See 40 CFR 135.4).
  Both sections 15 and 19 of FIFRA were
substantially  amended by Pub. L.'
532. the FIFRA Amendments of 198
which was given into law by the
President on October 25,1988. EPA docs
-------
                    Federal Register /  Vol.  54, No. 32 / Friday,  February 17.  1989 / Notices
                                                                                                               7373
are
in
 not believe that the 1988 amendments
       iicable to its current dinoseb
         cation and disposal program.
          y. all references in this Notice
 !o sections 15 and 19 of F1FRA refer to
 the law as it existed prior to the 1938
 ;!inendmer.;3.
   B;ised en information about the
 adverse human health an:i
 environmental risks pose- by Jinr.st b-
 cnntuir.in.™ pesticide prod;: J.s, on
 October 7. 19;;6. the Admi;;;.,;rator
 issued an Emergency Suspension Ordor
 for all registrations of pesticides
 containing the active ingredient dincseb.
 it immediately prohibited all further
 sale, distribution, and use of dinoseb
 products. Notice of this action was
 published in the Federal Register of
 Gclober 14, 1086 (51 FR 3663-i). Although
 four registrants requested e hearing
 concerrir.g whether the suspension of
 dinoseb products should remain in
 effect, these requests were withdrawn
 on October 30, 1986, resulting in
 immediate entry of a Final Suspension
 Order.
.   Also on October 7, 1986, the
 Administrator issued a Notice of Intent
 to Cancel and deny registrations of all
 dinoseb-containing pesticide products,
 published in the Federal Register of
         4, 1986 (51 FR 3G650). Upon the
         n of the applicable 30-day
             dinoscb registrations were
 cancelled by operation of law. However.
 several registrants requested hearings
 contesting the EPA's cancellation an'ion.
 These registrations were suspended, but
 not cancelled, pending  the outcome of
 an administrative hearing.
   Prior to issuance of a Final
 Cancellation Order, certain actions were
 taken which resulted in modification of
 the Suspension Order on dinosob. First,
 EPA was petitioned under Subpart D of
 40 CFR Part 154 to modify the Final
 Suspension Order to permit use of
 dinoseb on certain crnps. Following an
 administrative hearing, on March 30,
 1{|.37.  the Administrator issued a
 Decision and Final Order Modifying the
 Final Suspension of Pesticide Products
 which Contain Dinoseb. This order and
 the FIFRA section 18 emergency
 exemptions which implemented it
 allowed limited use of FIFRA during the
 1987 and 1S80 growing  seasons on dry
 peas, lentils, and  chickpeas in
 Washington and Idnho. A subsequent
 order pmmitted use on the same crops in
 certain counties of Oregon.
   So.'ionJ, following a complaint filed in
 tli./ U.S. District Court for ths District of
           a number of user groups, the
          :-! Order on dinoseb w;;s
         on April 15, 1U37, with respect
to certain crops in the Pacific Northwest.
Love v. Thomas. 6G8 F. Supp. 1143 (D.
Oregon 1987). affirmed in part 833 F. Zd
1039 (9th Cir. 1S38). In particular, the
District Court ruling enjoined the
Suspension Order as it applied to
dinoseb use on cur.cberrios, cucurbits.
green peas, and snrs? beans in th? Stales
of Iddho, Ore^-n, and Washing:on.
  Cn ;-jne 9 1533, the Adminisirator
issued a Fincii Cancellation Order on
dinoseb. cancelling all remaining
registrations. However, the Order
provided for limited use of existing
stocks of dinusob on specific crops in
the Pacific Northwest during the 1988
and 1009 growing seasons. The Order
permitted existing stocks of all
cancelled dinoseb products which were
previously labeled for use on peas,
lentils, or chickpeas to be sold.
distributed, and u.icd for weed control in
dry peas, Icr.tils. chickpeas, and green
peas in the States of Idaho. Oregon, and
Washington during the 1968 use season.
In addition, the Order permitted existing
stocks of ai! cancelled dinoseb products
previously labeled for use on
cancberries (blackberries,
boysenberries, loganberries, and
raspberries) to be sold, distributed, and
used for cane control in these crops in
the States of Oregon and Washington
for  the 1983 and 198? use s£asons. The
1939 caneberry use in Washington end
Oregon is the only allowable use
remaining ai this time.
  The Final Cancellation Order was
challenged in the same District Court of
Oregon, which initially issued a
preliminary injunction partially staying
the Order. However, the Court
ultimately concluded it did not have
jurisdiction to review the Order and. in
the alternative, entered judgment
sustaining the Administrator's decision.
Northwest Food Processors v. Thomas,
N-88-641-RE (D. Oregon Sept. 25,1988).
The Northwest Food Processors
Association previously filed a petition  in
the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
seeking review of the cancellation order
and has also appealed the  Federal
District Court decision to the Ninth
Circuit Court.
C. April 15.1987 Federal Register Notice
  EPA issued a notice, published.in the
Federal Register on April 15.1937 (52 FR
12352), announcing that pursuant to
sections 15 and 19 of FIFRA it was
accepting claims for indemnification
and/or requests for disposal assistance
for  dinoseb pesticide products that were
suspended and cancelled. The April 15,
19137 Notice described procedures and
set a deadline of July 14,1987 for filing
claims and/or requests for eligible
products. As described in the April 15,
1987 Notice, eligibility did not extend to
suspended dinoseb registrations which
h.\d not been cancelled (i.e., those
registrations for which registrants had
requested a cancellation hearing).
Although such products were not
eligible for indemnification and disposal
assistance at that time, EPA requested
holders of these ineligible products to
provide the Agency with certain basic
information, such as location and
quantity of their stock. EPA requested
this information to be able to estimate
the total quantity and location of all
dinoseb products which could become
eligible for indsmiiificutiOE and disposal
assistance if the registrations of such
products were eventually cancelled.
  In response to  the April 15,1987
Notice, EPA received over 1200
submissions. About one-third of these
were for products eligible at that time
for indemnification and disposal
assistance, and the others were for
products that were not eligible. All
submissions were assigned claim or file
numbers and information from the
aggregate was used to estimate the total
amount and location of dinoseb stocks.
EPA has been reviewing these
submissions and has contacted some
people regarding their claims/requests.
EPA has made a  number of offers to pay
indemnification to owners, and is
processing these  claims as the
acceptance agreements are returned  by
the owners. The Agency will be
contracting all other people who
responded to the April 15,1987 Notice
regardless of whether their products
were eligible or ineligible for
indemnification or disposal at the time
of their initial submission. EPA
appreciates the cooperation of holders
of suspended-only products who
responded to the April 15,1987  Notice.
The information helped expedite the
dinoseb indemnification and disposal
program.
  After the publication of the April 15,
1937 Notice, and  prior to issuance of a
Final Cancellation Order, several
registrants who had requested a
cancellation hearing withdrew their
requests and, in so doing, their dinoseb
registrations were cancelled by
operation of law. Once cancelled,
owners of such products were eligible to
seek indemnification and disposal
assistance. For example, the
registrations of L'niroyal Chemical
Company dinoseb products were
cancellations on  June 19. 1987 when
Uniroy.il withdrew from the hearing. At
that point, dinoseb products registered
by Uniroyal became eligible for
indemnification and disposal assistance.
However, many owners of Uniroyal
-------
7374
Federal  Register / Vol. 54, No. 32 / Friday. February 17, 19N9  /  Notices'
products may not have been aware of
the cancellation and their subsequent
eligibility. This Notice serves, in part, to
announce that owners of Uniroyal
products registered by other companies
who withdrew from the hearing after the
April 15.1987 Notice was issued art'
now eligible to file claims for
indemnification ar.J requests for
disposal and nur-l file claims/requests
as outline J in Unit II. of this Notice.

ii. Requirement? for Indemnification and
Disposal

.'{. Who is Eiis-i>!e to File Claims fur
Indemnification ar.ct Requests fur
Disposal?

I. General

  All federally registered dinoieb
products, including products with
Special Local Need registrations (under
section 24{c] of FIFRA), have been
suspended and cancelled. Accordingly.
owners of these cancelled dinoscb
products including registrants,
manufacturers, distributors, retailers,
and users may submit claims for
indemnification and requests for
disposal, provided that the cancellation
occurred after the October 7,1986
Emergency Suspension Order end the
other conditions specified in this Un.it
are met.

2. E'.iect of Intrastate Registration

  At the time of the October 7, IQIiO
Emergency Suspension Order, certain
product.1; containing dinoseb were being
marketed under State pesticide
registrations with applications for
Federal registrations pending before
EPA in accordance with EPA regulations
at 40 CFR 162.17. Applications for these
intrastate products were pending on
October 7,1906, when EPA issued a
concurrent Notice of Intent to Deny all
pending applications for Federal
registration of these products.
  The denial of Federal registration for
these intrastate products was analogous
to cancellation. A U.S. Claims Court
decision in Gro-Green Products, Inc. vs.
United States.  3 Cl. Ct. 639 (1983), held
that in similar circumstances a claimant
who held stocks of an intrastate
pesticide product containing silvex was
entitled to indemnification. Accordingly,
persons with dinoscb products that were
previously marketed under pending
intrnstate applications may also be
eligible for indemnification and
disposal, and must cubrr.it any claim
during the first time period established
in Unit II. E.
                    3. Effect of Section 18 Emergency
                    Exemptions, the District Court Rulings
                    and li:<: Fin;.l Cancellation Order
                      The Final Cancellation Order
                    fuptrccdeu ali sale, distribution, and
                    use of dinc-fi'b v.ndnr ihc section 18
                    emergency i x; mptiuns or the District
                    CoLrt rulings. However, as discussed
                    above, the Final Cancellation Order
                    P?r:r.iMcJ the sale-, distribution, and use
                    of dinoseb for certain crops in 1900 and
                    19o9.1'ersons who used dinoseb under
                    the section 18 emergency exemptions,
                    thn District Court rulings, or the existing
                    stoc! s provision (for uses other than on
                    cancbc-rrics) in the Cancellation Order,
                    end who have not cubmitted a ciaim for
                    inc'.emnification. must now do so.
                    Further, if ihry have previously
                    submitted a claim/request or
                    information they must now affirm,
                    amend, or withdraw it. Such amended
                    claims/requests must reflect any
                    product that was used or sold for one of
                    these uses. However, if a dinoseb
                    product may be used on caneberries
                    during the 1989 use season, they should
                    not submit a claim or emend a claim
                    until the second time period as
                    discussed in Unit II. E.
                      Owners/holders of dinoseb should
                    remember that products for which
                    existing stocks may still lawfully be sold
                    or used under the Cancellation Order
                    include any products labeled for
                    caneberry uses, whether or not they
                    were cancelled prior to issuance of the
                    Order. Such products must be used only
                    in full compliance with all of the
                    stringent use restrictions required under
                    the Order, and supplemental labeling
                    containing all of the use restrictions
                    must accompany the product when it is
                    sold or distributed. Holders of these
                    products may use, sell, or distribute
                    their dinoseb stocks in Oregon and/or
                    Washington during the 1989 caneberry
                    use season in conformity with  the
                    Cancellation Order. Owners/holders
                    who previously submitted claims/
                    requests on these products and whc
                    subsequently use, sell, or distribute
                    some or all of their stock must amend
                    their claim accordingly and notify EPA
                    during the second time period as
                    discussed in Unit II. E.
                    4. Ownership requirement
                      Any person who owned some quantity
                    of a registered dinoseb pesticide product
                    immediately before the registration of
                    that product was suspended, or who
                    subsequently received a permissible
                    assignment of the original owner's claim
                    or a power of attorney from the original
                    owner to file the claim, may ciaim
                    indemnification for the product. Claims/
                    requests rr.ay be filed by persons
repn-senting. in some legal
product owners at the time of
suspension or cancellation.
  A "pov.'(-r of attorney" is a don.'.mcn;
whicli appoints someone other than the
actual product owner (the registrant, for
exan-j-.h.J as an n?>cnt of the product
ownt.-r. In this in&lance, uuch a docu/ne'it
merely givjs an ayent the a;itiiori!\ to
submit an indemnification claim and
receive payment on the owner's behalf.
The claim remains that of the pesticide
owner.
  EFA encouraged regisiraiUs to rcciili
their products from distributor and
retailers, so that ihe dinoscb products
would be consolidated. If a registrant
recalled its products,  the registrant
could obtcin assignment of the original
owner's claim. The document of
assignment transfers the pesticide
owner's right of indemnification to the
other person. The pesticide owner
thereafter has no legal interest in the
claim. Samples of a "power of attorney"
end assignment documents are provided
in an Appendix to the Dinoseb Claim
Form. Forms are available from the
regional offices listed in Unit II. D. of
this Notice.
  The Federal Anti-Assignment of
Claims Act would ordinarily bar an
assignment of a claim that occurred
before the claim was  allowed. As
in the April 15,1987 Notice. EPA p
to waive this prohibition against "esirly"
assignments with regard to otherwise
valid claims for indemnification under
section 15 of FIFRA. However, EPA
intends to waive this  prohibition only
with respect to an assignee who took
back the product as part of a recall or u
seller who subsequently accepted
relumed stocks from purchasers.
  Owners such as end-users and
dealers/distributors who have acquired
stocks of dinoseb products since
October 7,198G, will not be eligible for
indemnification for such stocks even if
the products were acqiu'red  in a lawful
manner because these people did not
own the product on the date of
suspension. EPA will not waive the
Anti-Assignment of Claims Act
prohibition against assignment of
indemnification claims for these
products because waiver of this
prohibition would not be consistent with
the purposes of the Act. Claims for
indemnification belong only to the
person v/no owned such stcdcs on
October 7,1965 and may not be assigned
to anyone else unless such assignment is
part of a recall or return cf stocks to
suppliers.
  EPA suggests that any dealer or u
who acquired stocks of dinoseb
products after October 7,1986, which
-------
                    Federal Register  / Vol. 54. No.  32 / Friday. February 17.  1989 / Notices
                                                                         7375
 he/she cannot or does not intend to •
           l or use should attempt to
           stocks to the party who
            on October 7,1986. Only
 that party is eligible to receive any
 indemnity payment for remaining
 stocks. Likewise, any person who
 intends to acquire dinoseb for the lawful
 •,!se permitted under the Final
 Cancellation Order should be cautioned
 that he/she would not be eligible for
 inde.iinitication for that particular stock.
 if any is unused at the end of the 10D9
 use siuson, because he/she was not its
 o-.vnor or. October 7,1936. However.
 ever, if it is not possible to return
 r«;:iainirig stocks of a cancelled
 pesticide product to the  original own:.;?.
 '.he new holder may submit a request far
 Fcdeni disposal assistance if the storks
 nre -./Jierwise eligibla.
  hi-A rs^uires information from the
 claimant on the current ownership end!
 ior.atic;i of the product, as well as the
 ownership at the time of suspension. For
 purposes of rietsrmining who owned the
 product at the time of suspension,  the
 operative date is October 7,1080.
 5. Loss Requirement
  Tr.o amount of indemnity payment is
 to be determined on the  basis of the cost
 of the pesticide owned by the person
 immediately before suspension, but car.
 n.-.t^j^d the pesticide's fair r.-.arket
 \ :il^HEh3t time. Owners can recover
 ir.d-jrSfilieation only for losses suffered.
Therefore, anyone who legally sold or
 used any dinoseb products after Oc'ober
7.1986 (e.g., as legally permitted under
section 18, the District Court injunctions.
 or the Final Cancellation Order) must
 rr.ake appropriate adjustments en  his/
 her claim. The total amount of "loss"
 sustained by the owner for a given
 amount of a dinoseb product mast be
 reduced by the proceeds of any sale or
distribution of that product. Any owner
 who uses a giver, amount of a dinoseb
 product has eliminated those "losses"
 th.-;t might otherwise have been
 sustained as a result of suspension and
cancellation cf the aiiount of product.  A
claimant is not entitled to an indemnity
payment for any amount of dinoseb
product for whi'jh losses were recovered
 through sale or use.
K. Wt:a! Products Are Eligible for
indemnification and Disposal?
  The following lists include all dinoseb
 products that arc now eligible for
 !iiderr.,".iirication and Federal dispoiiul
.•issis'j.HCH. List A contains products for
 which no cunebOiTy uses are permiitcd.
  d for which EPA is now accepting
        ,'qut!s!s. Claims/requests  for
        in List A must be submitted
        e first time period specified in
Unit II. E. List B contains products which
may be used on caneberries in
Washington and/or Oregon during the
1989 caneburry season. Claims/requests
for products on List 5 should not be
submitted to EPA until the occoid time
period specified in Unit II. E.
  Most pesticide product labels contain
an EPA registration number (usually
designated as "EPA Rc«. No. 999909-
99<:D"J and an EPA establishment
nu.-n.bfr (usually designated as "EPA
Est. No. 99999"). The owner should
locate the EPA registration number and
use that for identifying his/her
produr.'(s) and for completing the form.
The owner should not use the EPA
establishment number for identifying
his/her prodact(s). Th:it nur/.jer is not
sufficiently specific 'c be useful for the
dir.nseb indemr.if'sution and disposal
program. Some pro Jjct labc's list a
nvjistra'.ion number thai begins with the
letters "SLN" and i'-.cn c iwo letter State
abbreviation, fciiaw?::.! by 3 6-J;git
number. Thsse are c.iiJed scr.tirvi 2t(c)
or L-pecial Local Ner.-_ •egislrations and
are legitimate EPA rcjis'.ntion numbers.
In rare cases, pesticide product labels
do not contain an EPA registration
number. Theae are probably "intrastate"
products that have never received a
FedDral registraticn number. For thpse,
the owner should uja tho State
registration r.nrr.ber provided en th«
label  to identify :he prcductU) and Tioto
on the form that no EPA rogistration
number is present on the l.ihel.

LIST A—PRODUCTS THAT MAY NOT  BE
  USED ON CANEBERRIES IN  WASHING-
  TON AND/OR OREGON
   Company Name/
   Registration No.
     Produc; Name
AFC Company;
  037177-6221.
A3-Chcm:
  037730-C343....
Agway:
  008590-Jo	
 AFC Contact Wood
  Killer.
I
! Salvo.
!
I Agw3> Taxi-F-.im
•  Prsmei ^o.
A.H. Marks and        ;
  Company, Ltd.:       .
  015440-1	i
Ansul:               i
  006308-3010	\
  006308-3011	|
  006308-3012	'
  006308-3013	\
  C06308-3914	'
Apollc Enterprises:      I
  013165-13	1
S2irdaRdMcGuir3.fr:.:
  SLN NV-«10005	:
BakerVicId AG:
  0113C9-?775	
  011363-8793	
  SLN CA-780171.
BFC Chemicals:
  045639-113	
 Tecrnical DNS?.

 AncracK Herbia3e
 Ancrick Hertiride
 AncracK Herbrcnie.
 Ancreck Kerj:c,i'e.
 AncracK He.^i~.;:;a.

 Dinitro 3.

 BaWs Con;a:t Weed
   Killer.

 Bic Dir.iiro Wee-j "•' '••:.•.
 Bac Contact V
-------
7376
Federal Roaster  / Vol. 54, No. 32 / Friciny. February 17. 19U9 / Notices
LIST A—PRODUCTS THAT MAY  NOT BE
  USED ON CANEBERRIES IN WASHING-
  TON AND/OR OREGON—Continued
                 LIST A—PRODUCTS THAT MAY NOT BE
                   USED ON CAIOEBERRIES IN  WASHING-
                   TON AN • /OR OREGON—Continued
LIST A—PRODUCTS THAT MAY NOT BE
  USED ON CANEBERRIES IN  WASHING^
  TON AND/OR OREGON—Continued   ™
Cc.rr.caov Nc^o/ ! p ^ , ft
Pi'-..-.. station Nn. i
SLN TM-C-'.CCOI 	
SIM WA-830'.-l5 	
Fc-rrl So.-/:C3:
0'CU1'1-S';C'- 	

F-'i.'C Cs-;isra'.:S!v
c:^::s IE;-! 	
C "J'-i'll-ie59
000273 3SS9 	
"Lf*' VV"i-77Cv-*J 	
010'33-ZS 	
GrilLn:
001812-1 1E 	 - 	
Helena;


CC5905-7W7 	
035905-7588 	
003905-7593
005905-7593 	 - 	
005905-7603 	
005305-7601 	
005^05-7602 	
00=905-7867 	
005905-7888 	 .....
C-35905-7889 	
005905-7890 	
0059C5-7891 	
C3J905-7BG2 	
"'JC3C5-73S3 	
00!:9C5-7S94 	
00!irO=-~on5 	
Hi-Plains:
C3ri965-3007 	
Iu3 Incorporated:
045115-47 	 _ 	
J.R. Simplest Company:
0070C1-4378 	
007CC1-774S 	
01"C02-11
Kaw Valley.
044215-68 	
044215-89 	
044215-90 	
04421 5-125 	
CLN CA-79C013
Landia Chemical
Company:
00&3S9-5G37 	
Larcrhf Incorporated:
OT^i4^-660 	 _ 	
U.r-o Chrm Cor.ipany:
004841-50
M'.cro-Flo:
051035-68 	
A:icr3Ci< ^ll"blClio.
r-.. ;--•-; 0>'- iT./ion
H-lS "-..c.-.-in
R-'fi ^iiii.^.;n.
N'T::.- .Vw-W Coie C.
S !•"•-. G ",CO.
f'r.r va Si-.'.-« P£ Cod-!
16.
S.rrC' rtL3.
rjitc-ra S.r.o» Pi1.:? i^ie
3~1213
Pro'.l G.;r:.-;l WS Pr-->-
m3:go
PICK.! Genera! Weea
Kilier.
PreTierge Cini'jo Weed
Killer.
Spark.
Sp^rk.
Spark.
SporK.
Spark.
Spark.
Spark.
Spark
Spark.
Spark.
Spark.
Spark.
Spark.
Spark.
Spark.
Spark.
Spa'k.
Surge Growth Stimulant
Spa'k.
Spur 440.
Dira'ro 3 Dinitro Weed
Killer.
Contact Weed Killer.
Contact Weed Kiiler.
Sim-Chcm Dinitro Weed
Killer.
Miner Dinitro Weed Killer
Cherrcx General Weed
Killer.
Tide Weed Pre-merge
Type.
Baird's N-D Herbicide.
AGSCO Skin-Set A
Herbicide for Potato
Vine Killing.
Tidn Woed-Asiio Pro-
Emsrge Typo.
Scathe Peanut
Hc.-r.cide.
USS Premergo DiniUo.
Fremerge Dinhro Wc:d
K'Hsr.
Premerge Dinitro W&ed
Killer.
Cc-'-.paiy 'Jarre/
f-TQ'Sfni-or NO
,
(/..ci .Vnrnca ClKm.cal
C-rr.r;any ii1:.:
SLN CA-790227 	
SLNCA-7:02Z3 	
P,i:!lic S.;\"!Y:
OCt '•«-•. 4? 	
Platte Cr.srr.ical:
CV 704-1 76 	

m.i-'"i4-?i1^
03«~04-i45 	
C34704-253
C34704-3860 ...-„ 	
Puregn:
CH1 202-244 	 	 	
SLN CA-?800i3 	 	
SLND-C40013 	
R«t:loff:
0074 ~ 'J-7 	
Rrverside/Teta:
009779-1 	
C09779-188 	
Rockwood:
010226-3751 	 	
Rcyslef Company:
004004-334 	
RusseM Chemical:
011159-7329 	
Santa Paula:
043906-7330 	
SLNCA-760016 	
Schail:
prj34gg_10 . ......
Socurity Lawn:
OOC769-3G5 	 _ 	
S.N.P.E.:
035134-1 	 _ 	
011682-12 	 _ 	
Soil Service:
006973-3597 	
Southern Agric. Ins.:
000829-197 	 _ 	
Staples CW
Incorporated:
001345-4 	 _...„ 	
Stautler
000476-1971 	
Steven Industries:
002459-2 i 3 	
Superior:
003122-7195 	 	
Thempson-Hayward
Chamical Company:
SLN CA-700177 	
Tc\0 Spray DusL Inc.:
SLN CA-790209 	
ProrJi'Ct Name '
Diaitro Cpntsct W*<*1
KiliCi.
Fire^il Dmi; o \Vosa
Killtr.
Oinitrc P E.
Clean Crop DiX:o-GS 3
•Aucd Killer.
Clean Croc Din,;.c ">-B
Herbicide.
C^an Crop Dinr.;o 5--!?
He.-bicioc.
Ciean Crcp Technical
DNi'P.
Clean Crop Contact
Werd Killar.
Qear. Crop Top-Kill.
Puregro Preharves'.
DcsiccanL
Purecro Contact Weed
Kiifer.
Puregro Preharvest
Desiccant.
DNBP-Ss Horbi&de.
Dinitrol.
Brand Prert,ergo.
Rockwood Brand
Dcsic:an;.
Cnem-Pest Diniuo Wesd
Killar.
D>'nr;ox 300.
Russell Chemical
Contact WK.
Santa Paula Chemical
Contact.
Schall Contact Weed
Killer.
Premerge Ointtro Weed
Killer.
Dinoseb.
Sim-Chem Vint Killer.
Super Contact Weed
Kiiler.
Dinitro General Weed
Killer.
Premerge Dinitro.
Dinitro P.E. Weed Killar.
Master Brand Promcrgo
Superior Yellow Top.
Contact Weed Killer.
Toxo Contact Weed
Kilier.
SSa i Pro**,*™
"rans Chomc:
CC'J6lB-13
U'nroyat Ciicrr.ical
Cor,- -an/. Inc.:
*.ri4 00-75 	
•JUO-iCO-103 	
OC«'*/"OC- 133 	
Ot040C-12S 	
OOO-Cv-147 	
CC, 1400- 1 53 	
CCU <00-130
OOP-'-C'J-C -'5 	
(KCMpo-Jos 	
OrjtWu-' >T
SLN AL-E'0026 	
SLN AR-800016.. 	
S' N AR-e40004.
SLN iD-6juoio 	
SLN 1D-63G013 	 	 	
SLN iD-840003 	
SLN ID-040006 	
SLr,' LA-600034 	
SLNMS-8CWM5 	
SLN wo-610021 	
SLN OR-630002 	
SLN OR~e40004 	
SLN 1N-810014



SLN WA-64034S 	 - 	
SLNWA-840046 	
Universal Cooperative:

Valiey Cnemical:
Van Waters and Rojers:
000550-70 	 	
Vartac Chemical:
0395*1-10 	 	 	

03951 i-8" .._ 	
03951 1-C8
039511-89 	
03S511-9" . . ..
03G511-112 	

02^511-115 	 	
C39S11-116 	
039511-6817
039511-6018 	 _.....
039511-6919 	 „ 	
039511-6620 .. . .
C3951 1-6821 	
03351 1 -6822 	 _. 	
03951 1-€923 	
0^95 11 -6824 	

0395 11-602'- 	
03951 1-6B"17
03051 1-6S28 	
039511-6829 	 „ 	
03"51 1-6830 	
03P51 1-6831 	
032511-6832 	
03551 1 -6833 	 	
03951 1-6834 	
039511-6835 	 	
TCI-DN3P
Dyanap.
Dory; (H.W.).
Uni'iyai Dnowb-i.
Un;r:va! Di"os,is-3.
EMy" CNb?.
CMS?.
~H !T"iit-c Technical.
DC Pest:: C .'• !-,•> Vvccii
!'.:!'sr
K "an Krc?
S*iW~A Oi^'TO W'ar."'
Ktl'et.
l,'n;rrya! O'nostb 3.
Un>ro;a: Dir.oseb 3.
Uniroyal Dmoi
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 54,  No. 32 /  Friday, February 17, 19B9 / Notices
7377
LIST A— PRODUCTS THAT MAY NOT BE
«ON CANEBERRIES IN WASHING-
ND/OR OREGON — Continued
^cgSonNo' Pr0dUCt Nam°
035C1 1-6336 	
03D5" 1-6337
fl-a -,•-, -{ja 38

C39511-68.19 	
G3~511-C9':0 	
C;~5l 1-6851 	
Cj';i!i-G3E3 	
.SLN <-L-82D004


SLN CA-82010V
3LN IL-82C020 	
SLN, iri-6"5 0005
SLN VO-820007 	
SLN NC-820004 	
SLN NC-820017 	
SLN VA-620007 	
CLN VA-82n026
\v?slern Farm Service:
0116^6-5767
SLNCA-70C094 	
Wlw-137
White House:
WiiS'jr E.l:3:
002935-353 	
00'935-65°2
C02G35-6593 	
i'02Q3S-45c34
"iD2'535-6636 	
C0'j35-6661 	
SLN CA-7CC004 	
S' N lD-770024
SLN ID-020CC4 	
SLN MT-810021 	
=)LN CR-76C012 . ..
SLN OR-780048

SLN OR-810C44 	
SLN VYA-760013
S1 N WA-770043
cl N WA-800068
SLN V. A-B30025
y.-'l?on Lac and
•any:
0-1
	
Prenerge.
Preme'gc.
Prcmerge.
Premerge.
General Weed K.llcr
Gorvrral Weed K-'-'-x
Gencia! Weed *.:!er.
General Weed Ki'.iii
P'emerge 3 Dinitro
Amino Herb.
Prumerge 3 Dinitro
Amme Herb.
Premerge 3 Dinitro
Amine Herb.
Fremefge 3 Dinitro
Amine Hero.
Premerge 3 Dir..tro
Amine Herb.
Premerge 3 Din:t;o
Amine Hero.
Premerge 3 Dintro
Amine Herb.
Prerr.orge 3 Dinitro
Amine Herb.
Prcmerrje 3 Dinitro
Amine Herb.
Premergo 3 Dinitrg
Amine Hero.
Prcn\erge 3 Dinuro
Amine Horb.
Contact Weed Killer.
Ccr.;act NCS.
WcsWn Fum Soiree
Ccr.tact Wooo S.:i
1 Dow. Gererai Weed
'• K.SIi-r.
: DO.
Dinitro Weoa K'i'v 5
; Do.
1
1 Contact Weed K:i!ef.
1 Owners of dinoseb products previously regis-
tered under FIFRA section 24(c) for use in only one
Slate on any crop other than canebemcs may or
may not be permitted to submit claims/rcqiiosts
dutmi; the first period discussed in Unit II. E., de-
pending on wnetnor tho product also boats gersral
labeling lor use 0:1 one or more caneberry crops. If a
product is registered undsr section 24(c) and doos
not bear any labeling for use on a caneberry crop.
the owrwr may submit a claim during the first tint-
period.
Using th«!se lists, the person filing the
claim should find the productfs) for
-------
Federal  Register  / Vol. M. No. 32  /  Friday. February 17,
                                                                                       /  Notices
whi..h he/she is claiming .
indemnification und/or requesting
iiisp"sal assislance, and complete the
claim form (including the product
registration number) as described in
Unit II. C.  If the registration number on
thp product label is not present on this
list, and the owner is sure he/she has a
ilinoseb product, he/she should file the
r.ihiir. or request using whatever number
is present  on the lubel. The absence of a
product registration number may be
explained  by a registration transfer from
•jne company to another. In such a case.
the new registration legally
encompasses ail forracr :vgist rations
tind, as long as the- registration was
transferred to another company and was
subsequently suspended and cancelled
under section C(c) cf FIFKA, tlie owner
may be  entitled to an indemnity
payment and/or disposal assistance
with respect to that product even though
the product now goes by another EPA
registration number.
C. What Information Must be
Submitted?
1. Claim Form and Supporting
Documentation
  EPA has prepared an updated form for
filing claims/requests ond  an instruction
sheet to accompany it. The form and
instructions distributed in conjunction
with the April 15,1987 Notice have been
revised  to  reflect chan«( s in the
eligibility and labeling of certain
products that have occurred since tlie
April 15,1937 Notice. The revised
materials can be obtained  from the EPA
regional offices listed in Unit n. D. of
this Notice.
  It is the  responsibility of the person
submitting an indemnity claim to submit
the required documentation to support
the claim. The insr  • ions
accompanying the -j.-i-n form indicate
what type  of supporting documentation
is acceptable for each element of the
claim. For  example, all individuals filing
claims must subm:1 evidence of the cost
to the claimant in either producing or
acquiring the product. The  cost is .
limited to the direct cost of the product
and does not include such  incidental
items as transport or storage costs. For
registrants/manufacturers  holding
inventorir.- of a labeled and packaged
product ti.at could not be sold,
production records showing cost of
production, or invoices showing the
purchase cost will be acceptable.
Distribute:::., wholesaijrs, retailers, and
users should submit purchase invoices.
tjurchasp receipts, or notarized
r.ffiviavits.
  If disposal or reprocessing has elrnady
occi'p-ed. evidence of legal dirposal is
                    also required. Records to be used as
                    such evidence should be kept in
                    sufficient detail so tlint EPA could track
                    the history of indiviriu:;! dinoseb
                    products for which indemnification is
                    being sought. Such evidence must
                    include invrices or waste manifests
                    from facilities permitted to handle
                    dinosc'b wastes. In such a case,
                    indemnity payments may be granted for
                    the cost of the product but not for the
                    cost of disposal or reprocessing.
                      The form also provides a way to
                    request disposal of a product, whether
                    or not indemnification is requested. All
                    information requested on the form
                    regarding quantity, unit number and
                    size, and Oihur facts pertinent to
                    disposing of excess product must be
                    submitted in order for the product to be
                    eligible for Federal disposal.
                      A claimant is not entitled to an
                    indemnity payment for a dinoacb
                    product for which he/she has already
                    recovered losses through sale or use. If
                    an owner of a dinoseb product has  sold
                    or used any existing stocks (for
                    example, for use consistent with the
                    Final Cancellation Order, for other
                    lawful uses during past use seasons, for
                    a non-pesticidal purpose, for use in
                    another country, or other purposes), the
                    owner must reflect the effect of this sale
                    or use in completing the claim form,
                    since it will lower the amount of
                    indemnification for which he/she is
                    eligible. Any claim against the Federal
                    government must be offset by the
                    amount received from sale or use of the
                    dinoseb product because tlie owner has
                    eliminated those "losses" he/she might
                    otherwise have sustained as a result of
                    suspension and cancellation of that
                    amount of product.
                      Any person submitting a claim as a
                    legal representative of another person
                    must submit evidence which establishes
                    his/her authority to file the claim and
                    receive payment in satisfaction of the
                    claim on behalf of the owner of the
                    product. A person submitting a claim as
                    an assignee must submit evidence of
                    assignment of the claim  and
                    demonstrate that such assignment
                    occurred as part of a recall of the
                    products in question.
                      If at any time a claimant decides  to
                    withdraw a claim and/or request, he/
                    she must certify in writing that the
                    product has been properly disposed of;
                    lawfully sold, distributed, or used in
                    accordance with the  Cancellation Order.
                    emergency exemptions, or the
                    injunctions by the District Court of
                    Oregon; recycled; or exported.
                    2. Business Records Verification
                      Manufacturers, registrants,
                    distributors, end any other claimants
tilr
that normally maintain business records
are permitted to consolidate the
supporting information required to
accompany the claim form and to x <
the contents of the claim by submitti^
an auditor's report or a schedule
supported by an independent certified
accountant's statement verifying the
validity of the schedule. Each clement of
the claim, sucli as cost per unit of
product or quantity of product owned at
the time of suspension, musl bo
reviewed and verified by the
independent auditor if verification fur
the complete contents of the claim is
being provided throuph the report or
statement. If the independent review is
being conducted for only one clement uf
the claim, such as a manufacturer's cust
of production per unit of product.
supporting documentation must be
submitted for all other elemnnts of the
claim. EPA retains the right to request
submission of the information that
formed the basis for the audits or
reports in  order to verify the validity of
the information submitted.

3. Composite Claim Lists

  Registrants or suppliers who have
recalled a product from their customers
and who are assignees or
representatives of those customers may
submit composite lists for separate
elements of the claim form identifyi
the product, product owner, qu:intiti
-------
                Federal Register /  Vol.  54,  No. 32  /  tnaay,
  .1 h assertions of cor.fidenttalily of
  :,s information must be supported
   .mentation of the reasons why
  ure of^^nformation is likely to
  .-jbstH^Kiarm to the
  •:i?ive pBPlon of the business.
  formation covered by the
  j.-i will be disclosed by EPA only
  •-.'xr.t allowed by FIFRA section
  ; I-Y means of the procedures set
  -. 4.".. CFR Part 2. If no such
  o;; and supports documentation
  •::any the information when it is
  .d by EPA, il T.UV be made
 .•j'.o 10 the public by EPA without
  • notice to the business (S«e 40
 :.2C.?(.'.}(2)). EPA has determined
  \-.:-\\ not aiford confidential
 :•';:.: to certain information
 •^ti'd on the claim form because it
 ju disclosed to contractors to
 .•;e for disposal of the dinosfib
  :Jcs. Confidentiality claims should
 • applied to: th: type, composition.
 •jdr.lily of pesticide product, the
 i::e cf containers, and the product's
 , jn. If EPA receives any
 :.:niiality clain:s for this
  .:!ion. the claim for
 ::r.;fication and/or request for
 •sjl will not be considered and will
       to the claimant.
'.'. Investigations
\\ rvlans to conduct randurti
         of clairns/reoupats
          e purpose of
          :ir veracity. In verifying
          s, EPA mny seek to enter
 iif:s lo examine any dinosub
 •"iiiu products being stored pending
 -sa! to asiiii': tiiat they are being
 ! appropriatniv [i.e.. in
 •.,-.;:. .nee wi;h tb.o regulations and
 'lines described in Unit III.), to
 line records rili-vunl to the claim,
 convict whatever other
 .:.:::itio:is are nncrssary to audit the
 - ! ;..iirr.unt or authorized
••-i'.'.ijlive must s>ia:i the claim form.
  .-j :hn iorn\ constuutes agreement

 ! ;..;•. ail s'u't.'.nier'.ls made and
••:. :'.ion provided in the claim arc
 -. id  cnrieut to the best of the
-. 
-------
 7380
Federal  Register /"Vol. 54, No. 32  / Friday. February 17, 1989 /  Notices
  EPA is not accepting claims/requests
for products that can be used on
canebcrries until after the 1989 season
because it would be unable to compute
the losses suffered by owners until these
opportunities for sale and use of the
products have expired. Therefore,
UWIILTS of products that can legally be
used on cancberrii/s should not submit
claims and/or requests for disposal until
the beginning of ihe second time period.
  The first time period extends from
February 17,1939 to June 19,1939.
O'.vnera of ilinoseb products which may
rot be used on caneberries in
Washington and Oregon must submit
chnr.'s for indemnification and requests
for cl.'spissiil assistance during this
period. The second time period extends
from June 15,1989 to August 15,1909.
and owners of dinoseb products which
may be used on caneberries in
Washington and Oregon daring the 1989
use season must submit claims for
indemnification and requests for
disposal assistance during this second
time period. Unit II. B. of this Notice lists
productr, according to whether or not
they are labeled for use on canebcrrins.
  Claims submitted by owners of
products that were eligible for
indemnification at the time of the April
15,1967 Notice but which may be used
on caneberries in Washington and/or
Oregon will not be processed until after
June 15,1939.
  As explained previously, EPA will be
contacting all people who submitted
information on their dinoseb products,
but whose products were ineligible at
the time of the April 15,1987 Notice. If
none of the information has changed, the
owners will be able to affirm the
information in their prior submission
and formally submit their claims/
requests by returning a signed summary
claim sheet and certification form during
the first cr second time period,
depending on whether their products
may be used on caneberries.
  In addition, EPA has decided to afford
owners of products eligible at the time
of the April 15,1987 Notice but who
failed to submit a claim and/or request
for disposal assistance in response to
the April 15,1987 Notice, a second
opportunity to do so now. These people
should determine whether their product
may be used on caneberries, and thus
whether to respond during the first or
second period. All claims/requests must
be submitted by August 15,19G9. All
claims/requests received after August
15,1939 will be denied. EPA does not
plan to provide another opportunity to
file or submit claims for indemnification
or requests for disposal assistance for
dinoseb stocks.
                      If a ckiim/rnqucst is filed within the
                    prescribfid time period, but EPA
                    requests supporting documentation not
                    included with the original claim/request.
                    an appntyrialc pi;riod will be allowed
                    for ::!bmis:;ion of the additional
                    inform.-ition required for consideration
                    of the claim/request.
                      A cldim/requcst may be amended at
                    any time before final action by EPA. Ali
                    amendments must be submitted in
                    writing and signed by the claimant or
                    his/her authorized agent or legal
                    representative.
                      Further, in order to expedite the
                    disposal of dinoseb products. EPA
                    requests persons who will be submitting
                    requests for disposal assistance during
                    the time period June 15,1939 through
                    August 15,1989, but who have not yet
                    submitted information or a request for
                    disposal assistance to so notify EPA
                    Headquarters disposal staff immediately
                    by telephone (1-800-DIN-OSEB (in
                    Maryland call 1-800-331-3704)).

                    F. How Will Claims be Processed?
                      Upon receipt of a claim, EPA will
                    assign it a claim number and all
                    correspondence regarding the claim will
                    reference that number. All claimants
                    will be notified of any additional
                    information or verification required for
                    consideration of the claim. If a claimant
                    is unable to provide the documentation
                    required for consideration of his/her
                    claim within the prescribed lime period,
                    the claim will be denied. EPA plans to
                    conduct random audits of claims,
                    including field inspections, and may
                    reject claims if investigators are not
                    permitted to enter the claimant's
                    premises or are otherwise impeded in
                    conducting an audit.
                      EPA's determinations regarding
                    eligibility of claims and amounts of
                    indemnity payable shall be
                    administratively final.
                    HI. Interim Storage, Transportation And
                    Disposal of Dinoseb Stocks
                      EPA encourages all registrants and
                    manufacturers that are capable of
                    recalling or reprocessing their dinoseb
                    pesticide products to do so. However, if
                    the product is reprocessed, the amount
                    of indemnity to which that person is
                    entitled may be effected.
                      EPA has awarded contracts to two
                    waste management firms for the
                    disposal of dinoseb. It is the
                    responsibility of the holders to handle
                    and store the material safely. Th?
                    conditions required for proper handling
                    of dinoseb pesticides may be governed
                    by FIFRA or the Resource Conservation
                    and Recovery Act (RCRA), as well as by
                    pertinent state and local laws end
                    requirements. The determination of
whether FIFRA or RCRA applies
depends on the intent of the holdor (i|
40 CFR 2(31.^(H)!2)(i) and 261.33, 40
U37 (Jan. 24.1985)). Simply stated, if
unused dinoseb pesticide  storks ure
being held with the intnnt of legally
using, recycling, selling, or distribute.;.:
them, then thoy may still be considered
pesticide products  and should be stored
in accordance with FIFRA. However.
cnce the stocks are being  held with the
clear intent of disposing of them, then
they may be considered solid or
hazardous wastes and must be stored
transported, and disposed of in
accordance with RCRA and any other
applicable laws and regulations
governing wastes. The procedures for
handling, storing, and disposing 01
dinoseb under FIFRA and RCRA are
described in more detail in the following
units.

A. Interim Storage

  In general, the FIFRA procedures for
storage described in 40 CFR 165.10
recommend that the material be stored
on pallets or similar raised platforms in
a dry, well-ventilated, and separate
room, building, or covered area with a
concrete floor, where fire protection is
provided. Movement or handling should
be kept to an absolute minimum.
  Containers should be stored with tl
label plainly visible. Containers shuul?
be checked regularly for corrosion and
leaks. If a dinoseb container is found to
be leaking or damaged, the container
should be transferred to a sound,
suitable, larger container (preferably a
steel salvage drum) and the overpack
container should be properly relabeled.
Alternately, the contents of the damaged
container may be transferred to e new
container (i.e., repackaged) and then
properly labeled. Before repackaging
however, the owner/holder should
contact the appropriate EPA regional
office to learn of any applicable St.iti? or
local requirements. Over-packing or
repackaging will not generally
jeopardize the award of a claimant's
indemnity payment, provided that the
claimant or holder adequately
documents such repackaging and the
outside of the package is clearly marked
with information to identify the
contents. Additional guidance is
provided in a short document on
overpacking and repackaging dinos«b,
available from the pesticide disposal
staff at EPA headquarters (I-BOO-DIX-
OSEB (in Maryland call 1-800-331-
3704)).
  However, if a person is  holding
unused stocks  with the clear intent
disposing of the stocks, he/she must
comply with the requirements under
DU1U





U^
-------
                    Federal Register  /  Vol. 54, No.  32 / Friday,  February 17, 1909  /  Notices
                                                                                                                 73G1
CFR
          jf RCRA as specified in 40
             ' 261 through 266, and 270.
          urements may differ from the
•iiorage requirements of F1FRA.
Additionally, a storage permit may be
•r.q-ir-c! (See -:0 CFR 270.13 through
r.v. is).
  In ;.:an-.-;'al, the dinosub storage are. a;::ho:izj!ion Act of 1985 (SARA).
  El'1 A may perform inspections of
::-.ii;:ri.i!s in  storage to determine if the
above conditions have been n:et. Further
ifchnic;ii advice may be obtained from
•.'-.c JIPA regional office contacts listed in
; >i!t ". D of this Notice. In addition,
:.-'";/r:r,ii'.inn on tha storage provisions
_:::i:ir FiFSA are available from the
•j.isticiue disposal staff at EPA
•|<;:.rh;u:'.n-?n; st 1-800-DIN-OSEB (in
M;'.:-v!;:rid  rail l-COO-331-3704). and on
•.•.(.: r.'->r;!.c;c requirements under RCRA
!rj::i '.':>.•! RCRA Hotline at 1-600-424-
 340 or !:'.P2) 3.12-3000.
B, Disposal
  Disposal of certain unused n jstici Je
products may be subject to regula!::)ii as
hazardous  waste under RCRA. Ur.dnr
the existing hazardous waste rules.
unused dinoseb. product that has
become a "waste" is regulaioJ w!ii-n
dii.-arded in commercial gradu,
trJ-nical grade, or off-spucificiitiun fo:-:'
f,r if dinoi-'ab is the sole active ingredient
in the furrnulation (hazardous wcsie
designation "Po:o") (Sec 40 CFR
2C1.33(e)). Discarded formulations
containing dinoseb as one of ft number
of a:tive ingredients are presently not
considered to be hazardous wastes
unless they exhibit a characteristic of
hazardous waste. A formulation is
considered hazardous if it has one or
more cf the following characteristics:
  1. It is  easily combustible.
  2. It dissolves metals or other
materials, or burns the skin.
  3. It shows Extraction Procedure
to.\icity (coniains hi^h concentrations of
heavy metals or specific pesticides that
could be released into ground waier).
  4. It is  unstable or undergoes rapid or
violent chemical reaction with water or
ether materials. (See 40 CFR 201.20
through 201.24 for additional information
about these characteristics).
  Persons accumulating or possusbirifj
dinostib in  less than the quantities
specified in thsse regulations (1
kilogram or about 2 pounds per  munth)
may be conditionally exempt frcrr.
RCRA regulation. However, State
hazardous waste storage and disposal
requirements may still  apply.
  Under the hazardous waste rules,
empty containers with  minimal  dincseb
residues as defined in 40 CFR 201.7 are
exempt from regulation under RCRA.
Specifically, containers that once
contained dinoseb are considered to be
empty if they are triple-rinsed with an
appropriate solvent (or cleaned by a
method of equivalent effectiveness) nr
the container's inner liner has been
removed [See 40 CFR 261.7(b)(3)l.
However, the rinsate that  is generated
from this operation may be considered a
hazardous  waste under RCRA and must
be managed in accordance with the
appropriate management standards
unless the person conducting the
operation is a farmer. Specifically, a    j'
 farnif-r disposing of such rinsate fmm a
 (Jinusub container that was used on his/
 linr (nvn farm is not subject to regulation
 under RCRA for those wastes provided
 he/she triple rinbjs each emptied
 din;;.;cb -ju.'itainnr t;nd disposes of the
 cki.-. .-;'.• residues on his/her own farm in
 a ma::r> Assiilunt Administrate?, Officu uf
 Pv"iti\:i{li'S unri. Toxic Suhstancns.
 |FR Doc. 8sr-?017 Filed 2-1fr-89: B:45 am|
i BILLING CODE 6560-SO-M
-------
                Federal  Register  /  Vol. 54,  No. 30 / Wednesday,  February 15. 1989 /  Notices
                                                                                                            7027
3iotec,
in Re
 OPTS-00049D; FRL-3522-2]

          B9V; Request (or Comment /
          |ry Approach           • '
 \GENCY: Environmental Protection
 Agency (EPA).
 \CTICN: Notice.

 SUMMARY: EPA is soliciting comments
 in the direction of its program under the
 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to
 insure  that products of biotechnology
 ire tested, manufactured, processed,
 '.nd used in a manner that docs not
 Dresent an unreasonable risk of injury to
 >.uman health and the environment. This
 • otice does not change the Policy which
 was published in the JUT.G 26, 1989
 Federal Register (51 FR 23313). EPA has
 jeen developing a proposed rule to
 address matters discussed in that policy
 •tateir.ent of the regulations of certain
 products of biotechnology under TSCA.
 Juring  this process comments have been
 received from cur own  science advisory
 committees and ether Federal agencies.
A number of issues have arisen and EPA
is requesting comment  on several issues.
Commenters are requested to review the
 issues in this notice and provide their
comments.
OATES: Written comments should be
 submitted by May 16. 1989.
 AODRM^Commer.ts en issues raised in
 ihis n^BBmust bear the docket control
 nunblTOPTS-000''OC, and must be
 submitted to the following address:
TSCA Document Processing Center (TS-
 790), Office of Toxic Substances,
 Environmental Protection Agency, Room
 L-100. 401 M Street SW., Washington,
 DC, 204SO.
  A docket will be available for public
 inspection in the TSCA Public Docket
 Office, Room NE-G304, at EPA
 Headquarters. 401 M Street SW..
 Washington, DC, from  6:00 a.m. to 4
 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
 legal holidays. The docket includes all
 documents relevant to  the issues raised
 in this Notice and will  contain all public
 comments that are received. These
 thicv.ments containing confidential
 business information will be placed in a
 separate, confidential file.
 FCR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
 Michael M. Stahl, Director, TSCA
 Assistance Office (TS-799), Office of
 Toxic Substances, Environmental
 Protection Agency, Room ED-44, 401 M
 Slreut SW., Washington. DC.. 20400. In
 ihr USA: (202) 554-1404. TDD: (202) 554-
               INFORMATION:
I. Background
        tcmber 31. 1984. the 'White
House Office of Science and Technology
Policy issued in the Federal Register a
"Proposal for a Coordinated Framework
for Regulation of Biotechnology" (49 FR
50880, December 31.1984). In that
proposal, EPA stated that the definition
of "chemical substance" under section
3(2) of TSCA includes all
microorganisms except those excluded
from TSCA jurisdiction (i.e., those
microorganisms manufactured,
processed or distributed in commerce
for use as pesticides, foods, food
additives, drugs, cosmetics, or other
related items are excluded).
  After rRviexving comments on the 1384
Proposal, ETA issued in 1986, as part of
the "Coordinated Framework for
Regulation of Biotechnology" (51 FR
23313, June 26.1986), a "Statement of
Policy" describing how EPA was
addressing certain microbial products of
biotechnology under TSCA. In the 1986
Policy, EPA interpreted the new
chemical substance premanufacture
notification (PMN) provisions of TSCA
section 5 to cover new (inter-generic)
microorganisms used for commercial
purposes. This  interpretation became
effective immediately. EPA also
requested voluntary submission of other
information until final rules were in
place, and described its intentions to
develop, under TSCA, a significant new
use rule for pathogenic microorganisms;
a rule modifying \hs PMN research and
development exemption so that small
scale field testing of microorganisms for
TSCA purposes is subject  to PMN; a
section 8(a) reporting rule  for other
microorganisms prior to release in the
environment; and section 5(h)(4)
exemptions as  appropriate.
  In developing a regulatory framework
to implement the 1986 policy statement,
EPA received advice and a "concept
paper" from other federal  agencies, as
well as unsolicited suggestions from
some nongovernmental organizations.
EPA discussed proposals with the
interagency biotechnology Science
Coordinating Committee (BSCC) and
received its comments. On December 21,
1988, EPA convened a public meeting of
the Subcommittee on the Proposed
Biotechnology  Rule under TSCA of the
EPA Biotechnology Science Advisory
Committee (BSAC), EPA's independent
science advisory group. A draft
proposed rule was provided to the
Subcommittee. This group was asked to
examine scientific issues associated
wilh EPA's approach, as well as the
utility of using groups of independent
exports to determine whether research
and development (R&D) proposals
should be exempt from the
premanufacture notification
requirements of section 5 of TSCA.
Several members of the public requested
and received permission to address the
Subcommittee. Included among the
commenters was the Chairperson of the
BSCC who described inter-agency
discussions over the  proposed TSCA
ru'cmaking.
  A number of basic issues have arisen
during the course of the development of
a proposed rule which EPA has
concluded need to be addressed before
a specific rule is developed and
proposed.
  These include:
  1. What should be  the scope yf the
microorganisms subject to EPA's
review?
  2. What should be  the scope of EPA's
review of R&D activities involving
release of microorganisms to the
environment?
  3. Since TSCA only allows EPA to
review those microorganisms developed
for "commercial purposes", how broadly
or narrowly thould EPA define
"commercial purposes" in the context of
research conducted at educational and
research facilities?
  4. If the definitions of "release to the
environment" and "contained facility"
are to be used to determine whether
there is EPA review of specific uses of
microorganisms, how should these terms
be defined? To what extent should EPA
rely on the definition of "con.teintd
facility" fcund in the guidelines of ths
National Instates of Health [X1HJ?
  5. To what extent should EPA
establish independent expert review
groups (i.e.. Environmental Bios:ifety
Committees (EECs)). similar to the N!U
Institutional Eiosafety Committees
(IBCs), to assist in the review of
potential environmental releases of
microorganisms? What should be the
scope of review by those groups?
  To aid EPA in addressing thess  issues,
this notice requests comment on them
from all interested persons. For
commenteni who wish additional
information txncerning the background
for these issues, m&iorials in th^ public
docket are available on request from the
address in FOR FURTHGH INFORMATION
CONTACT. These include: letters from
other Federal agencios commrr.tmg on
the draft approach, the
recommendations of the BSAC
Subcommittee on the Proposed
Biotechnology Rule under TSCA
following their December 21.1SP.8
meeting, the draft proposed rule they
discussed at that meeting, and the
comments of the members of ih'j public
and the BSCC chairperson at the BSAC
-------
7020            Federal  Register / Vol. 54, No.  30 / Wednesday. February 15. 1969  / Notices

Subcommittee meeting. All other          comments on a proposed regulatory         Dated: February 3,1909.           ~~
information in the docket is available in    approach for the products of              John A. Moore,
the TSCA public docket Office at the       biotechnology under the Federal          Acting Administrator.
address in ADDRESSES.                   Insecticide. Fungicide, and Rodenticide    [pg Doc- 89-3820 Filed 2-14-89: 8.45 am]
  Elsewhere in this Federal Register a      Act.                                    BILLING CODE txo-to-u
similar notice appears soliciting
-------
 7025
Federal Register  /  Vol.  54, No. 30 / Wednesday,  February  15. 1909 / Notices
^ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
•VGENCY                        j

 IOPP-50663; FRL-3522-3]

 Microbial Pest'cides; Request for
 Comment on Regulatory Approach

 AGENCY: Environmental Protection
 A;:ency (EPA).

 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: EPA is soliciting comments
 on issues that have arisen in the
 development of an amendment to its
 Experimental Use Permit (EUP)
 regulations under the Federal
 Insecticide. Fungicide, and Rodenticide
 Act (Fir RA). The amendment would
 require notification before initiation of
 small-scale testing of certain genetically
 modified rr.icrobial pesticides. Each
 notification will be reviewed by EPA
 and a determination made as to whether
 en EUP will be required. This
 notification scheme is intended  to
 provide sufficient oversight of the early
 testing of these microbial pesticides to
 mitigate any adverse human health or
 environmental effects. During the
 development of a draft proposed
 regulation, comments have been
 received  from EPA science advisory
 committees and other Federal agencies.
 Comments are now being solicited from
 all interested persons on issues arising
 during the course of development of the
 proposed regulation.
 DATE: Comments identified by the
 docket control number (OPP-50668]
 must be received on or before May 16.
 1989.
 ADDRESS:
 Written comments by mail to: Public
   Information Branch, Field Operations
   Division (TS-787C). Environmental
   Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW..
   Washington, DC 20460
 In person, bring comments to: Room 246,
   CM £2,1921 Jefferson Davis Highway
   Arlington, VA 22202.
 FOR  FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
 Frederick Betz, Science Integration and
 Policy Staff. Environmental Fate and
 Effects Division (TS-769C),
 Environmental Protection Agency, 401M
 Street SW., Washington, DC 20460. (703-
 557-9307).
    A public docket has been established
 and will be available for public
 inspection at the Virginia address given
 above from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
 through Friday, except legal holidays.
 Comments received in response to this
 Notice, except those containing
 confidential business information, will
 be included in the  public docket.
                      SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                      I. Introduction
                        Section 5 of FiFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et
                      siq.. and 40 CFR 172.2 provide for
                      issuance by EPA of EUPs for the testing
                      of new pesticides or new uses of
                      existing pesticides. Such permits are
                      generally issued for large-scale testing
                      of pesticides involving terrestrial
                      application to more than ten acres of
                      aquatic application to more than one
                      acre. It has been generally presumed
                      that smaller experiments would not
                      require EUPs. However, EPA recognizes
                      that small-scale studies with some
                      microbial pesticides that have been
                      genetically modified may raise many of
                      the same concerns as more extensive
                      uses of conventional pesticides.
                      Accordingly, EPA is in the process of
                      modifying its existing regulatory
                      program to address these concerns.

                      II. Background
                        Based on the conclusion that there is a
                      need to evaluate small-scale testa of
                      certain microbial pesticides prior  to
                      their release in the environment, EPA
                      issued its "Interim Policy on Small-Scale
                      Field Testing of Genetically Altered and
                      Nonindigenous Microbial Pesticides" (49
                      FR 40659, October 17,1984). This policy
                      staled that the 40 CFR Part 172
                      presumption would not automatically
                      apply for certain.microbial pesticide
                      products and that EPA should be
                      notified before initiation of any such
                      small-scale testing in order to determine
                      whether an EUP would be required. The
                      Interim Policy was subsequently
                      republished for review and comment in
                      December 1984 in conjunction wiLh the
                      "Proposal for a Coordinated Framework
                      for Regulation of Biotechnology" (49 FR
                      50880, December 31,1984) issued by the
                      Office of Science and Technology
                      Policy.
                        After reviewing the public comments
                      on the 1984 Proposal, in June 1983. EPA
                      published a final policy statement
                      entitled "Applicability of the Federal
                      Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenn'cide
                      Act (FIFRA) to Microbial Products" as
                      part of the Office of Science and
                      Technology Policy's Coordinated
                      Framework for Regulation of
                      Biotechnology (51 FR 23313, June  26.
                      1986). The 1986 Policy stated EPA's
                      concern about the potential risks
                      associated with small-scale testing of
                      certain microbial pesticides. To address
                      these potential risks, the Policy specified
                      that EPA be notified  prior to initiation of
                      small-scale testing of all nonindigenous
                      and genetically modified microbial
                      pesticides. The notification allows EPA
                      to make a determination as to whether
                      the test should be carried out under an
EUP. In addition, the 1986 Policy set
forth EPA's plan for future rulemaking to
codify the interpretation set out in the
Policy Statement.
  EPA received public comment on the
1986 Policy and began to revise the
existing Part 172 EUP rule to incorporate
the major elements of the Policy. In the
summer of 1988, the Agency provided a
draft of the proposed rule to Congress,
the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) and the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration. In November 100R. a
revised draft was reviewed and
commented on at a public meeting of a
Subpanel of the FIFRA Scientific "
Advisory Panel (SAP Subpanel). The
SAP Subpanel and Federal agencies
provided written comments.
  A number of issues have arisen during
the course of the development of this
regulation which EPA has concluded
need to be addressed before a rule is
proposed, including: (1) Scope of
genetically modified microbial
pesticides subject to notification; (2)
Review of nonindigenous microbial
pesticides at small-scale; (3)
Establishment of independent expert
review groups (Environmental Biosafety
Committees) patterned after the
National Institutes of Health's
Institutional Biosafety Committees. To
aid EPA in addressing these issues, this
Notice requests comment on them from
all interested parties to help facilitate
development of the rule.
   For commenters who wish additional
information concerning the background
for these issues, materials in the public
docket arc available on the request,
including the recommendations of the
SAP Subpanel following their November
22,19B8  meeting, the draft regulation
discussed at that meeting, comments
received from the public and ether
Federal  agencies on the draft proposed
regulation, the transcript from the EPA
Biotechnology Scientific Advisory
Committee's January 12,1989 meeting
where a recommendation regarding the
FIFRA proposal was adopted, and EPA's
most recent draft which includes
responses to the SAP Subpanel
recommendations and many of the
 comments received to date.
   Elsewhere in this Federal Register, a
 notice appears soliciting comments on
 regulatory approaches being considered
 for products of biotechnology under the
 Toxic Substances Control Act.
   Dated: February 3,1989.
 John A. Moore,
 Acting Administrator.
 [FR Doc. 89-3619 Filed 2-14-89; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 
-------
691S    Federal Register / Vol. 54, No.  30 / Wednesday,  February 15.  1989 / Rules and  Regulations
         Commodities
Pcctspef
 million
Cabbage..
     1.0
jrR Dnc. GC-31C2 Filed 2-14-C9; E:45 am]
e:—me core tsso-so-M


40 CFR PART 180

tPP 7E34C4/R100S; FRL-3318-7J

Pesticide Tolerance for Prometryn

AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Find rule.

SUMMARY: Tnis rule establishes a
tolerance for residues of the herbicide
prometryn in or on the raw agricultural
commodity dill. The Interregional
Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) petitioned
for this tolerance.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 15,1989.
ADDRESS: Written objections, identified
by the document control number, [PP
7E3454/R1005], may be submitted to:
Hearing Clerk (A-110), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. 3708,401 M
Street S\V., Washington, DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT By
mail:
Hoyt Jamerson, Emergency Response
  and Minor Use Section (TS-767C),
  Registration Division (TS-767C),
  Environmental Protection Agency, 401
  M Street SW.. Washington, DC 20450.
Office location end talephone number:
  Rm. 716, CM *2.1921 Jefferson Davis
  Highway. Arlington, VA 22202. (703)-
  557-2310.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA
issued a proposed rule, published in the
Federal Register of December 12,1988
(53 FR 50262), in which it was
announced that the Interregional
Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), New
Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station.
P.O. Box 231. Rutgers University, New
Brunswick, N] 08903, had submitted
pesticide petition 7E3464 to EPA on
behalf of Dr. Robert H. Kupelian,
National Director, IR-4 Project, and the
Agricultural Experiment Station of
Californi3.
  The petition requested that the
Administrator, pursuant to section
40B(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act, propose the
establishment of a tolerance for the
residues of the herbicide prometiyn (2.4-
bir(isopropylamino)-6-methylthio-s-
triazine) in or on the raw agricultural
commodity dill at 0.25 part per million
(ppm). The petition was later amended
to propose c tolerance of 0.3 ppm.
  The petitioner proposed that this use
of prometryn on dill be limited to use in
California base on the geographical
'representation of the residue data
submitted. Additional residue data will
be required to expand the area of usage.
Persons seeking geographically broader
registration should contact the Agency's
Registration Division at the address
provided abcve.
  There were no comments or requests
for referral to an advisory committee
received in response to the proposed
rule.
  The data submitted in the petition and
all 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.
  Any person adversely affected by this
regulation may, within 30 days after
publication cf this document in the
Federal Register, file written objections
with the Hearing Clerk, at the address
given above. Such objections should
specify the provisions of the regulation
deemed objectionable and the grounds
for the objections. A hearing will be
granted if the objections are supported
by grounds legally sufficient to justify
the relief sought.
  The Office of Management and Budget
has exempted this rale from the
requirements of section 3 of Executive
Order 12201.
  Pursuant to the requirements of the
Regidatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L 96-
354.94 Slat. 1164. 5 L'.S.C. 601-512). 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 cf small entities. A certification
statement 10 tiiis effect was published in
the Federal Register of May 4,1981 (46
FR 24550).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
   Administrative practice and
procedure. Agricultural commodities.
Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recorckeeping requirements.
  Dated: January 27.19£0.
Douglas D. Carapt,
Director. Office of Pesticide Prr-rams.
   Therefore. 40 CFR Part 180 is
emended as follows:

PART 130—[AMENDED]

   1. The authority citation for Part 180
continues to read as follows:
  Authority: 21 U.S.C. 34Ga.

  2. Section 180.222 is amended by
dusiyr.-.ting the current paragraph and
list of tolerances as paragraph (n) and
by adding new paragraph (b), to read as
follows:

§ 180.222  Prometryn; tolerances for
residues.
•    *    *     «   *

  (b) Tolerances with regional
repi^lvation, as defined in § l?n.i[n], arc-
established for residues of the hc.bicidr>
promctryn (2,4-bis(isopropy!arnino-G-
methylthio-s-triazinc) in or on the
following raw agricultural community:
                                                           Commodity
                             Parti per
                              million
                                                  Dill	
                                                                                    0.3
                                                  [FR Doc. 89-3193 Filed 2-14-89: 8:45 am]
                                                  BILLING CODE 6560-50-11                    f
                                                  	i

                                                  40 CFR Part 704                     1

                                                  [OPTS-62013D; FRL-3520-5]

                                                  Comprehensive Assessment
                                                  Information Rule; Extension of
                                                  Notification and Reporting Deadlines

                                                  AGENCY: Environmental Protection
                                                  Agency (EPA).
                                                  ACTION: Final rule; extension of
                                                  notification and reporting deadlines.

                                                  SUMMARY: EPA has received two
                                                  requests for a 60-day extension of either
                                                  the effective date of the Comprehensive
                                                  Assecsment Information Rule (CAIR),
                                                  or, in the alternative, an extension of all
                                                  notification and reporting deadlines for
                                                  the CAIR. EPA has evaluated these
                                                  requests, and has decided to g"">t a 30-
                                                  day extension for all CAIR notification
                                                  and reporting deadlines for the 19
                                                  substances to the CAIR.
                                                  DATES: Tne notification and reporting
                                                  deadlines are extended to the following
                                                  dates:
                                                    1. Submission of a CAIR reporting
                                                  form by manufacturers, importers, and
                                                  processors under § 704.223(a) is
                                                  extended to June 7,1GS9.
                                                    2. Submission of a CAIR reporting
                                                  form by persons %vho process e CAIJl
                                                  listed substance under e tradenamc
                                                  under § 704.223(b) is extended to July 0.
                                                  1989.
                                                    3. Notification of customers who
                                                  process a CAIR listed substance under a
                                                  tradename  under § 704.208(a)(3) is
                                                  extended to April  7,1989.
                                                    4. Submission to EPA of a list of
                                                  tradenames under which a person
-------
         Federal Register / Vol. 54. No. 30 / Wednesday, February 15. 1989 / Rules and Regulations-    6919
          a CAIR listed substance
                   is extended to
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael M. Stahl. Director. TSCA
A-jr,:r,tar:ce Office (TS-7S9). Office of
Tc:.ic Suiisiar.ces, Environmental
?ro!?c'.-ic- Aj^r.cy. R.T.. EE-14, 401 M
,'j::ect SW.. VVjihirgtcn, DC :3460.
T.jliphcr:-: (202) 5S4-14P-;, TDD f::)2)
SUPPLEMENTARY W'ORMAT'.CN: EPA
.•isucd .he CAIR (40 CFR Part 704] in the
Federal ?>?gji'.:r of December 22,1S83
(53 FR 51390), iL'dor section 8(3) of the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
EPA received tv.-o requests fcr a CO-day
•jx'.cnsion of cither the effective date of
the CAIR, or. i.i ihe alternative, an
extension of all notification and
~eport:ng deadlines To? the CAIR. These
requests were received from the
Na-icna! Point and Coatings Association
(NPCA) and The Society of the Plastics
Ind'jauy (SPI). EFA has ?valuated thesa
requests, and has decided to grant a 30-
cay extension for nil CAIR notification
•••r.d reporting deadlines for the 19
substances subject to the CAIR to the
above  .hies.
  EPA realizes that the extension
t;"r,'gd for the remission of
           i under which a person
          i r. CAIR listed substance
       '704.2C8(a)(l) is extended to a
da;.'; lhat is more than 30 days filter the
orisir.ai r.Mtificatbn dsadlin2 of
Fi-bruary 7,1983. This was necesssry
bcc.:us? the extension requests
subn:itt.:d by NPCA and SPI wers
g:-i-:.nd r.n February 7,1989, and the
public.'.; .ir. uf the Federal Register
^oc-'.rncnt announcing these extensions
v;?.a  rot possible until after February 7.
Therefore, F?A extended this deadline
<.o L'O d.iys after EPA's expected
publication date of this Federal Register
document. Note that the new
poih'icjiion deadline will be March 20,
1^9. even if this date  is more than 30
days ;;f;cr ihe publication date of this
Fetter:-; Rp; istc-r document.
  IndividMii companies may request a
rr-;:;ro:i:i;;lu extension beyond these new
lisjy.l^iis on a substance-by-substance
basis through the mechanisms set forth
in the CAIR. Failure to comply with the
new cx'c-nsion deadline;, or any further
•.?xt!?i:sion deadlines granted by F.PA to
ir'.'i-. i J:;;;! c'jiipa.nies, will constitute a
violation of TSCA section  15(3), and
if.,iy 5:i;,;^ct Ihe violjtcr to the penalties
d.--ii;rii;r.J in TSCA section 16.
           jauts ill 40 CFR Part 704
        ic.'.'s. Environmental protection.
           materials, Reporting «ind
           :ig rjq'jiremeiits.
  Dated: February 8,1989.
Joseph ]. Morenda,
Director. Existing Chesiica! Assessm
Division, Office of Toxic Substances.
[FR Doc. 89-3530 Filed 2-14-39; 3 -45 am]
8IUJNG CODE CHO-50-H
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Public Land Oroer 3708

[03-943-09-4214-10; GP9-064; Ofl-
1M73(WASH), OR-I9854(WASH)]

Partial Revocation of Powersitc
Classifications No. 349 and No. 400:
Washington

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Public Land Order.

SUMMARY: This order revokes one
Secretarial order and one U.S.
Geological Survey order insofar as they
affect 153.43 acres of lands withdrawn
for Bureau of Land Management's
powersite purposes. This action will
remove restrictions cr open the lands to
surface entry on 145 acres. Of the
balance which is within Power Project
No. 2145, 3.40 acres remain open subject
to section 24 of the Federal Power  Act
and 5 acres remain closed to surface
entry and mining. All the lands have
been and will remain open to mineral
leasing.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 10,1989.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Champ Vaughan,  BLM Oregon State
Office, P.O. Box 2965. Portland, Oregon
C7208. 503-231-6905.
  By virtue of the authority vested in the
Secretary of the Interior it is ordered as
follows:
  1. The Secretarial Order dated June
22,1944, which established Powersite
Classification No. 349, is hereby revoked
insofar as it affects the following
described lands:
Willamette Meridian
T. 23 N., R. 23 E.;
  Sec. 26, lots 7 and 8. and MW'ASE'.i.
  The areas described aggregate 113.40 acres
in Chelan and Douglas Counties.
   2. The U.S. Geological Survey Order
dated February 15.1949, which
established Powersite Classification No.
400. is hereby revoked insofar as it
affects the following described land:
Willamette Meridian
T. 23 N.. R. 23 E.:
  SfiC.20. SWUNE'A.
  The area described contains 40 seres in
Douglas County.
  3. The State of Washington has
waived its preference right for public
highway rights-cf-way or material sites
as provided by the Federal Power Act of
June 10.1320, as amended. 16 U.S.C. 818,
  4. That portion of lot 7 inside* the
boundary of Po-.var Project No. 2115
remains cicii-d ,o operation of the
public land laws, including the mining
laws.
  5. That portion cf lot 3 inside the
boundary of Power Project No. 2145 has
been and continues to be open to
operation of the public land laws,
including the mir.irg laws, subject to the
previsions of section 24 of the Federal
Power Act of June 10,1920.
  6. That portion of Lot 8 outside the
boundary of Power Project No. 2145 has
been open to operation of the public
land L=;vs, including the mining laws,
subject to the provisions of section 24 of
the Federal Power Act of June 10,1320,
snd will be relieved of the section 24
restriction at C:00 a.m., on March 10,
1959.
  7. At 8:30 a.m., on March 10,1089, the
land described in paragraphs 1 and 2.
except as provided in paragraphs 4, 5,
end 6. will be open to operation of the
public land laws generally, subject to
valid existing rights, the provisions of
existing withdrawals and reservations,
and to requirements of applicable lav/.
All valid applications received at or
prior to 8:30 a.m., on March 10,1989,
shall be considered as simultaneously
filed at that time. The land has'been and
continues to be open to the mining and
mineral leasing laws.
Rick Ventura,
Assistant Secretary of the Intsrior.
February 3,19E9.
IFR Doc. 83-3489 riled 2-24-89: 8:45 En-,]
EiLUNQ CODE 4310-33-M
                                                                               43 CFR Publis Land Order 6700

                                                                               [AK-932-09-4214-10; F-025943]

                                                                               Modification of Public Land Order No.
                                                                               3708; Transfer of Administrative
                                                                               Jurisdiction From the National
                                                                               Aeronautics and Space Administration
                                                                               to the National Ocsanic and
                                                                               Atmospheric Administration; Alaska

                                                                               AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,
                                                                               Interior.
                                                                               ACTION: Public Land Order.

                                                                               SUMMARY: This order modifies Public
                                                                               Land Order No. 3708 to transfer
                                                                               jurisdiction of 9.500 acres of land
                                                                               withdrawn for a tracking station near
                                                                               Fairbanks, Alaska, from the National
                                                                               Aeronautics and Space Administration
                                                                               to the National Oceanic and
-------
^
     c*
       3     UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
       »
      $                 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                                          OFFICE OF
                                                   PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Amendment to the Compliance Strategy
          for the Emergency Suspension of Dinoseb

FROM:     A. E. Conroy II, Director         ^>o  /}     .s?
          Office of Compliance Monitoring   Z/^7' fM^rU^^
                                           f] Is V"   \S
TO:       Addressees                      /J
      On March 30, 1987, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) signed a decision to modify his October
7, 1986 Emergency Suspension Order of pesticide products
containing dinoseb.  Pursuant to this decision, on April 1,
1987, the Agency issued a FIFRA Section 18 Emergency Exemption
which granted a specific exemption to the States of Washington
and Idaho for the use of dinoseb to control broadleaf weeds
in dry peas, chickpeas and lentils.

     Attached is an amendment to the October 7, 1986 Compliance
Strategy for the Emergency Suspension of Dinoseb, pursuant to
the April 1, 1987 Agency actions.  Please transmit a copy of
this document to the States.  Please note that because of the
nature of this action, this amendment is immediately effective.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this amended
strategy, please contact Dan Helfgott of my staff at FTS 382-7825
(EN-342).
Attachment
-------
                            ADDRESSEES
     Douglas D. Campt
     Frederick F. Stiehl
     Stanley Abramson
     Ken Shiroishi
     Phyllis Flaherty
     John Martin
     John J. Neylan III
     Ralph Turpi n
     Jerry Stubbs
     Mike Wood
     Dexter Goldman
                           (TS-766C)
                           (LE-134A)
                           (LE-132A)
      Jake Mackenzie
      Western  Regional Compliance Director

      A. Charles  Lincoln
      Eastern  Regional Compliance Director

 I     Louis  F. Gitto,  Director
      Air Management Division

 II    Barbara  Metzger, Director
      Environmental Services Div.

•I I   Stephen  R.  Wassersug, Director
^    Hazardous Waste  Management Div.

 IV    Winston  A.  Smith, Director
      Air, Pest.  & Toxic Mgmt Div.

 V     William  H.  Sanders III, Director
      Environmental Services Div.

 VI    William  B.  Hathaway, Director
      Air, Pesticides  & Toxics Div.

 VII   William  A.  Spratlin, Director
      Ai r &  Toxi cs Divi sion
VIII  Irwin L. Dickstein,  Director
     Air & Toxic Subs.  Division

IX   Jeffrey Zelikson,  Acting  Director
     Toxics & Waste Management Div.

X    Gary O'Neal , Director
     Ai r & Toxi c Divi si on
                                         Gerald  M.  Levy,  Chief
                                         Office  of  Pesticides &  Toxic  Sub,

                                         Ernest  Regna,  Chief
                                         Pesticides  &  Toxics Sub.  Branch

                                         Larry Miller,  Chief
                                         Toxic & Pesticides Branch
H. Kirk Lucius,  Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Subs.  Branch

Phyllis Reed, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Subs.  Branch

Norman E. Dyer,  Chief
Pesticides & Toxics Subs. Branch

Leo Alderman, Chief
Toxics & Pesticides Branch

Alvin Yorke, Chief
Toxic Substances Branch

Richard Vaille,  Chief
Pesticides & Toxics Branch

Anita Frankel , Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Subs.  Branch
     Jim Lamb
                     (TS-788)
-------
                         AMENDMENT TO THE
                   COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR THE
                 EMERGENCY SUSPENSION OF DINOSEB
OVERVIEW
    On March 30, 1987, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) signed the Decision and Final  Order
Modifying Final Suspension of Pesticide Products Which Contain
Dinoseb.  In this document, the Administrator modified his
October 7, 1986 Emergency Suspension Order of Dinoseb  to allow
emergency exemptions to be granted under FIFRA Section 18 to
the States of Washington and Idaho during 1987.  Pursuant to
the Administrator's decision, the Agency issued the FIFRA
Section 18 Emergency Exemption on April 1, 1987, which granted
a specific exemption to the Washington and Idaho Departments
of Agriculture for the use of dinoseb to control broadleaf
weeds in dry peas, chickpeas and lentils.

     Under the Section 18 Notice, the Washington and Idaho
Departments of Agriculture are responsible for ensuring that
all  the provisions of the Emergency Exemption are met  within
their States.  These States are responsible for conducting
inspections at the dealer and user levels to assure compliance
with the terms and conditions of the April 1, 1987 Emergency
Exemption.  Regions will monitor compliance with the amended
federal  SSURO in accordance with the Pesticides Inspection
Manual .
REQUIREMENTS	

     The April 1, 1987 FIFRA Section 18 Emergency Exemption
permits dinoseb pesticide products which were federally registered
for use on peas, chickpeas or lentils prior to October 7,  1986,
to be shipped, sold and used (this includes dinoseb products
which were cancelled as a result of the October 7, 1986 Notice
of Intent to Cancel).  Shipment is allowed under the previously
federally-registered product label, and under the terms and
conditions specified in the Section 18 Emergency Exemption and
the Amendment to the SSURO (see attached).  Sale and use is
allowed only under the terms of the Section 18 Exemption.
COMPLIANCE           	

     The Agency will modify, upon request by the registrant,
the October 7, 1986 Stop Sale, Use or Removal  Order (SSURO)
to permit registrants to distribute, sell, offer for sale,
hold for sale, ship, deliver for shipment, receive and (having
so received) deliver or offer to deliver, remove, or use pesticide
products containing dinoseb pursuant to the terms and  conditions
of the April 1, 1987 FIFRA Section 18 Emergency Exemption for
dinoseb pesticide products.  Registrants who have not  requested
and been granted an amended federal  SSURO may  not sell or
distribute their dinoseb products.
-------
                              -2-


     Reglstrants are required to submit to EPA Regional
representatives listed in the amended SSURO the following
information within five working days of transporting affected
dinoseb products: 1) the product name and registration number
of transported product(s);  2) the date, name and location from
where the product(s) were transported as well as the name and
location of state-licensed  dealer(s) in Washington or Idaho to
whom the product(s) were shipped; and 3) the quantity of product(s),
by registration number, being transported.  The EPA Regional
representative will transmit this information to Region  X
within five working days.  Region X will further transmit this
same information to the States of Washington and Idaho,  within
five working days, for use  by the States in targetting inspections.
The Regions will report monthly to the Office of Compliance
Monitoring (OCM) on the location and quantities of dinoseb stocks
transported to and from their Regions until August 31, 1987.
OCM will compile a summary  of dinoseb movement between Regions
and transmit monthly reports to the Regions.

     EPA Region X and the States of Washington and Idaho are
directed to amend any SSUROs issued at the dealer and user
levels to permit sale and use of pesticide products containing
dinoseb pursuant to the terms and conditions specified in the
April 1, 1987 FIFRA Section 18 Emergency Exemption.

     Under the Section 18 Exemption, the Washington and  Idaho
Departments of Agriculture  are responsible for ensuring  that
all the provisions of the Emergency Exemption are met within
their States.  These States are responsible for conducting
inspections at the dealer and user levels to assure compliance
with the terms of the April 1, 1987 Exemption.  The specific
number of inspections will  be negotiated by EPA Region X with
the States of Idaho and Washington.  Regions will  monitor
compliance with the amended federal SSUROs according to  the
Pesticide Inspection Manual.

     Any distribution or use of pesticide products containing
dinoseb not in accordance with the FIFRA Section 18 Exemption
is considered a violation of the FIFRA Section 6 Suspension/
Cancellation Order, as modified by the Administrator on  March
30, 1987.
-------
EPA1H51
B. Prendergast

EPA9401
Jon Heller

WA/DOA
EPX5675
ATTN:  Mr. C. Alan Pettibone, Director

/ZIP
Regional Director HPR-01
Pood and Drug Administration
909 1st Avenue Room 5009
Seattle WA  9817H,
/ZIP
Branch Chief HFF-3U
PDA/CFSAN
200 C Street S.W.
Washington DC  2020*1,
/ZIP
John A. Beare M.D.
Health Services Division
Mail Stop LJ-18
Olympia WA  9850H+

Washington Department of Agriculture

Attention: Mr. C. Alan Pettibone - Director

The Environmental Protection Agency hereby grants a specific
exemption, in accordance with the Administrator's Decision
and Final Order Modifying Final Suspension of Pesticides
which Contain Dinoseb and section 18 of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended, to the Washington
Department of Agriculture for use of dinoseb to control
broadleaf weeds in dry peas, chickpeas and lentils.  The
Washington Department of Agriculture is responsible for ensuring
that all provisions of this specific exemption are met.  It
is also responsible for providing information in accordance
with *»0 CFR 166.32.  This specific exemption is subject to
the following conditions, restrictions, and warnings:

FORMULATION

1.  This specific exemption authorizes the use of any
3 Ib. a.i. per gallon formulation of dinoseb which was
federally-registered for use on peas, chickpeas, or lentils
prior to October 7, 1986, subject to the terms and conditions
set forth below.

2.  Only that product which was formulated prior to October 7,
1986, is permitted to be shipped and used under this exemption.
Shipment is allowed under previously federally-registered product
-------
                             -2-
LABELING TO USED UNDER THE SPECIFIC EXEMPTION

     The provisions of this specific exemption constitute
supplemental labeling to the labels of previously registered
dinoseb products which are authorized for use under this
exemption.  Therefore, the state must ensure that this supple-
mental labeling accompanies the dinoseb product at the time
of sale.  The state must also ensure that growers with dinoseb
supplies already in  their possession be supplied a copy of
this supplemental labeling prior to use.  All appropriate
precautions and restrictions of the registered product labels
must be observed.  The following precautions and restrictions
take precedence over  those contained on the registered labeling.

1.   Due to developmental toxic effects in laboratory animals/
resulting from exposure to dinoseb, the following precautions
will be observed:

     Women of childbearing age may not use the product;
     all reasonable efforts should be made to minimize
     indirect exposures to women of child-bearing age;
     the product also poses risks to male reproduction;
     is acutely toxic and the product may be applied only
     by certified applicators.

2.   All use must be  made by certified applicators; other
persons, even if they are operating under the direct supervision
of  a certified applicator, may not use dinoseb.

3.   Women of childbearing age, i.e., under the age of 45,
may not be  involved  in mixing, loading, or any  aspect  of
dinoseb application.

4.   Mixing and  loading of dinoseb must be carried out in  a
closed system.

5.   Mixer/loaders and applicators must wear chemical  resistant
disposable coveralls  (Tyvek® suits) and chemically resistant
gloves  when mixing or loading dinoseb.  Applicators or other
personnel must remove such protective clothing  immediately before
entering the  tractor cab  to avoid  cab contamination, but must
carry an unused set  of gloves and coveralls in  their cabs, to
be  used in  the event of spraying equipment malfunction and
repair during application.

6.   Aerial application is prohibited.

7.   Ground application is prohibited except by the "barrel
sucker"/ground boom/tractor system.   Ground  application
is  restricted to a closed-cab tractor with a positive  pressure
ventilation system.
-------
                             -3-
8.   Ground application is prohibited when wind  conditions
exceed ten miles per hour.

9.   Application is limited to a maximum of 80 acres treatment
per day per certified applicator.

10.  One preemergent or early post emergent application of
dinoseb at a maximum application rate of 1.5 Ib. a.i. per
acre on lentils and 3.0 Ib. a.i. per acre on dry peas or
chickpeas is authorized.

11.  EPA recommends that growers should make every reasonable
effort to return unused dinoseb product to the manufacturer,
distributor, or  other  agents  capable of relabeling, recovering,
recycling, or reprocessing the pesticide.  Product which is
not  returned should be stored in accordance with recommended
procedures described in 40 CFR 165.10. In short, these proce-
dures  for  storage  recommend  that the material be stored  on
pallets or similar raised platforms  in a dry, well-ventilated,
and  separate  room, building  or  covered  area with a  concrete
floor, where  fire  protection  is  provided.

SPECIFIC  EXEMPTION REQUIREMENTS

 1.   Dinoseb  may only be  sold to growers  of dry peas,  lentils
 and/or chickpeas  in the state of Washington.

 2.   Growers  may purchase in a quantity not  to  exceed that
 required to treat his dry pea, chickpea,  and/or lentil
 acreage at the maximum application rates  specified in this
 authorization.  All stocks of dinoseb already in a grower's
 possession must be taken  into account when determining this
 quantity.

 3.   Only state-li\censed dealers are authorized to sell or
 ditribute dinoseb under this specific exemption.

 4.   Dealers authorized to sell or distribute dinoseb under
 this specific exemption must obtain and report  the following
 information from  growers prior to sale or distribution:
       a)   grower's name,  address,  and grower's license number,
       b)  number  of acres and type(s) of pulse crop to be treated,
       c)  the product name(s) and registration number(s),
       d)  the quantity of dinoseb sold or distributed,
       e   quantity of dinoseb previously in grower's possession, and
       f)  the name, address  and certification  number  of  the
           certified applicator to apply dinoseb.

  This  information  will be forwarded  by  the dealer  to  the Washington
  Department of Agriculture and the EPA Region X Office within
  five  days of sale or  distribution.
-------
                             -4-
5.   Certified applicators applying dinoseb under  this  specific
exemption will record and report the following information:
      a)  name, address and. certification number,
      b)  name and address of dry pea, lentil and/or chickpea
      grower,
      c)  date of application,
      d)  type of pulse  crop  and  number  of acres treated,
      e)  number of gallons applied,
      f)  registration number(s)  of  product(s) applied, and
      g)  sex of certified applicator  (if female, specify age).

This  information will  be forwarded to  the certified applicator
within  five days of use  to the Washington Department of Agriculture
and the EPA  Region X Office.

6.  The Washington  Department of Agriculture will  conduct a
monitoring  program of  use of  dinoseb under the specific exemp-
 tion  to insure compliance with the conditions and  restrictions
set forth in this exemption.   The specifics  concerning this
monitoring  are to determined  by the  Washington Department of
Agriculture and  EPA  Region X.

 7.   A final report summarizing the results of this exemption
must  be submitted  by January  15,  1988.  If  use of  dinoseb is
 required again for the  1988 growing season,  an interim report
 containing  all information available at  time of  filing, must
 be submitted with the new specific exemption request.

 8.  The Washington Department of Agriculture will  immediately
 report any adverse effects resulting  from the use of dinoseb
 under  this specific exemption to the EPA, Office of Pesticide
 Programs.

 9.  This specific exemption  expires on  July  15, 1987.

      The Agency will  not consider any emergency exemption
 application for the 1988 use season unless  the  Idaho or
 Washington Department of Agriculture, the American Frozen
 Food Institute, or  the American  Dry Pea and Lentil Association
 conduct  or  sponsor  adequate  tests on  alternative pesticides
 during the 1987 season.  EPA's consideration of any  emergency
 exemption  application for the 1988  use  season will be influenced
 by evidence of the extent to which there is good  faith compliance
  with the conditions and restrictions herein.
   ouglaS
  Office
  Date
 D. Campt,
of Pesticide Programs
   §§§
-------

                UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                                  AMENnMENT
                        TO THF SSDPO OF  OCTOBER 7, 1986
     ADR   I  |Qp7
              WO1
         ..  .	
PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECTlPT REQUESTED

Cedar Chemical
Suite 2414 Clark Tower
5100 Poplar Ave.
Memphis, TN  38137

Reference: DINOSEB

     By the authority vested in  me  pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide  Act (FIFRA), as amended (7 U.S.C.
§136k(a)), you are hereby ordered not  to distribute, sell, offer for sale,
hold for sale, ship, deliver for shipment, receive and (having so received)
deliver or offer to deliver, remove, or  use the pesticide(s) listed above,
or any other pesticides under your  control, ownership, or custody that were
suspended by the Administrator's Emergency Suspension Order of October 7, 1986.

     This order pertains to all  quantities of the above-mentioned pesticide(s)
within the control, ownership, or custody of your company, wherever located.
The pesticide(s) may not be sold, offered for sale, held for sale, shipped,
delivered for shipment, received and  (having so received) delivered or offered
for delivery, removed or used other than in accordance with the provisions of
this order or of further Stop Sale, Use, of Removal Orders as may be issued in
connection with the pesticide(s).

     Notwithstanding the provisions of this Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Order,
you may distribute, sell, offer  for sale, hold for sale, ship, deliver for
shipment, receive and (having so received) deliver or offer to deliver, remove,
or use the pesticide(s) affected by this order which are under your control,
ownership,.or custody provided it is for purposes of consolidation in one or
more locations, e. g., implementing a  product recall and/or it meets all the
requirements of the enclosed Section 18  Emergency Exemption Order and that it is
being shipped to a licensed, authorized  dealer in the States of Washington or Idaho,

     In addition, the following  information must be reported in writing to the EPA
representative listed below within  five  working days of transporting this material:
1) the product name and registration number of the transported products(s); 2) the
date, name and location from where  the product(s) were transported as well as the
name and location of distributors in Washington or Idaho to whom the product(s)
were shipped; and 3) the quantity of product(s) by registration number being
transported.

                     Mr. Kirk Lucius,  Chief
                      Pesticides and Toxic
                      Substances Branch
                     FPA Region  IV
                     345 Court!and  Street, NE
                     Atlanta, GA 30365
                     404-257-3621
-------
                                   - 2 -
     Any person violating the terms or provisions  of  this  order  shall  be
subject to the civil or criminal  penalties  prescribed in Section 14  of the
Act (7 U.S.C.§1361_).
                                         alph M.  Turpirt/Acting  Director
                                        Compliance  Division  (EN-342)
Enclosure
-------
'«<
           UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                       WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                           APR I 7 1987
       OFFICE OF
PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Dinoseb

FROM: n   A. E. Conroy II, Director    (^
      !/y  Office of Compliance Monitoring

TO:       Regional Division Directors


     On April 16, 1987, District Court Judge Redden of the
District of Oregon granted a preliminary induction which stayed
the dinoseb Suspension Order, in the States of Idaho, Oregon, and
Washington, pending EPA's final decision with respect to the
cancellation of dinoseb.  Further, Judge Redden's order permits
the use of dinoseb on green peas, snap beans, cucurbits (cucumbers,
squash and zucchini) and caneberry crops in these States.

     The above uses are only permitted under certain restrictions
set out in the Judge's order, provided that the aforementioned
States will agree to enforce these restrictions.  The Court Order
has been magnafaxed to you separately.

     While the Court's decision is not abundantly clear, it is
OCM's opinion that the scope of the decision is limited to the
States of Idaho, Oregon and Washington only.  Therefore, the
following guidance should apply to enforcing the October 14, 1986
dinoseb suspension order:

          1)  The Section 18 Emergency Exemption is not affected
              by the Court's decision.

          2)  The Court Order applies only to the States of
              Idaho, Oregon and Washington, and permits the use
              of dinoseb only on the crops listed above.  In
              these three States, the Court Order shall take
              precedence over the Agency's suspension order, and
              the Agency's Stop Sale Orders (SSURO) should not be
              enforced in those States.
-------
                     -2-


3)  Any sale, distribution and use of dinoseb,  in the
    three States, not in accordance with the restric-
    tions found in the Court Order or the Section 18
    Emergency Exemption is a violation of the suspension
    order.

4)  The Suspension Order is still  in effect outside of
    the three States.

5)  OCM has amended five SSURO's,  previously issued to
    registrants with stocks of dinoseb,  solely  for
    permitting these five registrants to ship dinoseb
    to Washington and Idaho for use under the Section 18
    Emergency Exemption.  No product can be shipped
    lawfully unless the product is registered for use
    on peas, lentils or chickpeas, and labelled accord-
    ingly.  The recent  section 18 Emergency Exemption
    extended allowable uses to Oregon and the five
    SSURO's are hereby amended to  Include this  State.

6)  No other shipments of dinoseb  (other than from the
    five registrants that received amended SSURO's) to
    the three States from outside  of the three  States
    are lawful.  Shipments of dinoseb by anyone other
    than the five registrants would be in violation of
    the Suspension Order (Section  12(a)(2)(J).

7)  We have contacted the States of Oregon, Washington,
    and Idaho concerning this matter.  If additional
    stocks of dinoseb are needed in these States for
    uses covered by the Court Order, EPA will expedite
    vacation of SSURO's using the  following procedure:

         o Registrants must contact the appropriate
           state department of agriculture and obtain
           agreement that the product may be shipped
           into the subject state  for an allowable use.
           Registrants should obtain an agreement from
           the state regarding the quantity of dinoseb
           product that may be shipped into the state.

         o Contact EPA [telephone  1) Charles Auer at
           202-382-3807; Dr. Jake  Mackenzie  at 415-974-7279;
           or call 202-382-3807 and request dinoseb
           coordinator] with the following information:

                - State contact and amount approved
                  for shipment.
-------
                             -3-

                - Registration number of product(s)  and
                  1abeled uses.

                - name and location of where product(s)
                  are shipped from and name and  location
                  of person receiving the product(s)

                - Date of shipment or proposed shipment
                  and quantities of product in each  shi
3 II I pine II I
each shipment.
                - Name, title, address,  and phone  number  of
                  company contact.

     EPA will verbally vacate SSURO's using the above procedure.
Companies should follow-up with EPA in writing.  EPA Headquarters
will provide information regarding vacation of SSURO's to the
appropriate regions.

     You should immediately discuss this matter with your State
counterparts to inform them of the Agency's position concerning the
Court decision.  In addition, the appropriate Regions should
contact the five registrants with amended SSURO's  to inform them
of this position.  The five registrants are:

          1.  Uniroyal Chemical            Region  1
              Bethany, CY

          2.  Cedar Chemical               Region  4
              Memphis, TN

          3.  Drexel Chemical              Region  4
              Memphis, TN

          4.  Platte Chemical              Region  8
              Greeley, CO

          5.  Wilbur Ellis Company         Region  9
              Fresno, CA

     We will keep you informed of further developments in this
matter and we will  discuss this during the April 22 OPP conference
call.  If you have any questions, please call Jack Neylan or Dan
Helfgott at FTS 382-7835.

cc:  Dr. John Moore, OPTS
     Jim Lamb, OPTS
     Doug Campt, OPP
     Stan Abramson, OGC
     Jake Mackenzie
     Chuck Lincoln
     Regional Branch Chiefs
-------
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                           MAR I  4  'OPQ
                                                           orr.ctor
                                                   'MTICIDCS AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:  FIFRA Section 18 for Dinoseb

FROM:      John J.  Neylan III, J)1 recto r
          Policy and Grants Division
          Office of Compliance Monitoring
TO:
                                                       cT?
          Addressees
     On March 14, 1988, the Agency issued FIFRA Section 18
Emergency Exemptions which granted a specific exemption to the
States of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon to allow the use of
all  dinoseb products labeled for use on dry peas, lentils,
and  chickpeas to control broadleaf weeds on these crops (this
includes dinoseb products which were cancelled as a result
of the October 7, 1986 Notice of Intent to Cancel).  Sale,
distribution, and use of these dinoseb products are only
allowed under the terms and conditions specified in the attached
Section 18.  Additionally, the April 16, 1987 District Court
Order which permitted the use of dinoseb on green peas, snap
beans, cucurbits (cucumbers, squash and zucchini) and caneberries,
pursuant to the terms and conditions specified in that order,
is still in effect.    The States of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon
have promulgated emergency regulations which implement the 1987
Oistri ct Court Order.

    Under existing Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Orders (SSUROs),
Cedar Chemical and Orexel Chemical Company were permitted to
ship dinoseb products for purposes of consolidating stocks for
the  formal  recall.  Additionally, after notifying EPA and
obtaining approval from the State of Washington, Idaho or Oregon,
Cedar and Drexel were permitted to sell and distribute dinoseb
for  the uses allowed under the District Court Order (green peas,
snap beans, cucurbits, and caneberry crops).  Under existing
SSUROs, other registrants were permitted to ship dinoseb only
for  purposes of consolidating stocks for formal recall.
Registrants may no longer sell or distribute dinoseb pursuant
to last year's Section 18 Exemptions because these exemptions
expired on July 15,  1987.
-------
                              -2-
     In order to Implement  the new FIFRA  Section  18  Emergency
Exemptions and continue  to  implement  the  District  Court  Order,
the Agency will  amend  existing dinoseb  SSUROs  to  permit  the
sale,  distribution,  and  uses  specified  in  the  Section  18
Exemptions and the State regulations  which implement  the 1987
District Court Order,  using the following  procedures:

     0  Registrants  must contact the  appropriate  State
        Departments  of Agriculture and  obtain  agreement
        that the product may  be shipped  into  the  subject
        State for an allowable use.   Registrants  must  obtain
        an agreement from the State  regarding  the  quantity
        of dinoseb product  that may  be  shipped into  the  State.

     0  Registrants  must contact EPA  by  telephone  [  1) John Mason
        at 202-382-7835; 2) Jake Mackenzie at  415-974-7279; or
        (3)  call  202-382-3807 and request  the  dinoseb  coordi-
        nator] and provide  the following  information:

             - State contact  and amount  approved  for
               shipment.

             - Registration number of product(s)  and
               labeled uses.

             - Name  and  location of  product(s)  to  be
               shipped and  name and  location  of person
               receiving the  product(s).
                                                     and
             - Date of shipment or proposed shipment a
               quantities of product in each shipment.

             - Name, title, address, and phone number of
               company contact.


     Companies must also provide the above information to the
EPA Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM) in writing subsequent
to their Initial  phone call which requested the amendment to
the SSURO.  OCM will provide those registrants that request
permission to ship dinoseb with a written amended SSURO.  OCM
will  also provide Information regarding the amended SSUROs to
the appropriate Regions and EPA personnel involved in handling
dinoseb indemnification claims.  Registrants who have not requested
and been granted  an amended federal SSURO may not move or ship
their dinoseb products, except for purposes of consolidating stocks
for the formal recal1 .
-------
                              -3-
     The following  guidance will apply for enforcing  the  October
7,  1986 dinoseb-'suspension order and  subsequent  cancellations:


     1) Any   saje-,  distribution,  and  use  of dinoseb,  in  the
        three States,  not in  accordance  with the restrictions
        found in  the 1988  FIFRA section 18 Emergency  Exemptions,
        or the 1987 District  Court  Order,  as  implemented  by
        the  regulations  of  the  States  of  Washington,   Idaho,
        and  Oregon,  is  a  violation   of  the  FIFRA   section  6
        Suspension/Cancellation  Order.

     2) No  product  can  be shipped lawfully  for  use under  the
        Section  18  unless:  (1)  the  product  was   registered,
        packaged, and  labeled  on  October  7,  1986,  or  (2)  the
        product  was  manufactured  from  stocks of  a   registered
        technical dinoseb  product  which were  packaged  and
        labeled,  and  in  the   possession  of  the  manufacturer,
        on or before October 7,  1986.

     3) No   product  can   be   shipped  lawfully  for   use  under
        the  State   regulations  which   implement  the  District
        Court Order  unless:  (1)  the  product  was   registered,
        packaged, and  labeled  on  October  7,  1986,  or  (2)  the
        product  was  manufactured  from  stocks of  a   registered
        technical dinoseb  product  which were  packaged  and
        labeled,  and  in  the   possession  of  the  manufacturer,
        on or before  October   7,  1986,  and  (3)  has  not  yet
        been  cancelled  pursuant  to the  October 7, 1986
        Cancellation Order.

     4) No dinoseb  product may  be distributed  or sold  for  use
        on dry peas, lentils,  chickpeas,  green peas,  cucurbits,
        snap  beans,  or  caneberries,  unless  the product  was
        previously  labeled for these  uses.

     5) Registrants  that  did   not  receive  an  amended   SSURO,
        who  ship  dinoseb  to  the  three   States,  will   be  in
        violation of the FIFRA Section 6 Suspension/Cancellation
        Order and  in  violation of the SSURO  issued  under  FIFRA
        Section  13.

     6) Only  pesticide  dealers licensed by  the  State  of
        Washington,  Idaho, and  Oregon  may  sell  or  distribute
        dinoseb  products  for  use under the FIFRA Section  18 or
        the  State regulations  which  implement the 1987 District
        Court Order.
-------
                              -4-
     7) Distributors, dealers, and retailers located in other
        States may ship'di noseb. stock s to licensed, authorized
        dealers in the State of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon
        for use consistent with the FIFRA Section 18 Emergency
        Exemptions or the State regulations which implement the
        1987 District Court Order, provided the distributor,
        dealer, retailer has obtained approval  from the State.
        Distributors, dealers, retailers who have previously
        been issued a State or Federal  SSURQ must have that
        SSURO amended before such shipment may  occur.   Further,
        such shipment must be in  accordance with U.S.  Department
        of Transportation regulations.

     8) Use of dinoseb product in the three States for broadleaf
        control of dry peas, lentils, and chickpeas must be in
        accordance with the use limitations specified  in the
        attached March 14, 1988 FIFRA section 18.

     9) Use of dinoseb product in the three States on  green -peas,
        snap beans, cucurbits, and caneberry crops must be in"
        accordance with the use limitations specified  in the
        State regulations implementing the April  16, 1987,
        District Court Order.

    10) Use of dinoseb in the three States not  in accordance
        with the Section 18 or State regulations implementing
        the District Court Order  is a violation of the FIFRA
        section 6 Suspension/Cancellation Order.

    11) No dinoseb products may be used outside the three
        States.  Use of dinoseb outside the three States is a
        violation of the FIFRA section 6 Suspension/Cancellation
        Order.


     EPA Region X and the States  of Washington, Idaho, and
Oregon are directed to amend any  SSUROs issued  at the  dealer
and user levels to permit sale and use of pesticide products
containing dinoseb pursuant to the terms and conditions specified
in the March 14, 1988 FIFRA Section 18 Emergency Exemptions and
the State  regulations implementing the 1987 District Court
Order, if this has not already been done.
-------
                              -5-
     Under the -Section 18 Exemptions and the District Court Order
the States of Washington,- Idaho, and Oregon are responsible for
ensuring that all the provisions of the Emergency Exemptions and
District Court Order are met within their States.  These States
are responsible for conducting inspections at the distributor,
dealer, retailor and user levels to assure compliance with the
terms of the March 14, 1988 FIFRA Section 18 Emergency Exemptions
and the State regulations implementing the 1987 District Court
Order.  These States are also responsible for assuring that
products sold and distributed for use under the FIFRA Section 18
Exemption are not used for the uses allowed under the State
regulations which implement the 1987 District Court Order (only
Cedar and Drexel's dinoseb products will be allowed for use
on green peas, snap beans, cucurbits, and caneberry crops).
The specific number of inspections will be negotiated by EPA
Region X with the States of Washington, Idado, and Oregon.
Regions will monitor compliance with the amended federal  SSUROs
according to the Pesticides Inspection Manual.

     Please note, the FIFRA Section 18 Emergency Exemptions "  .
issued on March 14, 1988 will  expire upon issuance of the final
dinoseb cancellation order (which is expected shortly), or
July 15, 1988, whichever comes first.  Further, use under the
1987 District Court Order and State regulations must also
cease after issuance of the final  dinoseb cancellation order.
Therefore, upon issuance of the final dinoseb cancellation
order, sale, distribution, and use of dinoseb products will
only be permitted consistent with the terms and conditions
specified in that order.

     You should immediately transmit a copy of this memorandum
to the States and discuss these dinoseb actions with them.  If
you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact
nan Helfgott at FTS 382-7825.
Attachment
-------
                            ADDRESSEES
II
      John A. Moore        (TS-788)
      Douglas D. Campt     (TS-766C)
      Edwin F. Tinsworth   (TS-767C)
      Frederick F. Stiehl  (LE-134A)
      Mark Greenwood       (LE-132A)
      A.E. Conroy II       (EN-342)
      Connie Musgrove       ' "
      Ken Shiroishi          "
      Phyllis FXaherty       "
      Mike Wood              "
      Jerry Stubbs           "
      Dexter Goldman         "
      Jan Auerbach         (TS-767C)
      Jane Hopkins         (TS-788)
      Phil Gray            (TS-766C)

      Jake Mackenzie
      Western Regional Compliance Director
      Louis F. Gitto, Director
      Air Management Division

      Barbara Metzger, Director
      Environmental Services Div
III   Stephen R. Wassersug, Director
      Hazardous Waste Management Div

IV    Winston A. Smith, Director
      Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div

V     William H. Sanders III, Dir
      Environmental Services Div

VI    William B. Hathaway, Dir
      Air, Pesticides & toxic Div

VII   William  A. Spratlin, Director
      Air and Toxics Division

VIII  Irwin L. Dickstein, Director
      Air and Toxics Division

IX    Jeffrey Zelickson, Director
      Toxics and Waste Management Div

X     Gary O'Neal, Director
      Air and Toxics Division

      Chris Kirby
      Oregon Dept. of Agriculture

      Art Losey
      Washington Dept. of Agriculture
Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Ernest Regna, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Larry Miller, Chief
Toxic & Pesticides Branch

Richard DuBose, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Phyllis Reed, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Robert Murphy, Acting Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Leo Alderman, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Alvin Yorke, Chief
Toxic Substances Branch

Davis Bernstein, Chief
Pesticides & Toxics Branch

Anita Frankel, Chief
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

Rod Awe
Idaho Dept. of Agriculture

Vivan Jennings
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture
-------
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                              MAR 2 8 1988
                                                           OFFICE OF
                                                   PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:
FROM:
TO:
           Dinoseb Stipulated Order
                                       r
           John J. Neylan III, Director'^
           Policy and Grants Division
           Office of Compliance Monitori

           Addressees
     On March 24, 1988, the counsel for the Environmental
Protection Agency and the plaintiffs in Love V. Thomas,  filed
the enclosed stipulation in that case, which describes those
activities which are lawfully permitted by the April 15, 1987
District Court Order and the State regulations implementing
that Order.  From the Agency's perspective, this stipulation
merely reaffirms the situation as it existed prior to the
filing of the stipulation.

     To prevent any misunderstanding, I have also attached
(1) a list of dinoseb products which are not cancelled and are
labeled for uses subject to the April 15, 1987 District  Court
Order, and (2) a copy of the March 14, 1988 memorandum which
provides information concerning the Agency's enforcement policy
for dinoseb.  If you have any questions regarding this letter,
please contact Dan Helfgott of my staff at FTS 382-7825.
Attachments
-------
  1    Susan K. Eggum
      McEWEN, GISVOLD,  RANKIN & STEWART
  2    1408 Standard Plaza
      1100 SW Sixth Avenue
  3    Portland, OR 97204
      Telephone:  (503) 226-7321
  4
      Phillip D. Chadsey
  6    STOEL, RIVES, BOLEY,  JONES & GREY
      900 SW Fifth Avenue
  6    Portland, OR 97204
      Telephone:  (503) 294-9376
  7
           Attorneys for Plaintiffs
  8

  9                    UNITED  STATES DISTRICT COURT

10                          DISTRICT OF OREGON

11    JAMES M. LOVE, NORTHWEST FOOD      )
      PROCESSORS ASSOCIATION,  a          )
12    non-profit association,  and        )
      TUALATIN VALLEY FRUIT              )
13    MARKETING, INC.,  an Oregon         )
      corporation,                        )
14                                        )
                     Plaintiffs,          )     Civil No.  87-343-RE
15                                        )
      DAVE FROHNMAYER,  Attorney          )
16    General for the State of           )
      Oregon, on behalf of  the         .  )
17    people of the State of  Oregon      )
                                          )
18                   Intervenor,          )
                                          )
19                   v.                   )     STIPULATED ORDER
                                          )
20    LEE M. THOMAS, Administrator       )
      Environmental Protection           )
21    Agency,                             )
                                          )
22                        Defendant.      )

23         On March 11, 1988,  plaintiffs filed a Motion  For  Order To

04    Show Cause Why The Defendant Should Not Be Held  In Contempt For

25    Violation Of This Court's Preliminary Injunction and Setting

26    Hearing.   In response to plaintiffs'  motion, counsel for plaintiffs

Page  1  -  STIPULATED ORDER

                            McEWEN, GISVOID. RANKIN & STEWART
                                  Anomm of Law
                             1408 Standard Plaza. IIOOS. W. Sixth
                                Portland. Oitqon 97204
                                Tel.phoo. {5031 226-7321
-------
 1    and for defendant have agreed  to  the  following terras of a stipullBId



 2    order:



 3       •  1.   All dinoseb products which  are  not cancelled (including



 4    but not limited to products manufactured  by Cedar and Drexel and



 5    their respective predecessors  and affiliates)  and which are the



 6    subject of this Court's April  15,  1987  injunction ("the injunction")



 7    may be  shipped into the states of Washington,  Idaho, and Oregon



 8    and sold,  distributed, and used  in  those  states for those crops



 9    (green  peas,  snap beans, cucurbits  and  caneberries) in accordance



10    with  the injunction and the state regulations implementing the



11    injunction.



12         2.   This stipulated order  shall remain in effect throughout



13    the 1988 growing season for the  crops which are the subject of



14    the injunction, or until the defendant  issues a final order in



15    the dinoseb cancellation proceeding,  FIFRA Docket No. 590, et



16    al.,  whichever occurs sooner.



17         3.   EPA has notified the manufacturers of affected products



18    of  these facts and will provide  the manufacturers, EPA regional



19    offices, and state agencies responsible for enforcement of FIFRA



20    with  notice of this stipulation  and a copy of this stipulated



21    order.



22         4.   Plaintiffs' Motion For  Order  To Show Cause Why



23    Defendant  Should Not Be Held In  Contempt  For Violation Of This



24    Court's Preliminary Injunction is hereby  withdrawn.



25         5.   Each party shall bear  its own costs and attorney fees




26    / / /



Page  2 -   STIPULATED ORDER




                            McEWEN. GISVOIO, RANKIN & STEWART
                                 Attorney* ot Low
                             1408 Standard Plaza. 1100 S W. Sixth
                                Portland. Oregon 97204
                               Telephone (5031 226-732)
-------
 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Page
incurred  in connection with the withdrawn  motion.
March  18,  1988.
3 -  STIPULATED ORDER
                                ROGER J. MARZULLA
                                Acting Assistant Attorney  General
                                Land & Natural  Resources Division
                                             L
                                SUSAN L. SMITH,  Assistant  Chief
                                Environmental  Defense Section Land
                                & Natural Resources Division U.S.
                                Department  of  Justice

                                Counsel  for Administrator  Thomas
                                SUSAN K. EGGUM,  McEwen, Gisvold,
                                Rankin & Stewart, Of Attorneys for
                                Plaintiffs
Is /
                                                9
                                PftlLLIP D.  CKADSEY, Stoel,  Rives,
                                Boley, Jones,  & Grey, Of Attorneys
                                for Plaintiffs
                             Me EWE N, GISVOID. RANKIN & STEWART
                                   Anomtyi ar low
                              1408 Standard Plata. 1100 S. W. Siith
                                  Portland, Oregon 97204
                                 Teltohont (5031 226-7321
-------
           DINOSEB PRODUCTS WHICH ARE NOT CANCELLED
           AND ARE LABELED FOR USES SUBJECT TO THE
           APRIL 15, 1987 DISTRICT COURT INJUNCTION

     This list consists of registered pesticide products
containing dinoseb which are 1) not cancelled, and 2) labeled
for use on crops which are subject to the April 15, 1987
injunction by the United States District Court in Oregon.  As
confirmed by the enclosed stipulation, these products may be
shipped into the states of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon, and
sold, distributed and used in those states in accordance with
the April 15, 1987 injunction and the state regulations
implementing the injunction.  To the extent that any stop
sale, use, or removal order previously issued by EPA represents
an impediment to such activities, EPA will modify that order
in accordance with the procedures set forth in the enclosed
March 14, 1988 memorandum.

     As of March 21, 1988, Cedar Chemical Corporation and
Drexel Chemical Company were the only companies whose dinoseb
registrations had not been cancelled.  However, many of the
registrations for dinoseb products currently held by Cedar
and Drexel were previously held by one or more other companies,
and then transferred to Cedar or Drexel.  Remaining stocks of
these transferred products which are labeled with the prior
brand names and registration numbers are not cancelled.  In
addition, a number of additional companies have obtained
supplemental registrations which permit them to distribute
Drexel products under other brand names.  These supplemental
registrations are also not cancelled.
-------
                                - 2 -
I.  Cedar Chemical Corporation

  A.  Current Cedar Chemical Corporation Registrations
     Transferred From Vertac Chemical Corporation

                                    Vertac        Cedar
                                   Chemical      Chemical
                                  Corporation   Corporation
  Product Name                      Reg. No.       Reg.  No.
  Dinitro Weed Killer               39511-10      56077-4

  Dinitro Weed Killer 5             39511-11      56077-5

  Selective Weed Killer             39511-85      56077-11

  General Weed Killer               39511-86      56077-12

  Premerge 3                        39511-87      56077-13

  Premerge                          39511-88      56077-14

  Dinitro 3 Weed Killer             39511-89      56077-15

  Dinitro General                   39511-91      56077-17

  B. Current Cedar Chemical Corporation Registrations
     Previously Transferred from Other Companies

                                    Former        Current
  Product Name (company)            Reg. No.      Reg. No.
  Selective Weed Killer (Dow)       464-10        56077-11

  Dow General Weed Killer (Dow)     464-98        56077-12

  Premerge (Dow)                    464-146       56077-14

  Premerge 3 Dinitro Amine          464-490       56077-13
    Herbicide (Dow)

  Helena Brand Dinitro Weed         5905-194      56077-5
    Killer 5 (Helena)

  Dinitro - 3 Weed Killer           9663-11       56077-15
    (Crystal)

  Dinitro General Herbicide         9663-18       56077-17
    (Crystal)
-------
                                - 3 -
II.  Drexel Chemical Company

  A. Current Drexel Chemical Company Registrations

       Product Name          Reg.  No.
       Dynamyte T

       Dynamyte 2.5

       Dynamyte 3

       Dynamyte 300

       Dynamyte 5

       Premerge Dinitro
       Weed Killer
19713-33

19713-78

19713-82

19713-28

19713-29

19713-203
  B. Registrations Transferred To Drexel
     Chemical Company from Other Companies

       Former Product          Former
       Name (Company)          Reg. No.
                  Current
                  Reg. No.
       Dynamyte T Dinitro      6308-89
         Weed Killer (Ansul)

       Trounce 3 Dinitro       6308-79
         Weed Killer (Ansul)

       Dynamyte 5 Dinitro      6308-80
         Weed Killer (Ansul)

       Dinoseb Dinitro Weed    1022-442
         Killer (Chapman)
                  19713-33


                  19713-28


                  19713-29


                  19713-203
-------
                              - 4 -
C. Supplemental Registrations for Drexel
   Chemical Company Products
     Product Name


     Hopkins Dinitro 3

     Dinitro 5

     Pure Gro Dinoseb 5

     Hopkins Dinitro 5

     Dino - 5 Dinitro Weed Killer

     Dinitro 5 Weed Killer

     Terra Dinitro-5

     Dinitro General

     Schall Contact Weed Killer

     Dinitro Contact Weed Killer

     Valco Brand-Beanweda

     Pure Gro Dinomerge 3

     Dino - 3

     USS Dinitro 3 Pre-Emergence
     Weed Killer

     Riverside Dinitrol 3

     Red Panther Dinitro 3

     Dinitro PE
Reg. No.
19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-

19713-
28-2393

29-635

29-1202

29-1063

29-2935

•29-3442

•29-14774

•29-44215

•78-3468

•78-44215

•82-1063

•82-1202

•82-2935

•82-3442
19713-82-9779

19713-82-42761

19713-82-44215
-------
            UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                        WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                            JUU5B66
                                                           OPPICB OP
                                                   PKSTICIDBS AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Compliance Monitoring Strategy for
          Cancellation of Dinoseb
FROM:     John J. Neylan III, Director
          Policy and Grants Division
          Office of Compliance MonitorinA  J

TO:       Addressees
     On June 9, 1988, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) signed the final Dinoseb Cancellation
Order.  This Order, which is effective June 10, 1988, cancels
all pesticide products containing dinoseb, or any of its salts,
which have not already been cancelled pursuant to the Notice of
Intent to Cancel (NOIC) issued on October 7, 1986 (51 FR 36650:
October 14, 1986).

     Pursuant to this Order, the Agency has authorized sale,
distribution, and use of dinoseb for certain crops for the 1988
and 1989 growing seasons in the States of Washington, Idaho,
and Oregon.  Also pursuant to the Cancellation Order, the State
Departments of Agriculture of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon
have agreed to enforce all the provisions of the June 10, 1988
final Dinoseb Cancellation Order.  Finally, please note that
all sale, distribution, and use of dinoseb permitted under the
1988 FIFRA section 18 emergency exemptions, the 1987 U.S.
District Court Order, and amended federal Stop Sale, Use, or
Removal Orders, are now prohibited.  All sale, distribution, and
use of dinc^pb must now be in accordance with the final Dinoseb
CancellattfJifFOrder.  Therefore, use of dinoseb on snap beans
and cucurbiwSfis now prohibited.  Further, sale and
distribution of dinoseb for use on snap beans and cucurbits is
also prohibited.
-------
                              -2-
     Attached is the Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the
Final Cancellation of Dinoseb.  This Strategy calls for the
State Departments of Agriculture of Washington, Idaho, and
Oregon to conduct.inspections at the distributor, dealer,
retailer, and user levels to assure compliance with the final
Dinoseb Cancellation Order.  Further, the Office of Compliance
Monitoring, the Regions, and the States are to amend Stop Sale,
Use, or Removal Orders (SSUROs), as necessary, to allow sale,
distribution, and use only in accordance with the final
Cancellation Order.  Procedures for amending SSUROs will be
identical to those procedures outlined on page 2 of the
attached March 14, 1988 memorandum from John J. Neylan III,
entitled FIFRA Section 18»s for Dinoseb.  Regions are to
monitor compliance with the amended Stop Sale, Use, or Removal
Orders in accordance with Section 13 of the Pesticides
Inspection Manual.

     This attached Strategy is effective immediately, and
supersedes previous Agency guidance on the enforcement of
dinoseb actions, including the October 7, 1986 Compliance
Strategy for the Emergency Suspension of Dinoseb.  Please
transmit a copy of this Strategy, and the attached June 10,
1988 final Dinoseb Cancellation Order to the States within
your Region as soon as possible.  If you have any questions
regarding the attached Strategy, please contact Dan Helfgott of
my Staff (EN-342; FTS 382-7825).
Attachments
-------
                              3— /OOv_;
       Edwin F. Tinsworth   (TS-767C)
       Frederick F. Stiehl  (LE-134A)
       Mark Greenwood       (LE-132A)
       A.E. Conroy II       (EN-342)
       Connie Musgrove        "
       Ken Shiroishi          "
       Phyllis Flaherty^      "
       Mike Wood       ~      "
       Jerry Stubbs           "
       Maureen Lydon          "
       Dexter Goldman         "
       Jan Auerbach         (TS-767C)
       Jane Hopkins         (TS-788)
       Phil Gray            (TS-766C)

       Jake Mackenzie
       Western Regional Compliance Director

I      Louis F. Gitto, Director         Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
       Air Management Division          Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

II     Barbara Metzger, Director        Ernest Regna, Chief
       Environmental Services Division  Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

III    Stephen R. Wassersug, Director   Larry Miller, Chief
       Hazardous Waste Management Div   Toxic & Pesticides Branch

IV     Winston A. Smith, Director       Richard DuBose, Chief
       Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div   Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

       William H. Sanders III, pir      Phyllis Reed, Chief
       Environmental Services Division  Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

VI     William B. Hathaway, Director    Robert Murphy, Acting Chief
       Air, Pesticides & Toxic Div      Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

VII    William  A. Spratlin, Director   Leo Alderman, Chief
       Air and Toxics Division          Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

VIII   Irwin L. Dickstein, Director     Alvin Yorke, Chief
       Air and Toxics Division          Toxic Substances Branch

Dt     Jeffrey Zelickson, Director      Davis Bernstein, Chief
       Toxics and Waste Management Div  Pesticides & Toxics Branch

X      Gary O'Nea&s Director            Anita Frankel, Chief
       Air and Toxics Division          Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

       Chris Kirby                      Rod Awe
       Oregon Dept. of Agriculture      Idaho Dept. of Agriculture

       Art Losey                        Vivan Jennings
       Washington Dept. of Agriculture  U.S. Dept. of Agriculture
-------
                 COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY FOR THE
                      FINAL CANCELLATION OF DINOSEB
   OVERVIEW
        On June 9, 1988, the Administrator of the Environmental
   Protection Agency- (EPA) signed the final Dinoseb Cancellation
   Order.   This Order, which was effective on June 10,  1988,  cancels
   pesticide products containing dinoseb,  or any of its salts,  which
   have not already been cancelled pursuant to the Notice of  Intent to
   Cancel  (NOIC) issued on October 7, 1986 (51 FR 36650; October 14,
   1986).   .--       V 3
        Pursuant to the terms of the Cancellation Order,  the Agency
   has authorized the sale, distribution,  and use of existing stocks
  /of dinoseb products for certain crops in the States of Washington,
/  Idaho, and Oregon.  Also pursuant to the Cancellation  Order,  the
   State Departments of Agriculture of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon
   have agreed to enforce all the procedures, terms, and  conditions of
   the June 10, 1988 Cancellation Order.  Therefore, the  States  of
   Washington, Idaho, and Oregon are responsible for conducting
   inspections at the distributor, dealer, retailer, and  user levels
   to assure compliance with the terms and conditions of  the June 10,
   1988 Cancellation Order in their States.

        All other Regions/States will conduct inspections at the
   registrant, producer, dealer, distributor, retailer, and user
   level, as part of their routine inspectional program,  to assure
   that no dinoseb stocks are being sold,  distributed, or used in
   violation of the final Dinoseb Cancellation Order.

  x/j   Please note that all sale, distribution, and use  permitted
   under the 1987 and 1988 FIFRA section 18 emergency exemptions,
   the 1987 District Court Order, and amended federal Stop Sale, Use,
   or Removal Orders (SSUROs) are now prohibited.  All sale,
   distribution, and use of pesticide products containing dinoseb must
   now be in accordance with the final Dinoseb Cancellation Order. 4 i
   ThereforeT-sale , -dist^ibution-.-and-tre^^f-dinoseb .qn,_snap beans
   and cucurbits (cucumbers, squash and zucchini) are ho  longer
   permitted.  The Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM)  may amend
   federal SSUROs upon request of the dinoseb registrant  to permit
   sale, distribution, and yse^in accordance with the final Dinoseb
   Cancellation Order .*Hme procedures for amending these SSUROs will
   be the same aa those outlined on page 2 of the attached March 14,
   1988 memorandum from John J. Neylan, entitled FIFRA Section 18 fs
   for Dinosebtfu. The Agency will monitor compliance with  the amended
   federal Stop Sale, Use or Removal Orders (SSUROs) in accordance
   with section 13 of the Pesticides Inspection Manual.
-------
     Additionally, OCM may authorize the sale, distribution, or
shipment of existing stocks of cancelled dinoseb products by
registrants, distributors, dealers, or users located in States
other than Washington, Idaho, and Oregon to licensed dealers in
these States, when sale of existing stocks by the recipient dealer
is permitted pursuant to the Cancellation Order.  Such
authorization is contingent upon the registrant, distributor,
dealer, or user obtaining permission from the State Department of
Agriculture of the State to which the cancelled product is being
shipped.

     This Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Final Cancellation
of Dinoseb is effective immediately, and supersedes previous
Agency guidance on the enforcement of dinoseb actions, including
the October 7, 1986 Compliance Strategy for the Emergency
Suspension of Dinoseb.
     The June 10, 1988 final Dinoseb Cancellation Order permits
the sale, distribution, and use of existing stocks of dinoseb
pesticide products: (1) for weed control on dry peas, lentils,
chickpeas, and green peas in the States of Washington, Idaho, and
Oregon during the 1988 growing season, and (2) for vegetative cane
control in caneberries (blackberries, boysenberries,  loganberries,
and raspberries) in Washington, and Oregon during the 1988 and 1989
growing seasons.

Regulated Industry	

     The June 10, 1988 final Cancellation Order specifically
cancels the dinoseb pesticide products of cedar Chemical
Corporation (formerly registered under Vertac Chemical) and Drexel
Chemical Company.

     The existing stocks provisions of the final Cancellation
Order affect:  (1) all registrants of dinoseb products, including
those registrants of products cancelled pursuant to the October 7,
1986 NOIC; (2) growers that use dinoseb on dry peas,  lentils,
chickpeas, green peas, and caneberries in the States of
Washington, Idaho, and Oregon; (3) dealers who are licensed by the
States of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon to sell cancelled dinoseb
pesticide pjroducts; and (4) registrants, distributors, dealers, or
users who sell, distribute, or ship cancelled dinoseb products to
licensed dealers in Washington, Idaho, and Oregon.
-------
                                -3-
Existina Stocks
     Cancelled dinoseb products may only be sold, distributed, and
used if: (1) the product was federally registered, packaged, and
labeled on October 7, 1986, or (2) the end-use product was
manufactured front stocks of a registered technical dinoseb product
which was packaged and labeled and in the possession of the
manufacturer, on or before October 7, 1986.  Cancelled dinoseb
products may only be sold and distributed for use on dry peas,
lentils, chickpeas, green peas, or caneberries if the product was
previously labeled for these crops.  Pesticide dealers in
Washington, Idaho, and Oregon must be licensed by their State in
order to sell or distribute cancelled dinoseb products.  These
dealers must record and submit dinoseb sales information to the
State Department of Agriculture and EPA Region X Office within 5
days of sale, distribution, or delivery of the cancelled dinoseb
product to a grower in Washington, Idaho, or Oregon.  The dinoseb
products may be sold and distributed only when accompanied by
supplemental labeling which includes the use restrictions and
warning statements contained in the June 10, 1988 final Dinoseb
Cancellation Order.  Further, use of all dinoseb pesticide products
may only be in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in
the supplemental labeling.

     Please note that existing dinoseb Stop Sale, Use, or Removal
Orders (SSUROs), including those that were previously amended
pursuant to the 1987 and 1988 dinoseb FIFRA section 18 emergency
exemptions and Judge Redden's 1987 District Court Order, will not
permit registrants to legally sell, distribute, ship, etc., any
dinoseb products upon issuance of the final Dinoseb Cancellation
Order.  Therefore, the Agency must amend any existing dinoseb
SSUROs before a registrant may sell, offer for sale, hold for sale,
ship, deliver for shipment, receive and (having so received)
deliver or offer to deliver, or remove pesticide products
containing dinoseb for uses permitted by the final Dinoseb
Cancellation Order during the 1988 and 1989 growing season.

     Upon request by the dinoseb registrant, the Agency may modify
any existing SSUROs to permit the registrant to sell, offer for
sale, hold for sale, ship, deliver for shipment, receive and
(having so received) deliver or offer to deliver, and remove
pesticide products containing dinoseb which meet the conditions of
the final D4poseb Cancellation Order.  The exact procedures that
will be usedTta amend federal SSUROs is identical to those
procedures outlined on page 2 of the attached March 14, 1988
memorandum from John J. Neylan III, entitled FIFRA Section 18's for
Dinoseb.  Registrants who have not requested and been granted an
amended federal SSURO may not sell or distribute their dinoseb
products.
-------
     EPA Region X and the  States of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon
are directed to amend any  SSUROs issued at the distributor,
dealer, retailer, and user levels to permit sale and use of
pesticide product containing dinoseb pursuant to the terms and
conditions specified in  the final Dinoseb Cancellation Order.

     Other Regions and States are directed to amend any SSUROs at
the distributor, dealer, retailer, and user level to permit the
sale, distribution, and  shipment of dinoseb to licensed dealers in
the States of Washington,  Idaho, and Oregon, provided the person
has received permission  from the subject State.

     Finally, registrants,  distributors, dealers, retailers, or
users located in States  other than Washington, Idaho, and Oregon
must obtain authorization  from the Office of Compliance Monitoring
before they may ship existing stocks of cancelled dinoseb products
to Washington, Idaho, and  Oregon.   Such authorization is contingent
upon the registrant, distributor,  dealer, retailer, or user
obtaining permission from  the State Department of Agriculture of
the State to which the cancelled product is being shipped.

     Any sale, distribution,  or use of pesticide products
containing dinoseb not in  accordance with the final Dinoseb
Cancellation Order is a  violation of FIFRA sections 12(a)(2)(K) and
COMPLIANCE MONITORING
     Pursuant to the terms and  conditions of the final Dinoseb
Cancellation Order, the Departments  of Agriculture of the States of
Washington, Idaho, and Oregon are  responsible for ensuring that
all the provisions of the Cancellation Order are met within their
State.  These States are responsible for conducting inspections at
the dealer, distributor, retailer, and user levels to assure
compliance with the terms of the June 10, 1988 final Dinoseb
Cancellation Order.  These States  are also responsible for
responding to tips and complaints  of violations of the Cancellation
Order.

     All Regions/States are to  perform inspections at the
registrant, producer, dealer, distributor, retailer, and user
levels, as part of their routine inspections, to assure that no
person is distributing, selling, offering for sale, holding for
sale, delivering for shipment,  receiving (and having so received)
delivering, offering to deliver, or  using pesticide products
containing dinoseb in violation of the June 10, 1988 final Dinoseb
Cancellation Order.*  Regions will monitor compliance with the
amended federal SSUROs in accordance with Section 13 of the
Pesticides Inspection Manual.
  Please note that pursuant to the October 7, 1986 Compliance Strategy for the Emergency Suspension of
  Dinoseb, Regions/States were to have conducted inspections of registrants and producer establishments

  by November 7, 1986.
-------
Neutral Administrative Inspection Scheme (MAIS)	;	

     Inspections by the States of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon are
to be conducted at a minimum of 15 percent of the pesticide dealers
licensed to sell dinoseb and 15 percent of the growers who are
legally permitted-to use dinoseb.  In addition, Washington, Idaho,
and Oregon should ensure that growers who were previously permitted
to use dinoseb on snap beans and cucurbits are aware of the final
Dinoseb Cancellation Order and that they may no longer lawfully use
dinoseb on those crops.

ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES

Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP)	

Will develop and provide to OCM a list of dinoseb pesticide
products that are registered for use on dry peas, lentils,
chickpeas, green peas, and caneberries.

Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM)	

Will develop and transmit the Compliance Monitoring strategy to the
Regions.

Will transmit the list of dinoseb products registered for use on
dry peas, lentils, chickpeas, green peas, and caneberries to the
Regions.

Will amend federal SSUROs, upon request by the registrants to
allow the sale, distribution, use, etc., of dinoseb products
registered for use on dry peas, lentils, chickpeas, green peas, and
caneberries in the States of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon.

Will authorize the sale, distribution, or shipment of dinoseb by
registrants, distributors, dealers, and users located in States
other than Washington, Idaho, and Oregon to licensed dealers in
those States.  Such authorization is contingent upon the
registrant, distributor, dealer, or user obtaining permission from
Washington, Idaho, or Oregon for shipment to their State.

Will notify the Regions of the registrants, distributors, dealer,
retailers, and users that have been given authorization to ship
dinoseb to Washington, Idaho, and Oregon.
           "2T*-»:- "
Will notify^EJj&gions of all SSUROs that have been amended by OCM.

Regions	.	

Will transmit the compliance Monitoring Strategy to the States.

Will transmit the list of dinoseb products to the States.

Will amend federal SSUROs in Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and other
States to allow sale, distribution, shipment, use, etc.,
consistent with the terms of the final Dinoseb Cancellation Order.
-------
                                -6-
Will inform States as to which dinoseb products have amended
federal SSUROs.

Will inform States of which registrants, distributors, dealers,
retailers, and users have been given authorization to ship dinoseb
to Washington, Idaho, and Oregon.

Will monitor compliance with the amended federal SSUROs in
accordance with section 13 of the Pesticides Inspection Manual.

Will report to OCM any enforcement actions taken by the Regions and
States in response to violations of the final Dinoseb Cancellation
Order, quarterly through FY 1990.

Will conduct inspections to assure compliance with the final
Dinoseb Cancellation Order at the registrant, producer, dealer,
distributor, retailer, and user levels, in States without
Cooperative Enforcement Agreements, as part of their routine
inspectional program.

Will take enforcement action, including issuing SSUROs, as
appropriate for violations of the Cancellation Order.

States	.	:	

Washington, Idaho, and Oregon will conduct inspections and respond
to reasonable tips and complaints to assure compliance with the
final Dinoseb Cancellation Order.

Washington, Idaho, and Oregon will take enforcement action as
appropriate.

Washington, Idaho, and Oregon will report to Region X on
enforcement actions taken in response to violations of the final
Dinoseb Cancellation Order, quarterly through FY 1990.

Washington, Idaho, and Oregon will amend any SSUROs, as necessary,
issued on their authority to distributors, dealers, retailers, and
users to permit the sale, distribution, and use of dinoseb products
pursuant to the terms and conditions of the final Dinoseb
Cancellation Order.

Washington, Idaho, and Oregon will provide permission, at their
discretion^£a registrants, distributors, dealers, retailers, and
users locate^in other States to ship dinoseb to licensed dealers
in their State for further sale, distribution, and use pursuant to
the final Dinoseb Cancellation Order.

States other than Washington, Idaho, and Oregon are to amend State
SSUROs, as necessary, at the distributor, dealer, retailer, and
user level to permit the sale, distribution and shipment of
dinoseb to licensed dealers in the States of Washington, Idaho, and
Oregon.
-------
States other than Washington, Idaho, and Oregon will conduct
inspections to assure compliance with the final Dinoseb
Cancellation Order at the registrant, producer, dealer,
distributor, retailer, and user levels, as part of their routine
inspectional program.
                         i
States other than Washington, Idaho, and Oregon will take
enforcement action, including issuing SSUROs,  as appropriate and
provided they have the authority, for violations of the
Cancellation Order.
-------
                    BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATOR            ^
              U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY         \£.
                        WASHINGTON, D.C.                    * Q
                                                               \j
In the Matter of:                 )

Cedar Chemical Company et. al.     ) FIFRA Docket Nos. 590 et al.
                       CANCELLATION ORDER

     Pursuant to FIFRA section 6( b), 7 U.S.C. §136d(b), and 40

C.F.R. §§164.91 and 164.103, I hereby cancel all registrations

for pesticide products containing dinoseb (2-sec-butyl-4,6-

dinitrophenol) or any of its salts which have not already been

cancelled pursuant to the Notice of Intent to cancel which I

issued on October 7, 1986, and which was published at 51 FR

36650, October 14, 1986.  Except as provided below, it shall be

unlawful under FIFRA sections 12(a)(l)(A) and 12(a)(2)(K), 7

U.S.C. §§136j(a)(1)(A) and (a)(2)(K), for any person in any

State to distribute, sell, offer for sale, hold for sale,  ship,

deliver for shipment, or receive and (having so received)

deliver or offer to deliver to any person any pesticide product

containing dinoseb or any of its salts.

     Pursuant to FIFRA section 6(a)(l), 7 U.S.C. §136d(a)(l),

I have decided to permit distribution,  sale, and use of stocks

of cancelled dinoseb products: (1) for weed control in dry

peas, lentils, chickpeas, and green peas in the States of

Washington, Idaho, and Oregon during the 1988 use season,  and

(2) for vegetative cane control in caneberries (blackberries,
-------
                              -2-

boysenberries, loganberries, and raspberries) in the States of
Washington and Oregon during the 1988 and 1989 use seasons.
Such distribution, sale, and use will only be permitted in
accordance with the following procedures, terms, and conditions.
No cancelled dinoseb product shall be distributed, sold, or
used for any crop in any State without express written authoriza-
tion from the Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and Toxic
Substances (or his delegate).  The Assistant Administrator
shall authorize distribution, sale, and use of existing stocks
of dinoseb products for a particular crop in a particular State
only if the State Department of Agriculture expressly requests
in writing that such distribution, sale, and use be permitted,
and agrees to accept and enforce all procedures, terms, and
conditions set forth in, or adopted pursuant to, this Order.
     The following mandatory use restrictions shall be observed
by all persons using any cancelled dinoseb product pursuant to
this Order, shall constitute supplemental labeling for all
cancelled dinoseb products which may be used pursuant to this
Order, and shall take precedence over any inconsistent restrictions
or provisions on the prior labeling for such products:
     (1) Dinoseb shall not be applied at an application rate
         exceeding three pounds of active (a.i.) per acre for
         dry peas, chickpeas, and green peas/ one and one-half
         pound a.i. per acre for lentils, and two and one-half
         pounds a.i. per acre for caneberries.
     (2) Dinoseb shall not be applied by any one individual on
         any single day to more than a total of eighty (80)
         acres of dry peas, lentils, chickpeas, and green peas,
         or to more than twenty (20) acres of caneberries.
-------
                          -3-
 (3) No individual shall mix and/or load in one day more
     than the quantity of dinoseb required to treat the
     maximum permissible daily acreage for one crop at the
     maximum permissible application rate.

 (4) Only certified applicators may mix, load, or apply
     dinoseb; other persons, even if they are operating
     under the direct supervision of a certified applicator,
     shall not mix, load, or apply dinoseb.

 (5) All mixing and loadi-ng of dinoseb products must be
     done utilizing a closed system.

 (6) All persons must wear chemically resistant disposable
     coveralls and chemically resistant gloves and boots
     during mixing and loading of dinoseb,  while adjusting
     or repairing dinoseb application equipment, and during
     application of dinoseb to caneberries.

 (7) Closed tractor cabs equipped with positive pressure
     ventilization must be used for application of dinoseb
     to dry peas,  lentils, chickpeas, and green peas.
     Applicators must remove protective coveralls and gloves
     worn during mixing and loading immediately before
     entering a closed tractor cab in order to avoid cab
     contamination, and must carry an unused set of coveralls
     and gloves in the cab, for use in the  event in-field
     repair,  maintenance, or adjustment of  equipment is required,

 (8) Aerial application of dinoseb is prohibited.   Dinoseb
     may only be applied utilizing tractor  drawn equipment.

 (9) Dinoseb may only be applied to caneberries as a low-
     pressure directed spray for vegetative cane (primocane)
     control.

(10) Application of dinoseb is prohibited when wind conditions
     exceed ten miles per hour.

(11) No person shall re-enter any field treated with dinoseb
     for any purpose within one week of application unless
     that person is within a closed cab,  or is wearing
     chemically resistant disposable coveralls and chemically
     resistant gloves and boots.   Any person required to re-
     enter a field treated with dinoseb within one week of
     application shall be notified that the field was
     treated with dinoseb and advised to avoid dermal
     contact with treated foliage and soil.
-------
                              -4-

     The following mandatory restrictions shall govern any

distribution or sale of cancelled dinoseb products pursuant to

this Order:

     (1) No cancelled dinoseb product may be distributed or
         sold for use on any crop unless: (1)  the product
         was registered, packaged,  and labeled on October 7,
         1986,  or (2) the product was manufactured from stocks
         of  a registered technical  dinoseb product which were
         packaged and labeled,  and  in the possession of the
         manufacturer,  on or before October 7, 1986.

     (2) No cancelled dinoseb product may be distributed or
         sold for use on dry peas,  lentils, chickpeas, or green
         peas unless the product was previously labeled for use
         on  peas, lentils, or chickpeas.   No cancelled dinoseb
         product may be distributed or sold for use on caneberries
         (blackberries, boysenberries, loganberries, and
         raspberries) unless the product  was previously labeled
         for use on one or more of  these  crops.

     (3) Only pesticide dealers licensed  by the State in question
         may distribute or sell cancelled dinoseb products,

     (4) Each container of a cancelled dinoseb product which is
         distributed or sold must be accompanied by supplemental
         labeling including all of  the use restrictions set
         forth above, and a warning stating (1) that the product
         poses a hazard to unborn children and that all reasonable
         efforts should be made to  prevent exposure of women of
         child-bearing age, (2) that the  product also poses
         hazards to male reproduction, (3) that the product is
         acutely toxic, and (4) that the  product may only be
         applied by certified applicators.

     (5) Dealers may sell dinoseb only to growers who may
         legally use the product pursuant to this Order, and
         no  grower shall be permitted to  purchase a quantity
         greater than that required to treat the grower's
         eligible crop acreage  at the maximum permissible
         application rate.  All stocks of dinoseb already in a
         grower's possession must be taken into account when
         determining the quantity of dinoseb a grower may law-
         fully purchase.

     (6) Dealers must obtain and record the following information
         prior to selling, distributing,  or delivering any
         dinoseb product:
-------
                              -5-
          (a) The grower's name, address, and certification
              number (if any),
          (b) The type of crop and number of acres to be
              treated,
          (c) The name, address, and certification number of
              the person(s) who will mix, load, and apply the
              dinoseb,
          (d) The quantity of dinoseb already in the grower's
              possession,
          (e) The product name(s) and registration number(s) of
              the dinoseb product(s),
          (f) The quantity of the dinoseb product(s) to be
              sold, distributed, or delivered.

     All such information shall be forwarded by the dealer to
     the State Department of Agriculture and the EPA regional
     office within five days following sale, distribution, or
     delivery.

     The Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and Toxic

Substances,  in consultation with the Regional Administrator

and the Departments of Agriculture of the States of Washington,

Oregon, and Idaho, shall establish procedures for monitoring

and enforcement by the States of the restrictions on sale,

distribution, and use imposed pursuant to this Order.   The

Assistant Administrator (or his delegate) may also authorize

(1) sale, distribution, or shipment of existing stocks of

cancelled dinoseb products by registrants,  distributors, dealers,

or end-users located in other States to dealers in the States

of Washington, Oregon,  and Idaho, when sale of existing stocks

by the recipient dealer is permitted pursuant to this Order,

and (2) any shipments of any cancelled dinoseb product which

are necessary to facilitate proper storage or disposal of such

products.  This Order constitutes final Agency action in the
-------
                              -6-


above-captioned proceeding under FIFRA sections 6(b) and 16(b),

7 U.S.C. SSl36d(b) and 136n(b), and is a final cancellation

order under 40 C.F.R. S164.130.
                                      Lee M. Thomas
                                      Administrator
Dated:
                  ^
-------
            UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                        WASHINGTON. 0 Z. 20460
                            MAR   3 1989
                                                  -> -: s r. c o E s -»,-. a T 3 x • c i 'j 9 •=
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT



FROM:
           Compliance Monitoring of the June 9, 1933 Dinoseb
           Cancellation Order for the 1989 Growing Season

           Michael F. Wood, Qirector\\^JLvjtJ>\-(*J
           Compliance Division
TO:
          Phylli s E.  Flaherty •}
          Acting  Director
          Policy  and  Grants  Division

          Addressees
     The purpose of this memorandum is to clarify that the
June 9, 1983 Final Dinoseb Cancellation Order and the June 15,
1938 Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Final Cancellation
of Dinoseb are in effect, and to provide you with the procedures
for amending Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Orders  (SSUROs).

     The Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM)  issued a Compliance
Monitoring Strategy for the Final Cancellation  of Dinoseb on
June 15, 1988.  However, on June 17, 1988, the  U.S. District
Court Judge of Oregon, Judge Redden, issued an  order which
temporarily stayed the effectiveness of the June 9, 1988 Final
Dinoseb Cancellation Order.  As a result, OCM issued a memorandum
on June 21, 1988 which instructed the Regions not to implement
the June 15, 1988 Compliance Monitoring Strategy.  On October 4,
1988,  Judge Redden granted EPA's motion for a summary judgement
and reversed his previous decision.  The result of this ruling
is that the June 9, 1983 Final Dinoseb Cancellation Order was
reinstated.  The Office of Compliance Monitoring will inform
the Regions of any additional rulings that may  affect the status
of dinoseb products.   However, since the June 9, 1988 Final
Dinoseb Cancellation Order is currently in effect, Regions and
States are to assure compliance with that order in accordance
with applicable provisions of the June 15, 1988 Compliance
Monitoring Strategy for the Final Cancellation  of Dinoseb.
-------
                              -2-
     The June 9, 1988 Final Dinoseb Cancellation Order permits
the sale, distribution, and use of existing stocks of dinoseb
for vegetative control in  caneberries (blackberries, boysenberries,
loganberries, and raspberries) in the States of Washington and
Oregon during the 1939 growing season.  As stated in the June 15,
1933 strategy, the procedures for amending Stop Sale, Use, or
Removal Orders (SSUROs) to allow sale, distribution, and use
of cancelled dinoseb products in accordance with the cancellation
order are found on page 2  of  the March 14, 1938 memorandum from
John J. Neylan III regarding  FIFRA Section 13's for Dinoseb
(attached).  The procedures set out in the March 14, 1988
.Tiemorandum, that were used in the 1983 growing season, will be
used this year as well (see Attachment A).

     If you have any questions regarding this memorandum, or
the attached June 15, 1988 Compliance Monitoring Strategy for
the Final  Cancellation of  Dinoseb, please contact Dan Helfgott
in the Policy and Grants Division at FTS 382-7825.  Questions
on the procedures for amending SSUROs may be directed to
John Mason of the Compliance  Division at FTS 382-7835.


Attachments
-------
 II
 III
fcrv
 v
 VI
 VII
 VIII
 IX
 x
 CC:
         Douglas  D. Campt
         Edwin F. Tinsworth
         Anne  Lindsay
         Frederick F. Stiehl
         Mark  Greenwood
         A.E.  Conroy II
         Connie Musgrove
         Ken Shiroishi
         Jack  Neylan
         Phyllis  Flaherty
         Mike  Wood
         Jerry Stuhbs
         Maureen  Lydon
         Jan Bearden
         Bob Zisa
         Ken Kanagalingam
                     (TS-766C)
                     (TS-767C)
                     (TS-767C)
                     (LE-134A)
                     (LE-132A)
                     (EN-342)
        Jake Mackenzie
        Western Regional Compliance Director
Louis F. Gitto, Director
Air Management Division

Barbara Metzger, Director
Environmental Services Division
            Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
            Pesticides  & Toxic Substances Br

            Ernest Regna, Chief
            Pesticides  & Toxic Substances Br
Stephen R. Wassersug, Director   Larry Miller, Chief
Hazardous Waste Management Div   Toxic & Pesticides Branch

Winston A. Smith, Director       Richard DuBose, Chief
Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div   Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

William H. Sanders III, Dir      Phyllis Reed, Chief
Environmental Services Division  Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br
William B. Hathaway, Director
Air, Pesticides & Toxic Div

William  A. Spratlin, Director
Air and Toxics Division

Irvin L. Dickstein, Director
Air and Toxics Division

David P. Howekamp, Director
Air Management Division

Gary O'Neal, Director
Air and Toxics Division

Chris Kirby
Oregon Dept. of Agriculture

Art Losey
Washington Dept. of Agriculture
             Robert Murphy,  Chief
             Pesticides  & Toxic  Substances  Br

             Leo Alderman, Chief
             Pesticides  & Toxic  Substances  Br

             Alvin Yorke, Chief
             Toxic Substances Branch

             Davis Bernstein, Chief
             Pesticides  & Toxics Branch

             Kenneth Feigner, Chief
             Pesticides  & Toxic  Substances Br

             Rod Awe
             Idaho Dept. of Agriculture

             Vivan Jennings
             U.S.  Dept.  of Agriculture
Michael Walker
Jim Roeloffs
John Tice
(LE-134P)
(TS-788)
(TS-766C)
-------
           UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                       WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                            flAR  I Z 1990
                                                  PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:  EBDC Compliance Monitoring Strategy
TO:
                                                  n
                                        '
                                                  »I  i
FROM:     John J. Neylan  III, D i recto r\L\M>^^^}fy()*s**^'
          Policy and Grants Division   X       (j  vJ
          Office of Compliance MonitorlYig  (EN-J32)
          Addressees
     Attached is the Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the
Cancellation and Registration Amendments for Pesticide Products
Containing EBDCs.  We appreciate the comments submitted on the
December 18, 1989 draft of this strategy.  We have  incorporated
most of these comments into the attached strategy.  We have also
incorporated the additional EBDC actions that have been requested
by the registrants and accepted by the Agency since the draft
strategy was sent out for comment.
     The EBDC
compliance in
that affected
in violation
strategy also
with the EBDC
inspections.
also included
products, the
              strategy calls for Regions/States to conduct
             spections at EBDC producing establishments to assure
              EBDC fungicides are not being sold or distributed
             of the cancellations and amended registrations.  The
              calls for Regions/States to check for compliance
              actions  in the marketplace as part of their routine
              A summary of the strategy  is attached.  We have
              an appendix which  lists all of the affected
              actions taken, and the existing stocks deadlines.
     Please transmit the strategy and summary to the States
within your Region.  If you have any questions on the attached
EBDC strategy, please contact Dan Helfgott of my staff at FTS
475-7376.
Attachments
-------
                           ADDRESSEES
 Douglas D. Campt
 Edwin F. Tinsworth
    e Lindsay
  rederick F. Stiehl
 Mark Greenwood
 A. E. Conroy II
 Connie Musgrove
 John J.  Neylan III
 David Dull
 Mike Wood      :
 Phyllis Flaherty   •
 Jerry Stubbs
 Maureen Lydon
 Ken Kanagalingam
 Bob Zisa
 Sherry Sterling
 Jan Bearden
(TS-766C)
(TS-767C)
(TS-767C)
(LE-134A)
(LE-132A)
(EN-342)
   it
   it
   ii
   ii
   ii
   it
   it
   ii
   ii
 Jake Mackenzie
 Western Regional Compliance Director

I     Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
      Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

II    Ernest Regna, Chief
      Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

III   Larry Miller, Chief
      Toxic & Pesticides Branch

IV    Richard D. Stonebraker,  Acting Chief
      Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

V     Phyllis Reed, Chief
      Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

VI    Robert Murphy, Chief
      Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br
VII   Leo Alderman, Chief
      Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

VIII  Alvin Yorke, Chief
      Toxic Substances Branch

IX    Davis Bernstein, Chief
      Pesticides & Toxics Branch

X     Kenneth Feigner, Chief
      Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br
                         ; 8.
cc:   Michael Walker
      John Fleuchaus
      John Tice
      Artie Williams
      Phil Ross
     (LE-134P)
     (TS-788)
     (TS-769C)
     (H-7508C)
     (LE-132A)
-------
               SUMMARY OF THE  EBDC  COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY
o      Ethylene bisdithiocarbamates  (EBDCs) are a group  of pesticides used  to control fungi  on a
       wide variety of fruits, vegetables, ornamental plants, turf grasses, and industrial  sites.  The
       EBDC fungicides include  mancozeb, maneb,  metiram,  nabam, and  zineb.

MANEB.  METIRAM. AND MANCOZEB

o      The  four technical registrants of EBDCs (DuPont, Pennwalt, Rohm  & Haas,  and BASF)  have
       amended the registrations for their maneb, metiram, and mancozeb  products to delete  42 food
       crops from most  of  their  technical and  end-use labels.  Thirteen crop sites will remain.

           In separate actions, Rohm and Haas has cancelled its  maneb  registrations,  and  three other
           registrants have  amended their EBDC registrations consistent with the actions taken  by the
           four technical registrants.

o      As of January 1990, the four technical  registrants must relabel all of  their affected  technical
       and end-use maneb, metiram, and mancozeb products  not  in the possession of  the  growers to
       reflect  the  deletion of the 42 crops.

           However, due to an error in  the  Federal Register Notice,  EPA will not enforce label
           changes required on Pennwalt's  maneb and mancozeb  products  until after the effective  date
           of the  revised Federal Register  Notice.
o      Rohm and Haas  (the sole registrant  holding nabam  agricultural food uses)  has amended the
       registrations of their nabam product registrations to  delete agricultural food uses.   Remaining
       uses  on nabam labels are  for use on ornamental plants  and industrial sites.

ZINEB

o      Micro-Flo Company, the sole  registrant of zineb technical product,  has  cancelled its zineb
       registrations.   Sixteen other registrants have voluntarily cancelled their zineb products  as  well.
       Two  other registrants have deleted zineb as an active ingredient.  The effective dates for the
       zineb registration amendments and cancellations are  listed in Appendix  A of the strategy.

INSPECTIONS

o      Regions/States are to conduct inspections at the EBDC pesticide producing establishments to
       assure compliance with  the cancellations and to  assure that the affected EBDC fungicides are
       being sold  and distributed  with  the revised labeling required by the amended registrations.

o      Inspections at the EBDC registrants'  producing establishments are to be completed by June 1,
       1990.  Regions/States must report to  HQ  on registrant violations discovered.

       Regions/States are to check for compliance in the marketplace as part  of their routine
       inspection targeting to assure  compliance with the cancellations  and amended registrations.
-------
  50020
Federal Register / Vol. 64. No. 291 / Monday. December  4. 1989  / Notices
  viewing at all EPA Libraries and in the  *
 ^PA RCRA Docket (M2427). U.S.
 Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
 Rtreet SW., Washington. DC 20460 from
  9:00 a jn. to 4:00 p.nu Monday thru
  Friday, excluding Federal Holidays, by
  appointment only. Appointments can be
  made by calling (202) 475-0327. Copies
  cost 15 cents per page. In addition, this
  document is available for purchase
  through the National Technical
  Information Service (NTIS), U.S.  .  .„.
  Department of Commerce, Springfield,
  Virginia 22161. at (703) 487-4600:
  Guidance Document on the Statistical
  Analysis of Ground-Water Monitoring
  Data at RCRA Facilities. (NTIS # PB89-
  151-047).
  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
  For general information contact the
  RCRA/Superfund Hotline, Office of
  Solid Waste (WH-563C), U.S.
  Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
  Street SW., Washington. DC 20460,
  telepone (BOO) 424-0346, or (202) 382-
  3000.
    For technical information contact Jim
  Brown. (202) 382-4658.
    Dated: November 20. 1969.
  Chiiftiaa It Holmes,
  Assistant Administrator for the Office of Solid
  Waste and Emergency Response.
  [FR Doc. 89-28287 FUed 12-1-69; 8:45 am]
^•UJNO COM MW-4MI


  (FRL-tttt-4]

  Cantor for Environmental Learning
  Advisory Board; Me*tkng

  AGENCY: EPA Region OL
  ACTION: Center for Environmental
  Learning Advisory Board; Meeting.

  SUMMARY: The Director of the Center for
  Environmental Learning announces a
  meeting of the Center for Environmental
  Learning Advisory Board. December 12,
  1989, in Washington. DC
    The following agenda items will be
  discussed:
  Review 1989-90 work plan
  Discuss national environmental
    education developments
  Review special emphasis projects
  Meet new Center for Environmental
    Learning staff member.
  DATE The meeting will begin at 10 a.m..
  December 12, 1989, and conclude at
  noon of the same day.
  ADORES*: The meeting will be in the
  Capitol Room. Omni Shoreham Hotel.
  2500 Calvert Street NW.. Washington.
  DC.
                    EPA Region QL 841 Chestnut Building,
                    Philadelphia. Pennsylvania 19107 (phone
                    [215] 597-9076).
                    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
                    Center for Environmental Learning will
                    review and modify its 1989-90 agenda
                    based on discussion among Board
                    Members and availability of staff and
                    budget
                    DaBMRyaa.
                    Acting Director. Congressional and
                    Intergovernmental Affairs.
                    [FR Doc. 89-28288 Filed 12-1-89: 8:45 am]
      FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
        Smith. Director, Center for
  Environmental Learning (C3IOO), U.S.
                    [OPP-30000/S3A; FRL 3683-«]

                    EthyterM Btodlthtocarbamates: Receipt
                    of Requests To Amend and Cancel
                    Registrations
                    AOENCY: Environmental Protection
                    Agency (EPA).
                    ACTION; Notice of receipt	

                    SUMMARY: This Notice, pursuant to
                    section 6(f)(l) of the Federal Insecticide.
                    Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FTPRA).
                    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq,. announces EPA's
                    receipt of requests from registrants of
                    certain technical and end-use EBDC
                    pesticide products to amend their
                    registrations to delete certain uses on
                    food crops. Additionally, from certain
                    other registrants, EPA has received
                    requests that certain EBDC products be
                    voluntarily cancelled. EBDC products
                    affected by these requests contain the
                    following active ingredients: maneb,
                    mancozeb, metiram, nabam. and zineb.
                    Certain of the requests include requests
                    for provisions for the disposition of
                    existing stocks of the affected products.
                    Such provisions are described in the
                    Notice. Additionally, this Notice
                    announces that EPA intends to approve
                    and give effect to these requests, thus as
                    to the respective products, either
                    cancelling such products or amending
                    their registrations to delete certain food
                    crop uses.
                      EPA's approval will be effective
                    December 14.1969. As of that date, all
                    future distribution or sale, or use of
                    affected EBDC products shall be in
                    accordance with the terms and
                    conditions described herein.
                    DATE: The cancellation or modification
                    of registration shall be effective
                    December 14,1989.
                    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                    Susan T. Lewis, Product Manager (PM)
                      21. Registration Division (H7505C).
                      Office of Pesticide Programs,
                      Environmental Protection Agency. 401
                      M St SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
                    Office location and telephone number.
                      Room 227, CM #2.1921 Jefferson
  Davis Highway, Arlington. VA. 703-
  557-1900.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

L Introduction
A. Maneb, Metiram, and Mancozeb
  As specifically discussed below, on
September 6,1989, the four major
registrants of maneb, mancozeb, and
metiram technical and end-use pesticide
products submitted requests to EPA
asking that 42 food crop uses of maneb,
mancozeb and metiram be deleted from
their product registrations. The
registrants involved in these actions are
Pennwalt Corporation (mancozeb and
maneb). BASF Corporation (metiram).
and Rohm and Haas Company.
Pennwalt Corporation, and E.I. duPont
de Nemours & Company (mancozeb).
  In total, these registrants requested
that their affected products be registered
for no more than a total of 13 food uses.
The crops which the registrants by their
actions asked be deleted are Hated
below under each individual chemical.
  Along with their requests, the
registrants submitted amendments to
labeling reflecting the deletion of uses.
Additionally, the registrants submitted
requests for labeling changes for
technical products which would restrict
the use of technical or manufacturing
use products to formulation of end-use
products for use only on one or more of
the 13 remaining crops for which the
particular parent EBDC continued to be
registered.
  Included in Unit n A. is a summary of
the text of the individual requests as
relates to matters required to be
included in this Notice pursuant to
section e(f)(l)- Copies of each of the
letters have been included in the public
docket (OPP-30000/53) which is
maintained for EBDC Special  Review.

B. Nabam
  In March, 1989, Rohm and Haas (the
sole nabam registrant holding nabam
agricultural uses) requested that all of
their nabam food uses be voluntarily
cancelled. A summary of the request
appears in Unit  O.A.; a copy of Rohm
and Haas' letter is available through the
EBDC Special Review Docket.

C. Zineb
  In July,  1989, Microflo Company, the
sole registrant of zineb technical product
and the sole registrant supporting  any
uses of zineb. submitted a request to
EPA that each of Mkroflo's zineb
product registrations be voluntarily
cancelled. A summary of Microflo's
request appears below; a copy of the
request has been placed in the docket
-------
i
Fedml
/ Vol. 54.  No. 231 / Monday. Decactw  4. Iflfli  /  Notice*
50021
   for the EBDC Special Review. A* of this
   date, sixteen other zinab registrant*
«-squealed voluntary eaaceQatioa
         additional 62 zuttb product*.
         requests have alto bean eatend
   into the Special Review dockat
     As discussed in Unit DA* EPA
   expects to approve each of thaw
   requests to amend certain registrations
   to delete uses or to voluntarily cancel
   affected registrations and give effect to
   such actions on December 14. 1889.
   Additionally, EPA has considered the   -.
   requests for existing stocks provisions
   following the effective date of these
   actions and its determinations are
   described betow.
     EPA is contouring its Special Review
   of the EBDC pesticide* and will shortly
   issue a proposed decision affecting
   EBDC registered products and uses.
   n. Summary of Requests

   A. Maaeb
     On September 8,1989, Pennwalt
   Corporation submitted requests to EPA
   that the following crops be deleted from
   its maneb product registrations and
   labels: Peppers, tomatoes, onions, beans,
   broccoli, cabbage, cantaloupes,
   watermelon, other melons, cucumbers,
   squash, apples, spinach, stone fruits,
   carrots, celery, turnips, cauliflower,
      sels sprouts, coHarda, mustard
      ns, kale, rhubarb, lettuce, and
      ese cabbage. As a result of
     nnwalt's requests, the following food
   uses would remain on its maneb labels:
   almonds, bananas, potatoes, sugar
   beets, and sweet com.
     Pennwalt submitted applications for
   pesticide registration for each of its
   affected products and revised labeling.
   Revised labeling submitted for end-use
   products reflected the use deletions;
   revised labeling submitted for technical
   products included language that limited
   the use of the technical product into
   end-use product formulations for use
   only on one or more of the retained uses.
     Along with its requests to delete uses,
   Pennwalt  indicated that the new
   labeling would be used on ail new
   products. Additionally, Pennwalt stated
   its intent not to relabel product currently
   released for shipment or in channels-of-
   trade until January 1,1990. Pennwalt
   indicated  that at that time, all remaining
   product would be relabled prohibiting
   the dropped uses. Pennwalt provided a
   confidential attachment which listed the
   amount of product in its control as of the
   date of the letter and an estimate of the
   amounts that might be used by January.
   Pennwalt  asked that the EPA consider
     e status of growers near the end of the
     iwing season in issuing a Final order
     the use deletion and label change.
                    Peaawait additionally described a
                    number of actions it intended to seek or
                    undertake, pertaining to tolerance
                    reduction* and/or revocations,

                    intepatedpest maaagemifirt
                    B. Metiram
                      BASF submitted similar requests to
                    Pennwalt's on September ft, 1989. In its
                    requests, BASF asked that use on apples
                    be deleted from its means registrations
                    and labeling. As a result of BASF's
                    action, the only food use of its metiram
                    products would be on potatoes.
                      BASF, like Pennwalt a* noted above,
                    submitted applications and revised
                    labeling. It included similar language
                    restricting the aw of its technics!
                    products. BASF indicated that as of
                    January 1.1990, "* * * aQ remaining
                    product not in the hands of growers will
                    be relabeled	
                      In other respects, the letters and other
                    submitted materials were similar to the
                    Pennwalt requests outlined above.
                    C. Mancozeb
                      On September 6,1989, both duPant
                    and Rohm and Haas submitted letters to
                    EPA requesting mat certain net be
                    deleted from their product mancozeb
                    registrations and labels. On September
                    8, Pennwalt submitted similar requests
                    for its mancozeb products. DoPont
                    requested that the following food crop
                    uses by deleted: Apples, crabapple,
                    quince, pears, papayas, pineapple,
                    carrots, celery, fennel cucumbers.
                    melons, squash (summer and winter),
                    tobacco (plant bed and field), cotton
                    (foliar), field corn, oats, barley, and rye.
                    Rohm and Haas requested that the
                    following crops be deleted: Apples,
                    barley, cantaloupes, carrots, celery, corn
                    (field, hybrid seedcom). crabapple.
                    cucumbers, fennel, melons, mnskmekms,
                    oats, papaya, pears, pineapples, quince,
                    rye, squash, and watermelons. Pennwalt
                    requested that the following food crops
                    be deleted: encumbers, melons, summer
                    squash, field com. celery, carrots.
                    apples, pears, crabapple. and quince. As
                    a result of these requests, the three
                    registrants' mancozeb products remain
                    registered for the following uses:
                    asparagus, bananas, cranberries, figs.
                    grapes, onions, peanuts, potatoes, sugar
                    beets, sweet corn, tomatoes, and wheat
                      Dupont stated that, as of January 1.
                    1990,"* * * all remaining saleable
                    product will be relabeled	Rohn
                    and Haas stated that as of that  date,
                    	all remaining product not in
                    grower's hands will be
                    relabeled	
                      In other respects, the letters were
                    similar to the Pennwalt requests which
                    are more fully described above.
                                         D.Nabam
                                           On March 13,1989. Rohm and Haas
                                         submitted to the EPA a request that the
                                         mod uses of its two registrations for
                                         end-use Nabam products be cancelled.
                                         Slice these products have non-food uses
                                         as well the EPA has interpreted Rohm
                                         and Haas's letter as a request that these
                                         registrations be amended to delete all
                                         mod uses. Rohm and Haas indicated
                                         that it had not sold any of the product
                                         for several yean. It indicated that the
                                         food uses should be immediately
                                         cancelled and did not request any
                                         existing stocks provision.

                                         E. Zineb
                                           On July 17,1989, Micro-Flo Company
                                         submitted a request to the EPA that its
                                         five zineb product registrations be
                                         voluntarily cancelled. It choose this
                                         option rather than any which would
                                         have indicated an intent to reregister the
                                         pesticide products. Micro-Flo did not
                                         request an existing stocks provision for
                                         any of these products. As of this date. 16
                                         other zineb registrants have requested
                                         voluntary cancellation for an additional
                                         52 zineb products. Two of these zineb
                                         registrants requested existing stocks
                                         provisions.
                                         IIL Existing StoA* Determination
                                           The EPA has reviewed the existing
                                         stocks and relabeling elements of the
                                         four technical registrants' actions and
                                         has concluded that registrants of
                                         affected maneb, metiram, and mancozeb
                                         products may proceed according  to the
                                         plan they described in their requests for
                                         use deletion. The EPA has considered
                                         the amounts of stock represented to be
                                         in existence and under the control of
                                         these registrants and has determined
                                         that distribution and sale oi these stocks
                                         until January 1,1990, and their use
                                         would not be inconsistent with FIFRA,
                                         After that date, all product remaining
                                         which is not in growers' hands must be
                                         relabeled to reflect the use deletions.
                                           Two zineb registrants, Universal
                                         Cooperatives and Dexol Industries,
                                         requested an existing stocks period.
                                         Because all uses of zineb were
                                         suspended in July, 1988, and remain
                                         suspended, no existing stocks provision
                                         is being granted.
                                            Rohm and Haas did not request an
                                         existing stocks provision for their
                                         nabam product registrations.

                                         IV. Conclusion
                                            EPA has received and expects  to
                                         approve each of the requests described
                                         above effective December 14,1989.
                                         incorporating the requested actions and
                                         the decisions governing existing stocks
                                         provisions as described above.

               •I
-------
50022
Federal Regbter / VoL 64.  No. 231  /  Monday. December 4. 1989 /  Notices
V.— LIST OF AFFECTED REGISTRATIONS -
Active tagredwm | Regtomnt
•MMWWM^t
rntncozeb «.««.«

mencozeb 	
menoozeb..— .— ...
meneb -.... •
meneb 	 -.__._
nebern.- 	 „.-...
nebem 	 	
CinetHtd
nGffisfnitonSi'
zirwb 	 _,
zirwb 	 	
zineb 	
zirwb 	 «...
zirwb 	
zirwb 	 	
zirwb 	
zirwb 	
ztn0o 	 	
zirwb 	 	
zirwb
zineb 	

zirwb 	
zirwb 	 _ 	
zineb 	 _
zineb 	 „ 	
zineb 	
zineb 	
zineb 	 	
zineb 	 	
zirwb 	
zineb 	 .._.
nnefj
zirwb 	
zirwb 	
znwb 	
zineb 	
zineb

zmeb
zineb 	 _ 	
zineb 	 ....
zineb 	


zineb 	
zvwb 	
zirwb-. 	 _ 	
zmeb 	
zirwb 	
zmeb 	 	
zirwb 	
zirwb 	
zirwb 	
zirwb 	
zirwb 	
zineb 	
zineb 	
zirwb 	
zvwb 	
zineb 	 _
du Pont 	
do 	 	 	
.-...dO ..... nil
(ft) 	
Rohm 4 Hus —
do *-
do
.—..do ._.-_» 	
	 do 	
PermweJt.....— . 	
do_ _
	 do 	
BASF Corp. 	
do
Rohm A HIM —
do 	 	 _ .
Rohm ft Haas —
	 do 	 	
	 do 	 	
	 do 	 	
	 do. 	 	
. 	 do 	
	 do 	 	
	 do 	 - 	
	 do 	
	 do 	 _ 	
	 do 	 	
	 do 	
	 do 	
MicroPro 	
do
	 do 	 	
	 do 	
._...do 	
Aowey 	 _.
Crwm-Nut 	
	 00 	
Oexol Ind 	 _...
	 do 	 — ..
FMC Corp 	
do
	 do 	 	
	 do 	 	
do
	 do 	
	 do 	 «..-..»
do
.. do 	 ..
do 	
	 do.... 	 .......
	 do 	 _.
	 do... 	
	 do 	 	
lm«k^«Ml
imoenej — ..-,—
PBI Gordon 	
Unrverul Coop.-.
	 do 	 	
Wittx* Etta 	
	 do ....—_
HRMcUrw 	
	 do 	 	
	 do 	 _.
	 do 	 	
	 do 	
do
Holden Corp 	
	 do 	 _ 	
Morgro Crwm. 	
CofcjMCnty.
AO.
do 	 	 .
Product-No.
352-341
362-343
352-396
352-449
707-078
707-093
707-102
707-156
707-102
707-179
707-180
45S1-225
4581-355
4581-359
7969-70
7969-71
707-003
707-070
CT4B0003
FL780066
KY800015
MD600009
MN830011
MO820011
OR840030
PA790005
PA800015
SC800008
VA800016
707-002
707-072
51036-23
51036-25
51036-62
51036-63
51036-148
8590-49
37686-41
37686-57
192-121
192-146
AZ81001900
GA80001100
KY80001100
M060001600
OR76002800
OR77008300
PA80001700
KY80001100
M060001600
OR76002800
OH77006300
PA80001700
SC80001100
VA80001300
746-34
33955-456
1386-75
1386-316
OR81003700
WA62006000
47056-43
47056-7*
47056-87
47056-89
47056-90
47056-92
1772-55
1772-74
42057-73
CA79011101
CA79011102
V.— LIST OF AFFECTED REGISTRATIONS—
Continued
Active Ingredwnt Reojelrant Product No.
zineb 	 nt»er*de Onty. CA83002900
A»
zirwb 	 The Lend. Epcot . FL820O8900
zirwb Pern Stete PA70000100
Univ.
Dated November 28, 1989.
UndaJ.FUlMr.
Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and
Toxic Substances.
[FR Doc. 89-28289 Hied 12-1-89; 8:45 am]
HLUNQ COM MSO-ft-U
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
[Q«n Docket No. 69-97; DA 89-1433)
Southern California Public Safety Plan
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The FCC is accepting the
Southern California Area's (Region 5's)
plan for public safety. By accepting this
plan, the FCC enables the licensing of
the 821-824/866-869 MHz spectrum for
public safety to begin. The Southern
California Region is the third of the 55
regions in the National Plan to be
accepted.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 21, 1989.
KM FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maureen Cesaitis, Private Radio Bureau,
Policy and Planning Branch,
Washington, DC 20554, (202) 632-8497.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 18 a
summary of the Commission's Order,
adopted November 8, 1989, released
November 21, 1989, accepting the
Southern California Area's Plan for
Public Safety. The full text of this
Commission action is available for
inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Dockets
Branch (Room 230), 1919 M Street NW.,
Washington, DC. The complete text of
the Order may also be purchased from
the Commission's copy contractor,
International Transcription Service,
(202) 857-3800. 2100 M Street NW.. Suite
140, Washington, DC 20037.
Summary of Order
The Chief, Private Radio Bureau and
the Chief Engineer have accepted the
regional public safety plan for the
Southern California Region. Region 5.
                                                                              The Region 5 plan is the third of its kind
                                                                              to be accepted and it represent* the
                                                                              culmination of the efforts of the many
                                                                              public safety organizations that
                                                                              participated In iU development
                                                                                In accepting this plan, the
                                                                              Commission's staff noted that the
                                                                              Southern California Region represented
                                                                              a challenge because of its large growing
                                                                              population and unique terrain. It said it
                                                                              was pleased to see restrictions on
                                                                              antenna heights and transmitter outputs
                                                                              and encouragement of use of special
                                                                              antenna patterns to limit each system's
                                                                              coverage so as to reuse these channels.
                                                                              It said it was especially pleased to see
                                                                              how Region S has combined small users
                                                                              into larger, trunked more efficient
                                                                              systems. The staff said it believed the
                                                                              Region 5 Plan represented a careful
                                                                              balance of the public safety and special
                                                                              emergency mobile communication needs
                                                                              throughout the area and will result in
                                                                              efficient use of the newly allocated
                                                                              spectrum.
                                                                                In 1987, the Commission established
                                                                              policies and rules for a National Plan for
                                                                              public safety services to ensure that the
                                                                              new six megahertz of public safer)'
                                                                              spectrum (821-824/866-869 MHz) be
                                                                              used effectively and efficiently for
                                                                              important public safety functions. The
                                                                              Commission established 55 regions and
                                                                              instructed each region tb develop a plan
                                                                              for use of the newly allocated spectrum
                                                                              to meet current and future mobile
                                                                              communications requirements of the
                                                                              public safety and special emergency
                                                                              entities operating in the area. After each
                                                                              pian is completed and approved by its
                                                                              regional planning committee, it must be
                                                                              submitted to the Chief. Private Radio
                                                                              Bureau, and the Chief Engineer. After
                                                                              the two BureaujChiefs have formally
                                                                              accepted a plan, the individual public
                                                                              safety entities can begin applying for
                                                                              licensing in the new 800 MHz spectrum.
                                                                                Upon release of the fuit text of the
                                                                              Order, the individual public safety
                                                                              entities in Region 5 may begin applying
                                                                              for licensing in the 821-824/866-869
                                                                              MHz bands.
                                                                                Action by the Chief. Private Radio
                                                                              Bureau and the Chief Engineer,
                                                                              November 8,1989,  by Order (DA 89-
                                                                              1433).

                                                                              Ordering Clauses
                                                                                // is ordered. That the Southern
                                                                              California Area Plan for Public Safety is
                                                                              accepted, subject to amendments
                                                                              contained in the Order. It is further
                                                                                                                         i
-------
                     redRr.il
                                                /  Vol.
                                              / ,\-.itit;»'S
-4:
iho risk of soisiuii. .'ictiviiy. am.1 ti:Ji
cffci:! ih.i! (his ni.iy Iwvv on l!iu
demonstration. Kurthur rcvirw skr.v. s
ih.ii M.-i.smic iii;iivily is mini:i>;ii ni-.ir !!: i  !'.\ '.  ••' . M'i:!.ui> >) nf ;>.• 'fox,'.
S-.i!iM..:-•-• Cu;-.!: >! As! JTSCA). Km--.-
,if i!"1 ij'.f..1 ni.ilio:1 iuvolvi'ii n::i\' liu
c!.ii:ii' i/' o: d.:!".-rvi!i!-.! !•) hi i:onfii!fnti.il
liijj-.iri'.'ss info.-.v.:iticn (CJJl).
DATES: Access In the C'!!-.f:>!''-r.!i,il ,!.;'.a
s'.;l)Hii;!r.i !-.• Kl'A will d rur no sooner
ItKin M;:rch Vj. :!IUO.
FCH FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mil haul M. Stahl. Director. TSCA
Kr.vironmniUal Assistance Division (TS-
739). Office of Toxic Substances,
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm.
EXW5. 401 M St.. SW., Washington, DC
204CO. (2!)2) 554-1404. TDD: (202) 554-
0351.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under
contract number G8-DO-0111, contractor
CAD. of 135 Beaver Street, Waltham,
MA. and its subcontractor BAH, of 4300
East West Highway, Bethesda, MD, will
provide support for the Office of Toxic
Substances (OTS) in identification of
regulatory and non-regulatory
alternatives, regulatory support, and
negotiation support. The support may be
in the form of conducting meetings,
conferences, workgroups, TSCA
implementation activities, and
identification of emerging issues that
could affect OTS programs. Also, CAD
and its subcontractor may provide
system development support and assist
in the review, development of policies;
strategies, and plans for EPA toxic
substance responsibilities. In addition,
CAD and its subcontractor will conduct
a census of the toxicological testing in
order to access the capacity for EPA
under section 4 of TSCA.
  In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j),
EPA has determined that under contract
number 68-D8-0111. CAD and its
subcontractor will require access to CB1
submitted to EPA under section 4 of
TSCA to perform successfully the duties
specified under the contract. Some of
the information involved may be
claimed or determined to be CBI.
  EPA is issuing this notice to inform all
submitters of information under section
4 of TSCA that EPA may provide CAD
and its subcontractor access to these
CBI materials on a need-to-know basis.
All access to TSCA CBI under this
contract will take place at EPA
Headquarters and BAH's facility located
at 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda,
MD. CAD and its subcontractor BAH
have been authorized access to TSCA
CBI at BAH's facility under the EPA
"Contractor Requirements for the
Control and Security of TSCA
Confidential Business Information"
security manual. EPA has approved
BAH's security plan and has found the
                                                                                         f ]••!!,!y to I".' in i (">'j>li,ini-"' iv  < ''v
                                                                                         ni.'WI.ll.
                                                                                           Cli'.-ir.iii- i. : ir .ILI I.-.-H lo  ii»'...\ \  '.'•>
                                                                                         i:ni!i:r tins i uit'.i'aci .s t-; lv.\ii;V.] i

                                                                                           CA.D anil p;;bru.",:r;ir.tor per--;:::', -i •.-.t'.l
                                                                                         In: T'l'i'iiri-..! to sign nondiixlos1.::-:
                                                                                         Hjjrecini.-n:s anu will be nricfiJii IT.
                                                                                         appropriuti? security procedures bi-:"j,-%
                                                                                         they are permitted access  to TSCA QJi.
                                                                                           DiilHii: Fi.-urjjry UO. 19UO.
                                                                                         Linda A. Trovers,

                                                                                         Office of Tn\it. SuL'stames.
                                                                                         |I'R Doc. «O-5iWC; Tiled 3-5-90; C:-:5 ,.n-|
                                                                                         B1LUNO CODE «i«0-SO-O
[OPP-30000/S30; FRL 3712-8]

Ethylene Blsdithlocarbamates;
Amendments snd Cancellations of
Registrations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Amended notice and notice of
receipt.

SUMMARY: In the Federal Register of
December 4.1989 (54 FR 50020). EPA
issued a notice under section 6(f)(l) of
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (F1FRA). 7 U.S.C. 13S et
seq., which announced EPA's receipt of
requests from registrants of certain
technical and end-use ethylcne
biedithiocarbamate (EBDC) pesticide
products to amend their registrations to
delete certain uses on food crops or to
voluntarily cancel certain product
registrations.
  This notice amends the December 4
notice to include several additional
crops in the list of those deleted from
Pennwalt Corporation's affected maneb
registrations  and  labels, to amend the
list of affected product registrations by
correcting a Pennwalt maneb
registration number, to include effected
Pennwalt mancozeb registration
numbers which were omitted in the
earlier notice, to delete an E.I. duPont de
Nemours & Co. mancozeb  product which
was included by error, and to delete a
Morgro zineb product from the list of
cancelled registrations and to add it to
the list of registrations with deleted
uses. All other portions of the December
4 notice pertaining to these products and
uses as well as all other products and
uses affected by that notice remain the
same. The December 4 notice is not
amended or otherwise changed in any
way for those products not affected by
these changes.
  In addition, this notice announces
EPA's receipt of some additional
-------
  .•JO
Register / Vol. 55. No.  44 / Tuesday. March  6. 1090 / Notices
requests from registrants of end-use
fLBDC pesticide products to amend their
registrations to delete uses and/or
active ingredients or to voluntarily
cancel their registrations. The affected
registrations include the following:
requests for deleted food crop uses for a
Griffin Corp. maneb product and for a
Ciba-Geigy mancozeb product, requests
for voluntary cancellation of six Rohm
and Haas Co. maneb producls and one
Agsco zineb product, and requests to ._.
delete the EBDC active ingredient and
corresponding fungicidal uses for a
Riverdale Chemical Co. maneb product
and to delete the EBDC active ingredient
from a Chas. H. Lilly zineb product.
  The several EBDC products affected
by the requests referenced in this notice
contain the following active ingredients:
maneb.  mancozeb. and zineb.
Pennwalt's requests include requests for
provisions for the disposition of existing
stocks of Pennwalt's affected maneb
and mancozeb product registrations.
Such provisions are described in this
notice. This notice announces that EPA
intends to approve and give effect to
these requests by, as to the particular
affected product, cancelling the affected
registrations or amending those affected
maneb.  mancozeb, and zineb product
registrations to delete the specified  food
crop uses or associated uses claims.

  With  the  exception of the registrations
of Riverdale Chemical Co. and Chas. H.
Lilly Co., EPA expects to approve these
requests effective March 16.1990. As of
that date, all future distribution, sale, or
use of affected EBDC products shall be
in accordance with the terms and
conditions described herein. With
respect  to the Riverdale and Chas. H.
Lilly registrations, EPA expects to
approve these requests thereafter
following completion of review of the
companies' submissions.

DATES: The cancellations or
modifications of registrations shall be
effective March 16,1990. In the case of
the Riverdale and Chas. H. Lilly
requests, EPA expects to approve these
requests thereafter following completion
of review of the companies'
submissions.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan T. Lewis, Product Manager (PM)
21. Registration Division (H7505C).
Office of Pesticide Programs.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
St. SW., Washington. DC 20460. Office
location and telephone number: Rm. 227.
CM #2,  1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,
Arlington. VA. 703-557-1900.
          SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
          I. Introduction

            On September 6 and 0,1989. the four
          major registrants of maneb, mancozeb,
          and mctiram technical and end-use
          pesticide products submitted requests to
          EPA asking that 42 food crop uses of
          maneb, mancozeb, and mctiram be
          deleted from their product registrations.
          The registrants involved in these actions
          are Pennwalt Corp. (maneb), BASF
          Corp. (metiram), and Rohm and Haas
          Co., Pennwalt Corp. and E.I. duPont de
          Nemours & Co. (mancozeb).
            In total, these registrants requested
          that their affected products be registered
          for no more than a total of 13 food uses.
            Along with their requests, the
          registrants submitted labeling
          amendments reflecting the deleted uses.
          The registrants also submitted requests
          for labeling changes for technical
          products restricting the use of the
          technical or manufacturing use products
          to formulation of end-use  products for
          use only on one or more of the 13
          remaining crops for which the particular
          parent EBDC continued to be registered.
            In March 1989. Rohm and Haas Co.,
          the sole registrant holding registrations
          for nabam agricultural uses, requested
          that all of its nabam food  uses be
          voluntarily cancelled.
            In July 1989, Microflo Co., the sole
          registrant of zineb technical product and
          the sole registrant supporting any uses
          of zineb, submitted a request to EPA
          that each of Microflo's zineb product
          registrations be voluntarily cancelled.
          As of December 4,1989,15 other zineb
          registrants had requested  voluntary
          cancellation of an additional 51 zineb
          products. The change in these numbers
          from the December 4 notice (which
          listed the numbers as 16 and 52.
          respectively) is due to the correction of
          Morgro's zineb product registration
          status from a cancelled registration to a
          product with deleted uses.
            These requests were described in the
          Federal Register notice of December 4.
          1989 (54 FR 50020). Copies of each of the
          letters have been included in the public
          docket (OPP-30000/53) which is
          maintained for the EBDC Special
          Review.
            Several errors were made in the
          December 4 notice, and those errors are
          described and corrected below. Since
          the December 4 notice was published.
          some additional requests have been
          processed which are appropriate to be
          announced pursuant to section 6(f)(1) of
          FIFRA. This notice includes those
          requests as well. In all other respects.
          the December 4 notice remains in effect
          for the products not aff-Mrrf by this
          umcmled notice. Furthermore, tho trims
and conditions of the December 4 i
are incorporated herein by rofcren

H. Summary of Corrections arc1
Additional Requests
A-.
  On September 8, 1989, Pennwalt Corp.
submitted requests to EPA that the
following crops be deleted from its
maneb product registrations and labels:
Peppers, tomatoes, onions, beans,
broccoli, cabbage, cantaloupes.
watermelon, other melons, cucumbers,
squash, apples, spinach, stone fruits,
carrots, celery, turnips, cauliflower,
Brussels sprouts, collards, mustard
greens, kale, rhubarb, lettuce, Chinese
cabbage, eggplant, endive, grapes, and
pumpkins. The latter four crops were
inadvertently omitted from the list of
deleted crops in the earlier notice. The
notice correctly stated that, as a result
of Pennwalt's requests, the following
food uses would remain on its maneb
labels: almonds, bananas, potatoes,
sugar beets, and sweet corn. Pennwalt's
affected maneb products are EPA Reg.
Nos. 4581-255, 4581-355, and 4581-359.
  The December 4 notice erroneously
listed Pennwalfs EPA Reg. No. 4581-225
as one of the affected maneb products.
EPA Reg. No. 4581-225 was cancelled.
effective July 1. 1987. The correct
product number for the product involved^
in Pennwalt's request is EPA Reg. No.
4581-255.
  On January 8, 1990, Rohm and Haas
submitted a request to voluntarily
cancel its maneb products. Affected by
that request are the following six maneb
products: EPA Reg. Nos. 707-48, 707-B3.
707-101. 707-103. 707-124. and 707-170.
This notice includes these maneb
products in the list of cancelled
registrations.
  On January 8. 1990. Riverdale
Chemical Co. submitted a request to
amend its product registration, EPA Reg.
No. 228-188. by deleting maneb as an
active ingredient and by removing
claims for the product's use as a '
fungicide. That product has been
registered for use as a miticide.
insecticide, and fungicide. EPA
construes Riverdale Chemical Co.'s
request to remove maneb from its
formulation and any associated claims
as an amendment to delete the product's
fungicidal uses and fungicidal claims
while maintaining its registration as a
miticicle/insecticide. This notice
announces EPA's receipt of Riverdale
Chemical Co.'s request to amend its
product registration and includes that
end-use product in its list of affected
product registrations. Approval of
      iilp Chpmical Co.'s request to
-------
Fodor.i!
 Vol.  ~M. N\>.
                                                         ••  /
                                                                         M.in.h  (>.  1WO / Notices
  .inii-nd its product ri'yislr.'i'imt is
  rxpiH.lfd h) occur following (.orjipii'iii'ii
  of MPA's review of its submission.
   On January 24. 1:WO: Griffin Cur,, (.in
  iriiii-fse muneb product formula'or)
  acknowledged !h;;t its nian.i-b r>ruii::i!.
  F!PA R»;C. No. 1812-:.'!. would I;,/
  iiffccled  by the deletion of food uses
  requested by the maneb technical
  registrants. Griffin Corp. requesied an
  amendment to its ro-jislMtion deleting
  ihc following food asrs: apples. grapes.
  beans, broccoli. cabbagfl._C;>rrfa loupes.
  uatermulon, other mcior.s. C'.iC'jmbers.
  eggplant, endive, lettuce, peppers.
  pumpkins,  spinach, squash,  and
  tomatoes. As a rcsui!. the above-
  referenced Griffin Corp. product will
  remain registered for the following food
  uses: Almonds, potatoes, sugar beets,
  and sweet  corn. This notice includes this
  Griffin Corp. maneb end-use product in
  its list of affected product registrations
  with deleted uses.
  B. Mancozeb
   The earlier notice indicated that on
  September 8,1989, Pennwalt submitted a
  loiter to EPA requesting that certain
  uses be deleted from its mancozeb
  product registrations and labels.
  Pennwalt requested that the following
  food crops be deleted: cucumbers.
  melons, summer squash, field corn.
  celery, carrots, apples, pears, crabappie.
  and quince. As a result of that request.
  Pennwalt's mancozeb products remain
  registered for the following uses: sugar
  beets, peanuts, wheat, potatoes.
  tomatoes, corn (sweet and popcorn),
  onions, asparagus, cranberries, and
  grapes. The earlier notice omitted the
  affected Pennwalt products  from the list
  of affected registrations with deleted
  uses appearing at the end of the notice.
  Products included in this amended
  Notice which should have appeared in
  the December 4 notice are EPA Reg.
  Nos. 4581-358 and 4581-370.
   The December 4 notice included E.I.
  duPont de Nemours & Co.'s EPA Reg.
  No. 352-343 among the list of affected
  mancozeb products. EPA Reg. No. 352-
 343 is currently registered for turf use
-only and was therefore erroneously
 included among affected products with
 food uses.That product remains
: unaffected  by any of the requests
 announced in either this notice or the
- notice published on December 4,1989.
   Oh November 28,1989, Ciba-Geigy (an
 end-use mancozeb product formulator)
 acknowledged that its mancozeb
 product EPA Reg. No. 100-629, would be
 affected by the deletion of food uses
 •requested by the mancozeb  technical
rt"..'is:r;int.i. ('.:'.:,i <.:i-i^y ri-ipc'.iri) an
iir»i"iilrnc;il ID its ri'j.'istr.i'ii'n t!''!r;;n^
I hi: following fi.»'.d li$i;l.riil'ons wi'h deli-tod uvs.

C. L'/;?,.'Z>

  On October 12. 1:J;i9. A.;i'i.o submitted
a rcLjunst to voluntarily cartel a zineb
cnd-uso product. EPA Ri'£. No. 554-72.
This nolice includes this ;;diiitional
zir.eb product in the list of cancelled
registrations.
  On August (5.1939. Morgro submitted
a request to amend its product
registration, EPA Reg. No. 42037-73. by
deleting zineb as an active ingredient
and by removing claims for the
product's use as a fungicide. Thai
product has been registered for use as a
miticide. insecticide, and fungicide. The
earlier notice erroneously included
Morgro's zineb product registration in its
list of cancelled registrations. EPA
construes Morgro's request to remove
zineb from its formulation and any
associated claims as an amendment to
delete the product's fungicidal uses and
fungicidal claims while maintaining its
registration as a miticide/insecticide.
This amended notice removes Morgro's
zineb product from the list of cancelled
registrations and includes it on the list
of products with deleted uses.
  On May 17,1989, the Chas. H. Lilly
Co. submitted a request to amend its
product registration, EPA Reg. No. 802-
474, by deleting zineb as an active
ingredient. The product was a multiple-
active-ingredient product and, therfore,
the registration did not require deletion
of its  food crop uses and remains
registered for the following food uses:
carrots, corn, cucumbers, melons,
summer squash, potatoes, and tomatoes.
Although section 6(f) does not require
EPA to publish notice of this request
because it is neither a request to cancel
nor a request to amend to remove uses,
EPA has elected to include an
announcement of this particular request
in this notice. Therefore, this notice
includes this Chas. H. Lilly end-use
product in its list of affected product
registrations. Approval of Chas. H.
Lilly's request to amend its product
registration is expected to occur
following completion of EPA's review of
its submission.
                                                            111. E.xiMiny St-K.Ns Uolerm  •.•i:r..i

                                                              For ll'i.1 pi: i p i )•;,.- s nf lh;s !:.•::> ;•.
                                                            t:.\;s !'>.." s!ii(.k« ay ilHin.'J ;i • '•.:•.:-.•
                                                            storks which  .:r-- '••.:rrcii!'y in :hr L ::.'i
                                                            Slates .I-..! w!;j. h ala-a;!;,- .'• :.;' '••>( .-•>
                                                            pai.ka^i'il. lol.i'lcj. ;ir,d rei.'.: -,•>'';">. Of
                                                            the above re^isirants. only Penniva!:
                                                            Corp. rnqi:es!(.'d Dn existing siooks
                                                            provision for  its nianob and ^jiico;:;-!'
                                                            product rf^istr^tions. Thoreforr-. HPA
                                                            was not reijU'jsled to grant, nor is it
                                                                  iy. aiiy e.xir.ti::.q stocks prjvir:<;:>
for the contini;
                                                                                 ar>d dist::bi:'ifn
                                                            of the othnr rn^istrnnts' products.
                                                            However, product already in the
                                                            growers' poss.essio-n may be used i;i;tj!
                                                            those stocks arc exhausted.
                                                              As described in the December 4
                                                            notice. EPA reviewed the existing stc/ci-s
                                                            and relabeling elements of Pennwalt's
                                                            request er.d concluded that Pennwalt
                                                            could proceed according tc the p!dr. it
                                                            described in iis request for use deletions
                                                            for Us maneb and mancozeb products.
                                                            EPA considered the amounts of slock
                                                            represented to be in existence in the
                                                            United Stales and under the control of
                                                            this registrant and determined, as
                                                            described in the December 4 notice, th.it
                                                            distribution and sale  of those stocks
                                                            until January  1.1990,  and the use of
                                                            those stocks in the growers' hands until
                                                            the stocks were exhausted would not be
                                                            inconsistent with FIFRA. Pennwalt
                                                            previously has agreed to relabel, after
                                                            that date, all product remaining which is
                                                            not in growers' hands to reflect the  use
                                                            deletions. Therefore, EPA has not
                                                            granted any additional existing stock
                                                            provisions for the sale and distribution
                                                            of Pennwalt EBDC pesticides which do
                                                            not bear labeling reflecting the use
                                                            deletions.


                                                            IV. Conclusion

                                                              Except as explained below, EPA has
                                                            received and expects to approve each of
                                                            the requests referenced above effective
                                                            March 10,1990. incorporating the
                                                            requested actions and the decisions
                                                            governing existing stocks provisions as
                                                            described above. With respect to
                                                            Riverdale Chemical Co.'s end-use
                                                            maneb product registration and Chas. H.
                                                            Lilly Co.'s end-use zineb product
                                                            registration, EPA expects to approve the
                                                            companies' requests to amend their
                                                            registrations thereafter following
                                                            completion of EPA's review of their
                                                            submissions.
-------
                      Federal  Register /  Vol. 55,  No. 44  /  Tuesday. Mjirch 6.  1990  /  Notices
                                        V. Amended List (Jf Affected Registrations
                   Active I
                                                                      Reg>fgis':atiofji.	-	j
Maneo		 Rcnm & Haas..
Ma.ieb	-	-	-	-j do	
Maneo	I oo	
Maneb			-		 do..	
Maoeb		-			-	j do.	
                                                                                           __	.,„!
Maneo			—	—	-	j do	
2>neb	' Aosco	
Festered Pro3uct/S:a:js Unatteci&t.	—	-	J
Wa->cozeb		-	-J duPonl...
                              4531 - 255
                              1581 - 355
                              4581 - 3S9
                              1812-2&1
                              4501 -358
                              *58I - 370
                               100- 629

                               228-188
                              42057 - 73

                               832 - 474

                                707-48
                                707-83
                               707 - 101
                               707 - 103
                               707 - 124
                               707- 170
                                554 .. 72

                               352 - 343
  Dated: February 26.1990.
Linda J. fisher.
Ass,'float Adoiiiusuv:orfur Pesticides and
Ten ic Substances.
|FK Doc. 90-5044 Filed 3-5-W: 8:45 am|
BILLING COCE 6S60-50-0


fFRL-3725-91

Further Extontion of Time to Either
Withdraw the Proposed Determination
or Prepare a Recommended
Determination for Two Forks Dam and
Reservoir.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of a further extension of
time.

SUMMARY: As announced in the
February 6.1990 Federal Re«:s!er (55  FR
4009). the EFA extended i!iu 404(r)
process to either  withdraw the Proposed
Determination or prepare a
Recommended Determination for the
Two Forks Dam and Reservoir until
February 28,1990. Additional lime is
needed to catalog and review public
comments and other documents relevant
to the decision. Therefore, EPA has
decided under its authority contained tit
40 CFR 231.8 to further extend the 404(c)
process to either  withdraw the Proposed
Determination or prepare a
Recommended Determination until
March 31, 1990.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gene Ri.-r-'.z. Two Fo:».s Tci.rn Loader : Axn i-i:cnt jivnvidi-s fur
                                         r.Mf! to make San Francisco ils
                                         piiltiislicd rogularly-s;.hi:dul«:d \.irthcr:i
                                         California pin    f i..-ill. K.VIC guaranti-i's
                                         ihi* Pnrt :ni i«!iniiiit c'.'iiiiiiiiin «>f 4JI vc-.si-l
calls and an annual minimum thruput of
23.000 20-foot equivalent units.
excluding empty containers loaded/
discharged from the vessels. In
consideration thereof. EMC will pay to
the Port discounted dockage and
wharfage  rates on a sliding scale based
on the Port's Tariff No. 3-C.
  Tit.'e: Virginia Port Authority/Sea-
Land Service. Inc. Terminal Agreement.
  Purtifs:
  Virginia Port Authority
  S-'a-Land Service. Inc.
  Symipsis: The Agreement revises
Pdragraph 4A of the basic agreement to
indicate that if un option to renew the
agreement is exercised, the option will
be fiied with the Commission as en
amendment before it becomes effective.
  By Order of the Federal Maritime
Commission.
jospph C. Polking.
Sci"(!.'(i/T.
  Ujteri: Feliruci.-y 28. 19JO.
1^ Due. 90-49.ri7 Filed 3-5-90: 8:45 am|
BIU.IKG COOE «73»-0(-«l
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Robert Angus Connell, el al; Change in
Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of
Shares of Banks or Bank Holding
Companies

  Hie notificants listed below have
applied under the Change in Bank
Control Act (12 U.S.C.  l«17|i)) ,-ind
§ 225.41 of the Doard's Regulation Y (12
CI'R 22.1.411 to acquire a hunk or dank
hulclin;* company. Thn factors that are
ctdisidtTi-d in acting on the luuiccs arc
:.rt t'cirlh in piiraxraph 7 of'he Act (12
U.S.C. IM7(i!|7|).
-------
MAR 1 2 1990
                COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR THE CANCELLATION
     AND REGISTRATION AMENDMENTS FOR PESTICIDE PRODUCTS CONTAINING
                   ETHYLENE BISDITHIOCARBAMATE (EBDC)
   OVERVIEW	

        Several registrants of ethylene bisdithiocarbamate  (EBDC)
   pesticide products have either voluntarily cancelled their EBDC
   registrations, amended their registrations to delete a total of
   42 crop sites, and/or deleted EBDC as an active ingredient (54 FR
   50020; December 4, 1989, and 55 FR 7935; March 6, 1990).

        This strategy calls for a limited number of inspections to
   take place by June 1, 1990, at the EBDC pesticide producing
   establishments listed in Appendix B to assure that EBDC products
   are not sold or distributed in violation of the EBDC
   cancellations and amended registrations.  The Environmental
   Protection Agency (EPA) and States will also check for compliance
   with the EBDC actions in the marketplace as part of their routine
   inspections.
   BACKGROUND	

        Ethylene bisdithiocarbamates  (EBDCs) are a group of
   pesticides used to control  fungi on a wide variety of fruits,
   vegetables, ornamental plants, turf grasses, and industrial
   sites.  The EBDC  fungicides include amobam, mancozeb, maneb,
   metiram, nabam, and zineb.

   Amobam	
        In 1986, all amobam registrants voluntarily cancelled their
   registrations in response to the Agency's request to submit
   additional data under FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B).  Registrants were
   allowed to sell and distribute existing stocks of cancelled
   amobam for one year following the effective cancellation date.
   Other persons were permitted to sell or distribute existing
   stocks of amobam until those stocks were exhausted.

   Nabam	

        All nabam agricultural food uses have been suspended since
   1985 for failure to submit FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B) data.  In
   March 1989, Rohm and Haas  (the sole registrant holding nabam
   agricultural food uses) requested that all of the suspended nabam
   agricultural food uses be deleted from its two nabam pesticide
   product registrations.  The Agency accepted Rohm and Haas'
   request to delete agricultural food uses from their nabam
   pesticide registrations effective December 14, 1989  (products
   listed in Appendix A).
-------
                               -2-
     Since 1985, Rohm and Haas and their supplemental
distributors have been prohibited from selling or distributing
stocks of their suspended nabam.  The Agency has not granted Rohm
and Haas or their supplemental distributors any additional
existing stocks provisions for the sale and distribution of those
nabam products which are labeled for agricultural food uses as a
result of the recent amended registrations.  Persons other than
Rohm and Haas and their supplemental distributors may sell and
distribute existing stocks of Rohm and Haas' nabam pesticide
products labeled for food uses until those stocks are exhausted.

Zineb	

     Since July 1988, all zineb uses have also been suspended
under FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B).  In July 1989, Micro-Flo Company,
the sole registrant of zineb technical product and the sole
technical registrant supporting any uses of zineb, requested that
each of its zineb registrations be cancelled.  Sixteen other
zineb registrants have since requested voluntary cancellation for
an additional 52 zineb products, and two other registrants have
deleted zineb as an active ingredient.  The affected zineb
products and the existing stocks deadlines of each zineb action
are listed in Appendix A.  The EPA is currently determining
whether any of the remaining registrants of suspended end-use
zineb products will attempt to support the continued registration
of the products.

     Since July 1988, registrants and supplemental distributors
of suspended zineb have been prohibited from selling or
distributing zineb pesticides labeled for agricultural food uses.
The Agency has not granted any existing stocks provisions for
zineb product which has been subsequently cancelled.  Persons
other than the zineb registrants and supplemental distributors
may sell or distribute existing stocks of those zineb products
until those stocks are exhausted.

Mancozeb. Maneb. and Metiram	

     In September 1989, Pennwalt, Rohm and Haas, BASF, and DuPont
requested to delete 42 food crop uses from the registrations of
most of their mancozeb, maneb, and metiram technical and end-use
pesticide products.  Since then, Rohm and Haas has requested to
cancel the registrations of their maneb products, and three other
registrants have amended their EBDC pesticide registrations
consistent with the actions taken by Pennwalt, Rohm and Haas,
BASF, and DuPont.  The terms of these amended registrations and
cancellations are described below in the section of this strategy
entitled "Terms of the Maneb, Mancozeb, and Metiram Amended
-------
                               -3-
Registrations and Cancellations."  The list of affected products
and the existing stocks provisions are summarized in Appendix A.

     The only mancozeb, maneb, and metiram registrations which
have been amended to delete use on 42 crop sites are products
registered to the registrants listed in Appendix A.  The
supplemental distributors of affected EBDC products of those
registrants are also affected by the amended registrations (see
Appendix C).  Other manufacturers of EBDC pesticide products are
not directly required to delete the 42 uses from their product
labels.  However, Rohm and Haas, Pennwalt, BASF, and Dupont are
the sole U.S. registrants of technical maneb, metiram, and
mancozeb.  The effect of relabeling the technical products is
that it will become unlawful for downstream formulators to use
the relabeled technical material in end-use products labeled for
use on the deleted 42 crop sites.

     On December 20, 1989 (54 FR 52158), EPA published a PD 2/3
Special Review document which proposed cancelling the 42 uses the
registrants deleted from their EBDC registrations and labels,
plus three additional food uses, and certain homeowner and
industrial uses.  Additionally, all uses of zineb were proposed
for cancellation.  However, since the PD 2/3 document is not a
final cancellation action, this strategy does not call for any
inspections to assure compliance with the PD 2/3 Special Review
document.  The Office of Compliance Monitoring will revise the
EBDC Compliance Monitoring Strategy when the EPA publishes the PD
4 Special Review Document and finalizes its action on the EBDC
pesticides (sometime in the Spring of 1991).
TERMS OF THE MANEB. MANCOZEB. AND METIRAM AMENDED REGISTRATIONS
AND CANCELLATIONS	

     Under the terms of the amended registrations, Rohm and Haas,
DuPont, Pennwalt, and BASF must revise labeling for their
affected maneb, metiram, and mancozeb end-use and technical
products to delete certain food crop uses.  These labeling
changes will be required on all new production as well as all
existing stocks which are not in the possession of the grower.
Further, the revised labeling for the technical products will
restrict the formulation of the technical into end-use products
registered for use on only one or more of the remaining 13 crops.
Therefore, it would be a violation of FIFRA (misuse) for an end-
use formulator who obtains an EBDC technical product bearing
revised labeling to produce an end-use EBDC product which is
labeled with any crop site other than those crop sites retained
on the technical product.  The registrants will be responsible
for making sure that all maneb, metiram, and mancozeb products
-------
                               -4-
released for shipment or in the channels of trade after January
1, 1990, bears appropriate labeling.  However, due to the error
in the December 4, 1989 Federal Register Notice, the label
changes required on Pennwalt's maneb and mancozeb products should
not be enforced until after the effective date of the revised
Federal Register Notice (55 FR 7935; March 6, 1990).

     In addition, Rohm and Haas has requested cancellation of the
registrations of their maneb products.  Riverdale Chemical
Corporation has requested to delete maneb as an active ingredient
from one of their products and to remove all associated
fungicidal claims from the label of that product (no crop sites
need to be deleted).   Griffen Corporation has requested to
delete certain food uses from its maneb end-use product
consistent with the Pennwalt, Rohm and Haas, BASF, and DuPont
action.  Ciba-Geigy has also requested to delete certain food
uses from its mancozeb end-use product consistent with the
Pennwalt, Rohm and Haas, BASF, and DuPont action.  The EPA has
accepted these cancellations and registration amendments
effective March 16, 1990 (55 FR 7935).  The list of affected
products and the existing stocks deadlines for each of these
actions are listed in Appendix A.

     Below is a summary of the crops which must be deleted from
the maneb, metiram, and mancozeb product label and those crops
which may be retained:

MANEB

REGISTRANT: Pennwalt Corporation, Riverdale Chemical Corporation,
and Griffin Corporation.

DELETED CROPS:
Pennwalt;  Peppers, tomatoes, onions, beans, broccoli, cabbage,
cantaloupes, watermelon, other melons, cucumbers, squash, apples,
spinach, stone fruits, carrots, celery, turnips, cauliflower,
Brussels sprouts, collards, mustard greens, kale, rhubarb,
lettuce, Chinese cabbage, eggplant, endive, grapes, and pumpkins.
Riverdale;  No crops deleted, however, fungicidal uses and
fungicidal claims must be deleted from label.  Remains registered
as a miticide/insecticide.
Griffen;  Apples, grapes, beans, broccoli, cabbage, cantaloupes,
watermelon, other melons, cucumbers, eggplant, endive, lettuce,
peppers, pumpkins, spinach, squash, and tomatoes.
-------
                               -5-
RETAINED CROPS:
Pennwalt;  Almonds, bananas, potatoes, sugar beets, and sweet
corn.  Uses for seed treatment and ornamental crops.
Riverdale;  Crops sites unchanged.  Remains registered for the
same crop sites as a miticide/insecticide.
Griffen;  Almonds, potatoes, sugar beets, and sweet corn.
METIRAM

REGISTRANT:  BASF Corporation.

DELETED CROPS:  Apples.

RETAINED CROPS:  Potatoes.


MANCOZEB.

REGISTRANT:  Rohm and Haas, DuPont, Pennwalt, and Ciba-Geigy.

DELETED CROPS:
DuPont;  Apples, crabapple, quince, pears, papayas, pineapple,
carrots, celery, fennel, cucumbers, melons, squash  (summer and
winter), tobacco (plant bed and field), cotton  (foliar), field
corn, oats, barley, and rye.
Rohm and Haas;  Apples, barley, cantaloupes, carrots, celery,
corn (field and hybrid seedcorn), crabapple, cucumbers, fennel,
melons, muskmelons, oats, papaya, pears, pineapples, quince, rye,
squash, and watermelons.
Pennwalt;  Cucumbers, melons, summer squash, field corn, celery,
carrots, apples, pears, crabapple, and quince.
Ciba-Geigy;  Cucumbers, melons, and squash.

RETAINED CROPS:
Rohm and Haas and Dupont;  Asparagus, bananas,  cranberries,  figs,
grapes, onions, peanuts, potatoes, sugar beets, sweet corn,
tomatoes, and wheat.
Pennwalt;  Sugar beets, peanuts, wheat, potatoes, tomatoes,  corn
(sweet and popcorn), onions, asparagus, cranberries, and grapes.
Ciba-Geigy;  Potatoes, tomatoes, and onions.
-------
                               -6-
EXPORTS	

     Cancelled EBDC products which are exported after the
existing stocks deadlines must comply with the labeling
requirements of FIFRA section 17(a)(1), and the export
acknowledgement statement requirements of section 17(a)(2).
Products which have had their registrations amended to delete
crop uses are subject to FIFRA section 17(a)(1).
COMPLIANCE MONITORING	

     By June 1, 1990, the States, and Regions with States not
operating under cooperative enforcement agreements, are to
conduct at least one inspection at each of the pesticide
producing establishments listed in Appendix B of this strategy to
assure that cancelled EBDC products are not sold or distributed
by those producers, to assure compliance with the FIFRA section
17 export requirements, and to assure that EBDC products which
have had crop sites deleted from their registrations are sold and
distributed with the revised labeling required by those amended  '
registrations.  Additionally, the Regions/States are to monitor
compliance with the EBDC cancellations and amended registrations
during routine inspections in the marketplace.

     As part of routine inspections, and if not already completed
under the FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B) Compliance Monitoring
Strategy, Regions/States should also conduct inspections at
establishments that produced nabam, zineb, and amobam to assure
that those EBDC pesticides are not sold or distributed in
violation of the suspensions, and subsequent amended
registrations or cancellations of those products, or export
requirements.

     The Regions should also check all Notices of Arrival of EBDC
pesticides imported into the United States against the list of
affected products in Appendix A of this strategy before releasing
such products.

Violations	_______^_	

     Persons that sell or distribute an EBDC product, which has
had its registration amended to delete crop uses, without the
revised labeling will be in violation of FIFRA section
12(a)(l)(B), for making claims for a registered pesticide that
differ substantially from those made in connection with the
pesticide's registration.
-------
                               -7-
     Formulators that use relabeled EBDC technical product to
produce an end-use product which is labeled with any crop site
deleted from the technical product label will be in violation of
FIFRA section 12(a)(2)(G), for using a registered pesticide in a
manner inconsistent with its labeling.

     Any person that sells or distributes a cancelled EBDC
product after the existing stocks deadlines is in violation of
FIFRA section 12(a)(2)(K) for violation of a cancellation order.
ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES	

Office of Pesticide Programs	

Will develop and provide OCM with a list of affected EBDC
products which have had their registrations amended to delete the
42 food crop uses or have otherwise been amended or voluntarily
cancelled.

Office of Compliance Monitoring	

Will develop and transmit the EBDC Compliance Monitoring
Strategy, including the list of affected EBDC products, to the
Regions.

Will update the EBDC strategy in accordance with the revised
Federal Register Notice.

Regions	

Will transmit copies of the Compliance Monitoring Strategy, and
any revisions to the strategy to the States.

Will conduct compliance inspections in States without Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements as specified in this Compliance Monitoring
Strategy, and as needed to respond to tips and complaints.

Will take enforcement actions as appropriate.

Will immediately send information regarding a registrant's
violation of the EBDC actions to the Office of Compliance
Monitoring/Compliance Division.

Will report to the Office of Compliance Monitoring/Compliance
Division; attention Mike Calhoun, by August 1, 1990, on the total
number of EBDC inspections, violations observed, and State or
Federal actions taken since January 1, 1990.
-------
                               -8-
Will check all Notices of Arrival of EBDC imported pesticides
against the list of affected products in Appendix A of this
strategy before releasing such products.
States	

Will conduct inspections as specified in this Compliance
Monitoring Strategy, and as needed to respond to tips and
complaints.

Will take enforcement actions, as appropriate.

Will report to the Regions within two weeks of discovering a
violation of the EBDC actions by a registrant or producing
establishment.

Will report to the Regions, by July 1 1990, the total number of
EBDC inspections and violations.
-------
                                     -9-
                                  APPENDIX A

                        LIST OF AffBC'lTP REG
ACTION:
amended Registrations - Deleted Uses.  Products sold or
distributed after existing stocks deadline must be relabeled
to reflect the amended registration to delete crops.
  Active
Ingredient

maneb
maneb
maneb
maneb
mancozeb
mancozeb
mancozeb
mancozeb
mancozeb
mancozeb
nabam
nabam
mancozeb
mancozeb
mancozeb
mancozeb
mancozeb
mancozeb
mancozeb
metiram
metiram
   Registrant

   Pennwalt
   Pennwalt
   Pennwalt
   Griffin
   Pennwalt
   Pennwalt
   Ciba Geigy
   DuPont
   DuPont
   DuPont
   Rohm & Haas
   Rohm & Haas
   Rohm & Haas
   Rohm & Haas
   Rohm & Haas
        & Haas
          Haas
          Haas
          Haas
   BASF Corp.
   BftSF Corp.
                   Product
                   Number
Rohm
Rohm &
Rohm &
Rohm
4581 -
4581 -
 4581
 1812
4581 -
4581 -
 100 -
 352 -
 352 -
 352 -
 707 -
 707 -
 707 -
 707 -
 707 -
 707 -
 707 -
 707 -
 707 -
 7969
 7969
 255
 355
- 35
- 25
 358
 370
 629
 341
 398
 449
 003
 070
 078
 093
 102
 156
 162
 179
 180
- 70
- 71
                   Existing Stocks
                       Deadline
                Registrant !  Distributor
3/16/90
it
it
it
ii
it
it
12/31/89
ii
n
12/14/89
12/14/89
12/31/89
it
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
3/16/90
n
n
n
n
n
n
12/31/89
n
n
N/D
N/D
12/31/89
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
   N/D = No Deadline
-------
                                     -10-
ACTION:
  Active
Ingredient

nvaneb
maneb
roaneb
maneb
naneb
maneb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
Cancelled Registrations.  Cancelled products may not be sold or
distributed after the existing stocks deadline (NOTE: sale or
distribution of zineb by registrant has been prohibited under a
FIFRA section 3(c) (2) (B) suspension since July 1988).  All exports
after the effective date must comply with FIFRA section 17.

                                       Existing Stocks
                                           Deadline
                                    Registrant !  Distributor

p«^i
-------
                                     -11-
  Active
Ingredient
                        Product
     Peaistrant
Cancelled
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
zineb
Registrations (continued):
     PMC Corp.        MD80001600
                      OR76002800
                      CR77006300
                      PA80001700
                      SC80001100
                      VA80001300
                       746 -  34
                       33955-456
                       1386 - 75
PMC Corp.
PMC Corp.
PMC Corp.
PMC Corp.
PMC Corp.
Imperial
FBI Gordon
Universal Coop.
     Universal Coop.
     Wilbur FJllis
     Wilbur Ellis
     HR McLane
     HRMdane
     HR McLane
     HR McLane
     HR McLane
     HR McLane
     Holden Corp.
     Holden Corp.
     Colusa Cnty. Ag.
     Colusa Cnty. Ag.
                  1386 -316
                 OR81003700
                 WA82006000
                 47056 - 63
                 47056 - 78
                 47056 - 87
                 47056
                 47056
                 47056
                 1772
                 1772
89
90
92
55
74
                  CA79011101
                  CA79011102
     Riverside Cnty. Ag. CA83002900
     The land, Epcot    FL82006900
     Penn State Univ.   PA76000100
                                    Existing Stocks
                                        Deadline
                                 Registrant !  Distributor
July 1988
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
M
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
N/D
n
n
n
it
n
it
n
n
n
n
H
n
n
n
ii
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
ACTION:
maneb
zineb
                                                        Uses.
  Products sold or distributed after the existing stocks deadline
  may not contain the deleted active ingredient, and must be
  relabeled to reflect the uses and active ingredient deleted from
  the registration.
    Riverdale Chemical  228 - 188
    Morgro               42057- 73
                                  3/16/90
                                     n
                        N/D
                         n
ACTION:     amended Registrations - Deleted Active Ingredient, Uses Unchanged.
            Products sold or distributed after the existing stocks deadline
            may not contain the deleted active ingredient, and must be
            relabeled to reflect the deleted active ingredient.
zineb
     Chas. H. Lilly
                    802 - 474
         3/00/90
             N/D
-------
                               -12-
                           APPENDIX B

              LIST OF EBDC PRODUCING ESTABLISHMENTS
Region III

Agway Inc.
980 Locks Mill Rd.
York, PA 17402
mancozeb - #100-629 Ridomil MZ58

Central Chemical Corp.
PO Box 309
Elkton, MD 21921
mancozeb - #707-078 Dithane M45
           #707-093 Dikar
maneb - #707-048 Dithane M22

Dragon Corp.
7033 Walrond Dr.
Roanoke, VA 24019
maneb - #707-048 Dithane M22

DuPont Co.
Agricultural Products Dept.
Wilmington, DE 19898
mancozeb - #352-449 Manzate 200 DF

Rohm & Haas Delaware Valley, Inc.
5000 Richmond St.
Philadelphia, PA 19137
mancozeb - #707-156 Dithane M45
maneb - #707-170 Dithane Flowable
Region IV

FMC Corp.
1200 Tallyrand Ave.
Jacksonville, FL 32206
mancozeb - #707-078 Dithane M45
maneb - #707-083 Dithane M22

Griffin Corp.
Rocky Ford Rd.
Valdosta, GA 31601
mancozeb - #352-398 DuPont Manzate 200
maneb - #1812-251 Manex Maneb Flowable
-------
                               -13-
Micro Flo Co.
Highway 41 North
Sparks, GA 31647
zineb - #51036-062 Zineb 75WP

Red Panther Chemical Co.
PO Box 550
Clarksdale, MS 38614
zineb - #1386-075 Unico Garden Spray
        #51036-062 Zineb 75WP

Sunniland Corp.
US Hwy. 17
Sanford, FL 32771
maneb - #707-170 Dithane Flowable

Sureco, Inc.
East Main St.
Fort Valley, GA 31030
zineb - #707-002 Staffel's Dithane 278
mancozeb - #352-449 Manzate 200 DF
maneb - #707-048 Dithane M22
Region V

Universal Cooperatives, Inc.
PO Box 471
Napoleon, OH 43545
zineb - #1386-316 Unico Garden Dust
Region VI

Central International Corp.
Farm Road 1101
Liberty, TX 77575
mancozeb - #707-093 Dikar

Pennwalt Corp.
201 W. Dodge St.
Bryan, TX 77801
maneb - #4581-359 Muneb 4F
-------
                               -14-
Reaion VII

Imperial Inc.
West Sixth & Grass Sts.
Shanandoa, IA 51601
zineb - #746-034 New MFA Multi-Spray

FBI-Gordon Corp.
300 S. Third St.
Kansas City, KS 66118
zineb - #33955-456 Acme Tomato & Vegetable Dust
Region VIII

AGSO Inc.
Mill Rd.
Grand Forks, ND 58201
zineb - #554-072 AGSO Dustret

MorGro Chemical Corp.
145 W. Central Ave.
Salt Lake City, UT 84115
zineb - #42057-073 MorGro Soil & Bulb Dust
Region IX

Dexol Industries
1450 W 228th St.
Torranee, CA 90501
zineb - #707-002 Staffel's Dithane 278
        #192-146 Dexol Zineb

Region X

Chas. H. Lilly Co.
7737 N.E. Killingsworth
Portland, OR 97218
zineb - #42057-073 MorGro Soil & Bulb Dust
        #802-474 Lilly/Miller Vegetable Dust
-------
Z/ll/89
              ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS
                      SYSTEMS BRANCH
SUBJECT: DISTRIBUTOR MASTER IMAGE(S) FOR REQUESTED COMPANY
                                                                                                                       PAGE
  EPA  PRODUCT DISTRIBUTOR  ACCESSION
  REGISTRATION    NUMBER     NUMBER
                    PRODUCT NAME
  DATE OF    DATE OF    DATE OF   REASON
APPLICATION APPROVAL CANCELLATION  CODE
000352-00341
000352-00341
000352-00398
000352-00398
000352-00398
000352-00449
000707-00002
000707-00002
000707-00002
000707-00002
000707-00002
000707-00002
000707-00002
000707-00078
000707-00078
004581-00359
004581-00359
007969-00070
034704
034704
001812
034704
034704
010404
000004
000016
000192
000769
003286
009205
010873
000070
009404
002935
034704
034704
0164051
0166382
0170605
0164050
0166383
0168287
0031050
0069726
0033902
0022365
0033901
0060981
0044771
0079607
0074045
0155330
0156167
0184563
                                    CLEAN CROP MANCOZEB 80MP FUNGICIDE
                                    CLEAN CROP MANCOZEB 80HP FUNGICIDE
                                    tlANEX II
                                    CLEAN CROP MANCOZEB 4L FUNGICIDE
                                    CLEAN CROP MANCOZEB 4L FUNGICIDE
                                    LESCO MANCOZEB 06 FUNGICIDE
                                    ZINEB 75X
                                    DRAGON ZINEB HETTABLE GARDEN FUNGICIDE
                                    DEXOL ZINEB GARDEN FUNGICIDE
                                    SECURITY ZINEB SPRAY
                                    STAFFEL'S DITNANE Z-78
                                    SKOOT
                                    TIFCHEM 75X ZINEB
                                    MANCOZEB AGRICULTURAL FUNGICIDE
                                    SUNNILAND DITHANE H-45
                                    HILBUR-ELLIS MANEB PLUS ZINC F4 FUNGICIDE
                                    CLEAN CROP MANEB 4L PLUS ZINC
                                    CLEAN CROP POLYRAM 80 OF
870409
870602
880201
870409
870602
871117
770225
790810
770419
760630
770419
781026
771108
800418
791120
860521
860611
890606
oooooo
000000
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
oooooo
OOOOOO
770315
790810
770428
760729
770426
781128
771130
800418
800207
860512
860527
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
oooooo
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO
OOOOOO.
                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                   t->
                                                                                                                   Ul
       18   RECORDS PRINTED
-------
2/11/89
                                                 RlT'lSTOANT LIST OF DISTRIBUTORS
                                                                                                                        PA6E
 000004   BONIDE  CHEMICAL CO.  INC.
 000016   DRAGON  CORPORATION
 000070   WILBUR-ELLIS COMPANY
 000192   DEXOL INDUSTRIES
 000769   SURECO, INC.
 001812   GRIFFIN CORPORATION
 002935   WILBUR  ELLIS CO.
 003286   ESCO DISTRIBUTOR INC.
 009205   A6RO-CHEM INC
 009404   SUNNILAND CORPORATION
 010404   H.  R. MCLANE, INC.
 034704   PLATTE  CHEMICAL COMPANY
2 WURZ AVE.
PO BOX 7311
BOX 16458
1450 W 228TH ST
BOX 938
BOX 1847
191 H SHAW AVENUE SUITE 8107
301 1/2 STAPLES ST. BOX 6467
11150 W. ADOISON
200 OAK AVENUE - P. 0. BOX 1697
7210 S.W. 57TH AVENUE SUITE 212
419 18TH ST. C80631) BOX 667
YORKVILLE NY
ROANOKE VA
FRESNO CA
TORRANCE CA
FORT VALLEY GA
VALDOSTA GA
FRESNO CA
CORPUS CHRISTI TX
FRANKLIN PARK IL
SANFORO FL
MIAMI FL
GREELEY CO
13495
24019
93755
90501
31030
31603
93704
78411
60131
32771
33143
80632
       12   RECORDS PRINTED
                                                                                                                                                        CTi
                                                                                                                                                         I
-------
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                           Oct. 6, 1983


                                              .
MEMORANDUM                                              GCNCRAL COUNSEL


SUBJECT:    Indemnification Claims for Suspended EDB Produces
FROM:
                     Cara S.  Jablon,  Attorney   x"    /).  pjX"—'
                     Marcia Mulkey,  Attorney    (—^       /]
                     Office of  General  Counsel           (/
                     Pesticides and  Toxic Substances  Division

—       TO:          William Miller  -
                     Product Manager
                     Registration Division
                     Office of  Pesticide Programs

              On September 28,  1983, the Administrator issued an emergency
         suspension order for the soil  fumigation use of EDB, as well as
         a notice of intent to  cancel registration of that use, and other
         major uses, of EDB.   We expect that indemnification claims will
         be filed for the suspended  products registered for the soil
         fumigation uses, pursuant to section 15 of FIFRA.  The purpose
         of this memorandum is  to provide you with information on
         procedures for filing  such  indemnification claims to enable you
         to respond to the requests  for information regarding the filing
         of such claims.

              Section 15 of FIFRA clearly provides that an indemnification
         claim following a suspension order does not  ripen until the
         registration of the pesticide  is cancelled "as a result of a
         final determination that the use of such pesticide will create
         an imminent hazard."  Thus, until the cancellation becomes
         effective for the soil fumigation use of EDB (either at the end  ,
—       of the statutory 30-day period if no hearing request is received,
         or,  in the event of cancellation hearings, when a final Agency
         cancellation order is  issued following the hearings), no claims
         for indemnification are appropriate.  Note that each registered
         product is treated independently regarding the issue of whether
         the cancellation is final,  i.e., if a registrant does not contest
         the cancellation action for a given product, the cancellation
         is final for that product even though other  registrants have
         requested a hearing to challenge the Agency's action for their
         registered products.

              Furthermore, a claim may only be submitted on behalf of a
         person who owned the pesticide before the suspension order was
         issued, and who suffered losses by reason of the suspension or
         cancellation of the registration.  To satisfy the loss criterion,
-------
                               -2-
the claimanc should establish thac he made reasonable efforts to
mitigate his losses, e.g., by attempting to resell his product
for non-suspended uses.  The statute also provides that the
amount of the indemnification payment is based on the cost of
the pesticide;  thus the Agency is not necessarily bound to pay
the full cost,  but could pay some percentage of the cost. */
Finally, note that the Agency has previously taken the position
that intrastate products do not qualify for indeanification
under the statute.

     Following is a check list of information to convey to
potential claimants who inquire regarding indemnification
procedures:
                          ..	         --                 ^
     1.  Explain that a claim for indemnification will not be
reviewed by the Agency until the product has been cancelled, and
that each registrant is on a separate track as to whether his
product has been cancelled.

     2.  A claim must be submitted on behalf of the person who
owned the pesticide before the suspension order was issued.

     3.  The indemnification claim should be sent to William
Miller, Rm. 211, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,
Arlington, Virginia.

     4.  SPA does not have a specific indemnification form.

     5.  The claimant should submit a notarized affidavit which
addresses the following:

         a.  the fact that the claimant was the owner of  the
         pesticide before the suspension order,

         b.  the date of purchase and quantity of the pesticide
         for which indemnification is sought,

         c.  the cost of the pesticide, including documentation
         to establish the basis for the alleged cost,
V Note that the statute provides that the Agency has an
affirmative defense against indemnification claims where the
owner of the pesticide "had knowledge of facts which, in
themselves, would have shown that such pesticide did not meet
the requirements of section 3(c)(5) for registration", and
"continued thereafter to produce such pesticide without
giving cimely notice of such facts to the Administrator".
-------
                               -3-


         d.  che steps taken by the claimant to reduce his
         losses, e.g., efforts to sell his product for non-
         suspended/non-cancelled uses,

         e.  the fact that he did not have knowledge of facts,
         which, in themselves, would have shown that the pesticide
         did not meet the registration requirements of FIFRA
         section 3(c)(5) , and

         f.  any trade secrecy claims which he wishes to make
         regarding the information contained in his affidavit.


     We strongly advise you_not to express any-views on behalf
of EPA regarding the circumstances under which the Agency  is
likely to pay indemnification or the amount of indemnification
the Agency is likely to pay.  Please refer all legal questions
regarding  indemnification to Alice Wegman in the Office of
General Counsel at 382-7505.


.cc.  Edwin Johnson
     Richard Johnson
     Paul Lapsley
     Barbara Paul
     Louis True
     William Wells
-------
                 United States
                 Environmental Protection
                 Agency
                      Utiice oi
                      Public Affairs (A-107)
                      Washington. DC 20460
AEPA     EDB   Facts
                                          February 3,  1984
                 EPA Decision    2/3/84
INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Protection  Agency  has  concluded
that the major uses of the  pesticide ethylene dibromide
(EDB) should halt,  because  the  risks posed by continued
use outweigh the benefits to  society.  The Agency began
the process of removing EDB from  the marketplace in
September 1983 by issuing an  emergency suspension of the
sale and distribution of EDB  for  soil fumigation uses, and
initiating cancellation for fumigation of stored grain,
spot fumigation of  milling  machinery and quarantine fumiga-
tion of citrus and  tropical fruits.   At  the same time, the
Agency noted that the nonsuspended uses, such as grain
fumigation, might pose unreasonable  risks through dietary
exposure, but that  information  to resolve that question
was inadequate.  Accordingly, EPA arranged for the U.S.
Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administra-
tion to sample a variety of food  commodities for EDB
residues.  A number of states have reported residue
findings in grainbased foods  as have food industry and
trade associations.  EPA's  Administrator wrote to governors
requesting the States assistance  in  clarifying the extent
of EDB use and the  occurrance of  residues in foods.
     As a result of these sampling activities and an
evaluation of the residue levels  reported, on February 3,
1984, the Agency announced  additional actions designed to
hasten the elimination of public  exposure to EDB through
its use on food commodities.  These  actions will ensure
adequate health protection  during the interim period
necessary to cancel uses and  eliminate EDB residues from
the food chain.  These specific actions are:
 ACTIONS
•  An emergency suspension of  EDB  for  fumigation of
stored grain and grain milling machinery.  The suspension
order halts the sale,  distribution and  actual use of EDB
products for these purposes.

• Announcement of recommended  maximum  acceptable levels
of EDB residues in three categories of  grain-based foods:
raw grain intended for human  consumption  (900 ppb); con-
sumer products requiring further preparation  (150 ppb);
and ready-to-eat products (30  ppb).

• Initiating actions to remove impediments to Federal
enforcement of the recommended levels.  These actions
-------
               include  revoking  the  existing exemption from tolerance
               requirements  for  residues  of. EDB resulting from grain
               fumigation, and 2  revoking tolerances  for  inorganic  bromi^
               resulting  from EDB fumigation of grain and other
               commodities.
                    The decisions on February 3 do not include further
               regulatory actions on the  use of EDB fumigation of citrus
               and  tropical  fruits.   The  Agency has concentrated its
               information gathering and  evaluation efforts on grain as
               the  principal cause of nationwide concern  about dietary
               exposure to EDB.   The use  of EDB to meet domestic and
               international quarantine requirements  for  fresh citrus
               and  tropical  fruit involves issues quite different from
               the  grain  uses.   The  Agency will be carefully studying
               the  quarantine situation in the next several weeks,  and
               further  regulatory decisions on these  uses of EDB may be
               necessary.
GRAIN
Risks
Maximum
permissible
Levels
The use of EDB on stored grain and the "spot" fumigation
of grain milling machinery both contribute residues to
the American diet and EPA's objective is to eliminate
this source of EDB exposure.  The February 3 emergency
suspension action immediately stops these uses and is
designed to hasten the eventual elimination of EDB from
the food chain.  However, as a practical matter, EDB
residues exist in grain at every production stage from
stored grain on farms to products on store shelves, and
may take several years to move through the channels of
trade.  Thus, recommended maximum acceptable levels of
EDB in various foods are necessary during this interim
period both to ensure adequate public health protection
and to avoid unnecessary disruption of the food supply.
The primary concern about the dietary risks of EDB is
for chronic effects of long term exposure, such as cancer,
and not for an immediate or short term toxic effect.
Because cancellation proceedings are already underway,the
goal of immediate suspension is to minimize further
exposure during the next several years.
     EDB has been used as a grain fumigant for many years,
and the population has been exposed from this source
for several decades.  Average consumption of EDB appears
to have been decreasing in the past year because EPA's
concerns about the chemical have prompted some voluntary
movement to alternatives.  The February 3 suspension will
hasten the decline in exposure.  The levels EPA is now
recommending are designed to drive down the average
dietary burden of EDB to near zero over a three year
period.

The Agency  is recommending maximum acceptable residue
levels  for  three different kinds of grains and grain
products to reflect  the  fact that commercial processing
and cooking of  foods  reduce EDB residue  levels.  For
example, analyses of  cooked grain-based  products show
reductions  of 80% to  95% of EDB residues.  Thus, setting
                          -2-
-------
                the  raw  grain  intended  for  human  consumption  acceptable
                level  at 900 parts  per  billion  (ppb)  helps  to ensure  that
                processed foods  requiring further cooking can be  below
                the  150  ppb  level,  and  that ready-to-eat products will be
                below  the 30 ppb maximum acceptable  level.  These levels
                in foods pose  acceptable low health  risks for an  interim
                exposure of  3  to 5  years and take into  account the quan-
                tity of  different foods in  the  average  diet,  as well  as
                the  quality, quantity and price of foods available.
                Consistent with  the legal requirements  for  setting residue
                levels,  the Agency  has  tried to strike  the  right  balance
                between  health protection and economic  consequences
                affecting food consumption.   There will be  some economic
                impacts  due  to grain or food products with  unacceptable
                levels of EDB  being withdrawn from the  market.


Enforcement     The  Agency's recommended maximum  acceptable levels for
                EDB  are  not presently enforceable at  the .federal  level
                because  there  is an exemption from tolerance  requirements
                for  EDB  in grains still in  effect.   This exemption dates
                from 1956 when by analytical standards  of the day, no
                residue  was expected or detected  as  a residue from EDB
                fumigation.  The Agency is  revoking  this exemption through
                rulemaking procedures.  Rulemaking can  become effective
                in as  little as  30  days, but requests for additional
                review can delay the process by as much as  a  year.
                    For Federal enforcement purposes,  EPA  establishes
                tolerances or  recommends action levels.  These levels
                are  enforced by  the Food and Drug Administration  (FDA)
                and  the  U.S. Department of  Agriculture  (for meat  and
                poultry)  which sample both  domestic and imported  produce
                and  may  withhold shipments  of food which violate  residue
                levels.   In general, FDA attempts to  conduct  sampling at
                a point  in the distribution system before products are
                dispersed to the retail level, and to sample  batches
                representative of an entire lot rather  than single
                product  containers.
                    Individual  states  may  have authority to  enforce  food
                quality  standards of their  own and they might use EPA
                recommended maximum acceptable  levels or not.  For example,
                the  State of Florida has recently taken action against food
                products on  the  basis of any residues above 1 ppb, the limit
                of detection for EDB.
                    The emergency  suspension of  grain  uses of EDB raises the
                related  issues of what  to do with grain already treated, and
                what to  do with  EDB grain fumigation  products.  We know that
                EDB  residues dissipate  over time. Therefore, EPA recommends
                that recently  fumigated grain be  held for at  least 90 days
                before shipment, to help ensure meeting acceptable residue
                levels.   Since the  new  suspension order includes  a require-
                ment to  immediately halt the use  of  EDB, no further fumiga-
                tion should occur on farm,  in transit,  in commercial  storage
                or in  milling  operations.
                    EPA will  request registrants of  suspended EDB pesticides
                to identify  and  recall  products down  to the retail level of
                distribution.  All  owners of these suspended  products,
                including end-users, may apply  for indemnification upon
                final  cancellation  of the products.

                                            -3-
-------
Alternatives
                                                                        •
                                                                       lessor
The principal alternatives to EDB for grain fumigation
are:  carbon tetrachloride by itself, and in combination.
with carbon disulfide and ethylene dichloride (EDC); mei
bromide; and phosphide gas released by aluminum or magne
phosphide.  The phosphide products are toxic acutely and
thus require extreme care in handling.  They are restricted
to use by certified applicators, but are not known to pose
any chronic health hazards from dietary residues.  Carbon
tetrachloride is under EPA review as a potential carcinogen,
although its risks do not appear to be as significant as
EDB.  Methyl bromide and EDC also have preliminary indica-
tions of adverse chronic effects such as genetic mutations.
These three chemicals will be further evaluated by EPA for
possible regulatory action.
CITRUS AND
TROPICAL
FRUITS
The Agency's September 1983 decision on EDB as a
quarantine treatment for citrus and tropical fruits was to
cancel the use effective September 1, 1984.  This phase-out
period reflects the fact that both the availability and
acceptability of alternative quarantine treatments need to
be clarified.  The Agency feels that more  information on
residues, alternatives, and international  trade must be
carefully considered.  The additional several weeks necessary
to gather further information and consult  with other agencies
will not pose a signficant increment of risk to the public.
     Both the purpose and amount of EDB used for quarant^fcp
treatment differ from the grain uses.                   ^^

• Quarantine requirements for citrus and tropical fruits
prevent the spread of potentially devastating infestations of
several species of fruit flies.  We require most fresh citrus
and tropical fruits shipped into the mainland U.S. to be
fumigated with EDB.  Japan requires U.S. fresh citrus to be
treated with EDB.  Some fruits shipped within the U.S. to
Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California must also be
fumigated.  Thus, decisions on EDB potentially affect
imports from Latin American, Caribbean and Mediterranean
nations, exports to Japan and interstate commerce.

• There will probably not be any single alternative to replac
EDB.  Alternatives being developed may prove acceptable and
feasible for some, but not other quarantine requirements.
Alternatives include: gamma irradiation; fumigation with
methyl bromide or phosphine gas; cold treatment and heat
treatment.

• Fresh citrus and tropical fruit comprise less than 2% of
the average diet, compared to over 10% for grain.

• Only a small percentage of all citrus consumed in this
country is treated with EDB.  Of the 5.8 billion pounds
citrus consumed, about 40 million pounds is imported f
fruit (most fumigated) and about 55 million pounds is
fumigated for domestic interstate quarantine.  This is about
2% of the total consumed.
-------
• Unlike grain, ending the use of EDB on  citrus  and  tropical
fruit will result  in a very  fast elimination  of  residues  from
the  food chain, because only  fresh  fruit  is fumigated  and  it
moves rapidly  through the channels  of trade.

• Use of methyl bromide on some domestic, interstate
shipments and changes of U.S. crop estimates  due to
intense cold have greatly curtailed EDB use this year  for
domestic production.

• Citrus intended for processing into juice is not
fumigated.

     In the coming weeks, the Agency will be  gathering
further information from the Food and Drug Administration
on EDB residues in imported citrus.   We will  also be
consulting with USDA, the Department of State, the
Department of Commerce,  the Agency for International
Development and the Office of the U.S. Trade  Represen-
tative on the economic ramifications of alternative
quarantine requirements for both imports and  exports.
The Agency will closely monitor EDB residues  in citrus to
determine further measures needed to reduce dietary
exposure from this source.
-------
ISEZ,
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                            FEB  "6 1984                            orr.c.or
                                                             PCSTICIOCS AND TOXIC SUOST/
 MEMORANDUM

 TO:        Addressees

 SUBJECT:  EDB Emergency Suspension of  Products Registered for Use as
           a Grain  Fumigant  or  Spot Fumigant of Grain Milling Machinery

      On February 3,  1984, the  Administrator signed  an Emergency Order
 suspending the registrations of  all  EDB products  registered for use as a
 grain fumigant and spot fumigant for grain milling  machinery.  This action
 follows the September 28, 1983 Notice  of  Intent to  Cancel Registrations of
 Pesticide Products Containing  EDB.

      I am attaching the strategy document and other background materials to
 aid  you and the States in operating  the compliance  monitoring/enforcement
 programs related to these two  actions. Specifically these attachments are:

      1.   Emergency Suspension Order
      2.   Compliance Monitoring  Fact Sheet
      3.   EPA Press Release
      4.   OPP Fact Sheet
      5.   Administrator's Statement
      6.   Enforcement Strategy
      7.   Indemnification Memo
      8.   List of Parties Appealing  the September 28, 1983
           Cancellation Order
      9.   List of active registrations for grain  and
           spot fumigation
      10   Copy of package sent to EDB  users
      11.  Sample of letter  sent  to active registrants
      12.  Sample of letter  sent  to persons whose  registrations
           were cancelled per September 28, 1983 Cancellation Order
      13.  Master list of all registrants  prior to
           Cancellation

      You should forward pertinent materials to the  States and work closely
 with them to implement the  EDB compliance/enforcement programs.
-------
                                                 -2-
                  The enforcement  and  compliance  monitoring  of the  Emergency  Suspension
             order in particular,  is  a top  priority  of  the Agency.   Regions shall work
             with the states to readjust  state  priorities to ensure a  vigorous enforcement
             presence in this area.   David  Stangel  (FTS-382-7856) of my  staff will answer
             any questions you or  the States may  have regarding the order or  compliance
             program implementation.
                                                        A. E. Conroy IL-fTJirfector
                                                       Compliance Moni^pn'nc Staff
                                                 Office of Pesticides ahtf Tpxic Substances
             Attachments
i
-------
          STRATEGY FOR COMPLIANCE/ENFORCEMENT OF  THE
       EMERGENCY SUSPENSION  OF  ETHYLENE  DIBROMIDE  (EDB)
Scope	;	•	

On February 3, 1984, the Administrator  of  EPA signed  an  order
immediately suspending the registrations  of  EDB for  use  in  grain
fumigation and spot fumigation of grain milling machines.

This Emergency Suspension Order has  two effects:

     (1)  it prohibits the distribution,  sale and movement  of  any
          EDB-containing pesticide product labeled for use  as  a
          grain fumigant or fumigant for  grain milling equipment,
          and

     (2)  it prohibits the use by any person of a pesticide product
          containing ethylene dibromide on grain or  grain milling
          equi pment.*

                                                             • >
Impact	

The February 3, 1984 action does not affect  the September  28,  1983
Emergency Suspension Order for EDB soil fumigant products.

The February 3, 1984 Emergency Suspension  Order imposes  restric-
tions beyond the September 28, 1983  Notice of Intent  to  Cancel
EDB products for grain fumigation and spot fumigation of grain
milling machines.  The Emergency Suspension  Order, unlike  the
Notice of Intent to Cancel, specifically  prohibits persons  from
using stocks of EDB products in their possession for  grain  fumi-
gation and spot fumigation of grain  milling  machines.

The Emergency Suspension Order does  not affect the other EDB
uses covered in the Notice of Intent to Cancel; i.e.   post  harvest
quarantine fumigation, felled log fumigation, and specified
mi nor uses.

Appendix I summarizes the status of  various  types of  EDB products.


Regulated Industry

The Emergency Suspension Order dated February 3, 1984, involves
16 products and 7 registrants.  The  registrants are  located in
4 States.
V This prohibition, unlike the September 28, 1983 emergency
suspension of EDB soil  fumigation products, extends to products
in the possession of end users .
-------
The September 28,  1983  Notice  of  Intent  to Cancel  affected  54
El)B grain or grain machinery  fumigation  products  of 23  regis-
trants. Those registrants  who  appealed  the Notice  of Intent  to
Cancel  retained registration  of  their products pending  a  hearing.
The 16  products of 7  registrants  now subject to th£ Emergency
Suspension Order are  the products whose  cancellation was  appealed
These products are subject to  a  formal  recall  and  are eligible
for indemnification.

Registrants who failed  to  appeal  the Notice of Intent to  Cancel
had thefir product  registrations  cancelled.  Their  products  will
be subject to a voluntary  recall  but are not eligible for indem-
ni fication.

Appendix II contains  a  list of these registrants.

Information on the numbers of  distributors and users affected  by
the Emergency Suspension Order will  be  sent to the Regions.
Enforcement	

Objecti ve	'*

The primary objective of this compliance/enforcement strategy
is to assure compliance with the emergency suspension order
signed February 3, 1984.

The strategy, however, also addresses the voluntary recall  of EOB
products for use in grain fumigation and spot fumigation of grain
milling machines whose registrations were voluntarily cancelled in
response to the September 28, 1983 Notice of Intent to Cancel.

Violations Associated with Enforcement of the Emergency Suspension
Order

Violation of the Emergency Suspension Order

Under Section 12(a)(2)(J) of FIFRA it is unlawful  for any person
to violate any Suspension Order issued under section 6.  Varia-
tions of this violation include distribution/sale  of any product
labeled for any use covered by the Emergency Suspension Order
and use of a product in violation of the Order.

Violation of a Stop Sale Use and Removal Order (SSURO)

Under section 12(a)(2)(I) of FIFRA it is a unlawful for any person
to violate any SSURO issued under section 13.

Failure to Maintain Reports Required

Under section 12(a)(2)(B) of FIFRA,  it is unlawful  for a reg1s
to fail to maintain reports required by FIFRA.  If  a registran
does not have records required by section 8 of FIFRA regarding
products such as records on the movement of EDB products or the
identity of the consignee, he is in  violation of FIFRA.
-------
Inspection Scheme
EPA attaches a high priority  to  enforcement  of the EDB Emergency
Suspension Order. Therefore,  the States  and  the affected  Regions
should modify their established  priorities  to include inspections
to monitor compliance with  the  Order.

The following ranking reflects  the  priority  which should  be  given
to inspections affected by  the  Order:

Priority 1 - Inspection of  registered  EDB producing establishments

Priority 2 - Inspection of  EDB  users

Priority 3 - Inspection of  EDB  distributors

Because of the small  number of  registrants,  all registered  EDB
producing establishments should  be  inspected immediately.

Because the number of users is  so large, the Regions should
work with the States  to develop  an  appropriate inspection
targetting scheme.
                                                              ;>
The Regions should also work  closely with the States to develop
a targetting scheme for distributors after  receiving information
requested in both the formal  and voluntary  recalls.

Pertinent factors such as size  or history of violation should
be used to rank users and distributors for  prior to random
selection for inspection. The greater  number of inspections
should be targetted at users.

Roles and Responsibilities

Office of Pesticide Programs  (OPP). EPA

0  OPP will prepare a letter  to  each registrant citing the
   products affected  by the Emergency  Suspension Order dated
   February 3, 1984.

0  OPP will review the current  CMS  list  of  registrants affected
   by the September 1, 1983 and  February 1984 actions to  assure
   its accuracy.

0  OPP will provide CMS with  a  list of those products which  are
   now finally cancelled because no hearing  was requested in
   response to the Notice of  Intent to Cancel of September  28,
   1983.

Compliance Monitoring Staff (CMS)

0  CMS will mail by certified mail  a package to each registrant
   subject to the Emergency Suspension Order dated February  3,
   1984.  The package will  contain:
-------
   1)   OPP's  letter  to  registrants

   2)   A copy of  the Emergency  Suspension  Order

   3)   Stop Sale, Use,  Removal  Order  (SSURO)  for  products  covered
       by the Emergency Suspension  Order  dated  February  3,  1984

   4)   A letter formally requesting  that  registrants  recall  their
       products

0  CMS will send  a letter to  EDB  users  affected  by the Emergency
   Suspension Order  including a SSURO and  a  list  of affected
   products.

0  CMS will also  send a letter  requesting  voluntary recall  to
   registrants with  EDB grain or  grain  machinery  fumigant  products
   cancelled  because of failure to  appeal  the September  28,  1983
   Notice of  Intent  to  Cancel.

0  CMS will send  an  informational  package  to the  Regions
   containing:

   1)   A memorandum  prepared  by CMS  transmitting  to the  Regions1'
       necessary  background information for  the  February 3,  1984
       Emergency  Suspension compliance/enforcement program and
       information necessary  to monitor the  voluntary recall  for
       products cancelled under the  September 28, 1983 Notice  of
       Intent to  Cancel .

   2)   A copy of  this Strategy.

   3)   A copy of  the Emergency  Suspension  Order.

   4)   Fact Sheets prepared by  OPP  and  CMS

   5)   Press  release

   6)   Administrator's  statement

   7)   OGC memo governing indemnification

   8)   List of parties  appealing  the September  1983 Notice of
       Intent to  Cancel and subject  to  the Emergency  Suspension
       Order

   9)   List of active registrations  for grain and spot fumigation

  10)   Copy of package  sent to  EDB  users

  11)   Sample of  letter sent  to active  registrants

  12)   Sample of  letter sent  to persons whose registrations  were
       cancelled  per the September  28,  1983  Notice of Intent  to
       Cancel

  13)   Master list of all registrants prior  to  cancellation
-------
v°   CMS will  send  the  Regions  a  preliminary  list  of  users  for
    further  distribution  to  States  as  soon  as  it  becomes
    avai1able .

 °   CMS will  also  send the  Regions  a  list  of the  establishments
    which  produce  the  suspended  and cancelled  products.

 0   CMS will  keep  the  Assistant  Administrator  of  OPTS  informed  on
    the status  of  the  recall  based  on  weekly Status  Reports  from
    the Regi ons.

 Regions/EPA	

 0   Regions  will  coordinate  with States  in  the implementation of
    this Strategy.

 Outreach
    Regional  offices in  cooperation with State  officials  will  be
    responsible for issuing  news  releases to  inform the  general
    public and users of  the  provisions  set forth  in the  Order.
    The Regional  Offices and State officials  should also  seek  ,->
    the cooperation of the appropriate  extension,  agricultural
    and user  groups (co-op's,  etc.) for further disseminating
    the information contained  in  the suspension order.
 Recal1s
    Regions will  conduct the initial  monitoring  of both  formal
    recalls for products suspended  under the  Emergency  Order
    and voluntary recalls for products  voluntarily cancelled
    in response to the Notice of Intent to Cancel. Monitoring
    should be done via telephone calls  to registrants  in their
    Region within 5 days of receipt of  this Strategy.   During
    this phone call, the Regional  Office will:

    1.  Determine the management's  response to  EPA's  Recall
        Request.

    2.  Offer to  assist the firm in drafting  a  Recall  Letter to
        its distributors.  (Information on the  ideal  Letter of
        Recall is found in Section  14 of the  FIFRA Inspection
        Manual .)

    3.  Determine the identity and  amount, including  size and
        number of containers, and  location of EDB  products
        affected  by the Emergency  Suspension  Order or  the Notice
        of Intent to Cancel under  the control of the  registrant.
        If unknown to the registrant, request that he  submit
        the information to the Regional  Office  as  soon  as possible.

    4.  Request that the registrant submit the  names  and addresses
        of all consignees within the  past two years to  the Regional
        Office as soon as possible.
-------
                            -  b
   5.   Request  that  the  registrant  provide  the  following  infor-
       mation on affected  EDB  products  at  the  distributor  levej|
       as soon  as possible:   name and  registration  number  of  t^
       product, distributors'  names and addresses,  location  of
       the product,  number and size of  containers,  and  total
       amount of product.

0  Regions will confirm  all  requests for information not  provided
   during the telephone  call  in a letter to the registrant as  soon
   as  possi ble .

0  In  those  cases where  the Regional Office encounters  or  antic-
   ipates refusal by registrants to provide information as
   requested, the Regional Office/State should  conduct  an  inspec-
   tion of the  registrant  books and records and obtain  such
   information  as soon as  possible.

0  The Regional Office will  maintain close contact, usually  on  a
   weekly basis, with the  companies initiating  the  recall  actions
   to  assure that all necessary steps  to remove the product
   from the  market,  are  being taken as  promptly as  possible.

0  Regions will provide  Headquarters with  a weekly  status  report
   on  the recalls until  all  stocks are  accounted.

°  Regions will provide  other Regions  with information  obtained
   as  part of the recalls  on distribution  of EDB to a location

Inspection Targetting	
0  Regions will notify States of EDB producing establishments/
   distributors of EDB within a particular State as determined
   from the recalls.

0  Regions will send States a preliminary list of users as soon
   as it becomes available.  The list will include grain elevators
   grain millers, warehouses, and PCO's who service warehouses.
   The Regions should obtain the list of PCO's from their contacts
   with warehouses.

Enforcement Actions
o
Regional  offices in cooperation with State officials will
be responsible for issuing SSURO's to distributors and
retailers which have products not under the direct control
of the registrant in the Regions and States for which they
have jurisdiction.

Regional  offices and State officials will  be responsible  for
issuing Stop Use Orders to any users not identified by  CMS.

Regions are responsible for lifting SSURO's issued in con-
junction  with the Suspension Order if appropriate (e.g.,  i
registrant decides to export the product).
-------
0   In those States  with  cooperative  enforcement  agreements
   Regions are responsible  for  taking  enforcement  actions
   in cases referred  to  them  by the  States.

Federal  Programs	
   In States without cooperative  enforcment  agreements,  the
   Regions are responsible for the entire compliance monitoring
   and enforcement program.
States
Inspecti ons
°  States will  conduct establishment inspections to assure com-
   pliance with EPA's SSURO's  and the EDB Emergency Suspension
   Orders and to confirm the amounts of existing stocks.   States
   should forward information  on existing stocks to the Regional
   Office.  All EDB producing  establishments should be inspected
   as soon as possible.
                                                              . t

0  States will  conduct inspections at the distributor/retai1
   and user level.  The identity of most distributors will be
   determined from information from the recalls. (Regional offices
   will  provide this information to States.)

0  States may develop a list of EDB users affected by the Emergency
   Suspension Order who are not contained on the EPA user list and
   may issue State SSURO's to  those users.

Enforcement
0  States will  be primarily responsible for enforcement actions.
   If a State cannot enforce the terms of the Emergency Suspension
   Order or Notice of Intent to Cancel , the State may refer the
   case to the  Region for enforcement action.

0  States and Regions are reminded that knowing and willful viola-
   tions of the Suspension Order and/or SSURO's are likely candi-
   dates for criminal action.

0  States should keep the Regional Office informed of all  EDB
   violations/actions on a monthly basis for the next six
   months.
-------
                  Appendix  I  -  Status  of  EDB  Uses
Stored Grain Fumigation
Spot Fumigation of Grain
  Mi 11 i ng Machinery
                  Subject  to  Emergency  Suspension  Order
                  of  February  3,  1984,  which  prohibits
                  sale,  distribution  and  use.   Also
                  subject  to  September  28,  1983  Notice
                  of  Intent to Cancel.   If  registrants
                  with  products subject to  notice  did
                  not appeal  the  action within  required
                  30  days  their products  would  already
                  be  cancelled.
Soil Fumigation
                  Subject to  Emergency  Suspension  Order
                  of September  28,  1983 against  sal*
                  and distribution  of  products.   Pro-
                  ducts  in hands  of users  at  time  of
                  suspension  could  be  used until
                  September 1,  1984 or  final  cancel-
                  lation, whichever is  later.
Felled Log Fumigation
                  Subject to September 28,  1983  Notice
                  of Intent to  Cancel.  Registrants
                  had 30 days to  appeal  or  product was
                  automatically cancelled.   Products
                  in hands of users  prior  to cancel-
                  lation could  be used until September  1
                  1984 or final  cancellation,  whichever
                  i s 1ater .
Post - Harvest
  Fumigation
Quaranti ne
Subject to September 28,  1983 Notice
of Intent to Cancel.  However, cancel
lation not scheduled to be effective
until  September 1 ,  1984.
Mi nor Uses
  Termite Control
  Beehive keepers  and
    Honeycombs
  Vault Fumigation
  Japanese Settle  Control
                  Subject to  September  28,  1983  Notice
                  of Intent to  Cancel.   Registrants
                  could  avoid  cancellation  by  amending
                  their  labelling  to  reduce  risk  to
                  acceptable  level .
-------
  THE COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY FOR
        CANCELLED LINDANE PRODUCTS
             APR 2 5 1985
     OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE MONITORING
OFFICE OF PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
  U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY FOR  LINDANE

OVERVIEW
PAGE

1-2

REQUIREMENTS/ACTION
Federal Registrants
Intrastate Registrants
Di stri butors
End Users
REGULATED INDUSTRY
2-4
2-3
3
3
4
4

OUTREACH
4

NEUTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE INSPECTION SCHEME
4

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT & ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITY
Office of Pesticide Programs
Office of Compliance Monitoring
Regi ons
States
ENFORCEMENT
Viol ations
Response to Violations
5-6
5
5
5
5-6
6-8
6
7-8
-------
                  COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY
                           FOR LINDANE              ARR 95 1S85


OVERVIEW

Three Major Highlights Based on One Notice of Intent to Cancel
and Two Subsequent Amended Notices of Intent to Cancel

0  Notice of Intent to Cancel - For continued registration,
   Lindane products are required to bear a restricted use (RU)
   statement if the label allows for use on commercial
   ornamentals, avocados, pecans, spray* uses on livestock,
   forests, or Christmas trees; structural treatments, or use in
   dog shampoos and dog dusts.  Other labeling statements are
   required for both RU and non-RU products.
o
   First Amended Notice - EPA Reg. No. 2781-3 is permitted
   continued registration as a dog dip to control pests in
   addition to mites provided labels bear certain precautionary
   1anguage.

0  Second Amended Notice - EPA Reg. No's. 495-6, -7, -8 are
   permitted continued registration as indoor smoke fumigation
   devices until May 31, 1986 provided labels bear certain
   precautionary modifications.  The first two products are for
   indoor use.  The third product will bear directions only for
   outdoor use; the indoor use has been deleted from the
   labeli ng.

The gamma isomer of hexachlorocyclohexane, commonly called
Lindane, is an insecticide used for food crops, ornament31s,
forests, seed treatments, structures (indoors and outdoors),
and animals.  Based on oncogenicity concerns associated with
potential exposure, the Agency issued a Notice of Intent to
Cancel the use of Lindane for dog dips to control pests other
than mites and for indoor smoke fumigation devices (except
greenhouse use).  The Agency also denied applications for
registrations for Lindane products for the remaining uses unless
registrants and applicants modified the terms and conditions of
registration to comply with the requirements of the Notice of
Intent to Cancel.  The most notable condition was the restricted
use classification for commercial ornamentals, avocados, pecans,
spray* uses on livestock, forestry, Christmas trees, structural
treatments, dog shampoos, and dog dusts.  The proper restricted
use pesticide statement does not appear in the Notice of Intent
to Cancel but does appear in 40 CFR 162.10(j).


*   The October 19, 1983 FR Notice incorrectly implied that all
     uses of Lindane on livestock were restricted.  Only the
     spray uses were restricted (based on a discussion with
     George LaRocca, PM 15 on October 11, 1984).
-------
                              -  2  -
 Other  labeling  modifications  were  required  both  for  restricted
 uses  and  other  uses  which  were  not  classified  as  restricted.
 EPA  announced  its  Intent to Cancel  Pesticide Products Containing
 Lindane  and  Denial  of  Applications  for  Registrations of  Pesticide
 Products  Containing  Lindane for  these uses  on  September  30,  1983
 (published  in  the  Federal  Register  [FR]  on  October  19,  1983  [48
 FR 48512]).

 However,  EPA amended the Notice  of  Intent to Cancel, as  the
 result  of a  hearing  request,  to  allow continued  registration of
 one  Lindane  dog  dip  product (EPA Reg. No. 2781-3) to control
 other  pests  in  addition to mites provided certain modifications
 were  reflected  on  the  labeling  and  accepted by OPP.  This
 amendment was  published in the  FR  on June 27,  1984  (49  FR 26282).

 Additionally,  a  second hearing  request  resulted  in  EPA  amending
 the  Notice  of  Intent to Cancel  to  allow  continued registration
 of three  smoke  fumigation  devices  (EPA  Reg.  No.'s  495-6, -7,
 and  -8)  until  May  31,  1986 provided certai.n modifications are
 reflected on the labeling  and accepted  by OPP.   This amendment
 was  published  in the FR on February 8,  1985 (50  FR  5424).

 REQUIREMENTS/ACTION;
   Federal  Registration  Requirements  under  FIFRA §3  and §24(c)	

 0  Persons  (as  defined by  FIFRA  §2(s)) may  not  distribute,
   sell,  offer  for  sale, hold  for  sale,  ship, deliver  for
   shipment  or  receive and  (having  so  received) deliver or
   offer  to  deliver  to any  person  cancelled  Lindane  products other
   than existing  stocks  as  defined  by  a  letter  to  the
'   registrants  (October  28,  1983).

 0  Cancellation of  products  not  conforming  with the  provisions
   of  the October  19,  1983  FR  Notice  of  intent  to  Cancel became
   effective 30 days after  the date registrants received that
   notice,  except  for  products for  which  a  hearing was  requested.

 0  Persons  were permitted  to continue  distribution of  existing
   stocks of cancelled Lindane products  until October  1, 1984,
   except as provided  in 50  FR 5424,  February 8, 1985.

 0  For EPA  Reg. No.'s  495-6, -7, -8 for  indoor  homeowner • ses and
   similar  new  registrations only,  persons  may  distribute,  sell,
   offer  for sale,  hold  for  sale,  ship,  deliver for  shipment or
   receive  and  (having so  received) deliver  or  offer to deliver
   to  any person  these products  including existing stocks until
   May 31,  1986 provided the registrant  complies with  50 FR 5424,
   February  8,  1985.

 NOTE:  Existing  stocks  are  defined to mean  the quantity of
       Lindane products in  the  United States at the time of
       cancellati on.
-------
                               -3-
0 For EPA Reg. No.'s 495-6, -7, -8 for indoor use only,
  registrants may distribute existing stocks of products not
  conforming with 50 FR 5424, February 8, 1985 until  April  15,
  1985.

  FIFRA §5 Experimental Use Products	

0 Experimental Use Permits (EUPs) are issued to accumulate
  information necessary to register a pesticide under FIFRA
  §3.  No EUPs are currently in effect to gather information
  for uses subject to the provisions of the October 19,  1983 FR
  and subsequent amendments.

  FIFRA §18 Exemptions	

0 Exemptions issued under FIFRA §18 for any Federal or State
  agency are not subject to the provisions of the Notice of
  Intent to Cancel and subsequent amendments.

  Intrastate Registrations	

0 Persons were required to submit applications for registration
  of Lindane products within 30 days after receipt of the
  October 19, 1983 Notice of Intent to Cancel.  Only  products
  conforming to the requirements of the Notice of Intent to
  Cancel were federally registered.  This effectively cancelled
  any products not in conformance with this FR notice.

0 Persons may not distribute, sell, offer for sale, hold for sale,
  ship, deliver for shipment or receive and (having so received)
  deliver or offer to deliver to any person cancelled Lindane
  products other than existing stocks as defined by the  letter
  to the registrants (October 28, 1983).

0 Cancellation of products not conforming to the provisions of
  the October 19, 1983 FR became effective 30 days after the
  date registrants received the Notice of Intent to Cancel.

0 Persons were permitted to continue distribution of  existing
  stocks of cancelled Lindane products with unrevised labeling
  until October 1, 1984.

Distributors (NOT INCLUDING REGISTRANTS)	

0 Persons may continue to distribute existing stocks  of  cancelled
  Lindane products until supplies are exhausted except as listed
  below.

0 For EPA Reg. No.'s 495-6, -7, and -8 for indoor use only,
  persons may continue to distribute existing stocks  of  con-
  tainers with either labeling revised in accordance  with 50 FR
  5424 (February 8, 1985) or non-revised labeling until  November
  30, 1986.  This also applies for similar new registrations of
  indoor homeowner smoke fumigation devices.
-------
                             - 4 -
Users :	

0 End Users are permitted to continue use of existing  stocks  of
  cancelled Lindane products until  supplies  are exhausted.

REGULATED INDUSTRY                                          ~

0 Number of Registrants with products cancelled -  170


0 Number of Producer Establishments - 60 producing in  FY83


0 Number of Cancelled Products
   317  Federally registered products
    66  Intrastate registered products (16
        indicated as cancelled on printout
        denied registration)
of which were
but in fact were only
  Major Producers:

     Celamerck GMBH and Co. KG
     Chevron Chemical  Co. - Ortho Division
     Chi pman,  Inc.
     Southwest Petro Chemicals (Omaha)  Division of Witco
     Hopkins Chemical  Co.
OUTREACH
To assure compliance with the provisions of the cancellation,
OCM plans to issue Stop Sale, Use or Removal  Orders (SSUROs)  to
all registrants who had products cancelled.  For those registrants
who have existing stocks with non-revised labeling  in  addition
to stocks with accepted modified labeling (generally restricted
use) for the same product, federal/state inspectors will  issue
SSUROs during site visits for stocks in violation of the  labeling
requirements.  Under the authority  of 40 CFR  169.2  persons  are
required to retain records of Lindane produced and  shipped  for  a
period of two years after creation  of the record.  SSUROs at  the
distributor level for indoor smoke  fumigation devices  (except
greenhouses) will be issued after November 30, 1986.

NEUTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE INSPECTION SCHEME

For any cancelled Lindane registrations, State/EPA  inspectors
will inspect all  establishments which produced Lindane after
1983.  EPA will request the States  to stop-sale any indoor  smoke
fumigation devices (except greenhouse use) subject  to  the provisions
of 50 FR 5424, February 8, 1985, (EPA Reg.  No's. 495-6,  -7,  -8
and similar new registrations)  after November 30, 1986 which  are
found during random marketplace inspections.                     i
-------
                             - 5 -
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT & ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITY	

Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP)	
OPP's Registration Division (RD) will:

o Provide OCM with list of Lindane products by registration
  number, and name and address of registrant.

Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM)	

OCM will be responsible for the following:

0 Developing a list of establishments for cancelled Lindane
  products which submitted annual production reports for the
  last two years.

0 Providing a list of establishments, product registration
  numbers and names and addresses for cancelled Lindane products
  to the Regions for distribution to the States.

0 Issuing SSUROs to establishments for any cancelled Lindane
  indoor smoke fumigation devices (except greenhouses) after
  November 30, 1986.

Regions	

The EPA Regions will be responsible for the following:

0 Negotiating with States participating in the FIFRA Cooper-
  ative Enforcement Agreement  Program to conduct inspections
  at producing establishments  and distributors for compliance
  with the provisions of the cancellation and any SSUROs issued.

0 Conducting inspections in States without Cooperative
  Agreements.

0 Distributing a list developed by RD and OCM to participating
  States or field inspection offices in Colorado and Nebraska.

0 Conducting import inspections (where appropriate).

States	

Participating States will be responsible for developing
the following:
-------
                             - 6 -
0 Conducting inspections for compliance with  the  provisions  of
  the Lindane cancellation and any SSURO issued  within  the
  State as part of the FIFRA Cooperative Fnforcement  Agreement.

0 Taking enforcement actions for violations of the Notice  of
  Intent to Cancel and subsequent amendments  or  referring
  violations to EPA.

0 Conducting import inspections (where appropriate).

ENFORCEMENT

VIOLATIONS	

It shall be unlawful for:

Regi strants

0 §12(a)(2)(F)  - to make available for use, or to use any
                 pesticide classified  for restricted  use for some
                 or all  purposes other than in accordance  with
                 §3(d) of  FIFRA and any regulations thereunder

0 §12(a)(2)(I)  - to violate any order  issued  under 613  of  FIFRA
                 (SSURO)

0 612(a)(2)(K)  - to violate any cancellation  of  a pesticide
                 registration

Distributors, Dealers &  Others

0 Sl?(a)(2)(F)  - to make available for use, or to use any
                 pesticide classified  for restricted  use for some
                 or all  purposes other than in accordance  with
                 63(d) of  FIFRA and any regulations thereunder

0 61?(a)(?)(I)  - to violate any order  issued  under 613  of  FIFRA
                 (SSURO)

0 §12(a) (2) (K)  - to violate any cancellation  of  a pesticide
                 regi strati on

Users

0 §12(a)(2)(G)  - to use  any pesticide  in a manner inconsistent
                 with its  labeling

0 §12(a)(2)(I)  - to violate any order  issued  under FIFRA §13
                 (SSURO)

0 §12(a)(2)(K)  - to violate any cancellation  of  a pesticide
                 registration
-------
RESPONSE TO VIOLATIONS
States

States are responsible for taking the enforcement actions for
any misuse cases.  States will  refer violations of the cancel-
lation order or SSURO to EPA unless the State has the authority
to enforce these provisions in  delegated programs.  State
action is based on the statutes specific to the State.

Federal
In those situations where EPA conducts the inspection or a
State refers a case to EPA for enforcement action, the FIFRA
Civil Penalty Policies will  be used to determine the level of
action.

Civil Administrative Enforcement Actions

Civil Penalties

The FIFRA penalty policies can be found in the FIFRA
Compliance/Enforcement Guidance Manual.  Relevant portions of
the penalty policy are given below:

§12(a)(2)(F) - to make available for use,  or to use any
               pesticide classified for restricted use for some
               or all  purposes other than  in accordance with
               §3(d) of FIFRA and any regulations thereunder.

Penalt'

/ Amount
1
I 500
Size of
2
I 1250
Business
3
1 2750
Category
4
| 4250 |
5
5000
§12(a)(2)(G) - Use or Disposal  of a pesticide in a manner
               inconsistent with its labeling.

                            Size of Business Category
                        12345
Adverse Effects
Highly Probable
Adverse Effects
Unknown
Adverse Effects
Not Probable
500
280
120
1250
700
300
2750
1540
660
4250
2380
1020
5000
2800
1200
-------
                              -8-
§12(a)(2)(I) - to violate any order issued under §13 of FIFRA
               (SSURO).

                            Size of Business Category
                        12345
Violation of a
SSURO
Failure to provide
Names & Addresses
of recipients of
products believed
in violation of
SSURO
5000
500
5000
1250
5000
2750
5000
4250
5000
5000
§12(a)(2)(K) - to violate any cancellation of registration of
               a pesticide.

                             Size of Business Category
                        12345
Knowledge of
the Cancellation
No Knowledge of
the Cancel 1 ati on
500
100
1250
250
2750
550
4250
850
5000
1000
Stop-Sale, Use or Removal  Orders

Inspectors will issue Stop-Sale, Use or Removal  Orders (SSUROs)
for cancelled Lindane products encounte-ed at producer
establishments.  Also, SSUROs will  be issued for indoor smoke
fumigation devices except  greenhouses (subject to 50 FR 5424)
found during random marketplace inspections after November
30, 1986.

Criminal Actions
In situations where the person knowingly violates FIFRA re-
quirements, EPA may refer such cases to the Department of
Justice for criminal  prosecution.  FIFRA §14(b) provides for
criminal penalties of up to $25,000 or $1,000 and/or imprison-
ment of up to 1 year  or 30 days depending on the status of
the violator, i.e., registrant, commercial  applicator, or
other person.
-------
                 ENFORCEMENT STRATEGY FOR LINDANE  PESTICIDE  PRODUCTS


REGISTRANTS
(Federal §§3
& 24(c))
(Federal §5)
experimental
use permits
(Federal §18)
Only for EPA
Reg. No.'s
495-6, -7, -8 &
similar new
registrations
REGISTRANTS
(Intrastate)
DISTRIBUTORS****
Federal &
Intrastate

Only for EPA
Reg. No.'s
495-6, -7, -8 &
similar new
registrations
CANCELLED
USES

all not
specifically
mentioned
below
n/a
n/a
indoor use of
smoke
fumigation
devices
all
all not
specifically
mentioned
below
indoor
smoke
fumigation
devices
FR CITATION
FOR
CANCELLATION
48 FR 48512
October 19,
1983
none
none
48 FR 48512
October 19,
1983 AND
50 FR 5424
Feb. 8, 1985
48 FR 48512
October 19,
1983
48 FR 48512
October 19,
1983

48 FR 48512
October 19,
1983 AND
50 FR 5424
Feb. 8, 1985
CANCELLATION
EFFECTIVE

30 days after
receipt of FR
Notice
not affected,
no current
EUPs
exempt
30 days after
receipt of
50 FR 5424* or
May 31, 1986**
30 days after
receipt of 48
FR 48512
30 days after
registrants
received FR
Notice
30 days after
receipt of
50 FR 5424* or
May 31, 1986**
DISTRIBUTION OF
EXISTING STOCKS
PERMITTED UNTIL
10-1-84
no current existing
stocks
exempt
4-15-85*
5-31-86**
10-1-84***
supplies are
exhausted

11-30-86* and **
**
***
****
Existing stocks of labeling not in conformance with  50  FR  5424,  Feb. 8, 1985
Existing stocks of labeling in conformance with provisions of
50 FR 5424, Feb. 8, 1985
Existing stocks of labeling not in conformance with  48  FR  48512  Oct. 19, 1983
Retail level and otherwise but not including registrants
-------
                                    -2-
            ENFORCEMENT STRATEGY FOR LINDANE PESTICIDE PRODUCTS

USERS
Federal &
Intrastate
Only for EPA
Reg. No.'s
495-6, -7, -8 &
similar new
registrations
USES
all not
specifically
mentioned
below
indoor use of
smoke
fumigation
devices
FR CITATION
FOR
CANCELLATION
48 FR 48512
October 19,
1983
48 FR 48512
October 19,
1983 AND
50 FR~54~24
Feb. 8, 1985
CANCELLATION
EFFECTIVE
30 days after
registrants
received 48 FR
48512
30 days after
receipt of
48 FR 48512*or
May 31, 1986**
DISTRIBUTION OF
EXISTING STOCKS
PERMITTED UNTIL
supplies are
exhausted
supplies are
exhausted
Existing stocks of labeling not in conformance with  the
provisions of 50 FR 5424, Feb.  8,  1985

Existing stocks of those products  conforming to provisions  of
50 FR 5424, Fet>. 8, 1985
-------
5424

federal Register /-VoLSOT
                                                        .Friday! Febnjary'oVftBS /
(OPP-30000/10Q; PH-FRL 277&-S]
     -..»<•»  •   . "••        :V. .r-".
Lindane; Amendment of Notice of '-Tf'•'• ''••
Intent To Cancel Pesticide Products'T
Containing Lindane    .   .   -..-..-.r-v   •-

AGENCY: Environmental Protection ^ L
Agency (EPA).      .          '*"f^*  . '"'
ACTION: Amendment of Notice of Intent  ..
to Cancel..          • '       "'.'.•

SUMMARY: A Notice of Intent to Cancel
Pesticide Products Containing Lindane
was issued on September 30,1983. This
Notice amends that Notice of Intent to
Cancel to change the effective date for
the cancellation of the remaining   , • -
registrations of lindane smoke  y-f-"
fumigation devices for indoor use, •'.'•"
provided certain additional protective  •
measures are instituted within 30 days
of the publication of this Amended  '
Notice. The Environmental Protection
Agency has determined that  .  ^..: •. •
maintenance of the registrations until
May 31,1986, under the conditions  •• ^;~
specified will not cause unreasonable
adverse effects on the environment... <
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 8,1985.  .;
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: "'
Judith W. Wheeler, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances Division. Office of General
Counsel (LE-132P), 401M St, SW.,
Washington, D.C 20480 (202-382-7510).
  The docket of the administrative
hearing (FIFRA Docket No. 524, et al.] is
available for public inspection in the
Office of the Hearing Clerk, Room  •••••••
3708A. 401M St, SW, Washington. D.C.
from 7:30 ajn. to 4 p.m.. Monday through
Friday, except legal holidays. An
administrative Hie containing public  '•!
comments and publicly released Agency
documents relating to this action is   J
available for public inspection from 8
ajn.  to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except legal holidays, in Rm. 711, ••>; £i~
Crystal Mall #2,1921 Jefferson Davis
Highway, Arlington. VA.   -.wf> '^n,*.!?,-
                                                                           unreasonable adverse effects i
                                                                           environment Any other person^
                                                                           seeks to register lindane smoVe^  _ _
                                                                           fumigation devices for indoor ose'mu.;
                                                                           -do so under the terms and conditions
                                                                           required herein, and any such'^Jfi?
                                                                           registrations will .also be subject loft
                                                                          . May 31.1986 cancellation date! Any'
                                                                           Isuch registration could be granted ort
                                                                           if the applicant also complies with all
                                                                           other requirements for registrationi'*1
                                                                                  ; —',.*.•..-<} MiiWS-.r^lto'ir 04J*?'-
                                                                          ( D. Bases for Determinations for -TSSfip
                                                                          -••Amendment to Cancellation Notice ','*
                  < Section B(b) of the Federal Insecticide.
                  Fungicide, and Rodentidde Act (FIFRA)
                  provides that a Notice of Intent to  s'.'H
                  Cancel does not become a final order of
                  cancellation if a person adversely  : i'/iu
                  affected by the Notice properly requests
                  •an adjudicatory hearing to contest the  i
                  cancellation. A registrant Continental  n
                  Chemiste Corporation, did request a  ^-.
                  hearing on the cancellation of the    ?\*v
                  registrations it holds for lindane smoke T
                  fumigation devices for indoor use. As a'
                  result of discussions between EPA and tf-.
                  the remaining registrant of the smoke 7*T
                  fumigation devices, Continental -"f-9  _   	r	__?	
                  Chemiste Corporation, it was agreed jjf flntent to Cancel Pesticide Products*^
                  that Continental Chemiste Corporation 1%  Containing Lindane Identified the rial
                  would withdraw its request for a   /..'>.*}. -associated with the Indoor Smoke ^
                  hearing in. FIFRA Docket No._524, et aL  ^fumigation devicedie of lindane. BBS
                  following amendment of the notice of  : ? on the cancellation'ofregistrations of
                  cancellation to provide that cancellation   '   •    ••--•-<•--••-•   -  -
                  of registrations of its lindane smoke   C.M
                  fumigation devices for indoor use will be
                  effective May 31.1988. -.^i
                  , ' Continental Chemiste Corporation ,
                  manufactures two lindane smoke              	       __   	     _
                  fumigation devices for indoor use, Smo-/!^^] 0"f ^~t foVflie^ flevices i's  _._
                  Cloud and Moth-Cloud, and one. Bug- .^consistent with the purpose of the Ac
                  Tab, for indoor and outdoor use. ,Sn*~- -=•*' •   	  "-•   ••••»• •••-•«•
                  Cloud is for general indoor nse and ..SP'^/- pfrpr». nn th» <
                  _  -  _t   . . •      .   • '     n 1  -«i» ' piiCUt* (JU U1C \
                  Moth-Cloud is for use in closets. Only
                  the indoor uses were cancelled by the.
                  September 30,1983 Notice of Intent to
                  Cancel.  ' -i-.'..'.^1-; -':''".£.*;"
                  B. Amendmentto^theNotice'~: ??'^|^i'
                    This amendment to the September 30, ,
                  1983 Notice of Intent to Cancel changes"
                  the effective date for the cancellation of
                  the remaining registrations of lindane H
                  smoke fumigation devices for indoor use
                  to May 31,1986, provided an appropriate
                                                                             The September 30," 1983 Notice of
                                                                                                          *
                                                                           lindane smoke fumigation devices for
                                                                           indoor use effective May'31,1986 and
                                                                           the labermodlficadons and other ten
                                                                          ''; identified urUnit m 9f this Amended
                                                                          •. Notice, the Agency has* determined th
                                                                          -providing a period of time for th'e'pha
                                                                                                        door
                                                                                                ,  sure to j%&
                                                                                         scceplably Ugh levels
                                                                          .cancer risk. Theretore,'for Smo-Cloud
                                                                           .which has by farJhe'largest volume '.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                .\.-rt'±*£ffii$
L Introduction  .
A. Regulatory Background    ---••--'
  On September 30,1983. EPA issued a
Notice of Intent to Cancel Pesticide
Products Containing Lindane.which was
published in the Federal Register of
October 19,1983 (48 FR 48512). This  .
Notice, in relevant part, states the
Administrator's intent to cancel the  '
registrations of lindane smoke     — '
fumigation devices for indoor use. The
decision to cancel registrations for
lindane smoke  fumigation devices for   :
indoor use was a result of a careful
evaluation of the risks to public health
and benefits of this use.
                  application to amend registrations to
                  impose certain additional protective"-
                  measures is received by EPA within 30 ~*
                  jigys of the publication of this Amended1
                  Notice, in order lor tne registrations of ."*.
                  lindane smoke fumigation devices for "**J
                  indoor nse to continue until May 31,1988
                  under this Notice, the registrant "i 3^v.»w
                  ; Continental Chemiste Corporation, must
                  amend its labels to reflect the terms and.
                  conditions which are detailed below. ~"5£
                  They are intended to provide additional:
                  protection to persons exposed to lindane
                  .smoke fumigation devices for indoor use
                  to reduce the risk of cancer from  >.:&$ • a        _    .
                  exposure to the products during the . !&;*. .but will continue to be available for
                  interim period until cancellation  . >*  "*r  —••'•—«•- '«R«*w-.~  ^ ^ J •*
                  becomes effective on May 31,1988. The
                  Agency has determined such   :.:-.!>.. •:
                  registration will not have unreasonable
                  adverse effects'on the environment   ^;.
                  Detailed below are specific     -   i
                                                                             Implementation of these measures
                                                                           ' will reduce substantially exposure frt
                                                                           the indoor nse of lindane smoke  osn
                                                                           fumigation devices and will reduce 6
                                                                           risk to an acceptable level during the
                                                                           phaseout period. Based on a compari
                                                                           of the benefits of continued use of tb
                                                                           smoke fumigation devices to these,-
                                                                           reduced risks, the Agency has  ^»
                                                                          ~ determined that the continued   —1>_
-------
                  .•   -.            •.-*':*•              :      -v  •S.
                  ^Federal  Register  /'Vol.'50. NovS? /"Friday.  February's. 1985  A Notices
registration of these products during the . "^3. After April 15.^985. lindane smoke    to the registrations df/Continent
phaseout period will not have    '•;---3J?Rvfumigation aevices for indoor use may     Chemiste Corporation, Kegistrt^
unreasonable adverse effects on the ' -V^'.not be distributed, offered for sale, held    495-6,495-7, and 495-flT»{nce fn^iTJBTe^
environment.   ... ..v-.^rv .:.;'.vS:-.r^y;;^!brsale, sold, shipped, or delivered for     the only registrations which were*fiotj£
	 	        . _ •'*'  .   • _  *'•' • "v " V - Si/ •ftlnmont Kv anv rooiatran't nnlo** tho r "*•'  ranrp11»rl Viw nrtAratinn rtf taw ftMaeftfifi
                 V.>--r
  This Unit of the Amended
establishes the terms and conditions"''
governing registration of certain lindane
smoke fumigation devices. '•-<..Jifc.1**-'
  In order to allow for the continued .!;
registration of Smo-Cloud (Registration
No. 495-6). Moth-Cloud (Registration
No. 495-8) until May 31.1986, and Bug-
Tab (Registration No. 495-7). the  tf
registrant must request amendment to .
each registration incorporating all of the
following terms and conditions.. • ^-rf-
including all of the required labeling  ,  '
modifications. V«$'^^*:>i'^"'C£*ii*>.':..
  1. Lindane nmoke fumigation devices '^S]
for indoor use only:    -•'••^^^^j^\";?t
  a. For Smo-Cloud and similar  :J^X:':''"
products, the label shall state: "Do not'"
use more than two times per year on the
same premises."    :::  .•?.".'.'•• ;v^^>;>
  b. For Smo-Cloud and similar  ...faffl
products, the label shall state: "Do not,
enter rooms for five hours after Lighting.
                  of the
  /«. After May 31.1988, stocks
 lindane smoke fumigation devices for
. indoor use in the possession of the V *
 registrant with lablels which compt
 with the amended terms of registration
 may not be distributed, offered for •aTep'
. held for sale. sold, shipped, or delivered
 for shipment  ,-ii^s,•'; ^i/^**^
  •5. Any existing stocks pf products'
 within the possession of the registrant
•after May 31.1986, and within the '!=£
>possesaion of distributors other than,
-registrant, including retaflere, after.
'" 'ovembcr 30.1986. feust be disposed of
     ie manner required by die
                                                                          >'...terms of the September30,1983 NoBcir
                                                                          "". of Intent to Cancel --*----r--''"*!»*«4 '
                                                                            " -This Notice of Amendment creates no
                                                                            new opportunity to request a hearing i]
                                                                          |.punuant to section 8 of FIFRA. Section
                                                                            B(b) provides adversely affected j>eipoiu
                                                                           jithe right to request a Bearing ti'3$3"*~
                                                                           ^challenge a_notice of intent to cancel
                                                                           r registration" of a pesticide product wt
                                                                           "30 days. The Notice o( Intent to Cancel
                                                                            the use,of lindane was issued on .. ^^jjj
                                                                           . _ September 30,1983. This Notice of  /'':
                                                                           r Amendment merely modifies the terms'
                                                                           '" -' the September 30 Notice to change -
                                                                              e effective date"of cKQceHation of 4U
                                     hfe It is the responsibility of the
                                     ''to notify distributors of this requirement
                                         certified maU and maintain records
                                  ' i
                                      Existing stocks are defin
                                      Amended Notice as lindane smokej
                                .    - .,.-r the phaieoul of ifL.	
                                5*5*. gimoke fumigation device* for ind
                                    .T^\n accordance with the .terms and_
                                    ^conditions TOntamedhereiiTh'erj
                                   TVwVtij. &!M*«MM Mf A>MA*.«lMA«*t la.mAt m
                                    .-..  .   •..   ,  .    ,  .  ._.   .  ....
Air out rooms for two hours afte7. -fumigation devices for todoor usewl
                                 ^"'' wer? «P8tered products when
reentering. After aeration, horizontal
surfaces shall be washed. Impermeable
gloves shall be worn during washing."
  c. For Moth-Cloud and similar
products, the label shall state: "Do not
use more than two times per year on the
same premises." It shall also state:
"Closet door shall remain closed for one
hour after lighting. Air out closet for one
hour after opening door. All clothes in
closet must be aired out before .^l^t/jj
wearing."  V V>..>s;S?r ?$i ;3'-'. -.v'-ji'-'j*i .?;>-H
  d. The labels must be revised to meet
current standards as specified in 40 CFR
162.10 and all other current standards as
specified in 40 CFR 162.10 and all other
current requirements applicable to these
products. Labels must describe proper  -
handling and disposal symptoms of •!::•
poisoning, practical treatment in the . vl:
event of poisoning, and other warning •
statements appropriate to the product's
toxicity category.  r x*:^v:rL"r^''Xi. :
  e. The labels, must state: $fot to be  .
oold after November 30.1986." .: .'••
  2. Lindane smoke fumigation devices
registered for indoor and outdoor use:
  a. Lindane smoke fumigation devices
registered for indoor and outdoor uses
will no longer be registered for indoor
use effective March 11.1985.
  b.  Bug-Tab and similar products will
continue to be registered for outdoor use
only when accompanied by labeling
which reflects the following limitation:
The label must state: "Not for indoor
use."          •....•,.••-  -V. ••:•.-,.,.:.
 marketed and which are present
 .the territorial United States.  •_3?
 -  6. The use of existing stocks by end-
 users is allowed to continue until the 4 rrv
'• supply is exhausted.   . >>'j-^ .C-£:7'o:
   7. Lindane smoke fumigation devices  V.
 for indoor use whose registration • TCA •/•-:
              -              -   V;c5',
                          not
j^notice'of intent.to cancel nor can i
<>er»on be adversely affected .b
^Notice under the termV bfisectf
        Continental Chemiste*!!
 Corporation may comply with 1
                ''  ' thisNotice]
                                                                                                              r
                                    : Cancel as amended by this Notice ma
                                      ,,^ ^ digtribu.ei Mpped, delivered
                                      abipment. received for delivery, iold.
                                    ^offeFred for , ale. held forwle.^
                                     • for delivery by or to any person ^"or
                                                                 '

                                     'State in any manner which would :j  ^
                                      violate FIFRA section 12 of the product
                                     ^ivere still registered. For purposes of this
                                      paragraph, and FIFRA iection~.S^" "*"
                                     112(a)(l)(B) and (C), the term Nlatement
                                      required in connection with [the ^  .
                                     ' product's] registration" shall mean the
                                     • statement on file with the Administrator
                                      in connection with the product's
                                      registration on the effective date of
                                      cancellation of the product
                                      IV. Procedural Matters
                                        This Notice announces the
                                      amendment of the September 30,1983
                                      Notice of Intent to Cancel Pesticide  ;
                                      Products Containing Lindaae. This  '•"'•
                                     : action is taken pursuant to the authority
                                      granted by section 6(b) of FIFRA and by
                                      the Agency's procedural regulations (40
                                      CFR 164.21(b)). This amendment i*   ••'.
                                      effective immediately and relates only
                                         Trogramsj Environmental
                                         iV '   • .nr'<.^1*1 B M| tlWMAft?-*
                                                       l?»
                                        i person, bring material ta Rm]
                                            stall Mall #2.1921 JeffersoriUaVji
                                        *Hiah W8 V* A ~"~"*""     fvn«_nn^d
                                         ^Although COTanenlflil Chemlste^
                                       Corporation, petitioner to the lindane^
                                       'cancellation hearing (FIFRA Docket Na
                                     •" 524. ft oL). is perinltte«ras • matter r* *
                                      ~ right to amend Its objections tb'flw^
                                     • ^September 3a 1963 Notice to reflecjj
                                       terms of this Notice'of AmendmeSr^
                                       •hder40CFRlMJ2lc).dw^  "
                                      ^Administrator expects that!
                                       will instead, abide by Its <
                                      ' withdraw Its challenge to Qier
-------
5426
                   Federal
                                                   27 ] Friday. Ftebruaifr ft, 1985  / Holioes
amendment* to objections mhirJi •*» ^f^jtjZC^'tJttit* fa fa ypgrrf of •    „  r,'-'^
filed nu*t be received by the Hearing  **S radiological emergency and are capable-
Clerk (A-110), Environmental Protection" :•;« being iapiesneoled. The adeqicsy of
Agency. 401 M Si. SW, Washington, <'§£&e puhfac alert and notification system
D.C 20460 within 30 days of the date o? jjf .also has beca verified as meeting the •':-'
publication of this Notice,  ..,-•:   . r V^stan3ards »et forth in Appendix S of the
- Dated:February4.1965.   '-i-   -      / NucleargegaUtory CnmmissinnfNRC)/
lohBA.Mo«w.     ,       -.::.,•.-.•     FEMAoteiaofNUREC-OB54/FEMA-
lomyvMoon,                      ,   REP-Mtaviskw 1. and inthe Standard
                                 • i. Goide far the Bvamatioa of Alert and
                                 •^•Notification Systems for Nodear Power
                                 : -j^PUnta (PFMVJ3)  Tfyfun-:-:': > v•'•:•'•*.'.'Vk>,
                                  ' ^%eFEMA will cootaroe to review the •*.'
                                 =  jtaras of ofisite plans and preparedness
                                    'r associated with the Nine-Mile Point/_ -•
                                     James A. Fitzpatrick Nodear Power"" '•'•'
                                     Generating Stations m accordance with
                                    . 1350.13 tt the FEMA rale. ' ~:-«ty.i«..*«•'••
                                     ^•-For further details with respect to tins
                                     action, refer to Docket File PEMA-REP-
                                     *-NY-l nafartamed by the Regional
                                     Director. FEMA Region n. 28 Federal "^
                                     Plaza. Room 1349. New "
                                                                          .,. By Oder .*!
                                                                          •Brace A. DombrowikL  ; • * •'•
                                                                           [FR Doc. 85-3207 FU
                                                                           aaxam coof
                                                                                    •
                                                                                            2-7-6S; MS
fFR Doc. 85-3333 F3ed 2-7-85; MS am]
BtLUNC CODE CSW-tO-M  '•••••••.-  ' '  •
FEDERAL EMERGENCY     :
MANAGEMENT AGENCY   ''. ?. •*••?
                     •  •  ' -•«. :•?•"'/
[Docket NaFE^OA-AEP-2-NY-tl .^-.y
                                                                           Order of bwMtigattan and Hearing;
The New York State and Local    ',':.-'
Emergency Preparedness Stte-SpecJQc
for the Nlne-UUe Point/James A.  rc->
Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Generating
Stations  .   ,,-jj-y. •;, n-,..!flo:j.,.;; ,..:£.,r..

ACTION: Certiricatron of FEMA findings
and determination.  '   :•-'-*• •• "•"• '>
                                                                             In th; Or^of
                                                                           rieBrtng veVrecl io (his proceeojiis
                                                                           famary 18. 1985 (SO PR 940B
                                                                           January M, 19^— f R
                                                                           ref ereBcev "to
                                                                             0633,
                                                                             •-
  in accordance with the Federal
Emergency Management Agency  •' v
.{FEMA) rule 44 CFR Part 350. the State
of New York submitted its plans relating
to the Nine-Mile Point/James A. >>.-  ,
Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Generating
Stations to the Director of FEMA Region
fl on July 15.1981,'for FEMA review and
approval On September 28,1084. the
Regional Director forwarded has
evaluation to the Associate Director for
State and Local Programs and Support
in accordance with section 350.11 of the
FEMA rule. Included in this evaluation
is a review of the Slate and local plans
around the Nine-Mile Point/James A.
Fitzpatrick facilities; an evaluation of
the joint exercise conducted on     ..• •'• •
September IS, 1981, Aagust 11.1982. and
September 22.1983, in accordance with
section 350 J of the FEMA rule; and a
public meeting held on November 4.
1981, to discuss the site-specific aspects
of the State and local plans around the
Nine-Mile Point/James A. Fitzpatrick  • .
Nuclear Power Generating Stations m
accordance with section 350.10 of Ihe
FEMA rule.       >„,:--••- •. ;*  . ;-.;.r»-••...
  Based on the evaluation by the
Regional Director and the review by the
FEMA Headquarters staff, I find and
determine that the State and local plans
and preparedness for the Nine-Mile
Point/fames A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear
Power Generating Stations are adequate
to protect the health and safety of the
public living in the vicinity of the plant
These oftsite plans and preparedness
are assessed as adequate in that they
provide reasonable assurance that
appropriate protective actions can be
                                   '•;:• JJiated: February 1. UK.'",
                                   ^v for {he Federal Empnynry
                                    ^Agency. , >
                                                                           line of fee text of tfee Order te
                                                                           No. 2076-010633"
                                     Sanmal W.Speck
                                      FEDERAL MARITUIE COy MISSION
                                                                           FEDERAL DESERVE 8
                                                                           BankEast Corp; AppOcnon To
                                                                           Engage de Novo In PvnntssJbla
                                                                                                 • •-*>*>
                                                                             Tke oaapany Hsted In this nofice IB
                                      Intmt to Ttnninate Approval of
                                      Agreement
                                       Agreement No-t
                                       Title: The Associated Latin American
                                     . Freight ConfeTences £
                                     • - Parties:. ..^y.tr -vT j
                                       ;JVQanlic & Gulf/West Coast of Sou&
                                         America Conference
                                       "East Coast/Colombia Conf prrnce \^i>ttHoiding Coapany Act p2
                                       United States Atlantic A Gulf /Ecaador ' ;; «B43(cKaI) sad i 22&21(a
                                         Conference  ; -.^ * ':ifafa&%ifa:j& (C CER Z2&zl(a)l to
                                                                           of tne Boarf's Reguktiori Y (12 OT
                                                                           lzSJt3(a)fl|5 ior Ihe Board's
                                                                                  de sum dther dbwtly or^;
                                                                                  asriialdlarif.'tt • *iaJa'nilin
                                                                            ctBrtry that is listed to f ZBJS atf 4s
                                                                                       as efooety «eJatod~to
                                    ._-'Untied Stales Atlantic A GiihVjamaica^ -J
                                     j;^• and Hlspaniola Steamship Fcsfghi -
                                      *-• .Association. .•• ' •"*#!>?tF'i*5*^iSiii
                                      "United States Atlantic * Gulf/ "	
                                    .... ...i, Southeastern Caribbean Confereace:. tbankznsj aad peodssibte for baok';
                                     ;:.' United States Atlantic ft Gulf/ -.^ v^holding companies. Unless otherwise
                                         Venezuela Conference  v.ir^ f,Tv>/noted snchsetrfrtieswiH be ooncVicfc
                                       United States Florida/Ecuador Freight  .throughoul[the IWtod Slate*:	
                                         Association    •• ^''•••.•MrtrTr'tw^tia^i'i
                                       West Coast of South America  ^  •   ;:
                                         Northbound Conference  ••»i:**t-yi=.;s;.
                                       Synopsis: By letter dated December ' -'i
                                      28,1984, the Commission was advised
                                      by the Associated Latin American  y,
                                      Freight Conferences ttiat all member
                                      conferences bad submitted (heir n..  . t
                                      resignations, effective December 91... -j
                                      1884. The Commission, therefore, gives
                                      notice of its intent to terminate its prior
                                      approval of Agreement No. 206-009678.
                                                                           immediate iaspectitm *i the Federal
                                                                           Reserve Bank tedicftted. Once the . a
                                                                         ^sppUcatiaaiaas been accepted for iiq
                                                                         >pKwesatag. ft will also be arailabsB k
                                                                         •¥ -inspection at die cfiices of the Board ••
                                                                                       .ttn^dperaonsa-yj
                                                                                  Atirvtt
                                                                                                   iboaofft

                                                                           question whefhen
                                                                           pnposali
                                                                                                      SMT J
                                                                                                      «• te
                                                                                              ably
                                                                           to prodncc benefits ItB tha
                                                                           as greater convenience, in
                                                                                          -
-------
26282	Federal Register / Vol. 49.  No. 125 / Wednesday. ]une 27.  1984 / Notices
                              IOPP 30000/10F; OPTS-fRL 2612-1]

                              Undanr, Amendment of Notice of
                              Intent to Cancel Pesticide Products
                              Containing Undane

                              AGENCY: Environmental Protection
                              Agency (EPA).
                              ACTION: Amendment of Notice of Intern
                              to Cancel

                              SUMMARY; A Notice of Intent to Cancel
                              Pesticide Products Containing Lindane
                            ' -was issued on September 30.1983. This
                              Notice amends that Notice of Intent to
                              Cancel to permit continued registration
                              of lindane dip to control fleas, ticks, lice.
                              sarcoptic mange, and scabies on dogs
                              provided certain additional protective
                              measures are instituted. The  Agency has
                              determined that continued registration
                              with these additional protective
                              measures will not cause unreasonable
                             adverse effects on the environment.
                             DATE: ]une 27.1984.
                             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
                             Judith W. Wheeler. Pesticides and Toxic
                             Substances Division. Office of General
                             Counsel (LE-132P). Environmental
                             Protection Agency, 401 M St. SW,
                             Washington. D.C. 20460 (202-382-7510).
                               The docket of the administrative
                             hearing (FCFRA Docket No. 524. et al.) is
                             available for public inspection in the
                             Office of the Hearing Clerk, Room
                             3708A. 401 M St.. SW.. Washington. D.C
-------
                   Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 125  /  Wednesday. June 27. 1984  /  Notices
                                                                     26283
 from 7:30 a.m. to 4:00 pjn., Monday
 through Friday, except legal holidays.
 An administrative file containing public
 comments and publicly released Agency
 documents relating to this action is
 available for public inspection from B
 a.m. to 4 p.m.. Monday through Friday.
 except legal holidays, in Rm. 711.
 Crystal Mall =2.1921 Jefferson Davis
 Highway, Arlingtoa VA.
 SUPPUMENTAmnNFORMATlON:

 I. Introduction. .

 A. Regulatory Background
   On September 30.1983 EPA issued a
 Notice of Intent to Cancel Pesticide
 Products Containing Lindane which was
 published in the Federal Register on
 October 19.1983 (48 FR 46312). This
 Notice, in relevant part, proposed
 cancellation of the registrations of
 lindane products for use as dog dips for
 the treatment of pests other than mites.
 The decision to cancel  registrations for
 the use of dog dips for the treatment of
 pests other than mires was a result of a
 careful evalauon of the risks to pnbhc
 health and benefits of this use.
   Section 6(b) of the Federal Insecticide.
 Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
 provides that A Notice  of Intent to
 Caned does not become a final order of
 cancellation if a person adversely
 affected by the Notice properly requests
 an adjudicator}1 bearing to contest the
 cancellation. A registrant. Happy jack.
 Inc.. did request a  hearing as to the-dog
 dip use of its product. Happy Jack
 Kennel Dip. Ail other registrations-for
 lindane dog dip products for treatment
 of pests other than mites were cancelled
 by operation of law.at  the-end of 30
 days after receipt or publication of the
 September 30.1983 Notice, whichever
- came later, under the terms of that -
 Notice.
 B. Amendment of Notice
   This amendment to the September 30.
 19S3 Notice of Intent to Cancel modifies
 EPA's determination that the remaining
 registration of lindane  dog  dip*4or
 treatment of pests other than mites was  '
 to be cancelled at  the end of 30 days
 from receipt or publication.of the
 September 30.1983 Notice, whichever
 came later. Under the terms of the
 September 30 Notice as amended by this
 Notice, the terms and conditions of use
 of the registration of this product may  be
 amended in accordance with this Notice
 and. if so amended, the registration may
 continue in effect. In order to remain in
 effect under the terms  of the amended
 Notice, this registration must be
 amended to require certain addtional
 restrictions on the continued use of this
 product. These additional restrictions.
which are detailed below, are intended
to provide additional protection to
persons applying lindane dog dip to
reduce further the risk of cancer from
exposure to the product. Taking into
account the benefits of continued  '
registration of lindane dip for use to
control fleas, ticks, lice, sarcoptic
mange, and scabies on dogs as well as
the risks of advene effects, primarily
through applicator exposure, the Agency
has determined that continued
registration under these terms and
conditions will not cause unreasonable
adverse effects on the environment
Detailed below are specific
requirements for modification of the
terms and conditions for the remaining
registration and the bases for the
determination that such registration will
not cause unreasonable adverse effects.

H. Requirement for Modification of
Registration Terms and Conditions  •
  In order to avoid cancellation under
the terms of the September 30.1983
Notice of Intent to Cancel, the remaining
registration for lindane dip for use to
control fleas, ticks, lice, sarcoptic
mange, and scabies on dogs must be
modified in the foUowing.rnanner. and
the labeling of any pesticide product
sold under such registration must reflect
these modifications:
  1. The following statement shall be on
the label beneath the "MIX AS
DIRECTED" statement under
"CAUTION" AN INDIVIDUAL
APPLICATOR MUST NOT APPLY THIS
PRODUCT MORE THAN TWELVE
TIMES PER YEAR.
  2. The following statement shall be
located on the front panel of the label
beneath the product name and in the
same size type as the signal wont.FOR
KENNEL COMMERCIAL FARM AND
SPORT DOG USES ONLY.
  3. Under "DIRECTIONS TOR USE" on
the label the last two sentences shall
state:
  An individual applicator nmit not nie thii
product more than twelve times per year.
Each treatment of three dog« or fewer should
be considered one me.
  4. Applicators' must wear the
following protective clothing dozing the
treament process:  elbow-length.
waterproof gloves: a waterproof apron:
and unlined. waterproof boots.
  5. The label shall state that "improper
dilution could cause serious injury to
your dog."
 <• ft. The label shall state that children
under the age of thirteen should not be
allowed to handle or apply this product
 *7. The label shall be revised in
accordance .••'& the provisions of the
Notice of Intent to Cancel dated
September 30.1983. regarding disposal
of dips.
  8. The label shall be modified to meet
current standards as specified in 40 CFR
162.10. Labels must describe proper
handling and disposal, symptoms of
poisoning, practical treatment in the
event of poisoning, and other warning
statements appropriate to the product's
toxicity category.

III. Bases for Determinations for
Amendment to Cancellation Notice

  The September 30,1983 Notice of
Intent to Cancel Pesticide Products
Containing Lindane identified the risks
associated with the dog dip use of
lindane. The estimated cancer risks
upon whrch the regulatory actions in the
September 30.1983 Notice were based
were approximately four excess cancers
per one million exposed persons. Since
the publication of that Notice, the
Agency has obtained new information
on use patterns for the dog dip use.
When this new information was
assessed in light of the modifications in
conditions and terms of registration
identified in Unit D of this Amended
Notice of Intent  to Cancel, the Agency
determined that the use of lindane dip to
control fieas. ticks, lice, sarcoptic
mange, and scabies in dogs will not
result in unreasonable adverse effects
on the environment
  The exposure  calculations which
provided the basis for the regulatory
actions contained in the original Notice
of Intent to Cancel were based on an
assumption of 28 exposures per year.
Since the-cancellation notice, the
Agency has learned that use of this
product by kennels and veterinarians is
more limited than the Agency previously
believed. By .modifying thejebel. to limit
the number of treatments by one
applicator to twelve per year, the
exposure of any one individual is
reduced substantially from that assumed
in the previous assessment This
modification satisfies Agency concerns
about the potential of excessive
exposure to teenagers working for
kennels or veterinarians. Moreover.
since  the actual treatment time of one
dog is under one minute, it is reasonable
to allow the treatment of three dogs or
fewer to constitute one use.
  The requirement for protective
clothing (elbow-length, waterproof
gloves: waterproof apron: and unlined,
waterproof boots) substantially reduces
risks from dermal exposure. These
garments can be readily obtained at
minimal cost
  Implementation of these measures
will reduce substantially applicator
exposure from the dog dip use and. thus.
-------
 26284
Federal  Register  /  Voh  49. No. 125 / Wednesday.  June 27. 1984  /  Notices
 will reduce the hsk to applicators 10 an
 acceptabie level. Based on a comparison
 of the benefits of continued use of
 lindane dips to control fleas, ticks, lice.
 sarcoptic mange, and scabies on  dogs to
 these reduced nsks. the Agency has
 determined that the benefits of
 continued registration as modified
 herein outweigh the nsks of use.

 rv. Procedural Matters
  This Notice announces the
 amendment of the September 30.1983
 Notice of Intent to Cancel Pesticide
 Products Containing Lindane. This
 action is taken pursuant to the authority
 granted by section 6(b) of FIFRA and by
 the Agency's procedural regulations (40
 CFR 164.21(b)). This amendment  is
 effective immediately, and affects only
 the registration of Happy Jade Kennel
 Dip. Registration No. 2781-3. for which a
 hearing was requested Registrations for
 this use of lindane for which there have
 been no requests for a hearing have
 been cancelled by operation of law.
   This Notice of Amendment creates no
 new opportunity to request a  hearing
 pursuant  to section 6 of FIFRA. Section
 6(b) provides adversely affected persons
 the right to request a hearing  to
 challenge a notice of intent to cancel a
 registration of a pesticide product within
 30 days. The Notice of Intent  to Cancel
 the use of lindane was issued on
 September 30.1983. This  Notice of
 Amendment merely modifies  the  terms
 of the September 30 Notice to allow the
 continued registration for the remaining
 lindane dip registration for use to
 control fleas, ticks, lice, sarcoptic
 mange, and scabies on dogs in
 accordance with the terms and
 conditions contained herein. Therefore.^
 this Notice of Amendment is not  a
• notice of-intent to cancel nor  can any - -
 person be adversely affected  by this
 Notice under the terms of section 6 of
 FIFRA.
  Registrants subject to a final
 cancellation order. asAvell as other
 persons, may apply for a new
 registration in accordance with the
 terms of the amended notice of intent to
 cancel and the requirements of the  -
 FIFRA and applicable implementing
 procedures. The registrant of the lindane
 dog dip product which is not  already
 subject to a final cancellation order may
 comply with the amended notice of
 intent to cancel by amending the
 registration to make the necessary
 corrections. An application for an
 amended registration, together with a
 copy of the amended labeling must be
 submitted by July 27,1984 to: By  mail:
 George LaRocca. Product Manager (PM-
 15). Registration Division (TS-767C).
 Office of Pesticide  Programs.
                    Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
                    St.. SW.. Washington. D.C. 20460.
                      In"person, bring material to: Room 204.
                    Crystal Mall -2.1921 Jefferson Davis
                    Highway, Arlington. VA (703-557-2400).
                      Happy Jack. Inc.. petitioner in the
                    lindane cancellation hearing (FIFRA
                    Docket No. 524. et al.\ is permitted as a
                    matter of right to amend its objections to
                    the September 30.1963 Notice to reflect
                    the terms of this Notice of Amendment.
                    40 CFR 164.22(c]. Any amendments to
                    objections should be filed within 30
                    days of the date of publication of this
                    Notice with the  Hearing Gerk (A-110),
                    Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
                    St.. SW.. Washington. D.C 20460.
                      Dated: June 11.1984 '
                    John A. Moore,
                    Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and
                    TOJUC Substances.
                    ITU Doe. M-1UB TiM 6 a M. t*3 .m|
                    MLLJNG coot
-------
48512
Federal Register  /  Vol. 46. No.  203 /'  Wednesday.  October 19. 1963 / Notices
resolution of the issues in the former as
tuno would have to be granted (or
discovery and hearing procedures to
t;ik-T place in the latter. The proceedings
in UocVet No. KP81-UO. ct a!., wujid
virtually come to a halt
  Transweslern argues that ftilure to
consolidate will result in unnecessary
duplication in the development of the
i". i-fjiiigs.  we do not believe that the
j.uliic interest would be served  in
consolidating the proceedings in Uorktrt
.\u. in with the s«:r.lion 5» r.isr
ii;i>t >i!so l)c; di-nied.
   'I in' (.'.inintixsion t^nlt'-ra:
   ( \, Docket Nos. RPU3-113. RP«:.MJ5
• "id KIVJ-136 are consolidated  for
P':r!>i-ji-k»:t N'ns. RI;33-113. KI'o.i-13:.- and
F.Poj-lj'j is .=";!.:b!is'ied tr. d.-termint; if
thi- ir.nimur.'i pun:* ase/miniTium take
r.-nv,*v,-i wh.ch PITCO. POrCO. and
!•(; i" I,,i- • '.vii'-i thrir natural g;is
pu:. ." -i.-.-s are ui:just. unreasonable.
uii.i i'\ i.'isciin-inaiory or preferential.
   !(J) A Presiding Administrative Law
Ji;d;-e to be designated by the Chief
Ad  -..r.istrative Law Judge for that
JM ;.,>se (18 CFR 375.304). shall  convene
a prefiguring conference to be held
v,i:;.:n 45 days after the date of this
cr:!r-r ir a hearing or conference room of
the rr->ral Energy Regulatory
Commission. 825 North Capitol Stn-.et.
i\W.. Washington. D.C. 20426 to
(•.•ji.ihlish such further procedural dates
•is nu\ be necessary, and to rule upon
all Motions (except motions to
consolidate, sever or dismiss), as
 pruvi.VO for in the Rules of Pra(.lii:c uiid
 I'rori'd'.ire.
   (1)) The request for consoliddtion of
 the proceedings in Docket No. RPH1-130
 with tlut of  Docket No. RP83-10U by
                       Trnnswestern Pipeline Company is
                       denied.
                          (E) The request for a stay of the
                       proceeding in Docket No. RPH1-130. :r Sousa
                       concurred in p»rt and dr scnled in purl.
                       Kenneth F. Plumb,
                       Scc.rt'lary.

                       Appendix A
                       Southwest Grfs Corporation
                       Pacific Cas Trannmisiitin Company
                       Pacific Cas and Elixthr Oc-'ipany
                       Northwest Centrul Pipeline Corpura'.icn
                       Public UlililiOK Comniis^i jn of the State of
                         California
                       Southern CHlifomia Cus Company
                       Pai-ific Lighting Cus Supply Company
                       Southern Union Gas Company
                       Gas Company of New Mexico
                       El Paso Natural Cas Company
                       Aiizona Public Service Company
                       Kan Die«n Gus ft Electric Company
                       Southern l.'nion Gas Company
                       Southern California EJison Company
                       Gas Sf rvicp Company
                       Governor Gfiirve Doitkrr.ejiiin
                       Pacific Interstate Transniission Compnny
                       Pacific Offslioii; Pi;-i-imr Comp.iriy

                       Appendix B
                       Gas Comnnny of !\'<-w Nt-xiro
                       Si)uthcrn Uni'.in CHS  Cn:npar.y
                       Publir Utilities Conmission of the State of
                          California
                        I'Mciiu: CHS Tninniiniisirii Ciiin|)iiny
                        S.imson Ktttiurcf!< Coni;n K VMO dr Kamp
                        IndopfnilHiit Pctroloum Ahsocialiun of New
                          Mexico
                        ilii&srll Kni-rvy Cuirpiiny
                        Ward Petroleum Curpnraiion
                        Oklahoma IndupviiJcnl Petroleum
                          Association
                        Railroad Commission of Texas
                        Phillips Petroleum Company
                        Raulo Petroleum Corporation
                        Oklahoma Corporation Commission
                        Sou I hern California  Edison Company
                        Southwcit Gas Corpora:ion
                        Pacific Interstate Transmission Company
                        Pacific Offshore Pipeline Company
                        Appendix C
                        Southern California  Cax Company
                        Pacific Lighting Gas Supply Company
                        Cas Service Company
                        Governor George DeuKmrjinn
                        Pacific Interstate Transmission Company
                        Pacific Offshore Pipeline Company
                        Public Utilities Commission of the  Slate of
                          California
                        Pacific Gat Transmission Company
Attorney General John K. Van de Kamp
I'liriTic Oflihore Pipeline Company

Appendix D
Southern Union Cas Company
Gas Company of New Mexico
F.I Paso Natural Cas Company
Arizona Public Service Company
Samson Resources Company
Independent Petroleum Association of New
  Mexiro
Has&el! Energy Company
Ward Petroleum Corporation
Oklahoma Independent petroleum
  Association
Railroad Commission of Texas
(TO Due U-2M4* Filed 10-11-63: KM im|
BILLOW CODE »7IM>I-M
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

(OPP-300CO/10E; PM-FRI 2453-1]

Intent To Cancel Pesticide Products
Containing Undane; Denial of
Applications for Registration of
Pesticide Products Containing
Undane; Determination Concluding
the Rebuttable Presumption Against
Registration; Availability of Position
Document
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTIOK: Notice of intent to cancel; notice
of denial of applications for registration;
notice of determination; notice of
availability of  position document.

SUMMARY: Lindar.e-contiining product* '
«re registered at pesticides under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodentidde Act (F1FRA). 7 U.S.C. 136et
seq. On February 17.1977. EPA initiated
an RPAR process to consider whether
the registrations for Undane products
should be cancelled or modified This
notice concludes that  RPAR process sad,
announces the Administrator's intent fc
cancel the registrations of iindane lor
two uses, to continue  the registration ef
all other uses sbject to certain label
requirements and use practice
prohibitions, and to deny application!
 for registration of Iindane products not
 in accordance with the terms of tills
 Notice.
 DATE: Requests by a registrant j
 applicant for registration for a"
 must be received on or before  1	^,
 18.1983 or within £> days from receipt \
 by mail of this Notice, whichever eci  '
 later. Requests for a hearing by any  _
 other adversely affected party mtutbi]
 received on or before November l\
 1933.                        •••   *
 ADDRESSES: Requests for a kearf
 be submitted to: Hearing Clerk (
                                                                                                            •:^Sf
-------
                 Federal Regir.ter  /  Vol. 40,  No. 2"?> ! Wednesday. October  19.  19B3 / Notices
                                                                        4851.1
             l Protection Aj><:ncy. 4(11 M
     V.. Washington. DC 2i<-»Ci>."
*Q* FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
By mail Jeff K'nmpler. Registration
tlirision (TS-707C). Office of Pesticide
^"ograms. Environmental Protection
AK.JIH.V. 401  M St.. SW.. Washington. IX.
20400, Office location and telephone
number: Room 711, Crystal Mall -2.
1921 Jefferson Davis Highway. "*
Arlington. VA, (703-557-7451).
  C'-.pies of the Decision Document an:
available upon request.
  The administrative rncord combining
public comments and publicly released
Agency documents is available fnr
public inspection from 8:00 am to 4:0(1
pm. Mond.'iy through Friday. evcept
IcRdl holidays in: Room 71 IK. OryslHl
Mall «2.1921 Jefferson Davis Highway.
Ariing'.on. VA 22202.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. In'.rodurtirm
A Rt:g;:li]tory Fmniuwirk
  Before a pesticide product mn\ be
sold, h'rld fe registered in
'Mmphunce with Ihe Federal lnse.:li<:;de.
Fungicide, and Rodenlicide Act (I-'IFRA).
     ,  sections 3fa) and 12|a)!1). A
     (ide registration is a lii.rnsp
        % pesticide product tu be s»'d
and distributed for a specified use or
usi-s in accordance with label
;'istrutlions  and precautions and oTlier
terms and conditions of registration. A
pes'iude product will be registered only
if it performs its intended pesticidiil
function without causing "unreasonable
adverse effects on the environment.'"
HFRA section 3[c)(5). that is. without
causing "any unreasonable risk to man
or the environment, taking into account
the economic, social and environmental
custs and benefits of the use of [ihe|
pesticide." FIFRA section 2(bb). Th-:s. in
support an application for initial
registration and to maintain an existing
registration, the benefits of e;;r.h of i!s
uses must exceed the risks of th.il use
wh'-n the product is used ir. .••i:f:oii|:itti.r
with commonly recognized (nai:le:r :mu
in compliance with the lerrr.s and
conditions of registration. The burden of
proving that a pesticide product satisfies
Ihe standard for registration is on the
proponents of initial or continued
registration.
  Under FIFRA section 6. the
Administrator of Ihe Environment]
Protection Agency (EPA. Agency) may
       the registration of a pesticide
       t or modify the terms and
        ns of its registration whenever it
is determined that the pesticide product
r.auses unreasonable adverse effects on
the enviromenl. The Agency created thp
P.ebultjhle Presumption Against
KeX:r.trat.on (KPARJ process \<> facilitate
the identification of peslii.ide products
(or uses thereof) which may not satisfy
thi; slatiiton, slandard for registration.
and to priividi: an informal  procedure
through which to gather and evaluate
information about the risks and benefits
of these products and uses. The
lexiilations governing the RPAR process
are set forth et 40 CFR In2.11.
  A rebutlable presumption iirises if H
pesticide meets or exceeds  nny of the
risk criteria se.l out in the regulations.
The Agency announces an RPAR by
issi:i:ig a notice of determination in the
Federal Register and by issuing a
Puriiionpor.ument (P1J 1). detailing the
Agency's position and concerns.
Registrants and other interested persons
art- invited to leview the (lain upon
wlnr.h the presumption is basi;d and So
Miml'it tia'n and informa'ioh to rebut the
presumption of tisk by showing thai the
i sli,.nle.
  Tin! ! oncojjenic in rodents
published in the Federal Register of July
21.1978 (43 FR 31432).
   As a result of the 1977 RPAR Notice.
the Agency received numerous
comments from interested parties
 regarding the risk* and benefit* which  ;
-------
4R514	Federal Register  / Vol. 48, No. 203 / Wednesday.  October 19.  1983 / Notices
result from the pesticidal uses of
linJunc. The Agency reviewed ull
comments and additional dais received
in response to the RPAR Notire, and
issued a notice which was published in
the Federal Roister of July 3. 1'JBd. (-J5
KH 4 0362) a "Preliminary Notice of
Di.-!ermination" for lindane. The detailed
rationale for the Agency's proposed
determination was contained in the
'.''.';. r J.-.ff.o:. ^I.S.'T.iivt.jV'.b! UM: o!
lindane for treatment of lice and scabies
is not affected by this RPAR
determination since it has been under
ihr jurisdiction of the I'.S Footi ;'nd
DniR Administration since 1979. 44 I'R
6:i:;9.) At that time, the Agency
determined that the benefits fruni the
use of lindane were outweighed by the
risks of oncogenicity and reproductive
and fetotoxic effects. In addition, the
Agency was also  concerned (although
Rl'AR criteria were not exceeded) about
acute central nervous system effects and
a!"vjt childhood sensitivity to the toxic
effects of lindane. Existing data did not
support presumptions that liiul.;ne
c.nisi'tl acute ha/.-irds to aquatic.
wikllife. lh.it lindane was mutjgenic.
that lindane was  linked to blood
dvscrcsia or that  lindane was
isi>i:ierized to mote toxic compounds by
ni;; rohiul or eukaryotic org.-inisnis of
any kind.
  As  require) by  F1FRA. the Agency
s:i!imi!!ed its findings to the Scientific
Aiii-isory Pan^l (SAP),  to the U.S.
1) •puiin-'ent of Agriculture (USDA) and
to ir.tcrestpd parties for review and
comment. The SAP held public meetings
emu ernir.ji Ilit? lindane proposed
di'teiminalion on July 24, August 13. and
A'lu'ist 14. I960 and heard presentations
by the Agency  registrants and other
in vreslr d members of the public. DiJli
the SAP and I'SDA submitted  comments
on the lind.ine PP 2/3 to F.PA.  Their
comments are presented with the
Agency's responses in  Unit IV of this
Notice. After receiving numerous
comments from these respective groups.
Ihr Ajj«'nr.y reconsidered the nvtonl lo
winch risks were offset by social,
economic, or environmental bench's
HiiJ wl-,c!ht»r regulatory action might
leJuce risks without affecting  the
bi_p^fits of lindane's use.
  A draft PD 4 dated February 2:t. 10B3
\v. :s sent to several governmental.
industry and environmental groups as
w*>il as members of the former SAP for
comments because of the substantial
changes being proposed from the
rej;uli:tory position taken in the PD 2/3.
(Congressional authorization of the
Scientific Advisory Panel terminated as
of September 30.  1981. Sec FIFRA
section 25(d)). Comments received on
that draft HD 4 were carefully
considered by the Agency in the
development of the Agency's final
regulatory decision.

C. Content of This Kutico
  The Agency is initiating the following
regulatory actions in this Notice.
  (1) Cancel indoor use of lindane
*mo!<«! f»rr.i(i3ti(.-n dovir.es.
  \i, Ct-.o». .bt of imoane dug a:ps ior
control of all pests except mites.
  (3) Classify for restricted use the
lindane uses foi commercial
ornamentals, avocados, pecans,
livestock. Christmas trees, forestry.
structural treatments, and dog shampoos
and dusts, as well us require specified
label amendments and protective
clothing for applicators for  these  uses.
  (4) Require specific label
modifications, as appropriate, for all
other lindane uses in order to reduce
risks.
  (5) Require mulagenicity  data to be
submitted.
  The detailed rationale for the
Agency's determinations is set forth in
Position Document 4 (PD 4).
  Unit II of this Notice provides a
summary of the risk and benefits of the
peslicidal uses of lindane. Unit HI
presents (he Agency's regulatory
decision. Unit  IV sets out the comments
on the PD 2/3 submitted to the Agency
by the Secretary of Agriculture and
members of the former Scientific
Advisory Panel and the Agency's
responses to those comments. Unit V of
this Notice sets out the procedures by
which a registrant or other person
adversely affected by this Notice may
request a hearing to challenge the
actions proposed in this Notice. Unit V
also sets out the procedures which
registrants should follow in seeking
amendments of their registration to
conform to the requirements of this
 Notice in order to continue their
registrations for those uses of lindane
 retained under this Notice.
 I!. Summary of Risk* and Benefits of the
 Pesticidal Use of Lindane
   The Agency, in reaching the decisions
 set out in this Notice, has considered
 information on the health risks.
 evironmental effects and the economic
 and social benefits associated with the
 pesticidal uses of linedane. Information
 was submitted by the United States
 Department of Agriculture, and the  .
 Scientific Advisory Panel,  the Centre
 International d'Etudes de lindane. the
 California Department of Food and
 Agriculture, the Food and Drug
 Administration, the Natural Resources
 Defense Council, the National Audubon
Society, and numerous other interested
parties. The Agency's detailed
assessments of risk} and benefits and
its regulatory conclusions ar^^orth
in the lindane Position Docul^Bt. Th
document is hereby adopted^^he
Agency as its statement of reasons for
the determinations and actions
announced in this Notice and as its
analysis of the impacts of the proposec
rer^atory actions on human and
eviror.mental health as well as on the
agricultural and industrial economy. F
the reasons summarized below, and
described in detail in PD 4.  the
determinations of the Agency on linda
are as follows.
A.  Determinations of Risk
  The Agency has made the following
conclusions regarding the potential of
lindane to cause oncogenicity,
fetotoxicity and adverse reproductive
effects, acute hazards to man and
domestic animals, acute toxicity to
wildlife, mutagenicity, and  regarding ti
susceptibility of children to lindane an
the association of lindane with blood
dyscrasias.
   1. Oncogenicity. After an exhaustive
study of available data, the Agency
 believes that tindane should be
considered to have the potential for
inducing carcinogenic effects in human
There is positive evidence thaUjndane
 causes liver tumors in mice ]^B| on
 two lifetime feeding studies.^^F
 subchronic studies provide supportive
 evidence on oncogenicity consistent
 with that found in the lifetime studies.
 addition, a metabolite of lindane, 2,4,6-
 trichlorophenol, has been shown to
 cause carcinogenic effects  in rats and
 mice. There is no evidence that lindane
 is carcinogenic to rats.
   2. Fetotoxicity and reproductive
 effects. The Agency's concern that
 lindane might cause adverse
 reproductive effects, as distinguished
 from fetal effects, has been successful!;
 rebutted. Adverse fetal effects do occui
 but only at or above doses that also
 cause general toxic effects in the
 mother.
   The presumption that lindane might
 cuuse reproductive or fetotoxic effects
 was originally based on three studies. I
 the preliminary determination (PD 2/3).
 EPA concluded that due to a number o
 aerious flawslircertain feeding studies
 data were inadequate to assess the
 reproductive effect* of lindane. One
 study was still considered to provide
 unreburted evidence of fetotoxidty.
 However, a number of technical
 inadequacies in the iitudy precluded'Its
 use to calculate a matemalq^gptoxfe
 no observable effect level  (I^B. Iha
-------
                  Federal  Register /  Vol. 48. No.  203 /  Wednesday,  October 19. 1983  / Notices
                                                                        4*515
   dy WAS lined in a qualitative sense by
    Avervy when it set !he maternal
              10 the presentation of the
    2/3 to the SAP and after thorough
             of the ei^ht studies
M.'ljmitteri Ir. rthuUal to the Agency's I'D
1 and PO 2/3 positions, the Agency has
concluded that lindune does not cau.se
reproductive effects, but thdl it does
Ly prutrctinjj mothers
f;-<;m acuti. toxi:. effects, it will id.so
s:!!iu!t.ini:i)iisly IIP pnitirclinj; fetuses
fn'in possible adverse efieds.
  ;i. Acute end subacuie hazards to
 './.PC/IS and domestic animals. The
Ajji-ncy banco its original concern
r::;.!.irJiiij{ the acute effects of lindanr tin
numerous stiiuins in humans and
animals \\hich show ihat Imdane cause*
symptoms of a-:ule and subacule
tiixicity typical of central nervous
 system" (CN'S) eflects. In I'D 2/3. the
 .V'Kicy determined a S'OKI. ot 2.5 mf!/
 iij'djy ljas.:d on two studies.
b.iliseii'JOi.t to I'D 2/3. commentcr*
 listed a nu:!ibur of sc:iocs deficiencies
 which they  believed precluded the use
 nfoi'i* uf t!ie studies (I layef) to est.iljli;:h
      I.. Thr Acenr> has reevalujled
    studies and concluded  that they c.in
    he used '.c pst.-iblish a NOKJ..
 A!t!'."!iph ilie Hayes stiiih is not usui In
 . ;.K i:!.i!<- ;i N'OKI.. it dues support  !hr
 Ajjency's i/ricua! conclusion in I'L) 2/3
 tniit hiiniii"1! .mil ar.ir.'i.ils with sirr.i'.-ir
 rv.'osure t.i Illumine nro like!;. toe>>.:(iit
 si'itilar :-is,:-s of tc.Xi1..:1;'.
   The Axvr.i y h;:s rtelerm.ned lh.it the
 .lorffert level for general loxir.ily. found
 HI ;hc rcpivtlixtive s!'.;dies. i> 5 niv'l>;j/
 cliiv. Ciini. .1! p1. :iier.t:e frr.Ti !hi!
 p|iiirir.acfu!i<:.«! uses of lii'd.ii'.r sti^yesis
 tr.at exposures even i.iwhiT than 5 n\pl
 ts/d.iy do r.ol i::,uail> rrs.ilt in «r.i;lv
 n'ruroto.xii' »yi::;itor..s.
   4. >'"/.'.-'/i'ii ..*>• i>f i:^:Lirt;; /t-/;.'•;.'<.•;:.••
 bonie comr'-'iit'-rs dispulfd the
 A(!cm:y's rv..c.i'rn in PU 2/3 th;it
 children ar>' mure sensitive >o the tnnii
  cfit'c's t>f li::d.rious differrr.eps in the
  jnterpretaiii'ns of data. E!;A
  recoTibiuert>d the issue of childhood
  sensitivity.
    Children  have a higher ratio of body
•  jurface arm to body weight than do
  adulls-- F.quiViiliTit doses (per surface
  area) of lindane. applied to adults and
  children. \. .'.uluce a greater mg/kg/hody
  Kfig'nl cose to children. In .icldition.
 Children lack ir..ilure hi.'patic conjugal-nx
 Kizymes for drluxificiition »nd
 Pfxcretion. Finally, a child's skin hns
i;rcLter permeability th.in an adull'.s.
Thus, theoretically, toxicity could be
enhanced. The pertinent studies all have
serious deficiencies which preclude their
use to make definitive statements
regarding a unique childhood sensitivity
to Imdane. The Agency also reviewed
the clinical reports, many of which
involved children. Due to a vast array of
diagnostic and observational variations
and conditions, these reports did not
allow for quantification  of risk to
children. The available data do.
however, support the Agency's concern
thiit children are more susceptible to the
tovu t.'ff.'cls of pcsl iculi:.i in general.
  .') IHuoJ Jyscronins. In the preliminary
;irii-rmination (PD2/3) Ihe  Agency
m.l-.r.itf'j that there were insufficient
tij'a to establish a cause and effect
rrla;ionship between exposure to
Imdane and blood dyscrasias. The
Agency also indicated that two
epidumiological studies,  which wen: in
progress  at that time, were  intended to
provide information regarding that
relationship. Since that time the Agency
has received a final report from one
study in Iowa and the first draft of H
si'cond study being conducted in
Hawaii. The results of the first  study
and preliminary data from  the second
sliidy show Ihat there is no statistically
significant association between chronic
exposure to lindnne and the incidence of
hiood dyscrasius  (including aplastic
  0 .-iru.v to.vK.vVy tn wiidlifi:. The
Awi n'\'s original presumption of acute
!i.\ir:ty to aquatic wildlife WHS
vv:;!id:awn in thr preliminary
'!:-:i-nnii,rt!ion. This was due to the I.id
:liiii there were no Imdane products
rr^'s!-;red for direct aquatic use. Since
iindiine is highly toxic to aquatic
v\ .!iiiifc, the Agi-ni-y is chiefly co:ici:rrmd
.,'MU! avoiding misuse or application
i/r.iu'.iccs that could result in drift or
run. iff. Therefore, even though the
tDxii'iiil presumption wns withdrawn.
ill'.1 Ajienr.y will riM|iiire lai
-------
 48516
Federal  Roister / Vol. 48. No.  203 / Wednesday. October 19. 1983  /  Notices
 were calculated for the major uses of
 lindane: avocados, pecans, commrrical
 ornamentals, forestry, hompownpr
 ornamentals, foliar an stump/slash
 applications to Christmas trees,
 structural applications, dip applications
 (livestock, lumber, pet dips and
 shampoos), enclosed area sprays (moth
 sprays, uninhabited  buildings and
 storage bins), dust applications (seed
 tieatments and pet dusts), cucurbits,"
 pineapples, and several household
 products. The details of these
 calculations are contained in Appendix
 111 of PD 4.
   2. Dietary exposure. The Agency's PL)
 2/3 estimate of dietary exposure WHS
 taken from the Food and Drug
' Administration's maiket (Total Diet
 Composites) survey  for the yp;irs 1S72 to
 1075. Comments were received which
 indicate that more recent data should be
 used. The Agency agrees that the more
 recent data should be used and.
 therefore, has estimated  dietary
 exposure from FDA  data for thn years
 )f
 using lindane and the lack of
 alternatives for these uses.

 1. High Benefit Uses
   High benefit uses of lindane are
 defined by the Agency as those uses for
 which cancellation would result in
 significant impacts and for which there
 are no alternatives. High benefit USPS
 are summarized ai follows:
   a. Woody ornamentals, including
 Christmas trees. The Agency estimates
 that cancellation  of the use of lindane
 on woody ornamentals would have a
 $20.6 million economic impact due to
 borer damage. Lindane is the only
 pesticide registered to control all borers
 in all woody ornamentals. For Christmas
                       trees and increased cost of S0.20-Sl.70
                       ppr acre would result form the
                       substitution of the alternative.
                       osydimetomethyl, for lindane. There are
                       no alternatives for use against certain
                       beetles.
                         b. Forestry. Small, privately owned,
                       southern forest areas would be the
                       hardest hit economically by a
                       cancellation of lindane for forest use
                       since forest mangaers rely heavily on
                       chemical control and cannot gerncrally
                       afford labor-intensive cultural
                       management practices. 1 here are no
                       alternatives for control of various bark
                       beetles.
                         c. Seed treatment. Major regional
                       impacts for spring-planted small grains
                       fit Ihe user level from wireworm
                       infestation would result from
                       cancellation. If significant production
                       li'ssL-s wore to occur, there could be
                       ni.ijor small grain market level impacts.
                       Tor lentils and dry peas,  there are no
                       alioratives to lindane sued treatment.
                       The benefits of lindane seed treatment
                       on sni.ill grains, lentils, nnd  dry peas
                       cannot be accurately quantified due to a
                       bck of data. The Agency's position is
                       that the estimated benefit for corn seed
                       treatment is $690.000.
                         d. Structures. Lindane  contains
                       ••fective properties for the control of
                       power post beetles. The alternatives are
                       significantly m<;re expensive and
                       inconvenient.
                         e. Avocntlcs. Lindane is used on up to
                       !HJ percent of the Florida avocado crop
                       on nn annual basis to control mirids.
                       There are no  registered alternatives for
                       control of this pest. The unavailability of
                       lindune was estimated to result in
                       producer losses of $8.7 million due to
                       downgrading and fruit loss. The impacts
                       of r.iincullation would be moderate in
                       most growing regions, but severe in
                       Florida.
                          f. Historic pmservatiun. There are no
                       alternatives for the control of powder
                       post beetles.
                          K. tlnrdivimrl ings ami lunihar. The
                       A|;rncy calculated the approximate no-
                       alternative impact of the cancellation of
                       lindane to be $247 million in 1980
                       dollars. Figures are not available on the
                       potential impact of the recent
                       registration of endosulfan as a control
                       for hardwood lumber destroying beetles.
                       Endosulfan will cost approximately
                       S0.15 more per 1000 board feet on
                       average, resulting in an average total
                       U.S. cost impact of approximately
                       SfrOO.OOO annually. There is a question of
                       supply availability for endosulfan.
                          h. Dog dips. Lindane use  in dog dips
                       for treatment of mites is a high benefit
                       use for which is no alternative. All other
                       uses of lindane dog dips ere low benefit
                       uses.
2. Moderate Benefit Uses

  Moderate benefit uses are those uses
for which either alternatives are not
available, but the impact of cancellation
is minor, or alternatives are less
effective or more expensive. Moderate
benefit uses of lindane are as follows:
  a. fora/ and foliage ornamentals.
There are no alternatives for certain
uses, but cancellation would not cause
severe impacts.
  h. Livestock dips. There are several
efficacious alternatives to lindane for
control of livestock pests, with the
exception of mites The economic impact
of cancellation was estimated to be
$l.HntV4QO annually, small relative to
livestock industry revenues.
  c. Pineapples. Lindane is used to treat
about 9.700 acres or 72 percent of the
total planted per year with pineapples in
Hfiwaii. It is used in conjunction with
soil fumigants to control symphylids.
Total reliance on soil fumigants would
result in an annual crop loss of 0.8
percent (5.150 tons) valued at S.515
million. Total economic impacts over the
four-year production cycle in Hawaii
were estimated at Si.018 million. For
Puerto Rico, about 1.300 acres arc
planted annually and about 2.000
pounds of lindane are ussd annually. A
total annual reduction in returns  would
amount to approximately $.375 million if
lindane is unavailable for pineapple use
in Puerto Rico.

3. Low Benefit Uses

  Low benefit uses are those for which
alternatives exist or cancellation of
lindane would result in only minor
impacts. Low benefit  uses of lindane
are:
  a. Cucurbits. The impact of lindnne
cancellation for cucurbit growers was
estimated to be $176.000 annually from
increased costs due to adopting
available alternative chemicals.  No
yield loss is expected.
   b. Pecans. Lindane is used on pecans
to control pecan phylloxera. The use of
alternative pesticides was expected to
result in grower level impacts of up to
$1.5 million annually due to •
combination of control costs and crop
losses.
   c. Household products (including
 indoor smoke fumigation devices).
 Effective, competitively priced
 alternatives to lindane products are
 available.
   d. Dog dips. For treatment of pests
 other than mites, dog dips are a low
 benefit use since numerous alternative!
 are available in the same price range.; -•'<
-------
                 Federal  Register /  Vol. 48, No.  203 / Wednesday. October 19.  1983  /  Notices
                                                                                                            48517
4ft
jiiation of Regulatory Action

 cellation Actions
  Based upon the determinations
•ummanzed above and discussed in
Detail in Position Documents 1. 2. 3, and
<• the Agency has determined that the
risks resulting from the indoor use of
smoke fumigation devices and from use
of dog dips to control pesta<4)her than
roites are greater than the social,  -
economic, and environmental benefits
from such uses. Therefore, the Agency is
cancelling these uses, effective at the
end of the 30 day period described in the
statute.
  Cancellation of the indoor smoke
fumigation devices is based on the facts
thiit the estimated lifetime cancer risk is
about 10"'for two applications per year.
thai the products are available to the
general public, that there is no way of
effectively limiting the number of
applications or providing for suitable
aeration after application, that there are
numerous alternatives for the same
spectrum of pests, and th;it there will
not be a detectable economic impart to
the user if these formulations aro
cancelled.
  The Agency will limit the use of dox
digs^only to control mites and will
      I dog dips to control any other
         is action is bused on a
deTerminulion that the bcnufits for usc.s
other than treatment of mites were low
because of the availability of  c
alternatives and that risks were high
when weighed against the benefits. The
cancer risk is4.2xlO~10~§. Because of
the potqntially large cohort at risk, the
Agency has determined that habitual
treatment for pests other than mites
would result in unacceptable cancer
risks to the general public.
B. Actions Modifying Terms and
Conditions of Registration
  The Agency also has determined thiit
the risks of all other registered uses of
lindane are greater than the social.
economic, and evironmental benefits of
such uses, unless the terms and
conditions of registration are modified
Briefly, these modifications involve
(depending on the use) restriction of use
to certified applicators, additional label
precautions and use of protective
clothing and equipment. The following
uso-by-use summary includes, for those
upes which are not being cancelled,  the
modification^in terms and conditions
that are necessary to maintain
       Cations or that must be met to
       new registrations. Registrations
       ! cancelled and applications for
registration will be denied unless
registrants or applicants modify their
labels in accordance with the terms and
conditions set forth in this Notice.

1. Commercial Ornamentals. Avocados.
Pecans. Livestock. Fun's try. Christmas
Trees. Structural Treatment. Dug
Shampoos, and Dog Dusts
  The Agency is requiring that all
lindane products  registered for the
following uses be classified  for
restricted use: commercial ornamentals.
avocados, pecans, livestock, forestry,
Christmas trees, structural treatments.
dog shampoos, and dog dusts. The
labels must contain the following
language:

Restricted Use Pesticide
  (•'or application only by or under the direct
supervision of a certified applicator.
  For all the above uses of lindane
subject to the restricted use
classification (except dog shampoos as
noted below) the Agency is  requiring
that the labels be modified to contain
the following language:
  Applicators must wear the following
protective clothing  during the application
prui.oss: a lipht-weighl protective suit or
coveralls: wilier-resistant hut: unlincd.
wuterproof gloves:  and unlined. lightweight
hoots. Mixers and londers must also wear
giiKKles or a face shield, waterproof gloves
HHI| H waterproof apron.

  a. Athlitiiinal rtujiiiirnients far Ji>g
Just use. In addition to the above
requirements, labels for lindane
products registered for dog  dust use
must contain the following label
wanting:
  Tliis product should be applied in a well-
ventilated area.
   b. Additional requirements for   .
structural treatment. In addition to the
above requirements, labels  for lindane
products registered for structural
 treatment i;se must contain the
 following l.-ibel language:
   Applicators working in enclosed areas.
 such as crawl spaces, must wear a respirator
 Approved by OSIIA (29 CFR 1910.134).
   cr Protective clothing requirements for
 tinf! shampoos. Applicators of lindane
 dog shampoos must wear the following
 protective clothing during the
 application process: waterproof, elbow-
 length gloves: a  water-proof apron; and
 unlined. waterproof boots.

 2. Homeowner Ornamentals
   For the use of lindane for homeowner
 ornamentals, the Agency is requiring
 that the labels be modified to contain
 the following language:
   Applicators must wear the following
 protective clothing during the  application
 process: long-sleeved shirt, long pants.
 waterproof gloves, full foot covering, and j
 head covering.

 3. Htird\w>d togs andLumbtv

   For the use of lindane for treatment of
 hardwood logs and lumber, the Agency
 is requiring that the labels be modified
 to contain the following language:
   Applicators must wear the following
 protective clothing during the application
 process: lightweight protective suit or
 coveralls: unlined. waterproof gloves: und
 unlined. lightweight boots.

 4. Dog Dips

   For the use of lindane for dog dips, the
 Agency is requiring that the labels be
 modified to contain the following
 language:
   Use of this product i* permitted only Tor
 treatment of mites. The use of this product for
 treatment of other pests is prohibited.
 Applicators must wear the following
 protective clothing during the treatment
 process: elbow-length, waterproof gloves: a
 waterproof apron: and unlined. waterproof
 boots. Improper dilution of this product could
 cause serious injury to your pet. Children
 should not be allowed to handle or apply this
 product.

 5. Moth Sprays

   For the use of lindane for moth sprays.
 the Agency is requiring that the labels
 be modified to  contain the following
 limguHge:
   Applicators must wear MSHA/OSHA-
 approved cartridge respirators when applying
 this product.

 6. Seed Treatment

   For the use of lindane for seed
 treatment applications, the Agency is
 requiring that the labels be modified to
 contain the following language:
   Applicators who apply this product
 manually or without the use of a closed-
 system treatment procedure must wear thr
 following protective clothing during the
 application process: long-sleeved shirt:  long
 pants: gloves: and a disposable, paper dust
- mnsk which covers at least one-third of the
 face.
 The labels must also carry the warning:
 This product should be applied  in a
 well-ventilated area.
    The Agency is not imposing •
 protective clothing requirement for
 automated or closed-system treatment
  procedures.

  7. Other Household Uses (Flea Collars.
 Shelf Paper and Household Sprays

    Fur the use of lindane in other
  household products (flea  collar*, shelf
  paper and household sprays), the
  Agency is requiring that the labels be
  modified to contain the following
  language:                         ,  .
-------
48518
Federal Register /  Vo!  48, No. 2C3  / Wednesday.  October  19.  19M  / Notices
  Do not allow Children to handle ur apply
this product.
  Children and pets should not be allowed in
(reeled areas until sprayed surfaces ar«- dry.

8. Label Modification:; Applicable to All
Undone Products Subject to This Notice
  In addition to the label modifications
specified above, the Agency is requiring
that the labels for all lindane products
be modified to meet "current standards
as specified in 40 CFR 162.1D. Labels
must describe proper handling and
disposal, symptoms of poisoning.
practical treatment in the event of
poisoning, and other warning statements
appropriate for the product's toxicily
category.
  Labels for applicable uses must
contain the statement:
  Aerial application of lindnne is prohibited.
  Finally, any lindane products
registered for residenti.il use (dog dips.
household products) that contain more
than 6.5 percent active ingredient must
comply with EPA's child-resistant
packaging regulations set forth in 40
CFR 102.10. See also Federal Register of
March 31.1301 (40 FR 15104).

9. Applications for Rn^is!rnticns  for
Direct Application to Aquatic
Environments
  All applications for registrations for
direct application to aquatic
environments will be  denied.

10. Disposal of Dips
  The following shall apply to all dip
uses, except those intended for
household use:
  Used dip solutions must be disposed of in
accordance with the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA). If the applicator
generates more than 1000 kg of uv;d dip
solution p:r month ur mure Ih.in lixm kg usird
dip solution in conil'inaticn with o'hrr
hazardous waste, the material must be
treated AS a rnuardous waste subject !o
subpurt C of RCRA. Any user who wtsl *>* to
treot. store or dispose of hazardous waste
mutt obtain t permit to SPM/C iine
 pursuant to F1FRA"section 3lc(U!(B) to
 all registrants of lindane indicating that
 additional mutagenicity data an:
 required. The Agency anticipates that
 the voluntary agreement with CIEL will
 satisfy the provisions of faction
                        3(c)(2)!B) regarding jcint data
                        development. The tests which are being
                        required include: (1) in vitro ^enc
                       • mutatior  '.esting ininammalian cells. (2)
                        in vivo otal and parenteral assay for
                        sister chromalid exchange, and (3) in
                        vitro test in mammalian cells under
                        finaerobic conditions. The requirement
                        for these data will be independent of the
                        Agency's RPAR determination as set
                        forth in this Notice to modify the terms
                        of registration.

                        IV. Comments of Scientific Advisory
                        Panel and Secretary of Agriculture

                        A. comments of the scientific advisory
                        panel

                          Pursuant to section 25(d) of FIFRA.
                        notices of intrnl issued under section
                        6(b) HTC to be submitted to an advisory
                        panel "for comment as to the impact (of
                        the proposed action] on health and the
                        environment."
                          The Agency transmitted the Position
                        Document 2/3 to the Scientific Advisory
                        Panel (SAP) in  June. 1980, for review. On
                        October 6, I960, SAP responded  to the
                        Agency. The SAP's comments  are
                        reproduced bnlow in their entirety.
                        Federal In&RCtitide, Fungicide. *nd
                        Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Scientific Advisory
                        Panel
                        /IPIWH- of Prelim/miry r\'utirt> of
                        Determination Concluding tlic llebutlable
                        Pn-?umplian Against Hr/tislrotion I RPAR I iff
                        ri-ftiritli* Pmutn:ts Containing l.mdanf
                          The Federal Insecticide. Fungicide and
                         RodenticMe Act  (F1KRA) Scientific Advisory
                         Panel has completed review of plant by the
                         F.nvironmental Protection Agency (EPA) for
                         initiation of regulatory action on pesticide
                         products containing lindane under the
                         provisions of tection 6(b)|l| of FIFRA at
                         iimtiulrit. The review WHB completed in open
                         nitTlinxs held in Arhn^on. Virginia, during
                         the period  |uly 24.1080. and Atxust  13-14.
                         19UO. Maximum public p«rtici|>a:rjn was
                         encouraged for the review. PiiL'ii: notices of
                         the meetings were p'.iblithed in the Federal
                         Refcisl-r on July 3.1980. and July Z5.1le d.tU
sunpesl than lindane is at worst a vwjak
animal carcinogen, may have a low decree of
fplo'.oxicity. may disrupt repoducdve
processes, and can produce central nervous
system excitability after oral and dermal
ingrsti.m. The Panel agrees with EPA that
lindane is substantially more to\ii lo young
than adults in both humans and domes!''-
animals and that chronic exposure can
sometimes result in disastrous blow)
dyscrnsias. However, for certain uses in
insect pest control, e.g.. scabies, bark n'l'tlcs
and powder post beetles, and seed treatment
for wirewormt. lindane has no av.iO.ilite
substitutes  and these nnd certain very limiti'd
applications in agriculture and pro'.i.cti.m of
ornamentals are both essential and weil
suited to Integrated Pest Management
procedures. Furthermore, the tot;i! amounts of
lindane used for these uses. e.g.. < one million
pounds annually, represent an minir.-.al
hazard to the environment. Therefore, the
Panel has the following comments ai-.d
recommenda tions:
   1. Household used of lindane in treated
shelf paper and floor waxes provide an
unwarranted risk to the householder  and
should be cancelled immediately.
   C. Pel uses for unrestricted use as flea
coliors, dog dusts, and dog shampoos should
be cancelled immediately. Veterinary
medical preparations of lindane for use in^
mange and tcabies and for flea, louse and!
tick control should be available as cellar*.
powders, sprayt. shampoos, and dips nn'lcr
restricted clastifications for use by licrnsrd
veterinarians only with label cautions nr.,1
requirement for protective clothes, as
proposed by EPA.
   3. Ornamental applications for unrestricted
u.ie by the  homeowner should be cancelled
immediately. Ornamental uses restricted to
commercial operators should b« continued
with full warning label cautions about the
huzards of cancer, fetotoxicity. an central
nervous system effects and • caution that
women of child-bearing age and chiUp-n
must avoid exposure. Full protective clothing
mutt be worn.
   4. Lindune registration* for powder post
beetle control should be continued under
restricted classification for use by registered
 Pest Control Operator! with full warning
 l.ibel cautions and full protective clothing
 proposed by EPA.
   S. Livestock application* should be placed
 under restricted classification for use by
 certified applicators only with full warning
 Ijbel cautions and mandatory protective
 clothing as proposed by EPA.
   6. Utes on pineapples should be retained
 with warning label cautions pMposrd by
 FPA.
   7. Uses on cucurbits should be continued
 under restricted classification with full
 warning label and mandatory protective
 clothing proposed by EPA.
   8. Uses on (vocadoet thould be contti
 under restrictive classification with lull
-------
                  Federal  Register  /  Vol. 43, No. 203  / Wednpsii,iy. October 19. Ifl83  / No'iices
                                                                          48519
        label and rrdi-.ijatory protective
        proposed by FJ-A.
        on pecans should be continued
under restricted classification with full
warning label and mandatory protective
clothing proposed by EPA.
  10. Uses on Chrislrr?.s trees should be
continued under restricted classification with
full warning label an:l mandatory protective
clothing proposed by EPA.
  VI. Uses in forestry for bark Metic control
should be continued under restricted    —
clsnsification for application by certified
operators with full warning labels ,inH
mnndatory protective clothing as proposed
by EPA.
  12. Applications to hardwood logs ami
lumber should be continued under restricted
claiisification with full warning labels and
mandatory protective clothing as proposed
by EPA. Special cnution should be given to
improving work place practices nod uispusnl
of (retted sawdust and shavings.
  13. Seed treatment uses of iindiine should
br continued under restricted classification
by certified applica'ois wi'.h full warning
IribcU and mandatory protective r.lnthinx
proposed by EPA. Testimony prc:.r-nl«d to the
Panel suggests that 9C% of liinJane sred
treatments are marie with dosed nic-rhnnii .il
systems that essentially eliminate operator
exposure. EPA should sponsor an ei!ui iHio
prugram to make use of such closed
mechanical seed treatment sys'errs
universal.
  14. The suspicion that linJ;me interferes
      ^productive processes (hormonrs)
      es that a 3-jjeneration reproductive
      Should be performed on mi approp".i!«
IrfSoretory animal.
  For the chairman:
  Certified as an accurate Report of Wnil.ncs:
H W«de Fowler. |r.. Ph.lX.
Executive Secretary. FiPHA Si:;i-nnfn:
Advisory Panel.
  Da I e: October B. uwo.

R. Response to Comments of I he SAP

  The SAP madi: some general
comments regarding the risks and
benefits of lindane and included a list of
specific reccrnmendaiions for euch use.
In response to the general comments.
the Agency's final position on tho lisks
and benefits of lindane is basically
consistent but differs in details  with th«>
SAP's position.
  The SAP asserted that lindane is a
weak oncogen, that it may have a low
degree of fetotoxicity, that it may
disrupt reproductive processes, and that
it can produce central nervous system
excitability. The Agency finds that there
is positive evidence that linihme causes
liver tumors in mice. Although the
biological data base is inconclusive, the
Agency has used the linearized
multistage model  for estimating possible
       «} humans. In light of carcinogenic
        of linjane in mice and th<:
       jgenicity of a lindane metabolite
in rnts and mice, the Agency beliews
that lindane should be considered to
have the potential for inducing
carcinogenic effects in humjns.
However, as discussed in Unit II. the
estimated risk levels have not bocn
found to be unreasonable in most r.asrs
as long as certain use precautions and/
cr restrictions arc observed.
  P.sgardmg reproductive and felotuxic
effects, the Agency has concluded that
the presumption of reproduction effects
has been rebutted because effects
observed in c.uilain studios could not he
linked to treatment with lindane.
  A NOEL has been established for
fetotoxicity and maternal toxicity. Tho
margins  of safely for all uses arc large
enough not to prompt the Acency to
cancel any uses because of letotoxic
effects.
  Concerning central nervous system
excitability and the por-sib!c effects of
lindane.  the Agency has concluded these
cffi:cls still do not must the RPAR
criteria.
  As discussed in Unit II, based on
con.monts received, the Agrnry has
Devaluated the benefits of lindane and
found them to be greater thin was
llio:i«ht at the time the PD 2/3 was
developed. However, tho Ay.ency does
nol concur with SAP's assertion that
"tlip total amounts of lindane for these
user, e.g., more than one million pounds
Huriually. reprcsnnt a minimal hazard to
lli»» environment." the Agency believes
that most of the uses of  lindanr prrsont
an unreasonable risk unless their use is
made safer through use restrictions nnd
lalil'i mollifications.
  Tlir SAP presented 14 specific
recommendations,  13 of which
rucommnndud  regulatory actions which
should be adopted for specific USHS. For
r.v.iiy of tho uses, the Agency's final
position is the  same as the SAP's. These
uses and actions include: cancellation of
household fumigation devices;
r.jii'.-ellution of dog dips for pests other
than mites; restriction of use on
linstock, avudncos, pecans. Christmas
trc;:s. and forestry  to certified
ii^;.)licaturs only: and requirement of
l;.!>i.'l warnings frr pineapples. On the
other uses for which SAP either
recommended cancellation or restricted
us1: classification, the Agency has
concluded that less stringent measures
are. adequate to prevent unreasonable
adverse effects. Specifically, the Agency
believes thit shelf paper should not be
cancelled: thai pet uses should nol be
cancelled, but  that dog shampoos and
dus's should be restricted to
votrrinyrians,  while dog dips for control
only of mites should continue to be
available with label wiirair.»;s and
restrictions; that homouwner
om.imanti'l applications, use on
cucurbits,  H implications to hardwood logs
and seed treatments need not be
classified lor restricted use but that
protective clothing and other lur-r-l
precautions are required. (All
registrations for lindane floor wax ha'.e
been withdrawn).
  SAP's final recommendation was that
a three-generation reproductive study
should be performed. The Agency points
out that such a study is now available.
has been reviewed and shows no
reproductive effects.

C. Comments of the  United Sides
Depnrlmn:! of Agriculture

  As required by F1FRA section 6(b). thr
comments of USDA  on the Position
Document 2/3 are presented below in
their entirety.

November 17.1980.
lion. Douglas M. Costle,
Administrator. U.S. Environmental Prutectiiir:
    Agency. Washington. DC 2(HfiO.
  Dear Mr. Costle: This is in response to the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
Notice of Determination concluding the
Rehutlrihle Presumption Against Regi.'lralion
of Pesticide Products Containing lindane.
  We interacted with EPA in developing the
biological, economic, and exposure
information according  to the current
Memorandum of Understanding between our
two agencies. Thus, we are pleased to be able
lu review and comment on this Notice and
the accompanying position document.
  The opening sentence on Page lil-1 is
incnrrcclly riled. The full title of the June
1978 report is "Preliminary Benefit Analysis
of lii:dane prepared jointly by USDA and
F.I'A." The hrtsic biological and economic
infoimntion contained in the June 1978 ami
the October 1979 report it the same. Doth of
these reports were compiled by the joint
t!UDA/State&/EPA lindane nssessment team.
Because of the opening stalemenl on page III-
1. our state ccoperators have voiced concern
that their joint efforts may not be utilized by
EPA.
  There are areas of agreement as well as
issues of concern to us And lo the cooper-Ming
States. Our comments on these specific items
are contained in the enclosure which is an
integral part of this response.
  The additional time  you granted for our
review of this document was very beneficial
and is appreciated. We are hopeful EPA will
give favorable consideration to these
suggestions.
      Sincerely,
Bob Bergland.
Secretary. U.S. Department of Agriculture

Enclo*ura—SvcrcUry of Asricohure'i
ResponM LicdaiM Notice of Detsjfmbwlion,
PD2/3
  1. We believe that every effort should b«
made lo maintain peat control strategies
without causing unacceptable risks to oserv
and the public. We concur with EPA's
selection of regulatory options regarding the.
continued registered uses of Undine on
livestock, pineapples,  pet washes, and   -
                                                                                                                     -V. ',V*V-:it;U.
-------
48520
Federal  Register  / Vol. 48.  No. 203 /  Wednesday.  October 19,  1933 /  Notices
comrr.e'cial ornamentals wilh ceilain U:Ule
modifications, including "Restrirlril l!se."
  2. We concur in EPA's proposal) .TKiii.iKry
options of cam ellation where the risln
appear to exceed the benefits. These includr
  —Household ate associated wh shelf
piper, waxes, sprays and smokes (fumigation
devices), and Ihe minor use associated with
industrial moth sprays:
  —Pel applications including collars.
shampoos and dusts:     * "x
  —Insert sprays—uninhabited liiiiMings.
ond
  —F.mpty storage bins—fog sprays. All of
these uses involve continuous exposure for
which there .in*, adequate substitutes.
  3. The precautionary statement. "Do no*
use lindane products on pregnant or young
anirmils." may be desirable for veterinarians
treating household pels, llowrvrr. il ni.iy be
impractical or impossible, in many cases, to
make pregnancy  dfilermiiinlions when
bvL-stor.lt herds are being United. We sti^rst
that this statement be mo;lifi»d  to be
advisory rather than u Inlicl prohibition
  4. We share the F.l'A's cone-urn for
applicator exposure hut would lik.i:
r.larif-e.ition of Ihe exposure cal-juhtions
 iised since this was not explained in I'D j/:1,.
 Also, we recommend consistencv  in the
 s<:!ecli'in of available protective r.lnlhing. Tin-
following lal'H modifications on Ihr i:sp cif
pro'i:c!ive r.l:)!liin..; mighl bo  cnn:.iil'.'i"'l:
  —Long sleeved shirts Hnd  pants.
   —Impervious gloves  (rubber or  r,<- ijui-ii")
and boots.
   —Wide Slimmed hals or roof u |»- covi-i«.
 CHIT spr.iying equipment whrn  i.vr'hrad
 sprayint! on aym ullural and/or I'mi-siu vVs
   —Approved respirators when kmdiMiK
 dust foMnul.it ions and when sp.W1':^ i.'i
 confined spaces.             ~
   —Impervious (rubber or ne.i'pM".-i | aprons
 in  those ar"as where no'iniil trr.i!:vn.ot
 practices could anticipate splashing uf 11-..-
 treatment solutions and wherr  npn-ns iln <'<•'.
 constilutr a hazard around pq'iiprn-r.i.
   S. /.iVrxforA —As p-iir.lin! ui.i in !iir USD V
 Slitte/F.PA benefit report, lir.d,.r,e is often
 used in mrpliinatinn wuh oilier j-eslii itles.
 priniiirily loxaplipni. lo uir.'.r:.! pes's on
 livestock. One of the more p«ipn!.ir
 combinations is  lind-me (!"•) a:,i: I'A.tii'ii-iii-
 |44%|.This r.ombina'inn rrsiil's M> immediate
 control by lindanr- cocpled with the lr:i;;er
 lesidual activity p-otided by u>.i;ilnne. In
 developing Ihe final regulatory m li-n! lur
 liodane. the regulatory actions :aken on
 toxaphene must also be considered.
    We believe that if Ihe Imdnnf- reRislriitii'iis
 fjr livestock  are retained, but (lit registered
 uses of toxHphene are  cancelled,  the livestock
 industn,- would be unable lo control certain
 pest problems.
    6. Hardwond I ufs ond Lumber.—Thr
 decision to phase out this use ovn a '1 yenr
 period in the absence of efleclive rt^istcn-ri
 nltcrnatives seems inappropri.ii^ considering
 the exten! of anticipated hii?:iid  A July ^H.
 1980 letter from Southern Fores! F.Apmmrni
 Station at Gulf port. Mississippi, to the
 Documents Control Office of the  Clirrnii .il
 Information Division of F.PA indirwied Ihi-
 limited but critical amounts of lindiine used
 in  protecting wood Irani beetle attacks As
 the assessment  report notes, there me no
                          chnmic'sl or nnnrht-mii al di:ernalivies
                          avail,ih'e for Ihe n-gistercil uses of lindane on
                          hiiiii'.vnod legs and lumbt" Chlorpyrifos is
                          nut rrjiisipred for use on d-lled h.irdwood logs
                          and lurv.bor and there are no ar.surances thnt
                          il will be effective end lh.il such registrations
                          will 'JP obtained. Il is questionable as to
                          whetlif r 2 years is sufficient lime for
                          registrants to develop and have reviewed by
                          F.I'A the volume of data needed fop a new
                          reuislrotion of this type. We therefore suggest
                          ll:;il F.I'A give further consideration lo the
                          adoption uf Option 2 (continued registration)
                          with Ihe Hpproprixle label modifications lo
                          reduce exposure.
                            7. Siffi Trnnlnirnl.—We are concerned
                          about the impact of the proposed cancellation
                          of lindane as a seed treatment. The absence
                          of an effective seed prolectanl results in
                          insect injury lo liic seed with the resulting
                          loss of pl.inl sl.ind. plant vigor, yield losses.
                          and incroiisi-d susceptibility to disease
                          organisms. Some uf Ihrxr losses nuiy
                          necessitate Ihe lime and expense of
                          n-plHiiliiig \vhich res ills in yield  losses due to
                          the shorli n.'d growing sciison. KI'A indicated
                          tha: tindiiiie s»rd trcutrr.fnts are applied as
                          insi;r;in':e treatments. Ber.anse of the pests
                          mvolvi-d. tliis is the only prcicedute that is
                          pr.idci:,)! and applies equ.illy  lo Ihe
                          Hltf-riiitiver.. Must crops < p.oilui.cr ill.(I ii>,'s lind.ine
                           SI-'.I!OMI  lir.iU his imn s.:i:il but |iiiri.ha!ies it
                           ,i!'r;iiU tn:ali>d. l.,n:i.nv' in registered nnd
                           eftVchvi: for tin: control «' srnl com beetles.
                           seed cur:! m.iR^ols. aril wircworms. Thr
                           ;'iis:;il,lc ,il!irni;,!jves lo hr.'l me on cum are
                           ill,^mui. .tin! tl'lorpvrifov I>'rt7.inon is  not
                           r^vtli .'i-il as .1 sued treatment for wirewonns.
                           and cliliirpvrifos is only registered HS a seed
                           liralni'.-nt for contrvtl of sei-.l  corn maggot.
                           1 li:Ti'' ire. wilhuit'  lindar.e. wi'pwi)rm
                           pnitili-ius can be rvpcclril.li! iiii'.r«nsr to Ihe
                           I'xlcnt  tliHl siy:iifu-anl crop lossi-s will  occur.
                           The iilti-rr.:ilivi.s can onU  br  applied as a
                           pb'iiliT box In- itnirnt in nun.
                              l.ii,il:'iii'. however. r.;m In- appbod  similarly.
                           as a slnny In- itnn:nl si-i-d ilt-ali-r or eli-valor.
                           and iii i'dvMMi-i: of (ilantini; iiy ai'lnmii'ic seed
                           (!••• i!':rs lli.il pit-tar II.e |irit|i-:! a-nnunt of
                           nialvriii! diri'r.tly In srcits irlt>s.—We support the delayed
                           "final decision" on this use until the
                           Unviersily of Florida has had an opportunity
                           lo fin.ili/.c ils data on tin: avocado/mirid
                           project We believe thai since this is truly a
                           minur use. with no effective alternative
                           r.untr'tls available lo producers, every
                           consideration should be Riven lo regulatory
                           options lo retain this registration.
                              8. Ornamental*.—As previously staled, we
                           agree with the continued registration of
                           (mil.me or ornamentals (including
                           greenhouse and nursery plants) by
                           r.iimmeirial applicators.
  Dcc.iuse continuous exposure it not
involved and there are no satisfactory
substitutes, we further recommend that
registrations for lindane be retained for
homeowner use or, omamenliils nvrih
appropriate label modifications lo reduce
possible exposure. This use is only on an "as
needed" basis and usually requires no more
than one application every year or every few
years. As pointed out in the PD 2/3. lindane is
the only material registered fur the control of
all major borer species on woody
ornamentals.
  10. Cut'tirhits.—Lindane is registered fur
the control of a wide ranvc of mter.is on
cantaloupes, cucumber*, pumpkins, squish.
and watermelons. This is not true for any of
the alternative insecticides identified  in I'D
2/3. The USDA'State/EPA benefits n port
indicates (hat significant incrrated Ir-alnirn'.
costs can be expected fr.>m the cancellation
of lindane for these uses. Most of Iho
alternative insecticides may be more
hazardous to the eppli^l^rs. benr'Jii'ial
insects, and pn!linHto:s. and require moir
frequent applications. Therefore, we susx''Sl
Ihe selection of Option 2 providing for the
continued registered use on curcurbits.
   11. Minor i/Vw.—There are minor use
registration; not  specifically  addressed in
ei;her the 1,'SDA/Slate/KPA benefits  report
or in I'D 2/3 that are important lo regional or
local areas and Puerto Rico. Of importance in
the continental United States are preplan!
treiilmenls labeled for Ihe control of soil
insects attacking celery, cucumber*, kale.
Irliui r. melons, pumpkins, spinach, ami
tom.ili.i-s Of particular inlrrcsl outside the
continental U.S.  are the control of the West
Indian  stiejr cane root borer weevil and
while grubs on sugar cane, symphylani am!
grubs in pineapple*, cutworms and white
gruiis nn vegetables, foliage applications for
(hi- control of scales, while flies arid olhrr
 Mia^e insects of mangos, lace bugs on
 ornamentals, registrations be retained with
appropriate label modifications.
   12. Christmas  Trees.—The principal inserts
i:f concern on Christmas trees lire Ihe while
 pirn- wrevil. Ihe  pales weevil, and the pine
 rnot weevil. 1 he whit? pin*1 weevil attacks
 nrw terminal growth. H.id this U the only
 arr.i thai require* treatment. Therefore.
 i:;sr. tirida! application:, car* usually be made
 with i nmpre.ssed air. handyiin. or backpack
 equipment which deliver coarse droplets. The
 only registered alternative for this use.
 oxydcmeton-methyl  (Metasystox-'R). cost* up
 to two times that of Undone. This insecticide
 is more toxic than lindane, especially from •
 dermal exposure aspect. The palei weevil
 end pine root collar weevil are attracted lo
 recently cut pine •tump* where they begin
 their life cycle in the roots of cut utumpi. The
 most appropriate control for them insects it
 lo m.nke insecticidal applications lo the cut
 slumps and adjacent toil The** treatments
 are normally applied with commercially
 available boom type iprayen, all of whichj
 deliver coarse sprays. In the case of the p«|
 weevil, control must be obtained to prevent  :
 reinfcstation for the remaining standing tree*
 Folinr sprays are seldom used for the oohtrpj.;
 of this weevil if cut slumps ar* tmtcd.I^'^j
                             •  •-
-------
^i'.:?r  / Vri. M  No.  ?.G1 /  \V. -.' •'• .  • !;:v. October in,
                                                                                                        /  N'olices
                                     '.IT,?!
            :«l i.r n.>r: hc:n:r. i/». !n !hf>-»: xanie six Si.ili s.
 v.i-ld 'oases wv- r:-.'iniatr VV.-
 ii'vi Qjp.Mr.m th'- iiiiv is.'InMy i'f *iib'.!ilrlii:r.
 rn'lostilf.in  for this 'ISP he'>"*uv? of >t~ ,'M°*'»T
 • '•\a''ivfc toxialy UP 'tn»  is :ippl;"<1 on1 •••  pir
          /posun; is Tr.ir.iiriiii. I'liiihiT. ihr:r
        loricherr.ii>;! o:ntrn! ii!t>  rnutints  H  i!.l
          'ive erx ••»:"'• j'it.''!'y an ?;>'.'!:'.'•
 control m<-!)surrr. nr" as-i^reil fnr Ihnsr S'iii.-s
 I ^ivsnx this  proiiU'tn pest, the av.i.I.ilnl.lv nf
 ii.iHi.ne is o»;!';:;ii4!i)
 umi.ifr prodiictici'. PIJ 2/3 is in ciror  v.>:, \: j|
 slhlrs that "a vant-ty of (.he:;iic;il allrni.-:ivi:s
 arc presently rrg's'ercd" for (oresliy  tr«:s.
 For the mountain pine Iwrlle. Dfnd'tHi-.ir.ns
 pondcmoe HopHns. a majtir forest insni:! p;:s!
 in mflny western areas, only threu prr.iir.iilcs
 arr fegistered: linditne. r'.hylene ilibromklc
 (r'.UIt). and  cacodylic »cii\. Both F.OB and
 i.acod'. lie acid art- currently under Kehultalile
 l're?uniplion Against Registration (Rl AR)
 review and il apperi.s likely that the  fijrt&iry
 cscs of ROB will be cancelled. Problems
 «MSOi;;.-iti>d  with ti»- rptical timing and
 n,«'.JiTl of Hpf-licii!:(,;• of aicodylic acid
 n;i«k'ft .!•••• ot that (.hcmir.il iilinost
 noni xi-i« '•(. !-'nri!».-r. the u»<; of trap trrps is
 not pCf •.I'-it in vrry nia:iy situaliuns.
 priiiiahly iHifitisf of the neP.rl in (real so
 ma-v '"-•-•!> within .•: v.-ry limited amount of
 iirr.e. Ipk bpp. and !'K: sprnct beetle.
 DL-r.Jroctonu* ni]i/>fi>uis (Kuby). are Iwo
 oth':r important bark Iwclles in the Wi-st for
 whirh lindrfne and FDD an? the only
• cl..Tviic.il8 reasonably uHcful fnr dinrt
 conlrol. Wt do nut believe rhloipyrifos.
 dicrotophoi. §nd <>n(josulf:in r.<>il:"n-  TO a'-.-^ti'ly toxic
             •i:i-l nrirS'.'nl n real haz.ic! l'i ..',''HI;' alors far
             li;*x'.pr Ih.in iir.ii.cip In »i) !.' „•!. endtisuliiin
             is limited to i se on h>,;c. A'i'v, 'hr l'n';ir.ido
             F:.)t:t KanRO i-T;d in So^th i);)»^)!a. rfr"iis
             wdirri. prii:it- liinJowiirri trc it h.irk boi'tle
             infested tr^trs >\ilh lindanc. This is n.>t a
             tvpiral fores::;.1 applica'i'in bjl 'hr i-hi-uiiral
             is usc-il in a forKs!  enviriv.mpri! and c;«'iiiot be
             rons'i!»ri!il an ornnmen!;ii us:- A!tho.,i;S the
             Purest Scrvin: doe« not have d.ila on tlie
             amoi.nl of lindane brinr, i';p!i.;d '.his way.
             li.y.rd on the number of cit'zen in ;niri:'.s
             recifivpd, we are sere that a (ul>slar.'is. because the
             formuliitnrs of the EDB-regislcri'd pro.-iiicts
             only sell lo State or Federal agencies.
               Ty  rudur.e h.sscs from bark bt^etVs i:u  an
             ar»-;.wi-lr bd-rs. u com!>ii. :ti;)n of ni.-'liiids is
             ir'i'il. Various SoiitH nre ni-''!r.fi»rj f.•!
             jHlisf.icI jry prodiir.tir.n of for-:st projuc.ts at
             ecunomir.al prices. Wh.Te  inhrct ii'.fp;.U:d
             lir-!)i:r is acrrs:;ible and i%i.onf>m:::ally
             v.:!|iiible. »alv:i!»t'  losing is u^od 'L> i -:!uce
             ihr irsnct populnLun ar.if  at  I'l- Siinn- time.
             n i;uvi-.r sc^nr: \ ,;'.uv. Silvii ulii, ;il prni tic.-s
             ;i:i  iitili/.ird lo provide  lor.x term pr'.l. i:ti;in
             fioni  l.'.irk Ivi-llc irpi(l"mirs. lln-h \iilii'1 Irros
             i:i irrn jtuiii .'rd Ircrs vsln-re ihr o' .IT t.ii'thi K nrt-
             nol prac'lii;.il •':.•*• to lerniin !. -l,pf \^'>ie-. or
             ulln:: fiic.inis  IT liinlmi'is r.iif
             irii|Mir,.tnl (mil iif thin inli'^iHint npp:c.:n.h is
             !i»*i I lowcv-i. w.- ajj-rcf tttut OI:H nl tiie major
             imp/i Is of i:..iii;i'il,;;icn will hi In the sninll
             priv.  'P. landi.v.IInr most widely usrd when  '..ilvHC" i: not
             prriLlical. This mpthi'd is "n!y cff''i''i> r ili.nng
             the hot iiu.-nriisr months when the bi-i.tLrs are
             mosl active. lld  In drivi? ill •
             lieutlos out of th.' infested logs befort- they
             h«ve ffily drvploped.  thus sluppin? the
             spread of the :.il«:,tation. I lowrver. '.lie l.-cst
             li!>ie  t.i contr. I Ihc beetles is whnn l>v.  ;ire in
             ill-; trees duii:i)t the r.oMfi nir.trr msMiths.
             This is whep Ihif Mil-anii-'prny ('':id.>rc)
              l;riilmi'nl  must be usi'J.
                One of the questions of con- -:ni «l>nul this
              product is the possible arlvr'.r pffprl on
              humnn health when used iniule Ihc home.
             The Wood Preseivative Ar.sessrm:nl Team
              has recommended that FTP nol be used in the
              home, and *ome labels already carry this
              xlHlement. Bccmiae the hr.rards of PCP
              prnitlude it* use inside dwellings, it cannot be
              considered an ullemative tu luulanr. Undane
              is oftHCtive for the control of the wood boring
              insert complexes, dry wood termites, and
              there are no other safe effective alternative
              control measures. We suggest the adoption of
              Option 2 (continued registration), tabel
              modifications are sugsestt-d in lieu of
              cancellation.
U. H:'sp:Vii: to Ccr.imrnfs of:;--- i'.-'.'' \
  The Aypnry's final re.qulatuM, pi«s'!i-n
is similar to that rncommend>d by !hf
S'jcrntdry of Agriculture. U'hiie LSl'A
r.oncurrnd with th»; proposal ID t«ni>-!
household uses, pet applications. i:>sn.t
sprays in ii'iinhiihited buildings dn:i
empty stor ige bins, the Agency h
-------
5522
Keiieral  Register  /  V-.l  -48. No.  T.O / \Yi-di:p«;i!.i\.  October in. 19H:i  / Motif's
.ivs of receipt of this Notice, must
 :ii::iil amended l.ibel(s) and
;';>licHtion(s) for ;micndcil
.•yi'-trntions(s) making the nen!::tary
•^rroctions. Five copies of the amended
ib?ling and an application for ;ini(::ulc:siicidi' Pmgrann. KnvironiTient< other person adversely affei.ted by
•);• actions described above, nseQuc;i v- ufFiling or fi.v'/;:i.i; M
                       /•';/< n Hcnri:^ /.V^//-.v,7

                          1. Cunxrqut.'.. ° <:f fi.'nii: c ti:rcl\  ami
                       t!'''iTl!i'f> l!Cb:in\; rnQ,:fst. If A hi;uri:ig on
                       any action initiated by this Notice is
                       requested in a timely and effective
                       manner, the hi'Miing will be Rovi-mml by
                       the Agency's Rules of Priir'.n.e
                       (ioverning Hn.irinus under FIFRA
                       sr'i lion (i (40 (MR Part  Ifi4). The heiiriiig
                       will be limited I') those us"s and
                       registration:! (or ii]iplii:a!ion.s) for which
                       a he.arinj; has \>'.TT\ requested. In the
                       event of a hc.irins, i;ach canc.elUttion
                       an:l denial action subject to the hearing
                       will not become effective except
                       pursuant to an order of the
                       Administrator at the conclusion of the
                       hiriirin".
                          2. Cn;isi^i:i'nccs of failure tu fill- in a
                       tunuly and effective manner. If a hearing
                       ci>n<;f!t ning the cancellation or denial of
                       registration of a specific use of a specific
                       p:*Mir.ide product containing liiuliine has
                       not been rr()iieslcrl by the end of the
                       applicable 30 day period, registration of
                       th.M lindane. product will be cancelled.
                       or the application for registration
                       denied, unlnss the registrant or applicant
                       ainemis the terms and conditions of his
                       registration as d(;scril)i:;l in this Notice.
                          A registrant :nay contest the
                       ciim.clhiiion of his rrgisliHtion  for some
                       us' s  of a pro.lui t. v.hilt; mollifying  ihc
                       t.-i-iis and coiuliliutis of the registration
                       ol I he s.unc proic.t to bring it into
                       compliance with thr rpquin-mcnls of this
                       Notice. In order to do so. he must (I)
                       n'.ike n timely riM]tiest for .1 hearing
                       challenpinx tin; cancellation of the
                       product lor the uses which he wishes to
                       contest, and 12) make a timely
                       application for amendment to modify
                       the terms and conditions of the
                       registration for ««es permitted  under Ibis
                       Notice which he wishes to retain.

                       I). Intnitttati' I'roiltmts
                          The Agency is aware of a number of
                       pesticide products containing lindane
                       which are not federally registered and
                        which an; binrtg marketed under the
                       authority of -iO CFR 162.17. Ail persons
                        producing or distributing such products
                        mast submit an application fur federal
                        registration, including all required
                        supporting data as prescribed by the
                        provisions of section 3 of FIFRA and of
                        40 CFR Part 102 within 30 days of
                        receipt of this Notice or publication in
                        the Federal Register whichever is later.
                        The  Agency further notifies all such
                        applicants that only products which
                        conform with the requirements of this
                        Notice will be registered. Any person
                        who wishes to register a product which
                        would not conform with Ihc
                        requirements of this Notice is informed
th;it the N'otic^ is a denial of his
appliciliirn. ar.d if he wishes to r.'.ir.tpst
the denial, he must request a hearing
within the .ippliraMe 30 day period
provided l>\ this Noticf.
  1 he HO d.iy period  in which to ruqurst
a hearing applies to all regulatory
at lions pioposed in this Notice.
including all denials  of registration, all
cancellations, and all registrations
whii.h miist lie amended to implement
changes in the terms and conditions of
usp iii order to avoid cancellntion.
  D.-itinl S-TteinherDO. 1903.
Don R. CUy.
j4.-f."K! A>"i,sii':n' Administrator fur Pi's:icif1rit
on,i 7i>.xic Sul'ft
|l>- n>,< H.I JH: J K
•IUIMC COCK t4*0-H-M
IOPP-30000/7E; PH-FRL 2451-21

Intent to Cancel Registration* of
Pesticide Products Containing
Strychnine; Denial of Applications for
Registration of Pesticide Products
Containing Strychnine; Determination
Concluding the Returnable
Presumption Against Registration;
Availability of Position Document

AGENCY: F.nviionmental Protection
Apency |F.PA).
ACTION: Notice of determination: notice
of tivriilability of position document.

SUMMARY: Strychnine is registered as H
pesticide under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungi: ide. and Rodenticide Act. In
December of 1976. EPA initiated an
RPAR process to consider whether
strychnine pesticide registrations should
be cancelled, modified, or continued
unchanged. This Notice concludes that
RPAR process and announces the
Administrator's intent to cancel
registrations «nd deny applications for
certain uses of strychnine, to continue
the registration of other uses of
strychnine only if the label is modified.
and to require efficacy data to
determine lowest toxic dosape for
ground squirrels.
DATE: Requests by • registrant or
applicant for a hearing must be received
on or before November 18.1983 or (for
registrants) within 30 days from receipt
by mail of this Notice whichever occur*
later.               ' ._-.  -  ^-^' - .-
ADDRESSES: Requests for a hearing must
be submitted to: Hearing Clerk (A-110).
Environmental Protection Agency. 401M
St. SW.. Washington. D.C 20480. .<;  .,:\
K» FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:   .
By mail: Bruce Kapner, Registration   ' ":
  "Division (TS-707C). Office of Pesticide'
   Programs. EnvironmentalProtec'tim'
                                   •
-------
                          -XI  I 0
SUBJi-.CT:  L Insane fiotlco of Intent to Cancel
          vs. Registration Standard

FfJOfi:     A. E. Conroy II, Director
          Office of Cor.ipliance Monitoring (Ett-342)

TO:       Ullllaa A. Spratlln, Director
          A1r and Toxics Oivlslon
          Region VII
                \

     This responds to Leo Alderman's June 20, 1986 roeraorandurn
regarding the Llndane Notice of Intent to Cancel (NOIC) versus
the Lindane Registration Standard (RS).

     Mr. Aldernan requested answers to two questions 1n the
nemorandua.  First, wnet 1s the violation for Llndane products
found 1n the marketplace after December 30, 1986 without the
labeling changes required by the RS?  Second, what FIFRA
authority can be cited to support enforcement actions against
nonconpllance with the RS?

     As background, before answering the questions, the RS states
that all Llndane products released for shipment after June 30,
1986 oust bear EPA accepted labeling in accordance with the RS.
A HO, all Llndane products In channels of trade as of December
30, 1986 must bear these accepted labels.  The NOIC did not
Inpose relabeling dates for products found 1n channels of trade.
Existing stocks of products cancelled by the NOIC and
subsequently found 1n channels of trade ore not subject to the
RS.  This 1s because the RS Imposed requirements for continued
registration and new registrations, and products cancelled by the
NOIC do not fall Into either category.  However, products which
conplled with the NOIC labeling requirements and are still
registered nust now coraply with the RS labeling requirements.
-------
                               -2-
     There 1s a twofold answer to your questions.   If  a
registrant complies with the RS,  submits  the  revised  label  to
EPA, and Registration Division accepts the  Lindane  product  label,
then any of the products with that registration number found  in
the marketplace with labeling not 1n  accordance with  the  RS after
December 30, 1986, will be in violation of  FIFRA §12(a)(l)(E)  for
ra1sbranding.  However, 1f the registrant  does  not  comply  with  the
RS by submitting labeling revised in  accordance with  the  RS,  then
the product may be cancelled.

     If you have any questions concerning this raenorandun,  please
call Richard Green of ny staff at (FTS) 382-5567.
-------
cc :

-------
\ ma*?*'
                  STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                          WASHINGTON. C.C. 20450
                         280CT1976
                                                       OFFICE OP ENFORCEMENT
 TO:.     Enforcement Division Directors
          Pesticide Branch Chiefs

..FROM:   A.  E. Conroy II, Director
          Pesticides and Toxic Substances
 .  .       Enforcement Divison

 RE:   :  Conclusion of the Mercury Cancellation Proceeding
    On August 19, 197G, the Administrator concluded the four year old
mercurial pesticide product cancellation case by approving a settlement
in In re Chapman. Chemical Company, et_al. betv/een the registrants,
and EPA.  The purpose 01 this memorandum  is to briefly review back-
ground events, to explain the terms and conditions of the settlement
order, and to provide you with a revised mercury cancellation enforce-
ment strategy.
I.  BACKGROUND                  .   .                '

    The mercury hearings were initiated on March 22, 1972,  when EPA
Administrator Ruckelshaus issued PR Notice 72-5 announcing the Agency's
intent to cancel the registrations of  all mercurial pesticide products, and
the immediate suspension of all alkyl mercury compound registrations
and of all nonalkyl products registered for use on rice seed,  in laundries,
and in marine antifculing paint.  In March of 1972, there were tv/enty
registrants with thirty-seven alkyl mercury products registered, and
four hundred eighty-four registered non-?.ikyl mercury products held by
one hundred sixty-five registrants.  None of the registrants of the sus-
pended mercury pesticides opposed  the .Administrator's order-and the
products v/crc therefore suspended ivna fir.ciV.y ^ruice'Ied. Twenty-three
registrants scu*ii£ adiv.ir.i.v.rr.iiv- r^-.-l-:-.v of the r.ccicc c:' ir.te:v; :o car.cel;
these registrants centos:-.a tho c?.r.c3lla-:icn of :ncrc::ry as ?. bnctoricide/
fungicide- for use OP. turf, in pr.ints and co^tin^s, as a seed treaimcnt,  in
dry formulations,  in i'alirica, on wood, and as a treatment for the  control
of tlje Dutch dm disease.
-------
                                 -2-

    The formal adjudicatory hearings v/cre held between October 1974 and
 September 1975.  On December 12, 1975,  Administrative Law jjudjjc P,er-
 nard D. Levinson issued an initial decision,  concluding that the follow-
 ing pesticides containing mercury should  be  cancelled because they create
 an unreasonable adverse effect on the environment:

 •V-  (1) all uses in painty and coatings, c;-:ccpt as an in-can preservative
 •''••• :••   in water-based paints and coatings and as a fungicide in water-
        based paints and coatings used for exterior applications;

   • -(2) all uses as a fungicide  on golf courses,  .except as used on greens,
        tees, and aprons for the control of fungi of the snow mold complex;

     '(3) all uses for seed treatment;

     (4) as a treatment for  control of the Dutch elm disease; and

     (5) all uses for any material that  could be used in wearing apparel
        and other uses for  textiles and fabrics, except as a fungicide in  -
        the treatment of textiles and fabrics for out-of-door use.

    On February 17, 1976, the Administrator issued his decision and order
 in the consolidated mercury hearings (In  re Chapman Chemical Company
 et al.,  FIFRA Docket No. 246, et al.).  Tiie-viamir.isiraior iouna liiat u:e
 benefits from the  continued use 01 mercurial pesticides for use as bacteri-
 cides or fungicides "(D in paints and coatings, (2) on turf, including golf
 course  greens and all other areas of golf courses, (3) for seed treatment,
 and (4)  for any other use not specifically  identified and permitted" by the
 decision did not sufficiently outweigh the  risks to man and the environment
 and were,  therefore, cancelled.  The  decision and order cancelled the
 registrations for all remaining mercurial products,  except for use

    (1)  as fungicides in the treatment of textiles and fabrics intended
        for continuous outdoor use;

    (2) to.control brov.ii mold on freshly sav/n lumber; and

    (3) as a  treatment for  the control of  Dutch  elm disease.
                                         /                          _   •

As to the axiatins' stocks i-scus, •!--:• Arfnunistrw.Trr provided that th?
sale and vse  of cancelled inci-cury products which v/cre forrnulrucd
on or before  Febrv.v.rv 17, 157G, v/ero  permitted.

   Several mercury registrants sought review in the United States
Federal Court of tho Acirr.inisir^tor' = ^ar.c^.ilstior. of the seed treatm
and the-  :i;r: iVu-.gicido u.-:es  ox :;;o:r procucco. On Marc:: 2,  1976,  the
Adminisirator ordered thr.t t'."/ c:':':-tv-v-T!r of t':-.-^ r"?bru?.r^' 17t!'.
Cancellation  Oroct- h-j ii-»:iporr.r:lv -r;:y. ..  ••••\-:ij!^ judicial rcvio\v fn
several Uniui-:.> .Steles Cor.vts 01 A;. ;.)(.-.:u-.   •: .';••  order applied to rU
existing incrv.urial rr£/strrition.
-------
 June 30,  197G, or the conclusion of judicial review proceedings,  which
 over o'ocu/:-' -j ;--;!.  /..-: i;nr;ori;::i: feature of the March 2nd Order was
 that il prohibited tlic parties to the cancellation proceeding from increas-
 ing production of subject products or from stockpiling.

    On March 20,  197G,  the Administrator granted registrants' petition
 for rcccnruci oral •'••" ~.r L' ': <•:•:•:•::;:';r. and ordr-r to cancel the registration,
 of vn.Tcur'-.l ;-.:-r,tl::k:e;.- for use in v.-ater-bo-scd paints and coatings.

    The Administrator modified the February 17 cancellation order on
-May 27,  l&VG, ..to reinstate the registrations for certain mercurial water-
 based paints and coatings;  and, he crfonded the stay of the effective
 date of the-cancellation--until November 30,' 197G" (or'until the conclusion
 of judicial review; if earlier).

    On August 19,  1976,  the Administrator approved a settlement in
In re Chapman Chemical Company, et al.  between respondent-EPA
and registrani-appe.Ll.ants Parsons Chemical Works, Inc.; Troy
Chemical Corporation; Gustafson, Inc. ; Mallinckrodt,  Inc.; W. A. deary
Corporation; and O. M. Scott & Sons Company concerning certain contested
uses awaiting review in the Eighth Circuit, U. S. Court of Appeals, as the
result of an appeal filed following the February 17 cancellation order.  In
brief, the settlement will terminate the mercury case contingent upon the
completion of necessary regulatory activities by the Registration Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs,  according to the following terms:

    (1)  Registrations for mercurial seed disinfectants and  for
       •mercurial turf fungicides for use against summer turf
        diseases will be finally cancelled on or before August
      '  31, 1978.  Production of these products in the interim
        is limited to prevent stockpiling; total permitted pro-
        duction will not exceed the equivalent of two years of
        production, as determined by production data for recent
       years.  These uses involve 2*0,' 000-25, 000 pounds of
        production cf technical mercury annually.

    (2)  The cancellation of registrations for mercurial fungicides
       for use against winter turf diseases (10, 000-15, GOO pounds
       production of technical mercury aiir.uaily) is vacated.  Use
       of these p re'.luces vie-in. :J5 :';••;; o: v.-a:;r bodies wh £•:*=•  :'ish
       are taken for hv.rr.ar. consumption is prohibited.  7iv~ p"c-
       ducts may be applied only by or Muj?dor the direct supervi-
       sion of" golf course superintendents.  The registrants will
       request that these products be classified as restricted use
       pestlci.ies.

    (3) Morcurv product.*? c~Tr!""?cd ••"j'o'-c *.'.:.r off-active ck'-.tc.- e5 :.;.";.?J.
• .      ca.nc^]j:?i;c/: (Avj^v.t't j-i,  i:-V.- .>.- :•..•.• -.•irio f.;\ whicli ;na^:]:'r.:j:i

       tlic ricilo, distribnti.cn, nuu xu-e ;••]'  .-.-iiji-li -.vill be permitted.
-------
                                              .
/                            .   •    '    -4-

          The Administrator has concluded that the terms and conditions of settle-
          ment agreed to by the parties to the cancellation procccdim- satisfy
          appplicable statutory standards under F1FRA and that the jjetticmen' irs
          in tlio public interest.  See attached "Chapman Chemical Cornpnny.  rl
          al., Consolidated Mercury Cancellation hearing, betUcmcnt one! 'Drcfc-.
          (41 Fed.  Reg. 36068, Aurrust 26,  1076) {hereinafter. Settlement and
          Order]."

:    .          Until such time as RD/OPP notifies  the registrants of cancelled
          mercurial pesticide registrations of the status of these.products under
    .  .    FIFRA S3, PTSI3D cannot be confident in the accuracy of any .list of
          continued mercury registrations  that this office..mightconstraeh—At-
'    _   _thijs_ juncture., ..it appears-thalrsn  use's of'mercury were cancelled on
_;       "•"" August 31, 1976,  except as follows;                  '  '

              (a)  for seed treatment (cancellation stayed by August 19
                  Settlement and Order),

              (b)  for control of summer turf disease (cancellation stayed
i                  by August 19 Settlement and Order),
. I
1              (c)  in the treatment of textiles and fabrics intended for
i                  continuous outdoor use,
i          •                                          •'             ~~'

i              (d)  as a treatment for control of the Dutch Elm disease,

I '      '       (e)  as an in-can preservative in water-based paints and
4                  coatings,
»
;         -.     (f) as a fungicide in water-based paints and coatings used
I           .      for exterior application,

            .  (g)  as a fungicide for use against winter turf diseases, and

              (h)  to control brov.-n mold on freshly sawn lumber.


         II.  ENFORCKaII:XT STRATEGY.

          •   A. ENFOr.CE?.I}O:T OF n-Z STAY CRDE.": -- STATUS.
               In my n/-:r:)0rr:-:c;:-;v. ',o you of Ma;/K, 1976, entitJecl i:Cc:i3ol: J^il
          Mercury Jhk-arin^—Mnrci: 2 iir.y of i;;e Fcbrctury.17.Cancellation Order, ""
          I outlined the Arfcncy's-enforcemer.l strategy concerning the manufacture
          of mcrcv.rJal pesticides during '•.he pendency 01 ihs stay of tlte cs:ic
-------
                                 -57

 of the AJtn.iii.sli-aiur's orders — particularly, the "average monthly amount"
 ro.rtri rt'O'--- ••-.-.-. r" <.-v:..i...; : -..I v.'rih by effected registrants is appreciated.
 The fu;\h_r n<.--_ -i to monitor aaci to advise the Administrator as to the level
 of compliance by the registrants with the conditions of the stay order lias
 been mooted by  the issuance- of his  most recent order announcing the con-
 clusion of the  mercury proceedings.

    13.  TL'ir'IS OF -uUl ",'.;• TTLKX ENT AND ORDER. "
       *•  fteristrrtion .Status of Mercurv Products.   The Administrator's
August 31, il/i'l, 1bc;ueir.Jni SJIQ Ui-cier provider me following:

           (a) the. cancellation .order- prov-isio«-crancellin-g"-th'e     ...... " ""  ".""
               registrations of the following mercurial seed
     .   ,. '•     treatment products is stayed until August 31,
               1978,  or until the registrant has produced the
               maximum allowed  quantity of the product under
    ...     .  . the conditions of the particular settlement agree-
               ment, whichever occurs first:

               (i)   Parsons Chemical Works (19G9-MI-01) —

                    1969-57   PARSONS SLURRY CONCENTRATE "60"
                    1969-53   PARSONS LIQUID SEED SAVER
                    1969-91   PARSOXS SEED SAVER DUST

               (ii)  Gustafson, Inc. (2079-NJ-01; 3S209-NJ-01)  —  .

                    7501-2    MIST-O-.ALA.TrC LIQUID SEED DISINFECTANT
                    7501-5    MIST-O-A1ATIC DRILL BOX  TREATMENT

               (iii)  Troy Chemical Corporation (53S3-NJ-01) —

                    605-37   GALLOTOX LIQUID SEED DISINFECTANT

          (b) the cancelTrition order provision cancelling the registrations
              of the following mercurial fungicide products for use against
              summer turf diseases is stayed until August  31,  1973, or
              until  the re-gist rant his  produced ih-i maximum allowed
             • quiL'itity of the  pi'octuct vjiJer cor.:!-'.ticns of the particular
              settlenunt ?.-— eer.-.-.:r.c,  whichever occurs first i,':
   T7  As par; 01 the settlement agrccm-i-nt,  O. M.  Scott,  and W. A. Cleary
'zve sjvrc-c re i-piy :c  :he fl.-gif:.'-:v.:r; Division, Cifice 01 Pcdticidos Pro-
       on or before September 1, 107G. to an^.^r'.ci t.')c:- rc-cristriiiicn^ --f ^iii-f. -.:
  nDV'f-r tr.rf •.'f.'-^ii-x-f; :;.'•'.: (ii) pt\'r.!'.:;-:;; ]'•.-.•• ur:^ r'!";i:i9t winter t;:vf li.'Jtci.-'.c;:.
 on \\-i\l be nu!...j'i'c:U uiid ;-jnnj'J ic.-j \viih t!:o :icc<-;;i;;i:-y ir.forr.i.iiion us i;.-,.'\-i ;••,
PT.SED is ap/n-i.-.cd of tlic coir.plctiou of this nctiou by IlD/Ori'.
-------
                                   - c .-

               (i)   O. M. Scoit  t Sons  Company (533-OH-01) --

                    538-27   PRO-TURF BROAD SPECTRUM FUNGICIDE
                    538-3G   PRO-TURF FERTILISE.!', PLUS FUNGICIDE
                    533-56   CALIFORNIA FERTILIZER PLUS FUNGICIDE

            .  J  (ii)  W. A. Clcary Corporation (1001-NJ-01) —

                    1001-4    PMAS CRABGRASS KILLER AND FUNGICIDE

           (c) the cancellation order provision cancelling the registrations
               of the following Mallinckrodt,  Inc.  (3ViJ-PA-01; 372-NJ-01)
               •mercurial-fungicide -products for use-against winter turf dis-
               eases 2J is vacated in accordance with the terms of the
      -.  •      settlement agreement and production,...sale,.. and distribution
,...„:.-.«.—-—----- may resume "unimpeded" 37:

                    372-5    CALO-CLOR
    . .'..    .        372-33   CALO-GRAN            '            •

           (d) the order of March 2,  1976,  staying the cancellation
               order of February 17, 1976, is dissolved effective
               August 31, 1976.         •   .


        2.  Enforcement Responsibilities Under. Settlement  and Qyd-er. • Pur-
 su?~f to therierms oi trie seuic-men; agreenv;j:its/rc-gi£tran:-appjii£^rts must
 fu     certain substantive requirements  to be afforded a stay of the effective
 dak. of the cancellation of the seed treatment and summer  turf disease pro-
 duct registrations. The conditions impacting on the Office of Enforcement
 include:

         •  (a) During the pendency of the stay, the registrants must limit
               production of the subject mercurials for use against summer
               turf disease to the amount determined by multiplying the
               average monthly production rate during the b?.sc period (in
               most cases, April 1,  1C72 to September 1,  1976) times  the
               number of mouths the cancellation i.? stayed (2-1).  If this
               total production fin;re is reached- prior to August 31, 1973,
               the subject  product's rc.gisiratio:*. Lcucmc  immediately
  cIcro'iL'"-;a boreal.'?.            """


    3_/ As part of the settlement agreement, Mp.llinckrodt has agreed to
  r^cnd the subject  n":u:tc:~;  '-.-'j?'-:-: "- :rdudr :';:<.• -:au:icn "Do noc apply
  ithin tv/cn.ry-i'ivc  (125) foot of any r>ocy or write- where fish are taken for
  j r"**, 1 *^ i** ^ M'" *' t ^ * *^ "•*«.^'  '. ««j«J •.«,..,. -••       • -    * .  .  _,— <*>>*1.*r^fti*^^'>
  J » • • —* I *» NX ll* w* . *. • ^ • *-/ ;•   ...-.•••.. v .  .  .  .      ••  -   '*•'«•.v*^t * to* • v>* v* fc» w ^* v*   « t #
  1Jy by or vnclor £);;• '.:? :'t/ct ?'.;:-.c;'\-:;-.' .';.   :"--:'.' C.'IP.T.'C yuperinf otu'cr.ti;. "
  ic?jo 1cibci ;idiliiio:iri \v:ll  nl.•;.<.• bo ;v.:;d,- :•.• <:;;: O. Ai. Scott and \V. A.  Cloary
  •b<<   ; for use against winter turf disc'i^es (sec footnote^/, nuj)rnj.
-------
                                    ,    -7-

                cr:. •'::•.''.'•<•?, .-;,,-] ihc rcpi;t?-anls must notify the Director
                -." '.'    '"•  ::  '.:!•••• r. L.nil 'i'u:%ic Substance:; Division of such
                fact  immediately.
                                                                 *
                On or  before September 1, 197G,  the registrants were to
                provide PTSED v/ith (a) production figures by product
                for the base period,  (b) the total existing inventories
                of subject pru'J'jci-.s as of September 1,  197G,  and (c) a
                list .:.' '• -.    ."• V  :.i;. tomcrs likely to purchase the
                c-'j'jjc.:ut li: :•!.-. :!.:•: is.   A s of now, iheso cln'.a have not
                bo'Cii fi!:ly submitted.  PTSED is corresponding with
                the subject rc.-riitrants, nr-tiirg their delinquency and
                the necessity for delivery of the required information.
                                     er~30, ' 19'7G';~t!i"e^regisfrants"must ......        "':
                submit quarterly production reports on subject regis-'             • '•'.
           .   .  tered products to PTSED (plus other reports and /or                 :
    ...    ..    additional information  necessary to eff ecutate  :n!'il_ ::c:tio!>s.   As soon as PToJ-JD is provicicvi  -vii.1': 'it*.
 official list  Oi ITiosc ;~~rcr.ry nrixii'^ta cancelled and those mercury ro-ia-
 tralions snrvi'.-incj the- cancellation proceedings,  you will be so advised.
 Addition.-J.ly.  ^5 300:1 -> u^.ci-rj i~  i ch-.iro in  :he registration £ta-.us 3f
^tlior.e procLictc- v.r.oso effective cr.tcs of cancellation have bee:; st?.yod by
'the SotLlcmont and x7-d-?r,  reri^i; -•:.;:  :..-• r.-'tiflei.;.   Violations of the
  ur.r.f.-l] rJ.ion o;-:." of '..-x: =.Li.!ir; stocks of products
 Subject to tJio Au-jst  L'J order,  there  will be no rc-caU program initiufv-J. •
-------
HI.  INQUIRIES.


    Inquires concerning anv far-ot «/• +,

and the Agency's enforcementstrate ^C?,Ty canccUation proceeding
voffional coordinator.         ^ratcgy should be referred to the appropriate
-------
            \
               \
    O.H. Scott tt San? Ccnvpany
    ATTN:  Gary is. (".":?. rr.          -•
    Karysvllle, OH 43040          ' ;  '        '   "
                                  -%•»•**
    Gsntlemen:           •        •*''      - •     	

    Subject:  PROTURF BRCOD SPECTRUW RJIiGICIDE          .
              (For Use on Winter Turf Diseases)
              EPA Reg. No. 533-27 " '                              '
              Letter of Koveaber 12,' 1976
                                  * ^
    The labeling refsrrsd to above; 
-------
TMC LAWN Peor-LC                                /? ;1
                                                   rysville, Ohio ''3040
                                                 (5I3JM2-M5
                                November 12,  1976
                - EPA Registration Division (WH-567)
                 Office of Pesticide Programs  _,_	  ,      	'.
                 Environmental Protection Agency
                 Washington, D.C. 20460

                .Attn:  Mr. John Lee, PM-22

 i                Subject:  ProTurf Broad Spectrum Fungicide
 !                          EPA Reg. No. 538-27
 I                          Resubcission

 I    ."           Gentlesen:

 I                Enclosed are five copies of finished labeling for subject
 I          •      product including the following revisions:

 {                     1)  "EPA Est. 538-OH-l" has been added  to  the
 i                         front panel below the ingredient statement.
i
 j                     2)  "EPA Rag. No. 538-27-AA" has been changed  to
j                         "EPA Reg. No. 538-27".

                 If you have sny questions concerning  this matter, please
                 give r.e a call at 513/644-0011, extension 2104.

j

i
i
i
1
                                                  ''Gary'' N./C
                                                  Fcdcra^. Regulatory Specialist

                 ca
                 enc.
                                                                c i • c * e
                                                                  (  « < <
                                                                    < (
-------
4




             •

             i
   ico 1  1Q7R
                 |!ri
                      ^       ^ <      :	  ___      y ^r--
                  r-lT(o)iJlJJ[p] r
                  n
                                                 JJLi
                                   n
                                FOR USE ON
                             WINTER TU3F DISEASES
                         FOR P.70r2SSIONAL USE ONLY
                                                          f-i
                                                          fl
                                                          i!
iiu^t 0- ro: :;5'v wi:-«-n ^col/ !••/# t
i/Aen fci rurr.sn cjr.iurrciicn.
s J ».:.' > Vc-3 :.: :' ifi Z:-;i cl «j:cr.
                                             .
                                        j) Ut( o( any *vj
                     US P
-------
              -  •••"*/ '-.:;   , ;..7. .>.   (j
                                                                              \
                                                        n  n
                      DIRECTIONS FOR USE

 •This product shall be used only by or under the direct supervision of golf
 course superintendents.

                    for use on winter turf diseases
  Prevents or arrests fungus activity causing pink snowmold (Fu;an'um nivalc)
  and gray snowmold (Typhula ipp)
                 SUGGESTED SPREADER SETTINGS

      to provide proper distribution calibrrrte spreader before application.

26 LUS !11.3 Kq) TREATS 11.000 SO FT ('.'. ACRE/1022 SO M) AT WORM A I. RATE
26LBS(11.8Kg) TREATS 5.5CO SO FT (1./S ACRE/511 SO M) AT OObSLe RATE

                                               SPRSACEH SET7IN3

                R       ORCUfO SPEED  COY:ft£3E    RATE
   Scott j TDrcp Typ>)         3 mph'  overlap v.-h?e Is   7       S'/»
   Candy 3 ft A Series Medal  4.5 mph  overlap wheels  2C      36
    42 In Modal            2.5 mph  overlap wheels  37      46
             • FOR USE ON GREENS. TEES, AND APRONS
  Usebsfcre dissasa appears or when symptoms ars first
  notlcsd. Revest RS r.icesrsry. To arrcil savsre infsction
      doubio rale.
  Foliage may be- either moist or dry v/hen making
  applies ticn.  On golf £roens. rinse surface lightly after
  applicator'  tc cvcirl picku? c;: :!iC35, s-'>  bsils or nici.i-
 FrcTurf Division, C ?.: Sco"A c; So.^s  iMarysviJ'o, Ohio 43040
-------
                                                           '              '

        O.M.
        ATT.M
        The labaling referred to above*, .^ubnitted         ':
        Enclosure           ': '^•••wa.-*-*---*-^- ••-,-.*««•--..•.•»  -.->...- ,-^.~.-,-, .^. i


        WH-567:FHB:JHLee:p,lo:acs:63S-6767:n/29/76
»• -T" •• ' '•:. ro.
-------
                  ^
    THE LAWN Pl-OPLE
                                                      /7 *
-------
                        '• 5.0V!
                        L. lllYi
                     —-Hl_^. _~: ...".
                                       NET WEIGHT 45 LBS. (20.-; Kg)
      LI.

          C-5
          •»U I

          fd"
                        1" ll» I I ..-
                                             X* >= '""i Bt
                                                       B   B  r
                                   ;: •' srs  - .' ;: •:.•••:••'; I;  .'::•' ,•
                                  t /i> ci u^j^rf'  U i.x'J J -1 ' .-X.U \i/iJ 'tjii \
                                  U
                                                                                             1
                                                                                      to
                                                                                      If]
                                                                                      • -»'• •
                                                                                      f-'s!
          o
          ,  T -  Q
DE
      -1   J97S
      '  '"• r -	^^     (
 -^ilSlf'-^.   !
 4,.., i........  ^.rfj^ion^..!-. Oi. r..t JOP!y w.i-ln tw
   five ir?l} '.x't of any v.jtcr nocy w»i:e li:n j:o
   (or lii/n,jn ccniuinvtlon.
                              E^i.'H,'*  ^^«.fc-,w,^^."««-.
i
                             I lvw.1 «   •-  .».
-------
         /
   f
 f
                       CM*   • •  >•••     •   »   .* J t
                      '  .-.-.•  • •.  A~- ---- - " .  : ~ .    • "V.1
                      • .(•V.-4 i. - » -« W.— ^. . -^ .v. •-' V    _. .'...-
                                  DIRECTIONS FOR USE

           This product shall be used only by or under the direct supervision of golf
           course superintendents.

                                for use on winter turf diseases

           Fertilizes turfgrasses. Controls fungus activity causing pink snovvmold
           (Fusarium nivale) and gray snowmold (Typhula spp)
                            SUGGESTED SPREADER SETTINGS
                                                            .!

               to provide proper distribution calibrate spreader before application.

         45 LBS (20.4 Kg) TREATS 11.000 SQ FT (% ACRE/1022 SQ M) AT NORMAL RATE
         45 LES (20.4 Kg) TREATS 5.500 SQ FT (1/8 ACRE/511 SQ M) AT DOUBLE RATE
                          GROUND 03   WIDTH OF
                                                          SPREADER SETTtr-JG
             SPREADER    PTOSPEED  COVERAGE   NORMAL RATE   EOU3LSRATE  t
         Scotts -(Drop Type) — 3 mph -
         Scotts Rotary        3 mph
         Lely-VVTR &
           WFR Models       4.5 mph
         Lely-HR            450 rpm
           (PTO Model)     @ 4.5 mph
         Gandy S ft
           A Ssries fVodel     4.5 mph
                              -overlap wheels
                                 3 feet

                                16 feet
                                16 feet
                              overlap wheels
1

5 III
5 II!
20
G% III
6V, III
27
-
       *    »
      «•••••
                         FOR USE ON GREENS, TEES. AND APRONS
  •
I t • »
               Apply to moist or dry grass.                            •  '

               To control snowmotd — apply DOUBLE RATE in fail, Inie winter-and
               early spring.
               ProTurf Divjiion. 0 M Scott & Sons. Msrysville. Ohio 43040
-------
fc  •  • .,
                          >

                                .«;".

                          L_d.:l
                                                                           1
                                                                           i
                                                                          .3
                                                 NET WEIGHT 45 LBS.  (20.4 Kg)
                 CL>


                 -c---^ u ^>.-:  ii::4-.:-.«  U ^ j  v^j-.jjfc^
                                              n       ^         o   c  n
                                           VI  : n r ^  11^"' r>.T> /t*.*p -i' a.J' :•-.":• ;<'
                                              av'iito-  U i.-=j i) .»'.::• a sir iiw««c
                                        FOR USE ON1 SUMMER TURF DIS5ASSS
                                                                                                t2_.  ..• •

                                                                                                's».  "- •:

                                                                                                'C. '• >; '
                                                                                                'i •
                                                                                                   r.o
                                                                                 °j£.
                                                                                  ^*
                                                                                  •••«•
                                                                                  CO*
              I    a « •?."

             ^    i9/C
                         Ad.
                                      iv*i*i'« i '»*. •••f — i.'. • »i»j t\ t,

                                      ***** ••*?«•«• ^-••^'^rj *» : •.'f.j .•,'*»

                                      ?0*« ^ ''V1 *-vi ««•:* •*•- »,f pi «i« *^\

                                      *c:i«* •*(•.•«.'•• '\ (^*^vi"»-f .*< *«n*'f

-------
                               ::.-"•*'o~i
                              22-5-5
                              fgrciizer plus fung icida
                          DIRECTIONS FOR UGE

                       for use on :i;niii;cr turf fJisBase
   Fertilises turfnresirs. Control:; fungus activity Musing brownpatcb, Icafspot,
   dollarspoi, »t J thread ami coppci spot.  Afeo ccntrois moss.
                   SUGGESTED SPREADER SETTINGS

       To provide proper distribution calibrate spreader before application.

45 LSS (20.4 Kg) TREATS 11,000 SQ FT ('/. ACRE/1022 SQ P/l) AT NORMAL RATE
45 LBS (20.4 Kg) TREATS  5,500 SQ FT (1/C ACRE/511 SG M) AT DOUBLE RATE
                 •GROUND OR  "WIDTH OF'
                                                   SPREADER'SETTIiVG
    SPREADER   PTO SPEED  COVERAGE   NORMAL RATE   DOUOLE RATE
Scotts (Drop Type)    3
Scons Rotary        3 mph
Lely-WTR &
  IVFR Models       4.5 mph
Lely-HR             450 rpm
  (PTO Model)     @ 4.5 mph
Gandy 8 ft
  A Series Model     4.5 mph
                              overlap wheels
                                 8 feet

                                16 feet
                                IGfeet
overlap wheels
6tt
1

5 III
511!
                                                    20
                                        N

                                        6% III
                                        6/2 111
                  27
       Apply to rnoist or dry grass.  On dichendra apply to dry leaves and
       then 5prini'.!= lightly 10 v.'jsii off partic^5.
       On I'utlirg c* ?°rs - :\:rt I--? t:it?u -.-.c -/ iTion'.:: oC .\'GR.".*AL RATE
       durinr; j.-c-.v:', ;''-•.:.:•* i-< r;:vc.jrition or oonrro!. Interim protection
       can bs cci.'i-:;vi=d with ProTi-.-f Groad S.-Jc-cffn F-jngicids.  K.'niO surfers
       lightly after 5;;;;lic^t.;on to avoid pickup on shoes, ROlT balls or maintenance
       equipment.

       For a!l ctjirr ."'»:"» — ":s b>->fcr9 fiinjcs djm -:r? appears or when syr.iptom:
       are first noticed,  fv'.v/ !>& rcps.it^d every oth«!r month at NORMAL RATE.
       !f disuos.o is s?v .'.';• r,: •.-..;.•_ :   .,..;• .; .nu.'jj ;«,-:.' .'ifjpiy <;t Dul--dLE RATE.
      To control rn»si — apply snytim-.; •; r.'On/v'AL RATE to mofst fo!io>id Spt'Ctrum  Fungicide
       as
-------
      i
      R(    . *.- .
      w _~ ...«*,	
                                      J
                                     ^4*
                                     NeTWEiGHT26LES(tux,i
                               \\  '"
                                 ^».*>».
                                                              _._./
                         ia/LJ
                     n                 n
                     : |   /T^.roi /^\ /r.^- • '3f:Jn n
                          vMlir, HUrpijl  !!'<
                          ^'i/^^  ^ ^J  U'J
                                                                               T

                                                                               fi
                                                                               c
                                                                               r
                                   U U
i:
                                             FOR US= CN
                                         SUP.'V.ER TUrt? OlSEAGeS
                                 ^~/'x-.VTi-j^i*scr?crir^^:r^
                                                  C:*rs^a£crs!Srl.
' ••'".-<•?«. oao

F='A' -.7. No!"
                              If c3:r.'i'-.
                              Toii:!3'i
-------
 i
.4..
                                                   vS;^i; ri rf.l.-?
                                                   ..a? 'Of W rjti t"UI»k(
                   DIRECTION'S f OR USE~	"

                 for use on summer turf diseases
                                   Prevents or arrests fungus activity causing disease such as brownpatch. leaf-
                                   spot, dollanpot, red thread and coppjrtpot. Also controls moss.
                                                  SUGGESTED SPREADER SETTINGS

                                        to provide proper distribution calibrate spreader before application.

                                 26 LBSI11.8 Ks) TRFATS 11,COar,Q PT (Vi ACRE/1022SC Ml AT NORMAL RATE
                                 26 LBS (11.8 Kg) TRcATS  5.500 SQ FT (1/3 ACRE/511 SQ M) AT DOUBLE RATE
                                                             srno   COVERAC:
                                           SPREADER SETTI'rt
       	SAYS    Par's"

Scotti (Drcp Type)          3 nph  overlap wheels    7      9Vi
Gandy 8 ft A Series Modal  4.5 mph  overlap wheels  25     36
  42 In Model           2.5 m?h  overlap whocU  37     46
                                        FOR USE ON TURFGRASSES OR DICHONDRA
                                   Use before disesse appears or when symptoms are first
                                   noticed. Kap-.at ss necessary. To arrest stvare infection
                                   usa cioublQ rats.
                                   Foliage may ba either moist or dry when making applica-
                                   tion (cxce3t n-oss ccr.tro! requires 3Dn!;caticn to moist
                                   foliage only). On gci; srodns, rinse  surface lightiy aft?r
                                   app!i-;aticr: to ^vo.M picl'.up :-n slices, gc!f tsiis or lT!^i,^-
                                  ProTurf Diviricn, 0 M S-ott &. Sons   MarysvSI.'o, Ohio 42040
                  *   i>.
                    iiit
                     •   i
                      t «
-------
CU1. Scott " l-r.s Germany
ATTii:  Giry-w. CU'.'k
Marysvilie, CH 4-JQ40

Gentlemen:
Subject:  PROTURF FERTILIZER plus FUNGICIDE            ...
          (For Usa on Winter Turf Diseases)
          EPA Reg. Ho. 53S-26 '  '           	
          Letter of November 12," 1976      "  '   '
                              •  *             •     .   •  "**      .           •
Tha  labeling raferrad to above^ submitted in ccnnectior. vdth regi strati or?
undar the Fcdirc.l Insecticide, Funnicids, ard Rodenticide Act. as anis
is acceptuble». and a strapsd copy is enclosed for your records.
Oohn H. Lee
Product Manager (22)            	
Fungicide Herbicide Branch      	
Registration Division

Enclosure               «*
                    ^           ........
WH-567:FHB:JKLee:nlo:acs:63£-6767:11/29/76

-------
             LAWN P'.V
fl  **
^ >•'
                                                                   r> .
                                                              Mar/svills. Ohio ft 040

                                                              (513/642-6015
                                          Novenber  12,  1975
                . Dc


                Jchn



    Subject;   ProTurf


               »*  U.'

               Resubnissioa
  .Enclosed  are FIT-

ca
                                                                         Ill
                                                                        •   *
                                                                         » <
-------
               f'O'..
                   ...    .              .
               NY  7'  .in >'":.'    :
               •   *  •• •  .• •   '  i ••  ••    / •
                  / J
                  '• J
                          •  i!:!>
                          '  '•  ( '  : '   .'
]

T
I
1
j

                        n
                      •-  --'
                               n   n
            -"'ir» r«7T'.-. s;- '•*•••- .-T> rt /-N : ,

                            ''''i  :'
             FOR USE OM WINTER TURF DISEASES
             FOR FRO?E3S;0?WL USE ONLY

          :" NET WEIGHT 4G1/: IBS (21.1 Kg)
                     •
       Oo
       fof
                       f.<» ei »i!c
j £ r* '"* T? 'O T1 7~ "Q
1
i r. ~ .^
* Uw- i 197R
I - •• • . --.•;;. Irsi.-ctiriJt'.
j .':'.-! n' "t.'^pV."'^"'
•:- : . '-I ^X; f /> /.
! :.. .•. . ••>. :..'. c'.'.^tj *ivc
^i^ji^^^^^..^." --'-



-

-------
                         i  i.r-r-(f «;lV;.: '_f  I
                         DIRECTIONS FOH USE

  "Piij product ih»!I lj» used only by or und»r the direct wpsrvition of sol/
  course vcpcrir.;.:nrji:rit«.

                       tor use on winter turf dis* LBS (21.1 Kg) TREATS 44.000 SQ FT [1 ACRE/4033 SQ M) AT HALF RATE
               Scons (O
               Scons P
3 mpfi oven:
         6 Itel
«.:•>    6   3V,
 0    G   8
                v^^|•?^•odcls
               Uly-MR
                (PTO MuCel)
        I6!eet    2','itr 3v.rt IV.ir
                                                     17V.
                 irrysn«i*.-i5s  «.^r;i  uvinipw.itcif i?Vi  17V«  iu
                 •j;cU2 r-.crd  2.5 r.ptj  overlap *!iccl$ 24   30   13
                FOR USE O.'J GREE.VC, TEE3. A,\'0 AFRO.NJS

            Apply to moist or dry grass.

            To control snowmola'-apply DOU3LE RATE in fall (before
            first snow), late winter and early spring.
            ProTurf Division. OM Scott & Sons. Marysville. Ohio43040
-------
            Vv.   /.O
   —•   v V

.'.>.:   I:
             u   \.
 !  I  •  '  pi
>  if  / "
                         n r.:nn


               i -: ^''   i' ;;: •   /<
               b'v-^'U   U^^jujLis

                           /7
                      r V7V •'•"?/^''''">

                      tW::'i'&
                      .-i»* ~- <_!•.• J S.i^
                          -     -     :.
                L'_i U LJ; .-"•*! LJ (^>' i J O-. J 'v^i
                        ^:..-x
             FOR USS ON SU.WcS TU3F OI5CASES
S^l»"      F0» FROFESSrO-VAL USE 0?!LY

   "^^  -  NET WEIGHT 4G%LBS (21.1 Ke)
        	 ..  WiJW-«£E?C'Jrcr.-yCMiVC       &'
                                             5 fn
       P-sT-.-f r »-,-. 0 « 5— i '.•;
       •
              I-.    .   .       ':T-  J
              f:-7,!:--- .•^.:i:=«^-:fcw,.
              J,/- -'''••• •""  ^>-:rtKj:«e /\c<.

              !*..-"'.V,.:- '  ". :-U^i;' •'•

              g'A . ^r I-r^S.?, /
-------
           /
     J

/.
                                                           .!:;:;: rll'./iiijij
r?d t.-
                                                          DIRECTIONS FOR USE

                                                        (or utt on tumrrwr turf disess«

                                                   -:. Contrail fun-jin ictiyjr/ c.-iiiin'i h.-ov/npsteh. Icjfspot.
                                                   «^i and csp>x:i ii'-ot. A.'tc contrjls rn
                                                	SUGGESTED srSEAD£R.S£TTUCGS-		  -•-•  	

                                        To provide prooer distribution calibrata spreader before application.

                                  46V4 LBS (21.1 Kc,) 7RSATS 22,000 SO FT ('A ACRE/2044 SO M) AT NOHMAL RATE
                                  46V4 LBS (21.1 K?) TREATS 11,000 SO FT (V, ACRE/1022 SO M) AT DOUHLE RATE
                                   5Vi LES (21.1 Kg) TREATS 44.C-JO SO FT (1 ACRE/«:0£3 SO M) AT HALF .HATE
                                                                                $?^y&£s $rrnv)     ~
                                                Scons ftc
                                                Lel»-V.7» i
                                                 WrP :/9C
                  _ r?8.l Ovsi-13?v.h«ls  <'.'i
                  3 w;n    3 tot     0
                                                                                     C
                                                                                     G
                                                                                         3V.
                                                                       16fc-:J
                                                                       15 fast
                                                              4.5 r:ti
                                  2v.rr 3'.'.3 iv.tr
                                   13'.',
                                                 a~ri4to«e!«  1'.',   ','i 10V.
                                                 Moc-l«2-moaei 2.5 mj^ ove.'l.a »i:*els  24   30   19-
                                             Apply to moist or cry grass.
                                             Putting greens—may be ussd every two \voeksat NORMAL
                                             RATE Curing growing jsason forpreventicn or control, in-
                                             terim protfecucn can"ce acfuevcd with PnjTurf Srosd Spac-
                                             trum Fungicstffe. Syrince surlcc^ lighily after application ;o
                                             avoid pickup on shoes, ijoil bal.'s or niaintannnze equipment.
                                             All other areas-use aeforo fungus cisma-s appears or
                                             when symptoms arc firjt noiicccl. May be rupsat?d every
                                             month  a; NORMAL RATE. If disease is severe or more
                                             feeding is desired apply ?.t DOUBLE RATE.

                                             To control moss—:pp!y any-l/ne et NORMAL RATE to moist
                                             fo!iage. Follow Lp at :wo wr:-.-k intervals os r.ejded.

                                             ProTurf Division,CM 2-/svilI«,OMo43040
-------
         . .i<
 • I
 11
 I!
Parsou

Poet

Grsisl Lsds38


Attcuticsi:  -
                                                                                 \-
                                                                        Uo7 i 0 '••';'
11

i '
          Tear
                                   ir o^T Se?itasb«r 3^ 1553
                                     ^^ °f ts» tt^^
                                                        Earold G. AITcrd %
                     s-a&aanftcl label
                           "
            10-10-68
-------
                          i^ -.. •'.-- 'i'-
                                                                                                                                  '--'•—-'   \
                                                                                                                              \..^.L.**:f^~
                                                                                          •»•- )•.• •!•
                                                                                                -"T*^

                                                                                                      Srr<| .
                                                                                                 SMMlKY
                                                                                                 lowinj: f::l
                                                                                                 Trcalcr:
                                                                                                                      KKKI)
                               n
                                                                                                                                                                s roii  i;sr;    "
                                                                                                                                 M he cl^niffl an. I tvrll riifi! l»>ii.,• it)
                                                    I5ijril                           j
                                                                                                                       only recommend-«l y  mi!  li.:
                                                                                                                         .* nrc  usnl.                                                '
                 %   This  V!!l!  Dye-  Seal1 Grain  Kcil
                                                        f                                    i
                   IV.K'GCR —f-:^  cur  OF  HEACH  OF CHILDREN
                        Sec  direct!'  •-;.•:• ;j.cl for  additional  warnings
                                                                                I AJU(
                                                                                                f
nti '0i'j statement  j:iJ  cfiic,  rcqujrcd warning  statements  on   f
                      ti;c  Direction  pdncl                     '
          AC.: .
          ir.mr
               rilcN''l AttnCURIC AMMONIUM  ACETATE  	 13.30%  '
INC^IDIENTS:  	i	*..'04.JO%  '
\   I	
                    CONTAINS:  MtTAUIC .V.r.-.CUItr
                                       J	  7.0%
                                        I
   ANTIIIO'i'K—If j:w:illinvr.l,  nivo nii!l< ••; v. I  •••  •••' r\-.z lurnlni '•
   lill>lcsp:innfiil Hi  s:'.il in » /:l;i::r. i'f wiirm v. ;it< :. .•   : ;"pv;;t u'-.lil •.
   Rrpcat n'ii!; or white ci ''ni: ln-iilcn  «i'h w..'. ••.  C:ill n  rl.j-aii:-!
         .
  'Wnriiinjj — May  rn>i\w-  I/rl:iyd CliniM'-i,!  .'I'MH.-I.   ;)n  i,ri I-:
   Tllifl  pioilnrl Mldlliit  ', f  ' .ir-^lurl ,-i| (ini "'111:11 .  i;:..; !i;.llil|.-.|  v.-|i!
   fjuitlc ventilation fr.r {',,<• 'ipi-r:ili:r.  !f "j-ii'i-'l • •:  '.in, iiniM'..lir(''.
   wilh  :;o;iji mid •.vnior  M.iy In- l;il::l  il'  :".\;>i;i. -...i.  Ii(i 1.11 j;pl  :
   clolhiiiyj. If il (li'cs crl  'nlf! cyri. flush v.-t'i v.:.!"r  for p.l. Icar.l  .\
   mcilirnl allcnlion. Tlii.v |n"il i-.-t ro:ilnim » ->irr i nii.liiiii.'. liiiry i.r i.'isc.inl in n .•-;•.
rrti-NOTI(:i5 TO MMJCIIASKIt —TiiMons C|icniir:il \V,u-ks Inc. :i?{
 •. \varrnnty, expressed  «>r imjiliftl^ r»!UTiiiiit|f  ll;c use  of tliis p/o '
   dicntcd on liic l;i!".'I.  Hnycr tis^UMC.s .-ill li'.k  nd/or han.l!i:
   when such tisc tind/cr luindlinp; is contrary to Jrtbt-1 instruvtion.-*. '
                                                                       i
                                                        •T-""

-------
                        von USB
r,-.l an.l w, II ,i,n I b. f..:» irtsitinK.  I.!()UID SKKD SAVKIl
\T«-.° "i:u" niu>l !.;.• uViil.-d with \viiti-r before  use.  .The. fol-
;K> dilution for «. .• n? .iKRU SAVI'K "UO" in a Slurry Seed
 I)
 •Y.O"
f_l)_
C)
\\.\TI :i     SUWIIV
 Call..i,   I  lUK'KKT
                                     i;!\TU
                     I    2.1 or.
                         2.1 re.
     -.l if ilr.-ir- il
     :!^!!.  K!|'C'-|IVC «m;lr«>r tuny
                                       l.i
                                       20
                                                UATB I'tfll
                                                 HUSIIKL
                                      '/« fl. oz.
           VVAi'.NIi-l:
 obtnined  if lower

 /           '•
;'-i             i
i\ved. £«YC  :n;:., •::• \\liite of  cjci; beaton with wntcr. then n
^ -la.-.s of v.";rnt -.vati:, mid repeat until vomit fluid is clear.
f i-fK  berUm uiih w.iter.  Call a |>hy .iejiin inimedir.tely.
~c l)etnyc>l  f'liei. ical  Linrns.  Do  m.. breathe spruy iniat.
 (c.i'siiloicil p.iis :um-i  and Iu:ndl.'il  \.ilh rare.  Allow ;iulc-
; i>|.crnt,ii.  If si i'leJ »u .skin, iiniuedlatciy wash thoroughly
•lay  bo (::ta! if : wallowed.  Do n»t i.jt in ryes, on  akin or
 inlu i-ye.s. flr.:;h with walui' fur nt  le:.st 15 minutes  anil pet
'to.l'.iet ctinlain-j a ali.'ii^ conccnti .ilin.i of dye,
•>il' ilyc biiniJs or article
;'irc'-t  wciii'iiii:' jr'ovc:.  and old
 >o;> c-o-.t:: IHT »l,,sc.!.  Keep liquid ::vviiy from open flajuc,
.nt. ••>!• luaU'd sun aces.  Do  not  reuse  empty container.
11: or fii:.sbin;r.  Ilnry or discard in a  safe place.
s;:ir—I'.IHOMS rhcndenl Works Itu-. f.nil Seller innkii
 ii::|.licd, tt:i..-err.inir the UHC  of this  product other tliinl  8P-" C'-'O«OMJC
>ir asf.ur.ifi -.-.ll risk cf u:ic nnd/or handling of this
:>iiJliac; is cor.lr.-.ry to label instructions.
                            GUNKHAL INKOUMATION '

           uii.i. NOT niKK'/K AIIOVI-: in i)ix:i:i:i:s m-:i.wv /I:KO   ^-
             r
Contents treiita 512 bunhcls per  irallon of concentrate oceoidiii(f  to typo  of
treated.
I'AIISONS si-:KI) SAVKR SI.URIIY CON'CKNTHATF ;;fiO" i-i it-tomnutided  f(ti thi-
coiiln I ol ili.<«.i->'^ caused by oi|;iini.-,m:i carried it:; the si-cd und  ii> ih<: soil, siuii I>H:
.-•eedlK.i nc htin'.ii.j;' uniiH or bunt of v/I;eul, oal Mi.i.t ai'.J in. j.l li"i:ie oat tiliclit.
(•'in- best iriult-i. treutcd r.rnin should  be bU-i'.;! r: ;. .eh* 01 in u  covered pllv f<"
nl len>l  "Jl hours.  Tieuleil j;uln inuy then be ph'.'i'.i.1.
NOTU'IC: Ili-ud Niniit of Foruhuni:!. brown loono smut c.f l-arb'.v. an.l I'/UHI; riiir.t f'
wheat run mil  bo  coniiulli il by uny known chuaiiiitl i-i-'.'i!  11'-MI'I'.VI.I.
                                                                                                                   CONCKNTKATK "&>"
                                                                                                                                                           .«IM.I<-:
                                                                  r/\us«).\s r,i-:i:i) SAVKU si.
                                                                  will  ilyc si-i'«l ri-«l.
                                                                  "l-or lu-utiiiK  .-iv.l  Kiiiin use TAKSOKS SKKI) SAVKit  SS.t.MMtV CC«;<'< KX
                                                                  Tit ATM ''ilo ' iiccuiiliiiK to inlili1 on "o."  Il is niipi.; Lint ilmi .•••i-iii\
                                                                  IICK liinc inn n few minutes alter ililuliou h;iJ luvn n:::'.le.  Ji-ii i":..i tiippii,^' ;>:m !•.
                                                                  liaiul.  ullo\vi|i|;  two cuj>s to  eniply into miifliino Ir.fori:  l.('"P  in' •
                                                                  tre:itcr.  After llow  of |;r:tiii lins been shut  clT (or l)u!<-|-. .uf iliroii;;)i).  lot in»r'ni;i •
                                                                  o|icralu  u  few seiomla to empty rciiuiiniii(; jviain  fr.in iM.ilri inl> l>o^, tliei« lilr.-i
                                                                  motor oil'.  Alw;iys use  fresh, rleim water vvhcij in.il;in^ ]ii>i|
-------
\\
I  i
               Persons Checdccl Uorko
               Attention:. Mr. A. R. Fox
               Eoct Offico Sos l.':-6
               Grarva *JAKD LIQUID READY MIX

                           Your latter of Septeabar 4, 1963



              S^J^^'^s^^ssr^
              fo? yo^ccrds!  *C?!**U' Md a «-P- «W 1= enclosed

              It 1. assumed that  tho vort "Poison" rtll be prlntoi In red.

                                                  Sincerely yours,

                                                  Harold G. Alford
                                                  Assistant Director
               '                                    for Registration

   ^ %        Enclosure
 i             Stamped Label
 j            A-4

 j            ARS:PR:HSH:ibf/9-25-68

-------
.1 n
    ::.l \vf!l  ciir>  I I" :',i.o livalinj;.  Not to he ililnlril will)
       >lni\c.-» pi  JPI-I  .-.n (units:
1C
U-U
.id.
* .•
•I'.-
.,d.
•il.
;;v
,i .ii
("inn rr.->i"ii .I|N
•i; ii. <•*.
f.t-r bu.
•>i II. <::-..
pv/ •.:.!.
p.i Ii.:.
i ' , .:. , •
/c and p.':i Ic.id.
i'an«Ki-n'
'i II. 112.
per bu.
V, II. o/.
;•>•!• bu.
!, II. Oi. .
per bu.
.._
1 -i .1 o,.
prr bu.

Slurry .Mnrliiiie:;
V-j ll. o^. per bu.
iM i->-. flip lo 10.5 pounds
n -i! 1 pi. per K"l- wuler
Sivd Culu If)
'.i ll. ii/.. per bu.
L' 1 i-f. cup (o li.f) pnuihl-j
I:N • 1 '/•: pi. per i;al. wuler
S( .-,! tiale l!0
'.a ll. o/.. per bu.
1' : i •.'. fiu> to 111 poiindi
ii.i 1 'i pi. por I'.nl. wuler
S.v.1 liiile IH
1 '. 1- ll. (>z. per bu.
1M cc. i up to U pounds
u-i* y pi. iii'r »;»!. water
Seed (lull- 10

• -. lil  *«->iMI ll-ii.l  .* t'<.n.  Ii. J.f.ll  milk tir win...- n\  ru'C |M-.||.-||  U'tlll w.iti'f.
.».i kl Hi  I'.'.i.lt i:.in> .:i.ili :.  \.«lh AU.I|I iiinl u-.inil u-iiU-l.  Il ill vxcf.  l*'lu-.li
. .ii-.l t'• l.L.l.i .1 ill nil.i...

« .1 f'lu.iiu.il t);nu.  D«i li.it  Kfi-.illic iJiuX IHI^f. Uu  Hut IXt III CVC>'. Ull kkln


..,.!,.,i,r tin..,I.  CD mil i!. I in i-)«-v. mi skin . i il,ill,iiikv  \Viuli
                       ..I.
                            I.. It.
                                     • I .
                                           Tlu
                                                    it
                                                        Hi.I
  ik* li..i.;l.» \ti.lii.n- l..-\ ..»..- il uill «t)L* II.H. \\ or ;iiliiIi.-»  tll.it fume jnlo
.  .It I'il.  S .^ ,» il ftiv iiit; t.''»Vf> ;iiij tiKI <.|iiilnii(;.

• ..ii* (!lui.iM.il  U'.iLk. Inf. .IIL'^ nil ri^k of IDC und/ur
}. tiki- ainl.'uf  |i.:ti!ii<«^ u luntrjry lu label iit^tiiiilumii.
                                                                                                     un.i, NOT nti:i-:/i: AIIOVK 10 i)i-:r;iti-:i-:s i;i:; :.\v  XI:KO

                                                                                         One Cnlioii Will Treat 170 llii.shcfa of SecJ Gruin Acco; Jin^ to Typi of Si'tJ TicnU-J

                                                                                       I'AKSONS  LIQUID Still)  SAVHH.ia  recommended /or  thu c.);iti-ol of disoast* cuuacd
                                                                                       by uii:,iiii:.Mis earned on  (he teed. und In  the soil, such us: gci:d-burne stinking <.niiit
                                                                                       or bunl of whoal, oat aniut mid seed-borne ont blight.

                                                                                       For best rosulta,  treated i;rfi!n clioulil bo stored In bncltj or In o covered pllo /or at le-it
                                                                                       J-l liuiirn. 'drilled £ruiu i:>uy then bu )>li'.ntcd.

                                                                                       NOTK'K: Html Kintit of .M(>i|;)iiiinu, brown loone .-mini of b;irlt!y, un>| loose kir.Mt o/ \v)ifkin. wnsh thoroughly with soap ond  uater.
                                                                                       May be futul if bwallowcd.  Po not rbu:
-------
1
.;
:
"
.
i
V* • •_.—.. . .'
-'• ">
• *' •"••: T- • *-.-' 1 i- 1 •>•> ' ,': '• "-'\ '••' / '< r'-^'f :» '•'.'••': . ' I
. • • ••!••• * | ':•••••. I J • i ' • •' A '•' \ i / • i r ' * *•".•• •
; ' *;':r •} r-"J>.v •; . •' i .%>s» ». • \ / j .' j i v "V •' ' /i I
%._...'.._...._......, ,._..- ....... ^... ^.-...., ...;,. .... j
^ ,7/: •'••£:. 73 / L .'• '.»!)'! ^?.i iT .^ys'tfi^Afi ! r: / >^} ; j r^ / I :
r p/i^f'- ' ,; r - f{ A n ??;•) jiiTs|?'f^.2:f"!^ir7>K !•
! ' WARNING - - XE=? CUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN j
• . . '
I See uii ,*:cn p-^v.cl for odditionol warnings j
• >'::'- •••QiSON ^ f
f
; : ..ce cnlidote stotcnic- ; c::d other required warning sfalemcnls on -
: : i!.c direction poncl • j
i
' ! -«'fc' "ffr,;i';l^ ox «nv *


SrcJ slioii!'! 1." flraiifl ntnl vi-II c>:iv«i l.i.-»".i:-.- •
nnylhiiifr clyc. Tin follov.-im; taMc r-hr.w.i picpi-i .-r.i..i.- '
sm:i>

Q 0^'^
—* u "•• rj '.-i
ru *~
A
•
"
K
.
,\
li
\VIIKAT
OATS ,
IIAULKY
TI.AX
.Mis, O-Ma.ic
J J II. •;/:. per bit.
2'.i re. tun I«i«::f1
p'Uinil i p;iu In.ul.
!' illnii|is pvf l>li.
ii ll. ox. per Int.
2!i '/I', cup to II '.'»
piilili-l-l putt Intnl.
11 dump-: p< I tin.
!i II. n/. pi-f IHI.
2'i cc. rup •(> rt'.i
p. 'ilii,!:; pail Inml.
'.I ilninp<; prr !iu.
1 '.i II. i>2. prr l>li.
li cr. r;ip I" "':•
P(>IIMI!S pun lurid.
!) iliinipa prr btt.
Ad:i|'liirs or
'I n. rz.
pi i !, i.
.v o r- •
i-i In.
Si 11.17..
p'rr hi.
1 '-i ll. )r.
prt IM.
'*'• '' .
•"»• r: .
l" •• J
•?; r j
|:or j
p.i r!
prl" '
Sec inarhinc iinuunl for rup nirr ninl i>ni!ln.i<|.
vriPMl i;s — l[ Mviiit.«v..|. Ctvr i.nll. »r . Irl- / , ,-,• 1., ,1..,, ... '

Wn>n:nit: Mn> l'iiiti...<- P l.)ivl ( In mi> .1 !<...« ll., ,.r
Mfii* In ii
K 1 ' III

i l.i,..?: •
i
1 in f -. . •
•i.i. »ir '
inn i io ri'in ;M-.I n _ r,,,. 	 ' i,., ,,.... i M.I.. :,... .. .«;. n. f
ilirrnilln: Ilir ti 	 1 (In. I,I..,|MI| oil., i ll,.'" ....1 '. .1 .... •!.. | i .

-------
  Parsons  Chonical Works
  Attn:  A.  R.  Fox
  P.O. Box K6
  Grand Led*c,  Michigan  48337

  Gentlemen:                   .

 Subject...:  ^S^

             Your letter of May 18, 1970

 Please refer to the enclosed PR Notice 72-5.
 Sincerely,
T. E. Acfarwzy
Chief,
Fungicida-HsrbiciuS Branch

Enclosure
PR Mot. 72-5
EPA:PR:RJ-7-:jc  -5-74-72
-------
                   ACi'lCULll'^M. Kl '.'.''.UCH '.• El!
                   rt.'.Ticuif •, itc';tjLAi ic/.'J 01 vr:
                       WASMIl.T.lOU. U. C. -O'.'^O
               •N ro.v jj'-iwj Ri:r.i;,ir:ATior,' OF LCONOMIC POISONS
             .'/ii/t^ r.',.: /•'••.iV..-//T
                                                                                OlVi^iO.V. tVASHIN'CTO:.1. O.

    - T-ay ccco^npuny ili*r sale-of this ^rc-uct. Cc^:'cs mjif Lj c^ccr!/ ICpib:*? oiij ijenricof,
             ;.•*•- of ;tw :froi,-.'» •'».T
            itive ens eo;h i'refr .n-;'»:ij
                                                                           IN A.-.-V CO'-'laCfCNOKM-E O:J VHIf P:!OOUCT.
                                                                           REKCR TO I'liS FILE 3YWi3OL lit).:
            Tcclni icr. "I   Hcpf.
                                                       Id. C'AIC C'C.'.'LL'

                                                         /I-7-70
    rouM O-I01-
    )•«,>  uoo
                               KXI:.MN*. t root I.T  fin OHM !<•!•''/ •.|lll^
                                      v.'li i  i.:. u-:rn urnii. L::i!AU..l l.">
-------
           UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

V    c'*'*                    WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460
     'w
                                JAN 6   1377
                                                           OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT

    TO:        Snforc"^«nt  rivjsicn Directors
              Pesticides Branch Chiefs
                                                f\    <"
    FROM:      A.  E. Conroy II, Director         /\   <^
              Pesticides and Toxic Substances  /"^'
                 Enforcement Division

    RE:        Enforcement  of Mercury Settlement


          In a memorandum  of October 28,  1976, entitled "Conclusion of the
    Mercury Cancellation Proceeding" (attached),  I  outlined the background
    and  conclusion of  In Re Chapman  Chemical Ccroany, et al., including,
    at pp  5-7, the terns of the settlement and order and the Agency's pro-
    jected enforcement thereof. Review of the compliance with the order by
    the  six registrants affected indicates that there exist degrees of com-
    pliance activities, varying from none to complete.

          On December -24,  1976, five registrants  (not including Mallinckroct)
    were advised  by registered letter (copies attached) of the Agency's record
    of their compliance, of those activities required to be completed, of a
    general deadline of January 14,  1977, for initial compliance, and of EPA's
    intention to  immediately enforce against non-compliance.

          As a follow-up to these letters, you are  requested to make plans
    to inspect, between January 19 and 21, 1977 those manufacturing facilities
    in your region where section 7 records indicate subject products are pro-
    duced  for the purpose  of placing stop sales against those products whose
    registrations are  no longer valid in  that information was not submitted
    as required by the "Settlement and Order". Attached is a list of affected
    products, labels,  producing establishments and  addresses. On the afternoon
    of January 18, 1977, your Regional Coordinator  will contact you to indicate
    which  producers and products have attained an acceptable level of conpliance
    and  which ones have not.
-------
                             -2-
      You may use the revised stop sale fora provided at p. 13 in the
new section 13 (10-76) of the Case Proceedings Manual.  In the paragraph
specifiying the violation,  it is suggested you insert the following:

            . . . there is reason to believe that  (product
            name) is in violation of section 12(a)(2)(K)
            of the Act in that  the registration of said
            product was continued subject to the terms of
            the "Settlement and Order" signed August 19,
            1976, in Re Chapman Chemical Company/  et al.,
            and said registration is no longer valid in
            that [base period production reports,  calcu-
            lation of total allowable production,  customer
            lists, existing inventories, and quarterly
            production reports] were not submitted as
            required by the Settlement.

      This is the first of several so-called "phased cancellations" which
the Agency is handling.  It is  of great importance that we enforce
compliance firmly and swiftly in this intial order to build an awareness
of and appreciation for the Agency's intentions to enforce similar
cases in the future. Should you have questions, please contact the
appropriate Regional Coordinator.
-------
TO:       Enfcrccrcr.t Division Cirectcrc
          Pesticides Branch Chiefs

FPCtt:     A. E. Conroy II, Director
          Pesticides and Tcxic Substances
             Enforcement Division

RE:       Enforcement of Mercury Settlement


      In a memorandum of October 28, 1976,  entitled "Conclusion of the
Mercury Cancellation Proceeding" (attached),  I outlined the background
and conclusion of In Pe Chapman.Chemical Company,  et al.,  including,
at pp 5-7, the terns of the settlement and  order and the Agency's pro-
jected enforcement thereof. Feview of the ccroliance with  the order-by
the six registrants affected indicates that there exist degrees of com-
pliance activities, varying from none to complete.

      On December 24, 1976, five registrants  (not including Mai1inekrodt)
were advised by registered letter (copies attached) of the Agency's record
of their conpliance, cf those activities reoxiired to be corpleted, of 3
general deadline of January 14, 1977, for initial compliance, and of  EPA's
intention to immediately enforce against non-ccupliance.

      As a follow-up to these letters, you  are requested to make plans
to inspect, between January 19 and 21, 1977 those manufacturing facilities
in your region where section 7 records indicate subject products are  pro-
duced for the purpose of placing stop sales against those  products whose
registrations are no longer valid in that information was  not submitted
as required by the "Settlement and Order".  Attached is a list of affected
products, labels, producing establishments  and addresses.  On the afternoon
of January 18, 1977, your Regional Coordinator will contact you to indicate
which producers and products have attained  an acceptable level of compliance
and which ones have not.
-------
      You way use the revised step  sale  fcrr nrcvir:o£ at •??« 13 ir. tho
new section 13 (10-76) of the Case  Froce-t^ings .Manual.  In ,
            and said registration is no  longer valia in
            that (base period production reports, calcu-
            lation of total .allowable.pco6uctio»»-customer' ——
            lists, existing inventories, and quarterly
            production reports] were net submitted as
            required by the Settlement.

      Shis is the first of several  so-called "phased cancellations"  which
the Agency is handling.  It is of great  importance that we enforce
corpliance finrly and swiftly in this intial order to build  an awareness
of and appreciation for the Agency's intentions to enforce similar
cases in the future. Should you have questions, please contact the
appropriate Regional Coordinator.
-------
 1

 i                                Region V Pesticide Products and
                                     ICo-npany Aodresses Involved In
                                       The Mercury Settlement



                    a.  Corresponding Address:

                        Mr. John P.  Kennedy, General Counsel
                        0. M. Scott u Sons
                        Mar.; ivi i it-;  fnio  43040

                   b.   Establishment Address & Est. #:

                        0. M. Scott & Sons Company
                        Marysville,  Ohio
                        Est. S538--OH-01 —    '-        -"

                   c.   Product involved:

                        1)   Pro-Turf Broad Spectrum Fungicide; EPA Reg. No. 538-27

 4                       2}   Pro-Turf Fertilizer Plus Fungicide; EPA Reg. No. 538-36-

.1                       3)   Pro-Turf California Fertilizer Plus Fungicide; E?A Reg.
 j                            No. 530-55

              Note:     0. M. Scott is currently in compliance with settlement acree-
 '                       ment and enforcement actions are not anticipated during
 .                       January 77.

              2.   Parsons Chemical  Works, Inc.

                   a.   Corresponding Address:

                        Mr. C. R. Parsons, President
                        Parsons Chemical Works, Inc.
                        P.O. Box 146
                        Grand Ledge, Michigan  48837
 i
•j                  b.   Establishment Address & Est. i:

j                       Parsons. Ch=mical t.'crks, Inc.
1                       Grand Le-Jfje, Michigan
 ;                       Ccf  •* TC--C v-v
 j                       tSt. rt  (rwi-;iiJi

 ]                  c.   Products Involved:

.]                       1)   Parsons Slurry Concentrate "GO";  EPA Reg. No.  196957
 i
 j                       2)   Parsons Liquid Seed Saver;  EPA Reg. No. 1959-53
-------
                          - 2 -

3)   Parsons Seed Saver Dust; EPA Reg. No. 1969-91
                                              if
Note:  Parsons Seed Saver Dust was included in the settlement
       agreement, but a search of EPA records has revealed that
       it v.-as never registered.  It carries the file symbol
       No. ISGl'-KR.
-------
                I:Nvii-io;• : .--•:- :~.-
. '
•
|
1
1















                                                                 OH'IOIAL f-'ILJ-
-------
            	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                               t  Sons
      Period
      Oct. 1 - Doc. 31,  1975
      J,-u. 1 - tor. 3'!,  ltV7
      April. 1'- June 20, 1S77
      Jul. 1 - Sept. 30, 1977
      Oct. 1 --Doc. 3V,  1S77
      Jan. 1 - Mar. 31,  1973
      Apr. 1 - June 30,  1978
      July. 1 - Aug. 31, 1278
Due To PTSED
Jan. 15, 1977
Apr. 13, 1977
July 13, 1977
Oct. 17, 1977
Jan. 17, 1973
Apr, 17, 1978
July 18, 1578
Sept. 18, 1978
J 1.11- I
                                                               OM-ICU.L
-------
                                 DEC 27  I97G
Mr. C.-H. Parsons,  President
Parsons Chemical Works,  Inc.
P. 0. Box 146                                                          -
Grand Letfge, Michigan  48G37

Dear Mr. Parsons:

     This lettsr 1s to acknowledge receipt of your September 10,  1976,
co.'ifflunicstion containing the signed settlement agreement  and order
pursuant to the Ad—in istra to r's~Crc;c-r and Settlement of Aucisst 19, 1975,
(41 FR 36G6G), in In re  Charon Chenical Co-!?.inv, ot al.,  the mercury
pesticide cancellation case.

     As you are well  aware*  the settlement to t/hich you arjreed specified,
in part, that Parsons Chemical  !-.'orhs, Inc. would provide  ths Director of
the Pesticides and  Toxic Substances Enforcement Division  (PTSEO)  with
(a) certain production raccrds  on your mercurial products,  Persons
Slurry Concentrate  "CO"  (EPA Reg. Ko. 1259-57), Parsons Liquid Seed
Scvnp (EPA Keg. Ko.  lSC.0-53), and Parsons Seed Saver Dust  (EPA Ren. Ho.
1259-91), (b) a ccniputation  of  the total naxinim cn-ounts  of production
of these products that arc allowed under the terms of  the settlement
agresr-enc, (c) a list of i^nediate ct'stotners, end (d)  an  inventory of
the quantities of thsse  products on hand.  PuTSED has  not  yet received
tills inforruition.   In addition, your first quarterly re-port, due  on
September 30, 197G,  has  not  yet arrived.  V.'a would also'renind you that
the next quarterly  Report covering the period through  December 31, 1976,
1s also due to be submitted.

     T!»8 above inforrrnticn .ind  ths quarterly reports for  Scnicr.-'-sr and
DecrcL-ar :;•-•'; bi- sutf::ittic ty JT«'.--." r/ "i4, li^77.  T~i-. t.»o  v/o"-*: pc-riod
Ji?t>.'cen f;cci.-;:iiir 3is£ r.:'.;i Jafi'j:r.v "••'tl; should sllcv.- 5nple  tr.rj to co;n-
plrjte the prociiir.tic-n rrr-.,rt:  for* r-hc Di-car./jcr cjijartar  and  still provide
siifficierit tir.e for r;;-< rijvj  the inforratiOM. If thisre  Is  no production
ciurinn reporting periods,  then  zero production figures  should !:-G  re-
ported.
-------
    ' The  information should be senc by certified nail  and addressed as
 follows:                   *         .       '

                    'A. E. Conroy II, Director
                    Pesticides and Toxic Substances
                    Enforcement Div1r.1o» (EH-342)
                    U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
                    401 M Street, S.U.
                    Washington, 0. C. 2CKGQ

     You may rest assured that the data you  subsnit will  be  treated as
 confidential, unless you advise otliervrise.

     Attached for your convenience.Is., a schedule-shewing- v?hTri"t"h"ovarious
 reports are duo.  ThersrwiTT be' no further reminders  from  this  Agency.
 the conditions and requirements imposed upon you by  the?  Aucjust  19- 197G,
 Settlement and Order are salv-exc-cutinn.   Your strict compliance with
 these.terms is not only anticipated, t-jt raqin'rucl.   Failure to  submit
 the required reports in a tif;;3ly wanner will result  1n t;iia  Initiation  of
 stop sale ?.nd seizure action on all products affected by this Order  and
 the ir.mediate cancellatioti cf the registrations for  these  products.

     Wa are also attaching a ccny of the Suttlc.r.cnt  Orc-'er  entitled
 "Prcpr-scd Tercs of Settlement of Cort-uin Portion of  FIFilA  Docket Uos.
246 et al.:  llercury Pesticide CancolUtion  Case",  signed  by you on
September 10, H'7u.  V.'G sucsgast ycu rev lev/ tho docuir.int.

                                   Sincerely yours,
                                   A.  E.  Conroy II, Director
                                 Pesticides  and Toxic Substances
                                      Enforcement Division
cc:  Col burn T. Cherney
-------
                       PARSONS CHEMICAL WORKS, 1!!C.
SCHEDULE FOR SUBMISSION OF REPORTS.
                                  *
                   PERIOD
          Amount fomul ated each month
            during period  betv/icn  April 1,
            1972 and July  31,  1976.
          Computation or total D.-ixiuuni
            anount of prcdtiction.
          Inventory of quantity of
            product on hand as of
            Sept.  1, 197C.
          List of teedlato customers
          July 1  - Sept. 30, 1976
          Oct. 1  - Dec.  31. 1976
          Jan. 1  - far.  31, 1977
          Apr. 1  - Jun. 30, 1977
          Jul. 1  - Sept. 30, 1977
          Oct. 1  - Dsc.  31, 1977
          Jan. 1  - for.  31, 1973
          Apr. 1  - Oun.  30, 1973
          Jul. 1  - Aug.  31, 197S
DUE TO PuTSED
Jan. 14, 1977
Jan. 14, 1977
Jan. 14, 1977
Apr. 15, 19/7
Jul. 18, 1977
Oct. 17. 1977
Jen. 17, 197C
Apr. 17. U-73
Jul. 13, 1S78
Sept. IB, 1S7G
-------
                                                                       ,;
           UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                       WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                                         OFFICE or
                                                 PMTICIOM AND TOXIC »UMTAMCn
 SUBJECT:   Compliance Strategy for
           and Voluntary Cancellat

 FROM:      John J. Heylan III, Direc
           Policy and Grants Division
           Office of Compliance Moni

 TO:        Addressees


     On June 25, 1990 the Director of the Special Review and
 Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, signed a
 FEDERAL REGISTER Notice entitled: "Pesticide Products Containing
 Phenylmercury and Other Mercury Compounds; Receipt of Requests
 for Voluntary Cancellation and Amendments to Delete Uses."  As a
 result of  negotiations between EPA and registrants of products
 containing these uses, the registrants have applied to amend
 registrations for certain mercury products to delete labeling for
 use in interior paints, and have requested voluntary cancellation
 for other  mercury products used in paints and coatings.
 Finally, the National Paint and Coatings Association (NPCA)
 agreed to  instruct members to voluntarily relabel existing stocks
 of mercury-containing interior/exterior and exterior paints and
 to either  reformulate or relabel existing stocks of interior
 paints containing high levels (i.e., >200 ppm) of mercury.

     Attached are the Final Compliance Monitoring Strategy, a
 summary of the Strategy, a copy of the Cancellation Order, a copy
 of correspondence regarding the NPCA agreement to instruct
 members about the voluntary paint labeling program, and a list of
 producer/registrant establishments that will be used to target
 inspections.  Targeting information for user/formulator
 establishments will be distributed to each Region under a
 separate cover.  Please transmit a copy of the Strategy and other
 attachments to the States.  Please note that because of the
 nature of  this action, this Compliance Strategy is immediately
 effective.  If you have any questions or comments regarding the
 Strategy,  contact Steve Howie (E-mail EPA 7201, FTS 475-7786) of
my staff.

     Thank you for your cooperation.


Attachments
-------
                                   ADDRESSEES
II
IV
VI
VII
VIII
IX
      Douglas D. Campt
      Edwin F. Tinsworth
      Anne Lindsay
      Mike Walker
      Mark Greenwood
      Connie Mxisgrove
      John J. Neylan III
      David Dull
      Mike Wood
      Phyllis Flaherty
      Jerry Stubbs
      Maureen Lydon
      Ken Kanagalingam
      Bob Zisa
      Sherry Sterling
      Jan Bearden
                      (TS-766C)

                      (TS-767C)

                      (TS-767C)

                      (LE-134A)

                      (LE-132A)

                      (EN-342)
                        N

                        N

                        If

                        n

                        N

                        N

                        N

                        n

                        N

                        N
      Jake Mackenzie
      Western Regional Compliance Director
Louis F. Gitto, Director
Air, Pest, t Toxics Mangt. Div.

Barbara Metzger, Director
Environmental Services Division
III   Thomas J. Maslany, Director
Marvin Rosenstein, Chief
Pesticides ft Toxic Substances Br

Ernest Regna, Chief
Pesticides ft Toxic Substances Br

Larry Miller, Chief
      Air, Toxics, ft Radiation Mangt. Div Toxic a Pesticides Branch
Winston A. Smith, Director
Air, Pest, ft Toxics Mangt. Div

William H. Sanders III, Director
Environmental Services Division

Robert Rannesschlager, Acting Dir.
Air, Pesticides ft Toxic Division

William  A. Spratlin, Director
Air and Toxies~Division

Irwin L. Dickstein, Director
Air and Toxics Division

David P. Howekamp, Director
Air Management Division

Gary O'Neal, Director
Air and Toxics Division
Richard D. Stonebraker, Chief
Pesticides ft Toxic Substances Br

Phyllis Reed, Chief
Pesticides ft Toxic Substances Br

Robert Murphy, Chief
Pesticides ft Toxic Substances Br

Leo Alderman, Chief
Pesticides ft Toxic Substances Br

C. Alvin Yorke, Chief
Toxic Substances Branch

Davis Bernstein, Chief
Pesticides ft Toxics Branch

Kenneth Feigner, Chief
Pesticides ft Toxic Substances Br
cc:   Artie Williams
      John Tice
      Jan Andersen
      Beth Edwards
      Tim Backstrom
      OCM Staff
                      (H-7508C)
                      (TS-769C)
                      (H-7508C)
                      (H-7508C)
                      (LE-132P)
-------
                      MERCURY BIOCIDE CONDITIONAL REGISTRATION
                              AND VOLUNTARY CANCELLATION
                  COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY SUMMARY SHEET
INSPECTION
DATE

by 10/23/90
by 2/20/91
between
6/28/91
and 8/28/91

between
6/28/91 and
8/28/91
INSPECTION
SITE

Producer
Establishment
User/Fonnulator
Establishment
(Paint
companies)
Producer
Establishment
User/Fonnulator
Establishments
(Paint
companies)
INSPECTION PURPOSE/ CONDITIONS TO BE MONITORED
Relabeling must have been done of existing stocks of ALL Hg
biocides sold or distributed on or after 7/23/90;

Proof must be available that stickers were delivered to customers by
7/23/90.

Restickering of ALL stocks of Hg bkxide must have been done by
8/20/90.

Use of ALL Hg biocide must be in accordance with the label: all
use on or after 8/20/90 must be in  accordance with revised labeling.

Paint produced on or after 8/20/90 must be labeled in accordance
with biocide label instructions.

Existing stocks of aQ paint products produced prior to 8/20/90
fhould be labeled in accordance with NPCA agreement

No shipment of cancelled products after 6/27/91.
No use of cancelled products after 6/27/91
      Conditionally registered products: Cosan PMA-100; Tbor PMA-100; VDcon PMA-30 and
      Merkyl MAP.
      Cancelled products: Interade 60 (Akzo); Cosan PMO-30-, Cosan PMA-30; Troysan PMDS-10;
      Troysaa CMP Acetate; Troyun PMA-30; Tbor PMA-100; Htfc PMA-18; Hob PMA-60; Super-
      Ad-It Fungicide (Hob).
-------
   COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR THE CONDITIONAL REGISTRATION AND
      VOLUNTARY CANCET      QN OF CERTAIN MERCURY BIOCIDES
 OVERVIEW
       Certain mercury biocides are registered as pesticides for use in paints as
 antimicrobial agents.  In addition, mercury biocides are registered for numerous
 miscellaneous uses, including textiles, adhesives, joint compounds, and other products.
 As such, these pesticides are used at the manufacturing level and the final treated
 products are exempt from regulation under FIFRA, provided that a registered pesticide
 was used and no pesticidal claims are made for the treated product However, mercury
 biocides have been implicated in a recent human poisoning incident that apparently
 involved mercury-containing paint applied to the interior of a residence.  EPA has
 conducted a risk/benefit analysis considering the exposure of painters as well as persons
 living and working in buildings painted with mercury-containing paints. EPA
 determined that there was an unreasonable risk to both painters and residents. In
 response, EPA worked with mercury biocide registrants to eliminate registered uses of
 such pesticides for formulating indoor paints and coatings, and to reduce risks involved
 in remaining registered uses.

       As a result of negotiations between EPA and registrants of products containing
 these uses, the registrants have applied to amend registrations for certain mercury
 products to delete  labeling for use in interior paints, and have requested voluntary
 cancellation  for other mercury products used in paints and coatings. On June 25, 1990
 the Director of the Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide
 Programs, signed a FEDERAL REGISTER Notice entitled: "Pesticide Products
 Containing Phenylmercury and Other Mercury Compounds; Receipt of Requests for
 Voluntary Cancellation and Amendments to Delete Uses."  This Notice was published
 on June 29,  1990 (Attachment 1).

       The cancellation order and amendments to delete uses were effective July 2,
 1990.  Effective July 23, 1990, it is illegal for registrants to sell or distribute any existing
 stocks  that do not  meet labeling provisions. By July 23, 1990, stickers and instructions
 for restickering of all existing stocks must be delivered to an persons holding existing
 stocks  subject to restickering.  The language to be added to stickers and new labeling
 prohibit the  use of mercury biocides in formulating interior paints and coatings, include
 precautionary statements on exterior paints formulated using mercury biocides, and
 specify the rate of  application for the remaining uses. The instructions accompanying
 the labeling will state that each container of mercury biocide subject to this action must
be relabeled by August 20, 1990. All paint manufactured or formulated with mercury
 biocides after August 20, 1990, must comply with the revised label

       Finally, to provide additional protection for users of paints, EPA negotiated a
voluntary stickering program  with the National Paint and  Coatings Association (NPCA).
 Pursuant to this arrangement, NPCA agreed to instruct members by direct mailings to
 label existing stocks of mercury-containing interior/exterior and exterior paints "for
-------
                                       -2-

exterior use only", and to either reformulate or relabel "for exterior use only" existing
stocks of interior paints with high levels (i.e., >200 ppm) of mercury.  Labels are also
to include warning and use statements.  The language to be used in the voluntary
labeling is identical to that required in the mandatory labeling that appb'es to stocks
produced after August 20, 1990, as described in the terms of the conditional registration
and the Cancellation Order, above. Members of NPCA were instructed to comply with
the voluntary program by August 20,1990. A copy of the letters used for the direct
mailing, including the initial mailing, the EPA response to that mailing, and a followup
mailing from  NPCA as a result of the EPA response, are attached to this Strategy
(Attachment 2).

      Compliance with the terms of the Conditional Registration Agreement and the
Cancellation Order will be monitored through inspection of registrant/producer facilities
and user/formulator facilities.  The voluntary existing paint stocks stickering program
will be monitored concomitantiy with inspections of use facilities.  States may wish to
monitor paint retailers to determine whether paint products that are being sold are
relabeled according to the terms of both the cancellation order and the voluntary
labeling agreement
REGULATED COMMUNITY	

      The registrants (who are generally also the producers and distributors), and the
users of mercury biocides (Le., paint companies), and the users of paints containing
mercury biocides, are affected by the Conditional Registration and the Cancellation
Order, although responsibility for meeting the terms of the Agreement and Cancellation
is primarily on the registrants. There are six companies with mercury biocides
registered for use in paints.  A list of these can be found in  the Appendix.
REQUIREMENTS OF CONDITIONAL REGISTRATION	

      Two companies (Cosan and Troy), have applied to conditionally amend the
registrations of two PMA pesticides:
            Cosan PMA-100; EPA Reg. No. 8489-5
            Troysan PMA-100; EPA Reg. No. 5383-8

      The applications are granted effective July 2,1990. The revised labeling will: (1)
Prohibit use in formulating interior paints and coatings; (2) Limit use to those exterior
paints and coatings that are labeled against interior use; and (3) Specify maximum use
rates. The registrants have also agreed as  a  condition of registration to develop and
submit certain data.
-------
                                       -3-

       One company (Vikon), has applied to conditionally amend the registrations of
two pesticides presently labeled for use in outdoor fabrics and paint by deleting all
paint uses:
             MERKYL MAP; EPA Reg. No. 6390-20
             VIKON PMA-30; EPA Reg. No. 6390-21

       The applications are granted effective July 2,  1990.

Stocks of Products With Amended
       Effective July 23, 1990, the registrants may not distribute or sell existing stocks of
mercury biocides that have not been relabeled, and, as a condition of registration, they
must deliver sufficient stickers to their customers to relabel all existing stocks in the
customers' inventories.  Registrants must have proof that delivered stickers were
delivered with required instructions.  The instructions, which are considered to
accompany the product, state the manner in which the sticker must be affixed to each
container, and that stickers must be in place on all user stocks by August 20, 1990.
CONDITIONS OF                  	

      Five registrants have agreed to voluntarily cancel a total of ten pesticide
products, effective July 2, 1990.  The registrants and the cancelled products are listed
below.

      Akzo Chemicals. Inc.: Intercide 60 (EPA * 34688-24).

      Cbsan Corp.!  Cosan PMO-30 (EPA * 8489-1); and Cosan PMA-30 (EPA #
      8489-2).

      Hols America. Inc.: Super Ad-It Fungicide (EPA * 1100-37); PMA-18 (EPA #
      1100-56); and PMA-60 (EPA # 110040).

      Thor Cheinicals Inc.:  Thor PMA-100 (EPA # 53034-1);

      Trov Chemical  Corp.: Troysan PMA-30 (EPA # 5383-4); Troysan CMP Acetate
      (EPA * 5383-10); Troysan PMDS-10 (EPA * 538342);

      The existing stocks of the cancelled products may be sold and used until June 27,
1991, provided they are relabeled. The revised  labeling will:  (1) Prohibit use in
formulating interior paints and coatings; (2) Limit use to those exterior paints and
coatings that are labeled against interior use; (3) Specify maximum use rates; and (4)
Provide that sale, distribution, and use will be unlawful  after  June 27, 1991.
-------
      Effective July 23, 1990, the registrants may not distribute or sell existing stocks of
cancelled products that have not been relabeled. They must also deliver sufficient
stickers to their customers to relabel aD existing stocks in the customers' inventories.
Registrants must have proof that the stickers were delivered with required instructions.
The cancellation order requires that by August 20,1990, no person who uses existing
stocks of cancelled products may use the product unless the approved sticker has been
affixed to the product

      Noncompliance with the cancellation order or its terms is a violation of FIFRA
sections 12(a)(l)(A) and/or  12(a)(2)(K).
CONDITIONS OF VOLUNTARY PAINT LABELING AGREEMENT	
 .•
      The National Paint and Coatings Association (NPCA) agreed to instruct
members to sticker all existing stocks of mercury-containing interior/exterior and
exterior paints "for exterior use only", and to either reformulate or relabel "for exterior
use only" existing stocks of interior paints with high levels (Le., >200 ppm) of mercury.
Labels are also to include advisement that the product contains mercury biocides, and
warning and use statements; label  statements to be used under the NPCA program are
identical to the paint label statements that must be used under the conditional
registrations and cancellation order affecting certain mercury biocides.  Members of
NPCA have been instructed to comply with the voluntary program by August 20, 1990.

      This agreement is entirely voluntary and noncompliance does not carry direct
penalties under FIFRA. However, since alternative actions would be necessary to
protect public health if this agreement is not adhered to, h is necessary that EPA be
aware of the degree of compliance.
COMPLIANCE MONITORING	

      Compliance with the terms of the Conditional Registration Agreement and the
Cancellation Order wflJ be monitored through inspection of registrant/producer facilities
(Attachment 3) and user/fonnulator facilities. Since there are only eight
registrant/producer facilities, each of these faculties wfll be inspected. These inspections
wfll be conducted after July 23,1990, and will be completed by October 23,1990.

      User/fonnulator faculties wfll be selected for inspection from the list of facilities
that are known to have received mercury biocides and produced interior paints or
coatings, or products other than paint that may be used indoors.  Selection of facilities
wfll be made at the regional level and wfll be based on number of facilities meeting
appropriate criteria, resources, and tips and complaints. OCM wfll develop a targeting
scheme based on available information and transmit it to the Regions.  These
-------
                                        -5-

 inspections win be conducted after August 20,1990, and wfll be completed by February
 20,1991.

       Additionally, after June 27,1991, registrant/producer and user/fonnulator
 establishments will be inspected to assure that  no cancelled products are sold or used
 on or after Jun?.27,1991.

       Inspections at user/fonnulator facilities wfll include determination of compliance
 with voluntary existing stocks labeling.  All existing stocks of paint products which
 contain mercury biocides and were produced before August 20,1990, should be labeled
 pursuant to this agreement, with the exception of interior paints demonstrated to have
 low levels (Le., <200 ppm) of mercury.
Regional/State Activities
       Inspections wfll be conducted by States and EPA (in non-grant states) to monitor
compliance with the Conditional Registration Agreement, the Cancellation Order, and
the voluntary paint-relabeling agreement  This wfll be accomplished through
registrant/producer establishment and user/fonnulator establishment inspections.
Enforcement actions regarding the Cancellation Order wfll be taken, as appropriate, by
the States and Regions, with reports of such actions and/or potential violations made to
EPA headquarters.  States and Regions wfll also report to EPA headquarters all
violations or potential violations  of the conditions of registration of mercury biocide
products. Reports of non-violative findings, ie^ non-compliance with the voluntary
agreement, wfll be made to EPA headquarters.

Registrant/Producer Level

       By October 23,1990, the  Regions/States wfll schedule and conduct inspections of
all of the registrant's producer establishments to obtain assurance that the labeling and
user-notification requirements of the Agreement and Cancellation Order have been
followed. In particular, these inspections wfll assure that: (1) all products that have
been sold or distributed after Jury 22,1990, have the correct amended labels or stickers;
and  (2) all stickers have been sent, with required instructions, to all customers holding
existing stocks by Jury 23,1990.  All stocks not properly labeled are subject to Stop
Sale, Use, Removal Orders (SSUROs).  Additionally, registrant/producer establishments
wfll be inspected to assure compliance with requirements under FIFRA section 17(a)
relating to labeling and foreign purchaser notification of pesticides produced for export
Regions/States wfll either perform such inspections concomitanth/ with inspections
prescribed by this Strategy or report such establishments as uninspected for compliance
with FIFRA section 17(a) to allow for subsequent targeting for inspection.
-------
       After June 27, 1991, inspections will be conducted at those registrant/producer
facilities that produced products subject to cancellation to determine that no existing
stocks of cancelled products are being sold after this date. All such stocks are subject
to Stop Sale, Use, Removal Orders (SSUROs).

User/Formulator Level	
       Interior-paint producing establishments that have been identified as having
received shipments of mercury biocides within the last year shall be targeted for
inspection to determine compliance with conditions of labeling.

       By February 20, 1991 inspections at selected user/formulator establishments will
assure that: (1) all current stocks, including products maintained in stock after August
20,1990, have been restickered; (2) all use of stocks is according to their label
instructions.  In particular, the inspector should assure that no mercury«containing
products have been used for interior paint production on or after August 20,1990, that
labels of all exterior paint products produced on or after August 20,1990, contain the
appropriate precautionary language, and that users do not exceed labeled use rates
when formulating exterior paints.

       In addition, these inspections will include examination of existing stocks of any
mercury-containing paint produced prior to August 20,1990.  Inspectors should examine
these stocks to first determine how they are labeled (exterior use only, interior/exterior
use; or interior use only.)  For any paints labeled for interior use, including
interior/exterior paints, it should be determined whether the paint contains greater than
200 ppm mercury.  All stocks of such exterior paints and interior paints with greater
than 200 ppms should be examined for labeling in accordance with the NPCA voluntary
relabeling agreement Determination of mercury levels of existing stocks of paint
produced prior to August 20,1990, and conformance with voluntary relabeling, is to
provide information regarding  the need for additional  regulation. Inspectors are
advised that they may rely on statements by paint formulators concerning the mercury
content of paints produced prior to August 20,1990, and that no additional
investigatory measures are required.

      After June 27,1991, inspections will be conducted at selected user/formulator
facilities to determine that no existing stocks of cancelled products  are in use after this
date. AO such stocks are subject to Stop Sale, Use, Removal Orders (SSUROs).

fMJilflflVPON QF RESPONSIBILITIES

Office of Pesticide Programs	
      Win develop and provide OCM with a list of all products affected by the
Conditional Registration Agreement and the Cancellation Order.
-------
                                        -7-
       Wfll develop and provide OCM with a list of user/fonnulator establishments that
 use mercury biocides in paint production.

 Office of Compliance Monitoring

       Wfl] develop and transmit the Compliance Monitoring Strategy to the Regions.

       Will transmit to the Regions a targeting scheme for user/fonnulator
 establishments.

       Wfll transmit to OPP any information regarding violation of the conditions of
 registration.

 Regions	
       Will provide copies of the Compliance Monitoring Strategy to States.

       Wfll distribute a list of products and producing establishments to the States.

       Will transmit to the States a list of the user/fonnulator establishments.

       Wfll conduct inspections in States without Cooperative Enforcement Agreements
as specified in this Strategy.

       Will take enforcement action as appropriate.

       Wfll report to the Director of the Compliance Division, OCM detailing State
inspection activities per their reports.

       Wfll report information  to States which indicates possible noncompliance with the
requirements of the Agreement, including information on tips and complaints received.

       Wfll report to the Director of the Compliance Division, OCM regarding
violations of the conditions of registrations, cancellations, or voluntary labeling
agreements immediately upon receiving such information.
-------
States	

      Will conduct inspections as specified in this Strategy.

      Will make reports to the Regions detailing the number and dates of inspections
related to this Strategy.

      Wfll take enforcement action as appropriate provided they have the authority.

      Wfl] report to the Regions on pdlential violations of the mercury biocide
conditional registration agreement, including enforcement actions for violations of the
Cancellation Order.  Reports will be submitted within two weeks of knowledge of
violation or enforcement action.

      Will investigate tips and complaints as received.  If States receive information
which indicates possible noncompliance with the Agreement, they should investigate to
ensure compliance.
-------
   ATTACHMENT 1
CANCELLATION ORDER
-------
 2C734
redan) ResUtet / VoL SS, Ko. 126 / Fridiy. Junt S. 1900 / Noticn
 almond buDi at 154) pom. abacad
 autmeal at 44 ppm. patches at 10 ppm.
 aectartoes •( u ppm. meat aad BMt
 byproduct* of catue at Q.OS ppm. cattle
 bdney tt OOS ppm. cattle liver at &20
 ppm, and milk at OOS ppm.
  These temporary tolerance* have
 been extended to ptnnlt the continued
 Burketing of the raw agricultural
 commodities named above whaa treated
 to accordance with the provisions of
 experimental uae parmil 4S639-EUP-M,
 which is beiaj extended aadar lha
 Federal Insecticide. Fungicide, and
 Rodentidde Act (FffXA) a* ameaded
 (Pub. L 9S-39B, 12 Stat tiff; 7 US.C. 196).
  The scientific daU reported aad other
 ralevaat malarial wen evaluated, aad it
 wae detarmiaed that the extension of
 the*e temporary tolerances wfll protect
 the public health. Therefore, the
 temporary tolerance* have bean
 extended on the condition that the
 peaticide be  used is accordance with the
 experimental uae permit and with the
 fbuewing provision!:
  V The total amount of the active  '
 ingredient to be need must not exceed
 the quantity  authorized by the
 experimental aae permit
  2. NoT-Am Chemical Co. anal
 Immediately notify the EPA of any
 findings from the experimental aae that
 have a (waring on safety. The company
 Biust alao keep records of production,
 distribution,  and performance and oa
 request make the records available to
 any authorised officer or employee of
 the EPA or the Food and Drug
 Administration,
  These tolerance* expire April i. 1991.
 Residues not in excess of these amounts
 remaining in or on the raw agricultural
 commodities after this expiration date
 will not be considered actionable If the
 pesticide is legally applied daring the
 term of, and in accordance with, the
 provisions of the experimental Me
 permit and temporary tolerances. Tbeae
 tolerances may be revoked if the
 experimental use permit la revoked or If
 any experience with or ecientific data
 en this peaticide indicate that each
 ffWOQBtlQO i*) 0
public health.
  The Office of Ma
has exempted tha notice from the
requirements of aacttont of
  Pursuant to the requin
      i of the
Requktory Flexibility Act (Pub. L 96-
IM. 94 Stat 1194.1 US.C 901-4U), the
Administrator baa determined Oat
refuiaooas establishing new tolerance*
or raising tolerance leveis or
establishing exemptions from toterance
requirements do not have a aignlfieant
economic knpact OB a substantial
aumher of small entities. A etrttficattae
                 ••lament to fhb effect was pabltohed to
                 tha Fadecal Register of hlaj 4 U91 (40
                 FR349SO).
                   Dated. Jea* la,
                 |Ml Dec •>!!» Piled
Ml am]
                 (Off-4*141; ffBXTfi-91

                 FMtcMa Products Cantata**
                 Prionyiinofowry and Othef Morawy
                 Cempeunda; fUoalpt of RoquaMa tar
                 Voluntary Cancellation and
                 Amendment* To Drttta Uae»

                 aantcv: Environmental Protection
                 Agency (EPA).

                 Acnoec Pesticide caneeuatioas aad
                 •utnuirr: to reepoaae to i
                 EPA regarding the rialc
                 aae of mercury producta to toterior
                 paints aad coating*, the registrants have
                 applied to amend the registrations far
                 certain mercury producta to delete
                 labeling for as* to toterior paints aad
                 coattogs aad have requested voluntary
                 cancellation of the regiitrationa for
                 certain other mercery products labeled
                 for use to paints aad coating*. AD atoek*
                 of affected products, tededag stocks to
                 the handa of end>usen. must be
                 •tickered by August 3D, 190a with
                 lingua** prohibiting uae to toterior
                 patois and coattogs. Existing stock* of
                 cancelled product* which have been
                 properly stickered may be sold aad used
                 antil June r, 1991.

                 •ana: The caacollatlon order aad
                      intents to delete
                 to this notice wffl become cfieeave My
                 x,t9oaUs«ofoanceJJedi—	-^
                 aoattog* will be oalawfal exTecbve ee
                 Aufoat gft 1990. Extotiag stock* of
                 cancelled products which have beea
                 BtepaHy stickared may be aold aad aaad
                 Beth Edwards, Special Review Braach.
                 Special Review aad Reregiatratioe
                 Division (HTloeC). Offloe of Peetlrtde
                 Agency. 401II 8u IW, Waahingtoa. DC
                       'ART

            LEPACoBCABte
 	___ _oocemtog Use of
 Mercury to latarior Patois and Coating*

   Following receipt of reports
 concerning a 4-year old child who
 developed acrodyaia (a rare form of
 mercury poisoning) after his home wes
 painted with paint containing mercury
 aad a foUowup mveetigatice by the
 Center* for Disease Control and the
 Stat* of Michigan of mercury levels to
 otter home* painted with similar paint
 EPA initiated a comprehensive review
 of the risk* aad benefit! assodatad with
 the uae of mercurial compounds to
 paints aad coating*. After evaluating the
 available evidence concerning exposure
 to mercury resulting bom use to patois
 aad «"««y taaddty of mercury aad
 mercury compounds, aad availability ef
 alternative biodde*. EPA concluded that
 the eoattoued use of mercurial
 compounds to the manufacture of
 toterior patois and costing* would
 prevent an uareeMoabl* risk of edvene
 health effect*. EPA alao concluded that
 the available data were insufficient to
 enable full evaluation of the risks and
 benefits aaeodated with a** of
 mercurial compound! to exterior patata
 aad coattogs. aad that the registrants
 should develop and eobmil additional
 data concerning this use.
   After completing its review. EPA
 Initiated discussions with the registrants
 of mercury products labeled for ase to
 paints aad coatings to determine
 whether the necessary change* to the
 legal atatua of mica product* could be
 achieved by voluntary action. The
 registrant* then agreed  to submit the
• amendments to delete aaes aad the
 nqueat* for voluntary cancellation
 described to this aotios. This notice is
 being published to advise the public of
 the changes to sale, distribution, aad use
 to be implemented far the affected
 producta, aad to meet the legal
 raquireaeats established by FffRA
             Ifee

              Coeea Chemical Corporation and
             Troy Chemical Corporation have
             applied to QMiditionally amend pursuant
             to FffRA eectioa Kc)P)(«) tblir
             refUtratioa* for cartato pesticide
             products «*"«*'"<^t pheayuaercuric
                 naabat: »rd ROOT. 006 laSeiwJA Oavto
                 Highway. Arlington, VA (TV) SOM010.
             acetate (PMA) which are presently
             labeled for aae to famatotton of patota
             aad coatings. The Barnes aad EPA
             regisMtion snmben for theae producta
-------
                   Federal Register I Vol 85. No. 12B / Friday, fun* 28. 1990  I Hotter
                                                                    2G-3S
     FMA-100  IMMgMManNB.
TIWIW MA-IOO
  EPA intend* to grant the application*
 to amend the ngistntion* for th***
 product* oo July 2.1991 Th* revised
 labeling required by the amended
 ngittration* for these product* will: (1)
 Prohibit UM of these product* la
 manufacture or formulation of any paint
 or coating Intended or labeled for
 interior use. (2) limit UM of the**
 product* to only UOM exterior paiata
 and costing! which an labeled with a
 specific warning against Interior UM.
 and (3) specify maximum application  -
 rates for use of thete products la
 exterior paint* and coating*. The
 registrants have also agreed a* •
 condition of ngistntion to develop and
 submit additions! data pertaining to the
 risks and benefits associated with
 continued UM of PMA product* la
 exterior paint* and coating*.
  For **ch of th* product* concerning
 which COMO Chemical Corporation or
 Troy Chemical Corporation  has
 submitted an application for conditional
 amendment the registrant will be
 required to affix a sticker incorporating
 the new label nquinment*  to all atock*
 of th* product distributed or sold by th*
 registrant on or after July 23.1990. For
 each product the ngiitrant  will alto be
 required by July 23.1990, to  deliver
 •tickers to all end-wen who an holding
 inventory of the product. Each end-user
 will be required to affix the  stickers on
 or before August 20.1990. to all stock* of
 the product remaining in it*  inventory.
 After Auguit 20.1990, UM of any (took*
 of thete product* In • manner
 inconsistent with the amended labeling
 will be unlawful.
  Vikon Chemical Company ha* al*o
 applied to conditionally amend punuant
to FIFRA section 9(c)(7)(a) it*
registration* for MERKYL MAP. EPA
Registration No. 6390-0 and VDCON
PMA-30. EPA Registration No> 6390-21.
product* which an presently Ubeled far
UM in manufactun of outdoor fabric*
and in paint to delete all label
Instructions and daims pertaining to •**
of theM products in paint EPA Intend*
to grant the applications to amend la*
registration* for theM product* oa July
2,1990. Vikon will be required to affix
nviMd labeling to aU atock* of thta*
product* which an distributed or told
 by Vikon oner after July 23,199aVikoa
will also be required to deliver nviaed
label* to each of it* cuitomen holding
•lock* of th*M product* by July 211990.
KL RaquMt* For Vohmtary CanoaDatioB
  Akzo Chemical*, he. Cosan Chemical
Corporation, Hul* America, be. Tnor
Chemical*, lac, and Troy Chemical
Corporation have each mbmitted
request* pumant to FIFRA section
6(rj(l) for voluntary cancellation of the
registration* for particular pesticide
producti which contain pbenylmercuric
acetate (PMA). di(ph*nylmereale)
dodeonyl sucdnatc (PMDS).
pbenylmercuric oleat* (PMO), er *•
(chlorom*tboxy)propylmercuric acetate
(CMPA). aad which an labeled for UM
to formulation of paint* aad coatings.
The registrant*, product names, and
EPA registration numbers for that*
products an a* follows;
                                                 MUMS
                                                  100.
                         1100-17

                         110>M
                                      EPA Intend* to grant the request* far
                                    voluntary cancellation of the
                                    registration* for th* above product* OB
                                    July 2,1990.
                                    IV. Existing Stock*
                                      EPA ha* decided that it wiH permit
                                    continued sal* and UM of existing
                                    •tocks of voluntarily cancelled product*
                                    eontaiaiag PMA, PMDS. PMO, and
                                    CMPA. for maaufactun and formulattoo
                                    of exterior paint* tad coating* until June
                                    27.1991. subject to *p*dflc mandatary
                                    term* and condition*. FIFRA Mctioa
                                    OUHl). 1USC aactioa UooMU
                                    provide* that EPA may permit contiaaed
                                    •ale aad UM of existing *tock* of
                                    cancelled product* for specific use* aad
                                    subject to specific condition*, tf EPA
                                    determines "that *uch sal* or UM I* aot
                                    InconsUtent with th* purpose* of tat*
                                    Act and  wiD not have unreaaonabi*)
                                    advene effect* en th* environment'*
                                    The term* and condition* which wffl
                                    govern sal* aad UM of existing atoek* of
                                    cancelled mercury product* an
 essentially Identical to the amended
 term* and condition* which will apply
 to th* specific mercury product* that
 will remain registered for UM in exterior
 paint* and coating*. That, th* acaiy: j
 of riik* and benefit* upon which th*
 Agency'* decision to permit continued
 registration is bated also provide* th*
 baii* for th* *ubetantiv* d*tenain*tioa
 required by FffHA Mctioa 6(0(1).
   Each regittraat of a voluntarily
 cancelled mercury product ha*
 mbmitted the text for a (ticker which
 Include* provision* thst (1) Prohibit us*
 of th* product in manufactun or
 formulation of any paint or coating
 intended or labeled for interior UM. (2)
 limit UM of the product to only thoM
 exterior paints aad coatings which an
 labeled with a specific warning against
 Interior use. (3) specify maximum
 application ntes for MM of the product
 In exterior paints and coatings, and (4)
 provide that Mle. distribution, and us*
 of the product will be unlawful after
 fune 27.1991. Except for th* expiration
 date for UM of existing stocks, theM are
 the same provisions included la th*
 revised labeling for PMA paint and
 coating product* with amended
 registrations.
   The cancellation order will requin
 each registrant or other person to affix a
 aticker incorporating the new label
• requirement* to all Mock* of the product
 distributed or told by oa or after July 23.
 1990. The cancellation order also will
 require each regiitrant of a cancelled
 product to deliver •ticker* by July 23.
 1990, to all end-UMn who an holding
 inventory of the product and will
 provide that stocks of each cancelled
 product remaining la th* inventory of
 tad«u*en m*y not be lawfully need
 after August 20.1990, unless the end-
 user has affixed the new sticker to the
 product aad all UM of the product is la
 full conformity with th* instructions oa
 tn* *ticker.
 V.Caacdktioa Order

   Effective on July 2.1990. the
 rcgUtratf oa* for the following pesticide
 product* an cancelled pursuant to
 Motion 6(0(1) of th* Federal Insecticide.
 Fungicide, and Rodentidde Act (FIFRA).
 7 USC MCtion U6d(f)(l):
-------
 26758
Knbtar I Vol 8& No. U8 / Fridiy, June ». IMP / Notice*
 n*
   Effective OB Inly 1 IMi * shall bt
 •Blawful under FTOAj Mctioa
 UdlllKA) ud/or FffRA Motion
 Wi)|2)(K). 7 U.&X. section*
 i38j(sXiXA). «8j(BX2XKX for any
 penoa to diitribut* or MIL or to BM lor
 •BT pesbddal purpose. any of these
 cancelled product* except is full
 coaplianoe with til pf the provision*
 concemiaf existing stacks aet forth
 below.
   Tit Afeacy ha* determined that
 existing •lock* of eech pnUdd* product
 cancelled by thit order guy be sold.
 distributed, ud used until June XT, 1991.
 sJjjcci to all cf tht following Baadatory
 term* and conditions. For each
 cancelled product th* itflstnat baa
 •abaitttd u part of It* request for
 voluntary caacallatiaa ander F1FRA
 faction 6(0(1) thi ttxt for • *ttcktr
 which btciudti Ubtl provWoac (1)
 Prohibittnt M* of tht prodoet la
 ••nufacrur* or foranuction of uy patat
 or coattm bittndtd or labolod for
 tottrior BM. (2) limitiai oat of the
 product ID oxtarior paint* aad oaattnf*
 to oaly thoat product* which ait kbolad
 with a wantofaiainrt Interior •**.(!)
 •ptdfyinf n*Jdaua application rataa
 far BM to axtarior paint* and ooattng*.
 fad (4) providiaf that aala. dutrlbwtioa,
 •nd BM of tta product will bt onlawful
 •ftar )UM V. 1991. Efftrtva oa July A
 UHX ao paraoa ahall diaMbvta or aaO ki
 •nyStataaayquaatirjofapaatlcida
 product caaotUad by tkJa ordar oBiaaa
 the approvod tttektr for that prodaet
hM btan afflud to OO
panoa ahaO a*a to any tote any
•jaanttty of a pattidda product caaotDad
by thi* order antes* th* approved tflcktr
far that product baa oaoa affixed to aacfa
conuiaer of th* product and auea •*• I*
to full eonfermitvwlth «D of la*

caactUtd product tha nffatrut thaB by
|uly 23. 1990. dalivtr to. cad ftdfy
nctipt by. aach caataoMr or oth«r oadV
           invtntory of Iba prodaet (1)
                                      QaaattttM oftka approrad atidov far
                                      that product which an aufficitat to aflx
                                      tha atickar to aach ceataJatf of tha
                                      product to th* outamar'a or aod<«aar'*
                                      iavaatory. aad (2) a knar advi*iaj tha
                                      eutoaar or aad-yav of tha aSacdva
                                      data* for tba iwiatd labaliai oa At
                                      atickan aad uutractiai tha cu*tomar or
                                      •adiiMr to affix thtfbckar to each
                                      oonuinar of th* product aa or balora
IOVTV4TTWA P¥8> 1171*1)

Teite and Hazardoua Sutwtt
Certain C*
lcato Pr
                                 faete
         AOCWCT7 CnviroBBaata] Protacttoa
         AfaaeyfJEPA).

               iNotfca.
         •tnnusm Section SfaXD of the Toxic
         Substaaot* Control Act (TSCA) requires
         aay panoa who intend* to manufacture
         or iaipoit a new chemical substance to
         aubmit a premaaafaeejn aotioe (PMN)
         to EPA at least 90 days before
         BBaaufecturs or Import commences*
         Statutory raquiremeats for section
         8(s)(l) premanufaetBn aotiees are
         di*eu**ed In the final rule published la
         the Federal Register of May 111883 (a
         FR 81722). This notice ennnnrtnes receipt
         oflft2*ucbPMN*en
-------
       ATTACHMENT  2
VOLUNTARY RELABELING LETTER
-------
                               FOR
                  IMMEDIATE ATTENTION
  July 5,  1990


  TO:       NPCA MEMBERSHIP

  FROM:     Stephen R.  Sides, Director
            Health,  Safety * Environmental Affairs
                          and
            Marilyn E.  Ludvig, Director
            Communications

  RES       MERCURY BIOCIDE8:  STATUS REPORT AMD FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS


  On June  29,  1990,  the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in
  concert  with the Centers for Disease Control, held a press
  conference to advise  consumers of the alleged hazards of
  mercurial biocides in paint. The focus of the press conference
  was a voluntary agreement between the EPA and the biocide
  manufacturers which,  in effect, eliminates the use of mercurial
  biocides in interior  paints, and specifies labeling language for
  mercury-containing exterior paints. (Although we were aware of
  negotiations between  the biocide producers and the EPA, NPCA was
  not a party to this agreement.)

  Shortly  before the press conference, EPA and CDC had indicated
  that they intended to advise consumers not to use any paints
  containing mercury. Such a statement would have been tantamount
  to a market-driven ban and recall.

  Last-minute discussions between NPCA and EPA established certain
  important facts, which resulted in EPA spokespersons being
  willing  to state publicly that consumers can buy and use existing
  stocks of interior paints, formulated with mercury at under 200
  parts per Billion,  without unreasonable risk.  (The great majority-
  of paints formulated  properly for interior use should fall below
  the 200  ppm/mercury threshold.)

  NPCA offered to work  with our members to label stocks of products
  now in the marketplace, containing more than 200 ppm mercury.
  Events that will affect paint product reformulation and labeling
  are summarized below.
1500 Rhode Island Avenue, NW • Washington. DC 20005-5597 • 202/462-62*2 • FAX 202/462-8549
-------
 Page two
 Memo - Mercury Biocides:  Status Report and Follow-up Actions
 July 5, 1990


 1.   Effective August 20, 1990, no interior paint product nay be
     manufactured using aercurial biocides.

 2.   Also effective August 20, 1990, exterior paint products
     manufactured with mercurial biocides oust have a revised
     label'statement (Attachment A to this memo).

 3.   Existing stocks of interior fir. exterior paint containing
     more than 200 ppm mercury may not be sold or
     distributed without the previously referenced label
     statement (Attachment A). Manufacturers should move as
     quickly as possible to relabel these products, but in
     no instance should these products be sold without the
     new label statement after August 20, 1990.  (Existing
     stocks, for purposes of this memo, include all products
     manufactured since June 1, 1990 and subsequently
     distributed.)


 For your further information, during the press conference on June
 29, NPCA learned of the EPA's intention to set up a "hotline" for
 consumers through the National Pesticide Telecommunications
 Network. Consumers wanting information on the presence or absence
 of mercurial biocides may now call a toll-free number (1-800-858-
 7378), where operators will provide information collected as part
 of EPA's survey completed March 30, 1990.

 However, NPCA is concerned about the quality and accuracy of the
 information being provided. EPA has compiled two lists: one of
 paint companies that reported using mercury during the two years
 prior to filling out the EPA questionnaire, and the second, of
 companies that reported us use of mercury during that period.

 First, the lists do not address the subject of which product
 lines do or do not currently contain mercury; they merely include
 company names. In addition, since the EPA questionnaire requested
 information dating back two years, some companies are included in
the USE MERCURY list, although they may have discontinued its use
some time ago.
                                                                 •
NPCA is requesting that the EPA immediately instruct its hotline
 operators to read a qualifying statement to this effect to
 consumers, and to suggest that the consumer contact the paint
 company for more detailed and definitive information.
-------
Page three
Memo - Mercury Biocides:  Status Report and Follow-up Actions
July 5, 1990


Meanwhile, company spokespersons should be aware that the EPA's
press conference, and its reporting by the media, have probably
created more confusion than enlightenment among the public. The
spokesperson should be prepared to answer all consumer and media
questions concerning the presence or absence of mercury in
company product lines. They should be prepared to deal with
questions concerning the anticipated retail shelf-life of company
products, and to be specific about the presence or absence of
mercurial biocides, and the concentration of them, in individual
product lines and batch-numbers.

They should also be aware of the Association's statements
concerning mercurial biocides, formulated at the appropriate
levels, in both interior and exterior products.

The enclosed fact sheet (Attachment B) may be useful in
responding to questions. In brieft NPCA does not believe that
there is scientific evidence to indicate that mercurial biocides
in paints properly formulated and properly applied in accordance
with existing label instructions, pose a problem ~ but to
alleviate public concern, it and its members have voluntarily
taken all appropriate steps to deal with the situation.
-------
                           ATTACHMENT X
              LABEL STATEMENT FOR EXTERIOR PRODUCTS
                     FOR EXTERIOR USE ONLY
 This product contains a phenyl mercury compound as a biocide for
 in^can preservation or mildew control. This product is intended
 solely for exterior use in well-ventilated areas. Use of this
 product  inside, or to treat any materials used inside any
 building or structure, may be hazardous to your health or the
'health of those occupying the building. Some children may be
 particularly sensitive to mercury. Keep this product out of the
 reach of children.
Note:  EPA has no requirement for type size or label placement at
this time.  It is advisable to oversee the placement of the label
on each container of product within your care, custody, or
control.  You may elect to provide the required labels to
retailers for placement on your products as they are removed from
previously shipped cartons. In an effort to avoid opening cartons
at independent or non-company owned or controlled distribution
facilities,, you may wish to affix an envelope with sufficient
labels for the number of containers in the carton along with
clear instructions for affixing at the point of sale.  Whatever
method of.labeling is used by your company, please keep detailed
records of your efforts to locate your products la commerce and
provide or affix the required labels.
-------
                                    ATTACHMENT B
                                      FACT SHEET
 1.     Small amounts of mercurial compounds art added to some Interior latex paints to
       preserve the paint In the can to keep N from spoiling;.

       At higher concentrations, mercurial blocldes are sometimes used In exterior latex paints
       to protect the paint, or the surface to which M Is applied, from mildew.

 2,     There Is no bssis In available scientific studies to conclude that paints, properly
       formulsted with mercurial biocldes in accordance with U.S. government
       regulations, pose sn unreasonable risk.

 3.     In the case of a Michigan child who became Rl after being exposed to Interior
       paint that contained a mercury bloclde, Investigations by the Centers for Disease
       Control contend that the paint to which the child was exposed had •
       substantially greater amount of mercury bioclde than that allowed under current
       regulations.

 4.     The  Michigan csse Is ths only one reported In over twenty yesrs where Juvenile
       mercury poisoning has been  linked to exposure to paint contsinlng a mercury
       bioclde.

       For some sensitive  children who msy reset to many materials, exposure to
       mercury In any form or in any amount may cause an allergic«like response.

 S.     Shipments  of mercury bioclde for the  manufacture of Interior latex paints will
       stop as of July 20,1990, and manufacturers have agreed to stop using mercury
       bioclde In formulsting Interior latex paints as of August 20,1990.

 6.     Also on August 20,1990, manufacturers have agreed to denote the presence of
       mercury end to put  health and precautionary warning labels on exterior paint
       formulated  with mercury Mocide.

7.     Of the over 500>minion gallons of houae paint produced annually in the United
       States, the NPCA estimates only one to three million gallons of Interior latex
       paint with mercury bioclde content over the EPA acceptable limit of 200 parts
       per million  art currently In the distribution pipeline.

8.     The National Paint and Coatings Association to a voluntary non-profit association
       which has as Ha members about 550 companies that manufacture consumer
       paint producta and Industrial  coatings and approximately 200 companies that
       supply raw materiala to the coating Industry.  Total dollar volume for the
       Industry's producta  to over 12 billion dollars per year.
-------
     Ta
      3     UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

     /                 WASHINGTON. D.C. 204CO


                             JUL  I 3 1950
                                                        orrtcc or
                                                 mneioct AMD TOXIC «UMTAMCM
Mr. J. Andrew Doyle
Executive Director
National Paint and Coatings Association
1500 Rhode Island Avenue, N.w.
Washington, D.C. 20005

Dear Mr. Doyle:

     Thank you for your July 5, 1990 letter outlining the steps
which the National Paint and Coatings Association proposes to
take to reduce the potential exposure to mercury associated with
continued sale and use of existing stocks of paints and coatings
containing mercury.

     There are several points in your letter which need to be
discussed further.

     Your letter indicates that the stickering program for
existing stocks would extend only to products manufactured since
June 1, 1990.  This specific date was never discussed with ae,
and I have very serious concerns about it.  Our understanding of
the June 28, 1990 agreement was that NPCA would request that
individual paint and coating companies sticker (or otherwise
relabel) all stocks of paints containing mercury compounds
including those manufactured between June 29 and August 20, and
those currently in warehouses and channels of trade and which:
(1) are intended or labeled for exterior use, (2) are intended or
labeled for both interior and exterior use, or (3) contain more
than 200 ppm mercury and are intended or labeled only for
interior use.  In those instances where a paint product contains
more than 200 ppm and the paint is formulated in a manner which
makes it inappropriate for exterior use, you agreed to request
that the paint product be reformulated or properly disposed.  No
stickers were to be placed on interior paints containing less
than 200 ppm mercury*  You agreed that the sticker to be placed
on these products would contain the same label statement which
will be required on all new production of exterior paints
containing mercury effective on August 20, 1990.  Z have appended
the text of this statement as Enclosure A.  The Agency
interpreted your agreement to extend to all stocks of all paints
and coatings formulated with the following mercurial active
ingredients: phenylmercuric acetate (PMA), di(phenylmercuric)
-------
                               -2-

dodecenyl succinate  (PMDS), phenylmercuric oleate (PMO), and 3-
 (chloromethoxy)propylmercuric acetate (CMPA).

     The Agency realizes that this prograa is voluntary and that
NPCA cannot legally  compel individual companies to comply with
the agreed sticker program for paints with higher mercury levels.
However, the Agency  expects that you will make conscientious
efforts to implement this program and to persuade individual
companies to., comply.  He expect you to determine the degree of
compliance by member companies-and to share your findings with
the Agency.  The Agency may also monitor compliance with the
stickering program at all levels from the paint manufacturer to
the retail point of  sale.

     In reliance on  your commitment to work, with the paint
industry to redirect paint with a higher mercury content away
from use on interior surfaces, I agreed to make appropriate
revisions in the text of the Agency's press statements to reflect
that commitment.  If the Agency determines that the magnitude or
timing of compliance with the NPCA program is unsatisfactory, I
will consider further measures,  including but not limited to,
revisions in the Agency's recommendations to consumers,
identification of particular companies which are not in
compliance with the  NPCA program, or appropriate regulatory
action.

     I realize that  in some respects this has been a frustrating
experience, both for your staff and for mine.  In retrospect, it
would have been better for both EPA and the NPCA if we had
reached an agreement on satisfactory measures to address the
problem of existing  stocks at an earlier tine.  I hope that you
will understand that the changes in the tone of the Agency's
message during the final weeks were attributable in significant
part to our perception that the paint industry was unwilling or
unable to do enough  to address the existing stocks problem.
However, I believe that the agreement which was-.finally reached,
if properly implemented, should substantially mitigate the risks
associated with the  continued sale and use of indoor paints
containing mercury.

     You also had a  few comments concerning the information
provided by EPA in the two lists of paint companies who do/don't
use mercury.  It is  apparent by your letter that your are not
aware that there is  a third list which lists for each company
that uses mercury the specific product lin«« which contain
mercury.  Further, there is an accompanying instruction sheet for
these three lists which explains that if a company is listed as
using mercury, it does not necessarily mean that all of their
products contain mercury and, therefore, the third list of
specific products iuc£ be checked.  EPA personnel and those
-------
                               -3-

answering our 800 number have not left the impression that if a
company has used mercury in one product line, it must, therefore,
have used it in all product lines.

     I an aware that several companies have recently reported to
EPA that they have discontinued the use of mercury in all of
their products.  Specifically, The Glidden Co. has stated that it
has not used mercury since September 1989 and that it is planning
to withdraw all of its remaining mercury-containing paint from
store shelves and channels of trade.  EPA commends this type of
voluntary action and is issuing a Press Advisory announcing
Glidden's decision.

     I think it would be useful at this time for you to meet with
my staff to duscuss the NPCA program.  He will contact you to
schedule the meeting.


                              Sincerely yours,
                              Linda J. Fisher
                              Assistant Administrator
Enclosure
-------
                      ENCLOSURE A
                 FOR EXTERIOR U6E ONLY

This product contains a phenyl mercury compound as a
biocide for in-can preservation or mildew control.
This product is intended solely for exterior use in
veil-ventilated areas.  Use of this product inside or
to treat any materials used inside any building or
structure may be hazardous to your health and the
health of those occupying the building.  Some children
may be particularly sensitive to mercury.  Keep this
product out of reach of children.
-------
 July  31, 1990
   TO:     NPCA KZMSSaSHXP
           Stephen R. Sides, Director
           Health, Safety and Environmental Affairs

   R£:     MSRCU3K BIOC2DES XBXtVSBL           -


 HPCA recently net with , representatives of the U.S. Znvironnental
 Protection Agency (IPX) to discuss the paint industry's voluntary
 efforts to relabel existing stocks of paint containing more than
 200 ppn of mercury.  This voluntary labeling program was
 communicated to HPCA members in a July 5, 1990 memorandum.

 To address EPA's concerns regarding the progress of the voluntary
 program, NPCA is issuing this reminder notice to clarify
 reccnwer.ded industry action fcr relabeling.  The IPX's future
 regulatory activities with respect to mercury will be based on
 the paint industry's response to this voluntary program.

 A reasonable voluntary effort to relabel existing stocks should
 include the following actions:

 *    Label all stock containing more than 2CO ppm mercury that is
      still within your care, custody and control (see enclosed
      label).  This would include such products present in the
      manufacturing facility, company owned warehouses and
      distribution centers, or in company owned or operated retail
      outlets.

      NOTE:     NPCA previously recommended (6/25/90) that all
                •xterior products containing any level of mercury
                be clearly labeled for exterior use.

 *    where feasible, locate and relabel affected products
      manufactured since June 1, 19 90 and subsequently distributed
    'or
                                                            *

1500 Rhode Island Avenue. NW • Washington. DC 20005-559" • 202/462-6r2 • FAX 202.'462-8«-*9
-------
     NOTE:     Where company records indicate that turnover has
               depleted the affected product in commerce, either
               in total or it specific outlets, no further action
               ii warranted.  Similarly, it nay not be feasible
               to locate products in secondary*distribution.

•    Begin relabeling of existing stocks as soon as possible, but'
     in all circumstances complete by August 20, 1990.

While the relabeling program is voluntary, ISA will enforce
mandatory restrictions on mercury biecide use scheduled to go
into effect en August 20, 1990.  E?A inspections will be
initiated at manufacturing facilities where mercury biocides are
in use, at which time questions'pertaining to .the voluntary
relabeling of existing stocks may be raised.
             LA3SL STATEMENT FOR PRODUCTS CONTAINING
                           THAN 200 PPM MEICCX*
    •  •                "For Exterior Use Only


This product contains a phenyl mercury compound as a bioeide for
ir.-car. preservation or mildew control.  This product is intended
solely for exterior use in well-ventilated areas.  Use of this
product inside, or to treat any materials used inside any
building or structure, ir.ty be hazardous to your health or the
health of those occupying the building.  Seme children may be
particularly sensitive to mercury.  Keep this product out of the
reach of children.11
-------
              ATTACHMENT 3
REGISTRANTS AND PRODUCING ESTABLISHMENTS
-------
             PMA AND PMA-RELATED PRODUCT REGISTRANTS
       U.S. CORPORATE AND PRODUCER ESTABLISHMENT ADDRESSES
1.   Troy Chemical corporation, Inc.
     On* Avenue L
     Newark, NJ  07105
     (Co. No. 5383)

     U.S. establishments that produced Troy products:

     Troy Chemical Company
     One Avenue L
     Newark, NJ 07105

2.   Cosan Chemical Company
     400 14th St.
     Carlstadt, NJ  07072
     (Co. No. 8489)

     U.S. establishments that produced Cosan products:

     Cosan Chemical Company
     400 14th St.
     Carlstadt, NJ  07072

     Bartlo Packaging Inc.
     61 Hillett St.
     Passaic, NJ  07055

3.   Huls America, Inc.
     P.O.Box 365
     Turner Place
     Piscataway, NJ  08855-0365
     (Co. No. 1100)

     U.S. establishments that produced Huls products:

     Huls America, Inc.
     830 Magnolia Ave.
     Elizabeth, NJ  07201

     Bartlo Packaging Inc.
     61 Willett St.
     Passaic, NJ  07055

4.   Thor Chemicals, Inc.
     Brook Rouse
     37th North Ave.
     Norwalk, CT  06851
     (Co. No. 53034)
-------
                               -2-
     U.S. establishments that produced Thor products:

     Thor Chemicals, Inc.
     120 Gracey Ave.
     Meridan, CT  06450

5.   AJczo Chemicals, Inc.
     300 S. Riverside Plaza
     Chicago, IL  60606
     (Co. No. 34688)

     U.S. establishments that produced Akzo products:

     Bartlo Packaging Inc.
     61 Willett St.
     Passaic, NJ  07055

     Akzo Chemicals, Inc.
     500 Jersey Ave.
     New Brunswick, NJ  08903

6.   Van Haters and Rogers, Inc.
     Subsidiary of Univar
     2256 Junction Ave.
     San Jose, CA  95131
     (Co. No. 550)

     U.S. establishments that produced Van Waters and Rogers
     products:

     Van Waters and Rogers, Inc.
     Subsidiary of Univar
     2256 Junction Ave.
     San Jose, CA  95131

7.   Vikon Chemicals Company, Inc.
     514 E. Parker St.
     Graham, NC  27253
     (Co. No. 6390)

     U.S. establishments that produced Vikon products:

     Vikon Chemicals Company, Inc.
     241 W. River St.
     Box 1520
     Graham, NC  27215
-------
              UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                         WASHINGTON, O.C. 20460
                            DEC 20 1991
                                                        OFFICE Of
                                                     PESTCI06S AND TOXIC
MEMORANDUM                                             SUBSTANCES
SUBJECT:  Compliance Strategy Addend
          Phenylmercuric Acetate
FROM:     John J. Neylan III, Directs
          Policy and Grants Division
          Office of Compliance Monito

TO:       Addressees


     Attached is a copy of the Compliance Strategy Addendum for
the cancellations of September 13,  1990, and July 1,  1991.   The
Addendum includes copies of the FEDERAL REGISTER notices of
September 12, 1990, and July  10,  1991.  Also attached is a
summary sheet addendum, which addresses the  inspectional needs
resulting from the attached Cancellation Orders.

     On July 1, 1991, the Acting  Director of the Special Review
and Reregistration Division,  Office of  Pesticide Programs,  signed
two Cancellation Orders which cancelled the  last two remaining
pesticide registrations for phenylmercuric acetate (PMA) for use
in formulating paints and coatings.   These Orders, which were
effective on the date signed, were  published in the FEDERAL
REGISTER on July 10, 1991  (56 FR  31403  and 31404) under the title
"Phenylmercuric Acetate: Cancellation Order."   Under the terms of
the cancellations, existing stocks  of one of the cancelled
product* cannot be sold or distributed  after June 27, 1991, while
existing stocks of the other  pesticide  may be  distributed and
sold until September 30, 1991.

     The details of these cancellations and  the existing stocks
provisions are included in the strategy addendum.  The addendum,
which is to be used in conjunction  with the  September 12, 1990,
strategy titled "Compliance Strategy  for the Conditional
Registration and Voluntary Cancellation of Certain Mercury
Biocides," also addresses the cancellation of  two non-coating PMA
pesticides which were cancelled in  a  separate  FEDERAL REGISTER
notice signed on September 4, 1990, and published on September
12, 1990, (55 FR 37541) titled "Pesticide Products Containing
Phenylmercuric Acetate; Receipt of  Requests  for Voluntary
Cancelation."  Those cancellations  were effective September 13,
                                                  Printed on tocycteo r >» •
-------
                               -2-
1990, and contained provisions allowing the sale of existing
stocks until June 27, 1991.

     If you have any questions or comments regarding this
Addendum, please contact Steve Howie of my staff at (703) 308-
8290.

Attachments
-------
                                  ADDRESSEES
      Douglas D. Campt
      Daniel Barolo
      Anne E. Lindsay
      Stephen L. Johnson
      Mike Walker
      Mark Greenwood
      Michael Stahl
      Connie Musgrove
      John J. Neylan III
      Mike Wood
      David Dull
      Phyllis Flaherty
      Frances Liem
      Bob Zisa
      Jerry Stubbs
      Maureen Lydon
      Jan Bearden
      Linda Flick
(H7501C)
(H7508W)
(H7505C)
(H7506C)
(LE-134A)
(LE-132A)
(EN-342)
   H
   n
   n

(EN-342W)
   n
   n
   n

(EN-342)
   ti
   n
   n
      Jake Mackenzie
      Western Regional Compliance Director
I     Linda M. Murphy, Director
      Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div.

II    Barbara Metzger, Director
      Environmental Services Division

III   Thomas J. Maslany/ Director
      Air, Tox. & Radiation Mangt. Div

IV    Winston A. Smith, Director
      Air, Pest. & Toxics Mangt. Div

V     Phyllis Reed, Acting Director
      Environmental Services Division

VI    Stanley Meiburg, Director
      Air, Pesticides & Toxic Division

VII   William  A. Spratlin, Director
      Air and Toxics Division

VIII  Irvin Dickstein, Director
      Air and Toxics Division

IX    David P. Howekamp, Director
      Air Management Division

X     Gary O'Neal, Director
      Air and Toxics Division
               Marvin Rosenstein,  Chief
               Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

               Ernest Regna, Chief
               Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

               James Burke, Chief
               Toxics & Pesticides Branch

               William J. Patton,  Chief
               Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

               Anthony Restaino, Acting Chief
               Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

               Robert Murphy, Chief
               Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

               Leo Alderman, Chief
               Pesticides & Toxic Substances Br

               c. Alvin Yorke, Chief
               Toxic Substances Branch

               Davis Bernstein, Chief
               Pesticides 6 Toxics Branch

               Kenneth Feigner, Chief
               Pesticides £ Toxic Substances Br
cc:   Artie Williams
      Kathy Taylor
      OCM Staff
(H-7508C)
(H7506C)
-------
             MERCURY BIOCIDE CONDITIONAL REGISTRATION
                    AND VOLUNTARY CANCELLATION
           COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY SUMMARY  SHEET
                             ADDENDUM
INSPECTION
DATE
By March 31,
1992
By March 31,
1992
INSPECTION
SITE
Cosan Chem-
ical , Bartlo
Chemical
Troy Chemical
INSPECTION PURPOSE/ CONDITIONS
TO BE MONITORED
JTA-20 and JTA-10 may not be
sold after June 27, 1991.
Stocks of Cosan PMA-100 may
not be sold after September
30, 1991. No stocks of Cosan
PMA-100 produced after July 1,
1991 may be sold.
Troysan PMA-100 may not be
sold or distributed after June
27, 1991.
Cancelled mercury products:

Pesticides canceled 6/29/90: Intercide 60  (Akzo); Cosan PMO-30;
Cosan PMA-30; Troysan PMDS-10; Troysan CMP Acetate; Troysan PMA-
30; Thor PMA-100; Huls PMA-18; Huls PMA-60; Super-Ad-It Fungicide
(Huls).

Pesticides canceled 9/12/90: JTA-20 and JTA-10  (Cosan).

Pesticides canceled 7/1/91: PMA-100 (Cosan); PMA-100  (Troy).
-------
   COMPLIANCE STRATEGY FOR THE CONDITIONAL REGISTRATION AND
      VOLUNTARY CANCELLATION OF CERTAIN MERCURY BIOCIDES

                                 ADDENDUM
 OVERVIEW	

      This amends the Compliance Monitoring Strategy issued September 12, 1990, for
 cancellations and amendments of pesticide products containing phenylmercury and other
 mercury compounds.  The actions that the above Strategy addressed were published in
 the Federal Register (55 FR 26754) on June 29, 1990.

      The reason for this addendum is to update the strategy to accommodate
 additional voluntary cancellations of the remaining miscellaneous and exterior paint
 formulating uses of mercury pesticides. This addendum should be used in conjunction
 with the September 1990 Strategy to target final inspections to ensure that the terms of
 all of the cancellations have been complied with.

      Since the June 29,1990, cancellation of mercury pesticides for use in indoor paints
 and coatings, four additional products have been canceled. These include two pesticides
 which were registered for use in formulating miscellaneous non-paint/coating products,
 and two pesticides which were registered for use in formulating exterior-only paints and
 coatings.

      The two miscellaneous non-paint pesticide products (Cosan JTA-20, EPA Reg.
 No. 8489-3, and Cosan JTA-10, EPA Reg. No. 8489-10) were registered by the Cosan
 Chemical Corporation (Cosan).  The Cancellation Order for these products was
 published in the Federal Register on September 12, 1990, (55 FR 37541, Attachment A)
 and was effective September 13, 1990.  The Cancellation prohibited sale and distribution
 of stocks after September 17,1990, unless such stocks had been relabeled with certain
 instructional language. Properly labeled stocks were allowed to be distributed and sold
 until June 27,1991. The cancellation also required relabeling of existing stocks of
 products in the hands of end-users (formulators) with instructional language by October
 17, 1990.

       One of the exterior-paint-use products (Cosan PMA-100, EPA Reg. No. 8489-5)
was also registered by Cosan while the other (Troysan PMA-100, EPA Reg. No. 5383-4)
was registered by the Troy Chemical Company.  The Cancellation Orders for these
registrations were signed and became effective on July  1,1991.  The Orders were
published in the Federal Register on July 10,1991 (56 FR 31403 and  56 FR 31404 for
Troy and Cosan, respectively, Attachment B).

      As stated in the June 29,1990 notice, conditional amendments to registrations hud
been granted to the two companies, Cosan and Troy, effective July  2,1990 for the two
exterior paint/coating products canceled in the Jury 1,1991, Orders. These amendments
-------
were conditional to the registrants: (1) changing the labeling of the pesticides to prohibit
use in formulating indoor paints, limit use to exterior paints that are labeled against
interior uses, and specify maximum use rates; and (2) developing and submitting certain
data.  Subsequently, the two registrants Cosan and Troy determined to request
voluntarily cancellation of their products rather than comply with the data submission
requirements of the registration amendments.

      Troy voluntarily ceased production of Troysan PMA-100 on February 28, 1991.
Through the agreement reached between Troy and the Agency, only stocks of Troysan
PMA-100 packaged and labeled on or before February 28,1991, were allowed to be
distributed or sold until June 27,1991, under the existing stocks provision of this
cancellation. No sale or distribution of any existing stocks of Troysan PMA-100 were
permitted to occur after June 27,1991.  Use of existing stocks of Troysan PMA-100
delivered on or before June 27,1991, for formulating exterior paints and coatings is
permitted. Such uses will end after existing stocks have been consumed.

      Cosan negotiated  an existing stocks provision to accommodate its greater
inventory of unformulated pesticidal active ingredient  Under the Cosan existing stocks
provisions of the cancellation order, stocks of Cosan PMA-100 which are packaged and
labeled by July 1,1991 were  allowed to be sold and distributed until September 30, 1991.
No stocks of Cosan PMA-100 were permitted to be sold or distributed after September
30,1991. Use of existing stocks of Cosan PMA-100 delivered on or before September
30,1991, for formulating exterior paints and coatings is permitted. Such uses will end
after existing stocks have been consumed.
REGULATED COMMUNITY
      The Cancellation Orders affect the registrants (who are generally also the
producers and distributors), and the users of mercury biocides (Len paint companies and
other fonnulators).  Responsibility for meeting the terms of the Cancellation is on the
two registrants, Cosan and Troy.
-------
                                       -3-
SUMMARY OF CANCELLATION ORDERS
Cosan JTA-20 and JTA-10

       All stocks of Cosan JTA-20 and Cosan JTA-10 distributed or sold after September
17, 1990, were required to have a sticker affixed with the following label provisions (see
attachment A): (1) limiting use to building product adhesives, drywall compounds, and
acoustical plasters and prohibiting use in interior paints and coatings; (2) reducing the
maximum application rate to 120 ppm in the formulated product; (3) limiting use to
those products allowed in (1) above which are labeled with a specific precautionary
statement; and (4) stating that distribution and sale after June 27, 1991, would be
unlawful.  The registrant was required to deliver by September 17,  1990, sufficient
stickers to customers/end users to resticker their stocks and to instruct the users to
resticker all stocks by October 15, 1990.

Cosan PMA-100

       The existing stocks of the Cosan products packaged and labeled before July 1,
1991 were allowed to be sold and distributed until September 30, 1991. After September
30, 1991, Cosan was not permitted to distribute or sell any existing stocks of canceled
products.  However, products packaged and labeled on or before July 1,1991, and
delivered by September 30,1991, may continue to be used for manufacturing of exterior
paints and coatings after September 30,1991.

Trovsan PMA-100

       The existing stocks of the canceled Troysan PMA-100 packaged and labeled
before February 28,1991 were allowed to be sold and distributed until June 27,1991.
After June 27,1991, Troy was not permitted to distribute or sell any existing stocks of
canceled products. Continued use of Troysan PMA-100 products for manufacturing of
exterior paints and coatings after June 27,  1991, is permitted.
COMPLIANCE MONITORING
      All inspections to determine compliance with this strategy are to be conducted at
producing establishments. The purpose of inspections will be to determine that sale and
distribution of the existing stocks has been in compliance with the provisions of the
Cancellation Orders for each canceled product  As was stated in Attachment 3 of the
-------
1990 compliance strategy for the cancellation of mercury-containing biocides, the
following establishments have been identified as producing Cosan and Troy products:

Troy products:

      Troy Chemical Company
      One Avenue L
      Newark, NJ 07105

Cosan products:

      Cosan Chemical Company
      400 14th Street
      Carlstadt, NJ 07072

      Bartlo Packaging Inc.
      61 Willett Street
      Passaic, NJ 07055

      By March 31,1992 the Cosan and Troy producer establishments are to be
inspected to determine that there  has been no distribution and sale of stocks after the
dates specified in the existing stocks provisions of the cancellation orders.  Distribution of
stocks of Cosan JTA-20, Cosan JTA-10, and Troysan PMA-100 after June 27, 1991, or of
stocks of Cosan PMA-100 after September 30,1991 is illegal.

      Reports of inspectional findings shall be made by April 30,1992 to Maureen
Lydon, Chief, Compliance Branch, Office of Compliance Monitoring,
ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITY	

Refer to the allocation of responsibility section of the original cancellation strategy.
-------
             ATTACHMENT A
CANCELLATION ORDER OF SEPTEMBER 4, 1990
    55 FR 37541, SEPTEMBER 12, 1990
-------
                 Federal Register / Vol 55. No. 177 / Wednesday. September 12. 1990 / Notices
                                                                                                            37541
  [OPP-46142; FRL-3MO-2)

  Pestidde Products Containing
  Pfienytmercurlc Acetate: Receipt of
  Requests for Voluntary Cancellation

  AQIMCY: Environmiatal Protection
  Agency (EPA).
  ACTION: Notice of pesticide
  cancellations.


  SUMMARY: Based on the risk* associated
  with indoor use of paints containing
  mercury. EPA recently announced a
  series of pesticide cancellations and
  amendments which have eliminated all
  use of mercury bioddes in interior
  paints. EPA has also expressed concerns
  regarding the potential risks associated
  with use of mercury compounds in other
  interior products such as joint
  compounds, adhesive*, and plasters.
  The only remaining registrant of
  mercury bioddes labeled for these
  miscellaneous interior oses has
  requested voluntary cancellation of the
_ 'l^istrations for these products. All
  stocks of affected mercury bioddes.
  induding stocks in the hands of end-
  users, must be stickared by October 15.
  1990. with language reducing the
  maximum nse rate and requiring a
  specific precautionary statement on
  products manufactured from the
  bioddes. Existing stocks of cancelled
 mercury products which have been
 property stickared may be sold and used
 until June 27,1991.

  DATES: The cancellation order
  incorporated in  this notice will become
  effective September 13.1990. Existing
  stocks of products cancelled pursuant to
  this notice must be stickared with new
 label language by October IS. 1990.
 FiH.ring itoclcs of such dBcafled
 products which have been properly
 stiekered may be sold and used until
 June 27,1991.   --   •     -.  •
 Beth Edwards. Special Review Branch,
 Special Review and Rsngistration
 Division (H730BC). Office of Pesticide
 Programs. Environmental Protection
 Agency. 401M SU SYY. Washington, DC
 20400. Office location and telephone   •
 —Tiber 3rd Floor. 2805 Jefferson Davis
  •Jrway Arlington. VA. (703) 308-8010.
 sumuuMTAJtv WFOMMATION:
 L EPA Conclusions Concerning Use of
 Mercury in Interior Products

  Following receipt of reports
 concerning a 4-year old child who
 developed acrodynia (a rare form of
 mercury poisoning) after his home .was
 painted with paint containing mercury
 and a followup investigation by the
 Centers for Disease Control and the  .
 State of Michigan of mercury levels in
 other homes painted with similar paint
 EPA initiated a comprehensive review
 of the risks and benefits associated with
 the use of mercurial compounds in
 paints and coatings. After evaluating the
 available evidence concerning exposure
 to mercury resulting from use in paints
 and coatings, toxidty of mercury and
 mercury compounds, *""^ availability of
 alternative bioddes. EPA conduded that
 the continued use of mercurial
 compounds in the manufacture of
 interior paints and coatings would
 present an unreasonable risk of adverse
 health effects. EPA also determined that
 continued use of mercury in the
 manufacture of other tB*t
interior products such as joint
compounds, adhesive*, and plasters
would present qualitatively similar risks
which could only be quantified after
development and submission of
additional data.
  As a result of discussions with the
registrants of mercury products labeled
for use in paints and coatings, the    .  •
registrant! agreed to rapidly eliminate
use of mercury bioddes in interior
paints and coatings and to require that
exterior paints and coatings containing
mercury bioddes be labeled with a
warning against interior use. These
changes were effectuated by conditional
amendments to «p«>ifl> registrations
and requests for voluntary cancellation :
of other registrations, as described in a
prior notice published in the Federal
Register of June 29. 1990 (S3 FR 28754).
  As part of the same discussions. EPA
and Cosan Chemical Corporation
("Cosan"). the registrant of certain
mercury products labeled exdusively
for Tniirtlls*'t
-------
       /542         Federal Register / Vol. 85. No. 177 / Wednesday.  September is.  1990 / Notices
     Cosan or any other person on or after
     September 17,199(X The cancellation
     order also will requite Coun to deliver
     •tickers by September 17.1090, to all
     end-tutu who an holding inventory of
     «aeh product, and wfll provide that      •
     •tocki of each product ••»»«• !"<«»» jn tht  •
     inventory of end-users aay not be
     lawfully used after October IS. 1990,   .
     unless the end-u«5 an)
-------
           ATTACHMENT B
CANCELLATION ORDERS OF JULY 1, 1991
 56  FR 31403  &  31404, JULY  10,  1991
-------
                   Federal Register / Vol. 56.  No. 132 / Wednesday. July 10.  1991 / Notices	31403
 number of small entitle*. A certification
 •tateneot to this effect WM publUhed in
 the Federal Register of May 4. 1981 (46
 PR 24990).

   Authority: a US.C. 946<(j).
   D«ttd: IUM 23. 1981.
 Dinctor. Kegittrotion Division. Office ff
 Pff5t/C/M PlVgFUfllt'
 [FR Dec. 91-19122: Filed 7-041: MS wn]
 Iff I03tt7/T609; FRU 392ft-*;]

 Fenouprop^thyl; Estaotishnwrrt of
 Temporary Totoranct

 AQiNcr: Environmental Protection
 Agency (EPA).
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: EPA has established a
 temporary tolerance for the combined
 residues of the herbicide fenoxaprop-
 ethyi and its metabolites in or on the
 raw agricultural commodity barley.
 grain at OJ» part per million (ppm).
 OATU: This temporary tolerance expires
 April 10. 1992.
 FOftnmTKMIIOKMMATIONCOMTACrBy
 mail: Joanne Miller, Product Manager
 (PM) 23. Registration Division (H730SQ.
 Office of Pesticide Programs.
 Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
 St. SW., Washington. DC 20460. Office
 location and telephone number: Rm. 23T.
 CM«Z 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway.
 Arlington. VA. (703)-557.1830.
 tutKjMunun wromuTWN: Hoaehst
 Celanese Corp. Route 202-205. P.O. Box
 2500. Somerville, NJ 08876-1258. has
 requested in pesticide petition (PP)
 1C3927. the establishment of a
 temporary tolerance for the combined
 residues of the herbicide fenoxaprop-
 ethyl ((±)-ethyl 2-(4-[(6-chlorc-2-
 b«nzoxatolyl)oxyjphenoxyjpropanoate))
 and its metabolites
acid and S-chloro-ZJ-
dihydrob«ttox*iol.2-
expressed as fe
                      j, each
                       tbyi. in or on
the raw agricultural commodity barley.
grain at 0.03 part per million (ppm). This
          tolerance will permit the
marketing of the above raw agricultural
commodity when treated in accordance
with the provisions of the experimental
use permit 8340-EUP-13. which is being
issued under the Federal Insecticide.
Fungicide, and Rodaotfdda Act (FffRA).
as amended (Pub. L 99-396.92 StatBtt
7US.C13D).        '
  The scientific data reported and other
relevant material were evaluated, and it
was determined that establishment of
the temporary tolerance will protect the
public health. Therefore, the temporary
tolerance has been established on the
condition that the pesticide be used in
accordance with the experimental use
permit and with the following
provisions:
  1. The total amount cf the active
ingredient to be used must not exceed
the quantity authorized by the
experimental use permit
  2. Hoechst Celanese Corp. must
immediately notify the EPA of any
findings from the experimental use that
have a bearing on safety. The company
must also keep records of production.
distribution, and performance, and on
request make the records available to
any authorized officer or employee of
the EPA or the Food and Drug
Administration.
  This tolerance expires April 10. 1992.
Residues not in excess of this amount
remaining in or on the raw agricultural
commodity after this expiration date
will not be considered actionable if the
pesticide is legally applied during the
term of. and in accordance with, the
provisions of the experimental use
permit and temporary tolerance. This
tolerance may be revoked if the
experimental use permit is revoked or if
any experience with or scientific data
on this pesticide indicate that such
revocation is necessary to protect the
public health.
  The Office of Management and Budget
has exempted this notice from the
requirements of section 3 of Executive
Order 12291.
  Pursuant to the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L 96-
354. 94 Slat 1164. 5 US.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).
                                        Dated: IUM ft 1981.

                                      ABM E. DOOM*.

                                      Dinctor. Acjtaratian Dmuott. Office cf
                                                                            lOPf-WUaAs nU.-3934-l]

                                                                            Phenytmercurtc Acetate; Cancellation
                                                                            Order

                                                                            AOINCY: Environmental Protection
                                                                            Agency (EPA).
                                                                            Acncac Notice of cancellation order.

                                                                            •UMMANV: Pursuant to a request for
                                                                            voluntary cancellation submitted by the
                                                                            registrant Troy Chemical Corporation
                                                                            (TroyM). EPA is cancelling the
                                                                            registration for the pesticide product
                                                                            Troysan PMA-100. EPA Registration No.
                                                                            5383-1. Effective on July 1.1991. EPA
                                                                            will not permit any further distribution
                                                                            or sale of this product Manufacturers of
                                                                            exterior paints and coatings may
                                                                            continue to use all stocks of this product
                                                                            which wen packaged and labeled with
                                                                            the registered labeling by Troy on or
                                                                            before February 28.1991. and which
                                                                            were purchased by and delivered to the
                                                                            end-user on or before June 27.19R1.
                                                                            OATU: This cancellation order will be
                                                                            effective on July 1.1991. EPA will permit
                                                                            stocks of Troysan PMA-100 which were
                                                                            packaged and labeled with the
                                                                            registered labeling by Troy on or before
                                                                            February 28.1991. and which were
                                                                            purchased by and delivered to the end>
                                                                            user on or before June 27.1991. to be
                                                                            used in manufacture of exterior paints
                                                                            and coatings.
                                                                                                        TACT
                                                                            Beth Edwards. Special Review and
                                                                            Reregistration Division (H7508C). Office
                                                                            of Pesticide Programs. Environmental
                                                                            Protection Agency. 401M St. SW.
                                                                            Washington. DC 20460. Office location
                                                                            and telephone number. 3rd Floor. 2800
                                                                            Jefferson Davis Highway. Arlington. VA.
                                                                            (703) 308-6010.
                                                                                      FAKY USPONMATION:
                                      JFR Doe. 81-10121 TOed 7-0-81: MS an]
I. Background
  In a letter dated November 26.1990.
Troy submitted a request for voluntary
cancellation of Troysan PMA-100. EPA
Registration No. 5383-4. In its initial
request Troy advised EPA that it was
immediately ceasing all production of
Troysan PMA-100 and requested that
EPA permit sale, distribution, and use of
existing stocks of Troysan PMA-100
until November 26,1991. In subsequent
discussions. EPA Indicated to Troy that
it would not be willing to permit sale
and distribution of Troysan PMA-100
after IUM 27,199L or use of any stocks
of Troysan PMA-100 purchased by the
user after June 27.1991. On February 28.
1991 Troy wrote an additional letter to
EPA eaiiflftiiiiig its prior request for
voluntary cancellation mra^ accepting the
existing stocks provisions specified by
EPA. EPA published a notice of
-------
            31404
                    Federal Register / Vol. sff. No. 132 / Wednesday. July itt". 199I.""/. Notices.
J..
  voluntary cancellation to Troysan
  PMA-100 In the Federal Register of May*
  31. ion (34 FR 24900}. Furtfatr
  informaHon on- the background and the
:  baaia for tola action may be found In
  that notice.

  0. Cancellation Older  ,

   Effective on July 1; 1981. the
  registration for Troysan PMA-lOa EPA
  Registration No. 5383-4. it cancelled
  punuaat to section 8(0(1) °' mt Federal
  Insecticide. Fungicide, and Rodentidde
  Act (FIFRA). 7 U.S.C. section 138d(fl(l).
  Effective on July 1.1991. It shall be
  unlawful under FIFRA section  •
  12(a)(l)(A) and/or FIFRA section
  12(aJ(2)(K). 7 U.S.C. sections
  136)(a)(l)(A). 138J W(2)(K), for any
  person to distribute or sell Troysan
  PMA-100 in any State. Effective on July
  1.1991. it shall be unlawful under FIFRA
  section 12(a)(2)(K). 7 U.S.C. section
  138J(aJ(2)(K), for any person to use
 Troysan PMA-100 for any pestiddal
 purpose in any State, except aa
 specifically provided below.
•   For purposes of this order, existing
 stocks an defined aa stocks which were
 in the United States and packaged and
 labeled with the registered labeling on
 or befon July 1.1991 the effective date
 of cancellation. Existing stocks of
 Troysan PMA-100 which werar packaged
 and labeled with the registered labeling
 by Troy Chemical Corporation on or
 before February 28,1991. and which
 were purchased by and delivered to the
 end-user on or before June 27.1991, may
 continue to be used in the manufacture
 of exterior paints and coatings, subject
 to the following mandatory terms and
 conditions. No existing stocks of
 Troysan PMA-100 may be used which
 do not bear the registered labeling: (1)
 Prohibiting use of the product  in
 manufacture or formulation of any paint
 or coating intended or labeled for  ..
 interior use. (21 limiting use of me

 to only those products which are labeled
 with a warning againat muitet use, and
 (3) specifying maxlmim application
 rate* for use in exterior pamta end .
 coatings. All usaof enisling) atoflfcs of
 Troysan PMA-100  must alao be in full
 conformity with all label nuuiiementa.
   Dated: July X.U9L

AeOatOfnetof. SptdalKnitwaai
R*ngittndoaDMuoa.Offlefof,
(OS9-M14M; FM.-3934-2)

PhenylmercurteAcetat
Order

Manor: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTKHC Notice of cancellation order.'

•UMMAwr Pursuant to a request for
voluntary cancellation submitted by the
registrant Cosan Chemical Corporation
("Cosan"), EPA is c*nc*IUng the
registration for the pesticide product
Cosan PMA-100, EPA Registration No.
6489-5. The cancellation of this product
will be effective on July 1.1991. EPA will
permit sale and distribution of existing .
stocks of this product bearing the
registered labeling until September 30,
1991. Manufacturers of exterior paints
and coatings may continue to use all
stocks of this product which wen
packaged and labeled with the
registered labeling by Cosan on or
bef on July 1.1991. and which an •
purchased by and delivered to the end-
user on or befon September 30,1991.
MTU: This cfcfllation order will be
effective on July-1.1991. EPA will permit
stocks of Cosan PMA-100 bearing the
registered labeling to be. sold and
distributed until September 30.1991.
EPA will also permit stocks of Cosan
PMA-100 which wen packaged and
labeled with the registered labeling by
Cosan on or befon July 1.1991, and
which are purchased by and delivered
to the end-user on or befon September
30,1991, to be used in mannfactnn of
exterior paints and coatings.
MM PMTMIM MPOMMATMN CONTACT:
Beth Edwards, Special Review and
Reregtstration Division (H7308Q, Office
of Pesticide Programs. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401M St. SW,
Washington, DC 20480. Office location
and telephone number; 3rd Floor. 2800
Jefferson Davis Highway. Arlington. VA.
(703)306-8010.
                                                  L Background
                                                    On April 1.1991. EPA advised Cosan
                                                  representatives that it intended to issue-
                                                  a notice of intent to cancel Cosaa PMA-
                                                  100. EPA Registration-No. 8489-4.
                                                  pursuant to FIFRA section 8(e). based on
                                                  the failun of Cosan to satisfy certain
                                                  conditions regarding development and
                                                  submission of data taiduded hi tin
                                                     iditional nejstrsttottior th» product
            (PR Doe. H-1IM17 PBed 7-4-eu Ml aai|
At that time. EPA suggested that Cosaa
consider requesting vohmtary
canceflation of Coaan PMA-lOa m   •
subsequent discussions, EPA and Ctttan
discussed the optiona available to
Coseiii the scope and potential
outcomee of a cancellation hearing, and
 the provisions for sale, distribution, and,
 use of existing stocks to be incorporated
 in a cancellation order. On May 10,1991.
 Cosan submitted the request for
 voluntary cancellation which is the
 basis for this cancellation order. EPA '
 published a notice of voluntary
 cancellation for Cosan PMA-100 in the
 Federal Register of May 31.1991 (96 FR
 24807). Further information on the
 background and the basis for this action
 may be found in that notice.

 0. Cancellation Order

  Effective on July 1.1991. the
 registration for Cosan PMA-100. EPA
 Registration No. 8489-4, is cancelled
 pursuant to section 8(0(1) of the Federal
 Insecticide. Fungicide, and Rodentidde
 Act (FIFRA). 7 U.S.C. section 138d(0(l).
 Effective on July 1.1991. It shall be
 unlawful under FIFRA section
 12(a)(l)(A)  and/or FIFRA section
 12(a)(2)(K). 7 .UAC, sections
 138J(a)(l)(A). 138J(a)(2)(K). for any
 person to distribute « sell Cosan PMA-
 100 in any State, except aa specifically.,
' provided below. Effective on July!.   .
 1991. it shall be unlawful under FIFRA
 section 12(a)(2)(K). 7 U.S.C. section
 138j(a)(2KK), for any person to use
 Cosan PMA-100 for any pestiddal
 purpose in any State, except as
 specifically provided below.
  For purposes of this order, existing .
 stocks an defined aa stocks which wen
 in the United States and packaged and
 labeled with the registered labeling on
 or befon July 1.1991. the effective date
 of cancellation. Existing stocks of Cosan
 PMA-100 may be sold and distributed
 until September 30.199t subject to the
 mandatory terms and conditions below.
 Existing stocks of Cosan PMA-100
 which wen packaged and labeled with
 the registered labeling by Cosan
 Chemical Corporation on or before July
 1.1991. end which an purchased by and
 delivered to the end-user on or befon
 September 30,1991. may continue to be
 used hi the manufactun of exterior
 paints and  coating*, subject to the
 following mandatory terms and
 conditions. No existing stocks of Cosan
 PMA-100 may be sold, distributed or
 used which do not bear the registered
 labeling: (1J Prohibiting use of the
 product IB manttfacnm or formulation
 of any paint or coating intended or
 labeled for Interior use. (2) limiting use
 of the product in exterior paints and
 coatings to. only those products which
 an labeled with a warning against
 interior use. and (3) specifying maximum
 application rates for use In exterior
 paints and  coating* All use of existing
 stocks of Cosan PMA-100 must also be
-------
                   Federal Register / Vol 56. No. 132 / Wednesday. July 10. 1991 / Notices
                                                                   31405
 in full conformity with all label
 requirements.
   D*ied: July 11901.
 AltanS.Abwm.oo.
 Acting Director. Spt&ollUvMwand
 Rmgittntion Civilian. Offlet effmUeOt
 JFR Doc. 91-18418 Filed 7-e-Bt 6*8 as]
 (FRL-397**]

 PrepOMd Dt Minimis Settlement
 Undtr 122(g), Cetorado Avenue/
 Suosftfc Hasting* Ground Water
 ConUnUnrtlonSItt   .  ' .

 AOBICV: Environmental Protection
 Agency.
 ACTON: Node* of propoMd de minimi*
 settlement under 122(g). Colorado
 Avenue Snbsite.

 KJMatAinr: The United Slates
 Environmental Protection Agency is
 propo«jpfl to enter into a de «"'«
-------
       UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                        WASHINGTON. D.C.  20-160



                            MAR   7  1979

                                                        OFFICE OF EHFORCCMCNT
SUBJECT:   Enforcement of  the Administrator's  Emergency Orders
           Suspending 2,4,5-T and  Silvex  Registrations

FROM:      A.  E.  Conroy  II, Director
           Pesticides and  Toxic  Substances
           Enforcement Division

TO:        Enforcement Division  Directors
           Pesticide Branch Chiefs
     On  February  23, 1979, the Administrator  signed  Emergency Suspension
Orders pursuant to FIFPA section  6(c)(3)  inrnediately suspending  the
registrations of  all pesticide products containing 2,4,5-T for fores-
    «uses (including site preparation, conifer  release,  and brush and
    3 control), rights-of-way uses (including brush and  used control),
    pasture uses  V* and of all pesticide products containing Silvex
 or forestry uses~"(including site preparation, conifer  release,  and
brush and weed control), rights-of-way uses  (including  brush and v;eed
control), pasture uses, home and  garden uses,  commercial/ornamental
turf uses "(including recreational area uses),  and aquatic  weed control/
ditch bank uses (use on rice not  suspended), pending the final outcome
of Agency cancellation proceedings which  were  also initiated by  Order
of the Administrator on February  28th.  Copies of these Orders are
being mailed under separate cover.  The purpose of this memorandum is
to sat forth the  Agency's enforcement strategy concerning  products
suspended by the  February 28th Orders.  It is  the Agency's intention
to ensure that the Administrator's Orders are  strictly  complied  with
by all affected persons, including manufacturers, formulators, regis-
trants,  \^olesalers, retailers, distributors,  government agencies,
and users.
^7Pasture is defined as land producing forage  for  animal  consumption,
"harvested by grazing, which has annual or more frequent  cultivation,
seeding, fertilization, irrigation, pesticide application,  and  other
    «lar practices applied to it.  Fencerows enclosing pastures  are  in-
    ed as part of the pasture.
-------
                                 .-2-

I.   SUSPENSION ORDER PIWI5IOMS

     The February 23th Orders provide:

        (1)  As of February 28, 1979, all registrations of pesticide
        products containing 2,4,5-T and Silvex for the uses described
        above are suspended.  For 2,4,5-T this means that in addition
        to the uses cancelled in 1970, all pasture land, right-of-way
        and forestry uses are now suspended.  For Silvex this means
        that all aquatic (except for use on rice), hone and garden,
        recreation area, as wall as pasture land, right-of-way and
        forestry uses are now suspended.  None of the products with
        any of the suspended uses may be sold or distributed in the
   .  . . United States,.^.The-.Agency-is-offic-ially-notifying-by-certi--	—
        fied mail all affected registrants of products any use of which
        has bsen suspended by the February 28th Orders (hereafter referred
        to as suspended products).

        (2) As of February 28, 1979, all 2,4,5-T and Silvex
        products, regardless of how and when they were obtained, may
        only be used or applied for non-suspended uses, and only if
        the particular product in the user's possession is currently
        labeled for one of the allowable uses.

II.  CCT330RIES 'OF 2,4,5-T AND SILVEX PRODUCTS

     The following is a numerical breakdown of producers and registrants
of the suspended products:

            Producers

                                       2,4,5-T:  43 .

                                       Silvex:   58

                                       TOTAL    101 V


            Registrants

                                       2,4,5-T: 80

                                       Silvex:  87

                                       TOTAL   167
VThere is 
-------
                                    -3-

             Distributor Registrants

                                        2,4,5-T: 376
                                                         •
                                        Silvex:  382

                                        TOTAL    758

 There are seven (7)  2,4,5-T registrants and fifteen (15)  Silvex registrants
 not affected by the  Administrator's Suspension Orders.

      There are three categories of 2,4,5-T and Silvex products:

         (A)  Federally registered products, al3.__u3es_,of .which..have.been	
	suspended. An example of a product in this category would be a
      product registered for use only in forests.  None of the  products
      in this category may be sold, distributed or used in the  United
      States during the duration of the Administrator's Suspension Orders.

         (B)  Federally registered products, some usss of which  have  been
      suspendsd.  There is a category of registered products some of but
      not all of whose uses were suspended by the February 28th Orders.
      An example of a product in this category would be a product registered
      for use on range land as well as for forest" use (the former being
      a permitted use, the latter being a suspended one).  Until the'     •
      completion of certain initial procedural steps resulting  from  the
      Notices of Cancellation as well as the Suspension Orders, which will
      help clarify the future status of products in this category, such
      products may not be sold or distributed for use in ths United  States.
      PTSED will be preparing further guidance on the status of these
      products after  discussions with OGC and OPP. Products in  this
      category may only be used or applied for non-suspended uses,
      and only if the particular product in the user's possession is
      currently labeled for an allowable use.

         (C)  Federally registered products, no uses of which have been
      suspended. There is a small number o£ federally registered 2,4,5-T
      and Silvex products none of whose uses were suspended by  the
      February 28th Orders, and whose sale, distribution and use may con-
      tinue.   An example of a product in this category would be a product
      registered for  use only on rice.  Also included in this category
      are 2,4,5-T and Silvex technicals, which are registered for manufac-
      turing  use only.

           You will be receiving shortly a list of suspended product
      registration numbers, product names, registrant names, and the
      names and addresses of establishments where 2,4,5-T and Silvex
      products with suspended uses have been produced.  You will also
      receive a copy  of the site/registration listing.   In order to
-------
                                  -4-

     determine whether a particular product fits into category A or
     B, you will only need to look up the product by its registration
     number and determine whether all or only some of its listed uses
     have been suspended.

          In addition to the federally registered products discussed
     in paragraphs A through C above, all products being sold pursuant
     to State 24(c) registrations are subject to the requirements of
     tha Administrator's February 23th Suspension Orders.  A final list
     of these products is not yet available.  As soon as this infor-
     mation is prepared, it will ba forwarded to the regional offices.
     In the meantime, the regional offices should inform the States in
     their regions that State registrations for suspended. usas..of-2*4,5*»T— -,.--. ••-••
 "  and Silvex issued pursuant to FIFRA section 24(c) have also been
     suspended by tha Administrator's February 23th Orders, and that no
     further State 24(c) registrations may be issued for suspended uses
     of the affected products.

          Intrastate registrations with assigned accession numbers are not
     included in the Administrator's February 23th Orders.  A listing of
     these products and the States in which they are registered is being
     mailed under saparate cover.  The regional offices should contact   -
     the State agencies responsible for the-original" "registrations to" "see'"
     that appropriate, steps are taken-by-the States to'lijnit'the possible' "'
 :    distribution, sale and use of these products consistent with the
     Administrator's Suspension Orders of February 28th.

III. ENFORCEMENT POLICY AND STRATEGY

     A. POLICY

     The Office of Enforcement intends to ensure that the Administrator's
February 28th Orders are strictly complied with. The Agency's enforcement
policy has a two-fold objective: 1) to prevent the distribution and
sale of suspended 2,4,5-T and Silvex products; and 2) to prevent any
use of these products for other than non-suspended uses.

     The general policy of the Agency has been to request a national
recall where product registrations have been suspended in order to prevent
an imminent hazard to man or the environment.  However, because of the
emergency nature of the Administrator's actions and the fact that such
a recall approach would not have the effect of immediately halting sales,
distribution, and use, the Office of Enforcement is issuing stop Sale/
Use and Removal Orders as quickly as possible to all registrants, distri-
butor registrants and producers of 2,4,5-T and Silvex products subject to
the Administrator's Orders, as well as to all identifiable large scale
users of these products.  In addition, the Aqency is taking special steps
to notify interest groups who represent oroducers, sellers and user/appli-
cators of the suspended products of the Administrator's Orders and the
resulting legal obligations.
-------
                               -5-
     B. STRATEGY

     The initial Stop  Sale, Use,  or  Removal  Orders directed  at  2,4,5-T
and Silvex registrants, producers, distributor  registrants,  identifiable
large scale users and  federal government  agencies  V have  been  prepared
and sent by certified  mail by PTSED.  A copy of the Stop Sale Order  forms
and cover letter being used are being mailed under separate  cover.   Each
region will be sent  a  copy of each Stop Sale Order issued  to any person
within their region.   A regional  contact  has been  named  at the  bottom
of each Stop Sale Order.  This contact  person should be  able to assist
the recipients of the  Stop Sale,  Use, or  Removal Orders  with any ques-
tions that might arise. In addition, the  cover  letter accompanying the
Stop Sale Orders requests that certain  information be provided  to the
regional contact person specified .on the  Stop Sale Order.  Note that
certain information  from producers of the suspended products is manda-
tory in accordance with section 7(c)(2) of FIFRA.   The information
requested is intended  to assist the  Agency in tracking shipments of
the suspended products through the channels  of  trade. Additional
information is requested of all recipients of the  Stoo Sale  Orders to
assist EPA in monitoring compliance.  The regional offices who  will  be
receiving information  from Stop Sale recipients should maintain the
information about stocks on hand  and report  monthly and  cumulative totals
to PTSED by the 10th of each month.

     The regional offices, working closely with.-States,  are  to  conduct  -
books and records inspections at  establishments of registrants  or
producers who fail to  comply with the Agency1s  request for information
about suspended products.  Such inspections  will be necessary in order
to obtain updated information about  quantities  of  production and loca-
tions of recent shipments.

     The regional offices and States should  visit  the headquarters
offices or major distribution points of food, drug, hardware, lumber,
garden supply, variety stores, etc., to inform  them of the Suspension
Orders and obtain assurances that they  will  take immediate action to
instruct their outlets to remove  the suspended  products  from sale.   In
addition, the regional offices and the  States will undertake special
marketplace inspections at a representative  sampling  of  these and other
retail--outlets in-order to monitor compliance-with the Administrator's
Orders.  The dealers and retailers who  are visited are to  be advised
of the Administrator's February 28th Orders  and asked to voluntarily
remove suspended products from their shelves(if they have  not^ already
done so).  Persons who refuse or  for some other reason fail  to  comply
voluntarily with an  inspector's request to remove  the suspended pro-
ducts from his available stocks should  be issued a Stop  Sale, Use, or
Removal Order.  Further decisions about future  efforts aimed at the
retail level will deoend on the degree  of voluntary compliance
occurring at that level.  PTSED should  be kept  advised as  to the
extent of voluntary compliance as well  as any problems concerning
the retail sale of suspended products.
^J  Twelve federal aqencies have been sent Stop Sale, Use, or Removal
Orders.  A list is being mailed under separate cover.
-------
                                  -6-

     Since the time for annual spraying with some of the suspended
products is imminent, regional offices and the States should take
immediate steps to inform users and applicators of the Administrator's
February 28th Orders.  Although the regional offices and- cooperating
State personnel should first seek voluntary compliance, they should
not hesitate to issue Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Orders to persons who
are holding quantities of the suspended products for application.  Such
orders may be issued to applicators who are in the process of making
an application with a suspended product.  An inspection of the appli-
cator's business establishment is not required for the issuance of such
an order.  A copy of the Stop Sale, Use, or Ranoval Order form applicable
to users (as opposed to producers or registrants) is being mailed under
separate cover for your information and/or use.

     Once final action has been concluded on requests for an expedited
hearing pursuant to the provisions of section 6(c), and the status of
2,4,5-T and Silvex products pending the outcome of the future cancella-
tion proceedings has been settled, the Agency will review the need for
a possible request for a voluntary recall of the suspended products by
the .registrants and producers.  Until that time the Stop Sale, Use or
Removal Orders will remain in effect, subject to suggestions from the
affected parties about possible disposition of the current stocks of
suspended products.

C. SUMMPJg OF 'PROPOSED ENFORCEMENT 'RESPONSIBILITIES ' "' " -•••

   1. Headquarter's Responsibility

      a.  Issue Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Orders via certified mail
      to all registrants, distributor registrants and producers of
      all suspended 2,4,5-T and Silvex products.

      b.  Issue Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Orders to Federal agencies
      involved with the use or application of the suspended products.

      c.  Issue Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Orders to identifiable large
      scale users of the suspended products after conferring with the
      regional office.

      d.  Supply regional offices with copies of the following:

         •1) The Administrator's Suspension and Cancellation Orders.

         2) Copies of the Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Order forms and
         accompanying cover letter.

         3) Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Orders mailed by EPA Hdqrs.

   2. Regional office Responsibility

     a.  Notify States of the Administrator's Suspension Orders and
     Agency enforcement strategy, and develop cooperative approach
     to implementation of the enforcement strategy.
-------
                                  -7-
     b.  Compile information supplied by producers concerning 1978-79
     distribution, as well as additional information requested from
     all Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Order recipients.  Report data to
     PTSED on monthly basis.

     c.  Conduct books and records inspections at those major producer
     establishments, who do not supply the requested information, to
     update information about quantities of production and locations
     of shipments.

     d.  Review information obtained from producers (per b. and c. above)
     to identify recipients of shipments of the suspended products in
     order to target distributor and marketplace inspections.

  •   e.  Contact 'headquarter s"Off ices •or'lmaj or" distribution "points 6f
     food, drug, hardware, lumber, garden supplies, variety stores etc.
     to inform them of the Suspension Orders and to solicit their coopera-
     tion in informing their customers of the Suspension Orders.

     f.  Conduct marketplace inspections in order to locate possible
     improper retail sale or distribution of suspended products.

     g.  Undertake special efforts to inform State pesticide user associa-
     tions, applicators and other, users .about the Suspension Orders and
     thair legal requiraments.

     h.  Issue SSUROs when appropriate.

     i.  Undertake appropriate enforcement action against any persons
     violating the terms of the Administrator's Suspension Orders or
     SSUROs.

     j.  Regional contact person, with assistance from EPA Headquarters,
     should be prepared to answer questions about the Agency's actions
     and to assist"persons directly affected (e.g. producers, registrants,
     sellers, users, applicators, etc.) with compliance.

   3.  State Responsibility

         States, especially those with''Cooperative Enforcement Agreements,
     are expected to cooperate fully with the enforcement efforts outlined
     in'this memorandum. Specifically, they will be asked to assist
     in items c, d, e, f, g, h, and i above.

17.  ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

     Enforcement actions will be taken in accordance with normal procedures
and at levels consistent with those set forth in the Case Proceedings Manual
against any person found in violation of the 2,4,5-T and Silvex Suspension
Orders or Agency SSURDs. Note; Section 26 of the amended FIFRA, which
grants to the States the primary enforcement responsibility for pesticide
use violations, does not extend to situations involving the use of a
Expended product in violation of Sections 12(a)(2)(J) or 12(a)(2)(I).
-------
                                  -8-

'  V.   DISPOSAL OF 2f4,5-T AND SILVEX PRODUCTS

       Until the conclusion of Agency cancellation proceedings involving
  2,4,5-T and Silvex  registrations, persons requesting information about
  the possible disposal of quantities of the suspended products should be
  advised to place the material in storage in accordance with label direc-
  tions.
  VI.  INDEMNITIES

       PTSED has been advised by the Office of General Counsel that con-
  sideration of requests for indemnification under section 15 of FIFRA
  by parsons possessing quantities of the suspended products vail not
  take place until the conclusion of Agency cancellation proceedings for
  the suspended products.     ...

  VII. INQUIRIES

       Any questions about this memorandum and the 2,4,5-T or Silvex
  Suspension Orders should be directed to the appropriate regional
  coordinator.

  VIII. SE?T UNDER SEPARATE COVER

        (1) Administrator's Suspension Orders, Feb. 28, 1979.

        (2) Administrator's Notices of Cancellation, Feb. 28, 1979.

        (3) PTSED Stop Sale Order forms and cover letter.

        (4) List of Intrastate 2,4,5-T and Silvex Products.

        (5) Copies of Headquarters-Issued Stop Sale, Use, or Removal

            Orders.

        (6) List of federal agencies sant Stop Sale Order.

        (7) List of federally registered 2,4,5-T and Silvex products

            suspended by the Administrator's Feb. 28, 1979 Orders.

        (8) Site/registration listing.
-------
       UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                        WASHINGTON. D.C.  20-160
                        APR 0 5 107P
                                                        OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
          Further  Guidance Concerning Enforcement of  the Administrator's
          Emergency Orders Suspending 2,4,5-T and Silvex Registrations

          A.  E.  Conroy II, Director
          Pesticides and Toxic Substances
          Enforcement Division

          Enforcement Division Directors
          Pesticide Branch Chiefs
      h a irenDrar.du.Ti dated March 7, 1979, I explained the Agency's
tenforcerrsnt strategy concerning 2,4,5-T and Silvex products  suspended
by the Pidrrdnistratoi: on February /.8th.  In that menorandirp. I  indicated
thcv   -v.-ouJ.d provide you with additions], guidance concerning  the  status
pf '    .rally registered 2,4,5-T and Silvex products v.hich have  both  sus-
tpsndcc" arc. non-suspended uses on their labels. In the meantins, such
products could  not  be sold or distributed for use in the United States.
•However, affected products in the user's or applicator's possession  could
ys used cr applied  -for non-susp-ended uses, if the particular  product
in the user's possession was currently labeled for an allowable use.
i
i     In a letter dated March 22, 1979, the Agency advised registrants of
2,4,5-T and Silvex  productstwith both suspandei and non-suspended uses
3n their labels that they would be allowed to distribute .and  sell such
brccucts for use in the United States once they hcd prepared  adequate
interim labeling designed to inform the purchaser that certain  of the
•ses on the label are allowable, but that others are suspended.   I have
Attached a copy of  the letter, which is self explanatory, and do  not
slan to sirrurarize it in this memorandum.
-s,
.
-------
                                  -2-

     As you  vail  see,  registrants of  such  products have been instructed
 to send copies  of their  interim  labeling to the appropriate regional
 office  along with information about what steps they have taken to com-
 ply  with the letter.   Since many of the products are distributed and
 sold throughout the United States,  as each regional office receives
 copies  of the interim  labeling,  they  should forward copies to all  .
 the  other EPA regional offices.   A list of regional contacts who are
 responsible  for matters  relating  to 2,4,5-T and Silver products is
 attached to  the March  22nd letter.  Although the Agency is not re-
 quiring  advance approval  for  each registrant's interim labeling, the
 regional office receiving the original of  the interim labeling should
 briefly review  each label as  it  is  received bo make certain that on
 its  face it  appears adequate  to. inform purchasers -of-.the-.-pr-oduct-that;—•   ••
 certain of its  uses are no longer  allowable.   Any questions about
 specific interim  labeling should  be directed to Mr. A. J.  Dellavecchia,
 Chief of PTSED's  Policy and Guidance  Branch,  and his staff.

     As you  know,  immediately following' the release of the Administrator's
 February 23th Orders,  PTSED issued  over 1,000 Stop Sale, Use, or Removal
 Orders  to all affected 2,4,5-T and  Silvex  registrants, producers and
 distributor  registrants. As a  result  of the Agency's subsequent decision
 to allow certain  cf the  registrants to prepare interim labeling so they
 can  sell  and distribute their  products which  have some non-suspended
 uses on their labels,  it will  be  necessary to formally vacate or' lift
 the  Stop Sale Orders affecting those  products which can be properly
 relabeled.   In  other words, registrants Vvho have prepared  interim label-
 ing  can  only begin to sell and distribute  their  products as soon as the
 interim labeling  is attached  and  after they have notified  EPA of their
 actions.  Other 2,4,5-T and Silvex  products in their custody or control
 which were subject to the Stop Sale Order  and/or which have not been
 properly  relabeled still may not be moved  in  commerce without advance
 approval  from the appropriate EPA regional  office.
                            *
     A question has been raised whether the Stop Sale, Use, or Removal
 Orders  issued by PTSED should  be  amended, vacated,  etc.  by PTSED or by
 the  appropriate regional office.  Once the  Stop Sale Order  has been
 issued,  it is the responsibility  of the regional office listed on the
Order to  take whatever future action  is appropriate in connection with
 that Order.  For  example, if a distributor  registrant is able to arrange
 for  the  return  of a particular product to  the  registrant or producer,  it
 will be  the  regional office's  responsibility  to  amend or vacate the Stop
 Sale Order to allow the pesticide to  be returned.
-------
                                    -3-
      A question has also been raised about the possible violation of
 the Administrator's Suspension Orders if a pesticide dealer attempts  to
 return quantities of the suspended products to the distributor, producer
 or registrant.  Although the Administrator's Orders state that "the sale,
 distribution, or other movement in commerce (emphasis added) anil the  use
 of all such pesticide products ... is prohibited", it is not the Agency's
 intention to prevent the return by a dealer of suspended products to  a
 registrant, producer, or distributor.  However, it is necessary for the
 Agency to know whether quantities of the suspended, products are going to
 be moved in commerce, to whom, in what quantities end for what purposes.
 Therefore, if a dealer plans to return unsold quantities of suspended
 products to a producer or distributor he should first contact the approp^
 riate EPA regional office in writing notifying them of his plans and
. wait for, .confirmation-.£ef ore - aGtually-.shipping -the --iratertal>v"~i>£ the ----" ••
 sane dealer is'subject to a federal Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Order,
 it will be necessary for him to have the Order vacated or lifted before
 he ships the pesticide.   Similarly, if the products under his conteol
 have been detained pursuant to a State order, it will bs necessary for
 him to contact the appropriate State officials about his plans to return
 the pasticide(s).

      Finally, based on an extensive computer listing provided by the
 Office of Pesticide Programs of possible users of suspended 2,4,5-T or
 Silvex products, PTSED is about to begin issuing approximately 24,000
 Stop Sale, Use,  or Removal Orders. These Orders will be sent directly
 to various persons vfto might be holding  suspended products for use or
 planning to use  such products  including  timber tract owners, aerial
 applicators, lawn service companies, electric power companies, pipeline
 operators, railroads,  irrigation operators,  etc.   A complete listing of
 the persons receiving  such Orders, broken down alphabetically, by State,
 will be sent to  each regional  office along with a copy of the cover
 letter and Stop  Sale forms as  soon as the Orders have been mailed.
Attachment
-------
V.
          UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
                                   O TON. o.c.  204eo
                            AUG 2 0 1979
                                                           OFFICE OF" ENFORCEMENT
SUBJECI1:   further Guidance  on the Cancellation and Suspension of 2,4,5-T
           and Silvex

TO:        Enforcement  Division Directors
           Pesticides Branch Chiefs
     On July 9,  1979,  the  Assistant Administrator for Toxic Substances
signed two notices  of  intent to hold hearings pursuant to FIFBA section
6(b)(2) to determine whether or not the uses of 2,4,5-T and silvex not
subject to the Emergency Suspension Orders of February 23, 1979 should
be cancelled (copies attached).  This essentially ireans that all uses
of 2,4,5-T and siivsx  will now be reviewed as psrt of the ongoing can-
cellation proceedings.

     In preparing  rhe  two  notices the Office of. General Counsel concluded
that the list of r.on-suspended uses of both 2,4,5-T and silvex products
was broader than crigir.nliy assuned.  In ;ny earlier guidance inarvoraiida
I expressed the  Agency's view thar only rice, rengeland, sugarcane and
cor rain orchard  u=-r£ of  thess products were not affected by the February 23,
1979 Suspension  Orders.  This ssrr^ viev; v;as expressed in the Registration
Divisicn/Pesricides and  Toxic Substances Enforce.nent Division March 22, 1979
letter to all 2,4,5-T  and  silvex registrants.

     It is now the  Agency's view that a nutber of uses of both 2,4,5-T and
silvex that were previously considered to be suspended are not suspended
and products with  these  additional 'uses on their labeling can be sold and
used in the United  States  pending the outco.re of the cancellation proceed-
ings.  According to the  6(b)(2) notice, in addition to use on rice and
rangeland, non-crop uses of 2,4,5-T at the following sites are not suspended:
-------
 iuiesct^ /, vacant. AWLS, tan*  terms;  inuUStt iaJ. Situs at
 wise  included in suspended  uses,  e.g.,  rights-of-way).

     Similarly, according to  the  6(b)(2)  notice,  in addition to us'e on rice,
 rangeland, sugarcane and orchards, non-crop uses  of silvex at the following
 sites are not suspended: fencerows,  hedgerows, fences (not otherwise included
 in the suspended uses, e.g. rights-of-way,  pasture, home and garden);
 incustrial sites or buildings (not otherwise included in suspended uses,
 e.g.  rights-cf-way, couuercial/ornaTsntal turf);  storage areas; waste
 areas; vacant lots; and parking areas.  Attached to this memorandum is
 a revised version (datec July 24, 1979) of  the list of suspended and
 non-suspended uses for 2,4,5-T and silvex products. This list supersedes
 the version provided to you in connection with ry guidance of April
•5th and-the March1'22Hif Tetter1 to "affected "registrants.
                                           A.  E.  Conroy II,/Director
                                         Pesticice and Toxic Substances
                                              Enforcement Division
                                                        \j
Attachment
-------
2,4,5-T  V

[2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy acetic acid,
  esters, amine salts]

Firetrails and lanes
Forest lands, management areas,
   plantations, and stumplands
Rights-of-way: highways, pipelines,
   powerlines, utilities, roadsides,
   roadways, etc.
Pasture
 SILVGX
 [2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy) propionic
    acid, esters, amine salts']
                 i
 Farm buildings
 Forestlands and management areas
 Golf courses
 Home use, lawns, grass, ornamental
    turf, patios, sidowalks, drive-
    ways, farmyards
Ditchbanks, drainage ditchbanks
 Ponds, pond margins, standing
    water
 Lake, lake margins
 Rights-of-way, all; roadsides,
    roadways, etc.
 Pasture
 Ditches - voter
 Parks, athletic fields
 Marshlands, canals, aquatic sites
                           NON-SUSPENDED USES
2,4,5-T
Rice
Rangeland
Airports
Fences, hedgerows (not otherwise
   included in suspended uses, e.g.
   rights-of-way, pasture)
Lumberyards
Refineries
Nonfood crops
Storage areas
Noncrop areas
Wastelands (not otherwise included
   in suspended uses, e.g., forestry)
Vacant lots
Industrial sites and areas (not
   otherwise included in suspended
   uses, e.g., rights-of-wayj
 SILVEX

 Rice
 Rangeland
 Sugarcane
 Preharvest fruit drop of apples,
    prunes and pears
 Fence rows, hedgerows, fences  (not otherwin
    included in suspended uses, e.g.,  rightc--
    of-way, pasture, home and garden)
 Nonfood crop areas
 Noncrop areas
 Storage areas
 Waste areas
 Vacant lots, parking areas, etc.
 Industrial sites or buildings  (not
    otherwise included in suspended
    uses, e.g., rights-of-way,
    conraercial/ornaiiental turf)
I/  Certain uses of 2,4,5-T were suspended and cancelled  in 1970.   P.  R.  Notice
70-11, April 20, 1970, suspended the registrations for products  containing
2,4,5-T and bearing directions for all uses in Iskos, oonds and  ditchbanks,  and
liquid formulations for use around the hora, recreation areas, and  similar  sites.
P. R. Notice 70-13, May 1, 1970, cancelled the rcnict rat ions of  2,-1,5-T
including all granular formulations for USG urourui tha hoirc,  recreation  areas
and similar sites,. and all uses on food crops intended for human consumption,
except for products whose labeling could be nradifiod by deleting such  claims.
-------
                 TOXAPHENE  CANCELLATION COMPLIANCE  STRATEGY
 Overview
      On  May  25.  1977  £PA  issued  a  Notice  of  Rebuttable  Presump-
 tion  Against Registration  and  Continued  Registration  of Pesticide
 Products  Containing Toxaphene.   This  RPAR notice  was  issued  pri-
 marily on  the  basis of  studies  showing  that  toxaphene causes
 tumors In  laboratory  animals,  acute  toxicity of toxaphene  to
 aquatic  organisms, and  the  high  likelihood that toxaphene  causes
 reductions  in  the populations  of nontarget animal  species.   Fur-
 ther  examination of the data available  to the Agency  showed  that
 toxaphene  1s extremely  persistent, moves  readily  through the
.env.i.roji.ment ...contami nates-tvabi tats. af. v-uJ-nera&te~xKqua-t-l€ -afvd *a v-i-an •'••
 species  at  levels sufficient to  reduce  their populations,  and  that
 humans are exposed to toxaphene  through  occupational  contact
 and contamination of  a  range of  food  products,  particularly  fish.

      On  October  18, 1982 the Agency  announced it's  decision  to
 cancel most  uses of toxaphene.   This  action  was taken pursuant  to
 Section  6  of the Federal  Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenti.cide
 Act,  as  amended  (FIFRA).   On November 29,  1982, the Agency pub-
 lished in  the  Federal Register,  47 FR 53784  the notice
 cancelling most  uses  of toxaphene, the  conditions  for continued
 registration  of  toxaphene  for'certain uses,  disposition of
 existing  stocks  and hearing rights of affected  registrants.   The
 cancellation  is  effective  30 days  after  notification  by the
 Registration  Division.
Requirements of the Rule

AT 1owable Uses

      The order cancels all  uses  of  toxaphene  with  the  following
•» ". c a p'. i o n s :

      1) Dipping of beef cattle and  sheep  to control  scabies.

      2) Use on cotton, corn or small grains to control armyworms,
        cutworms or grasshoppers.   Use  is  restricted to $18  emer-
        gency exemptions only.

      3) Use on pineapples to control mealybug and  pineapple  gummosis
        moth and use on bananas  for weevil control in  the Virgin
        Islands and Puerto  Rico  only.

      4) Manufacturing use only for  formulating to  products listed
        above.
-------
                            - 2 -
The order further restricts use to certified applicators, sped-
fies protective clothing to be worn when mixing or applying the
pesticide, and mandates improved directions for use,.disposa1 ,
and to reduce exposure.

Used dip solutions must be disposed of in accordance with the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).  If the owner
generates more than 1000 kg of used dip solution per month or
more than 1000 kg of used dip solution In combination with other
hazardous waste, the material must be treated as a hazardous
waste subject to subpart C of RCRA.  Any user who wishes to maha-ge
the disposal  of this material as a hazardous waste must obtain a
permit to serve as a hazardous weite facility pursuant .to.-KC.RA...,—
The label may exempt from these disposal requirements any farmer/
rancher who uses the product solely to treat beef cattle or sheep
which he and/or his Immediate family owns as individuals.

Existing Stocks

     Existing stocks are defined in the order a those stocks of
cancelled toxaphene products existing within the territorial
United States on or before November 29, 1982.

    .-The rule, allows the use o.f--exi s=t--i 09- stocks^-of-toxa-phen-e-
in the following manner:

     1 ) Existing stocks within the physical possession of
        reglstrants,(i.e.,stocks stored in facilities
        owned or leased by the registrant or within the
        the registrants direct control):

          a)  If the formulation is of a type that permits label
             conversion to one of the following uses, the re-
             labeled product may be sold and used until December 31
             1986.  Existing stock may be relabeled for:

               1) control of sicklepod in soybeans and peanuts
                  only  in States with this use as a current or
                  future §24 vc) registration,
               2) use on insects in no-till corn,
               3) use on dry or southern peas, or
               4) §13 emergency use exemptions,

          b)  If the formulation is of a type that does not permit
             label conversion, the product may be sold for one
             (1)  year (until  December 31, 1983} utilizing amended
             labeli ng.
-------
               c)  Registrants wishing to qualify for the existing stocks
                  provisions of the order must notify EPA, within 30 days
                  of receipt of the notice, of their decision regarding
                  disposition of existing stocks and provide EPA with
                  an itemized inventory of their stocks.  Failure by a
                  registrant to notify EPA of their decis-ion to attempt
                  to qualify for the provisions for existing stocks
                  will  cancel the product and require the registrant
                  to dispose of existing stocks of that product within
                  90 days of publication of the order.  Cancelled
                  existing stocks must be disposed of as required by
                  the Resource Conservaton and Recovery Act (RCRA).

               d)  Any registrant w1sh1ng-to sel> or distribute- any
                  existing stocks in their possession must either
                  relabel.or apply supplemental labeling_to the -pro-dust-.....
"	  	          as required by the Notice sent by Registration Divi-
                  sion,  OPP.

          Existing stocks of registered technical  products must be used
     in  the formulation  of products with registered uses prior to manu-
     facturing any new  toxaphene technical chemical.

          Existing stocks of any type may not be sold, distributed or
     used  after December 31, 1986.

	-.„,..,.:..£-) rEx i str.i n-g-^-sta-c-k s
        t rants  ("I.e. , products already
        o7 in the possession of dealers
         in  the  channels
         and retailers).
                                                             of traae
               a)  Existing  stocks already in the channels of trade or
                  in  the  possession of dealers retailers may be sold,
                  shipped or distributed for use tn accordance with
                  the labeling accompanying the product until Decem-
                  ber 31, 1933.   These products may be used until Decem-
                  ber 31, 19.35 utilizing existing 1abeli ng.  Any existing
                  stocks  of t^.is  type unsold as of December 31, 1983
                  must  be dlsoosed of according to RCRA regulations.

          3)  Existing stocks in  tne lands of users.
               a )  EXT sti
                  be  used
                  ser ji,
••22ay  in  the  hands  of  users  may
'.j existing  labeling until  Decem-
    Hearina
     The o r -. o •
a hearing p-j"-,
only wheths'' '. 1
action to •;.••:'
the A d m i n1 :•'•*.-".
existing s r ••;.-.-
                                    .» -v
     ''•ants  the  opportunity  for
     .;-,:h  a  hearing  will  consider
     •.*.ed  and  pursued  appropriate
      : the  time  provided  or  whether
    - •«--ii ng  the  disposition  of
     • % Act.
-------
                            - 4 -
     Any action concerning the registrant's products will De held
 in abeyance pending the outcome of the hearing.
Regulated  Industry
     Appendix A of this strategy  lists those registrants affected
by this order.
Enforcement
     The Agency's efforts to achieve compliance with this order
shall be directed towards assuring that cancelled products are
disposed of properly and that proper label ing is affixed to those
products introduced to or remaining in the marketplace.

Compliance Monitoring	
     Compliance monitoring of this order will be achieved first
through inspections of affected producer establishments and
secondarily, dealer inspections and marketplace surveillance.
                                                           •

     Producer establishment inspections shall be conducted to
determine if the registrant is complying with the ord-er.  Producer,
establishment inspections will be conducted in the following order!
of priority:

     1)  Inspection of registrants with cancelled products.

     2)  Inspection of registrants with non-convertible existing
         stocks, i.e.  products which cannot be relabeled and
         must be sold  within one year.

     3)  Inspection of registrants with existing stacks which
         can be relabeled to one of the allowable existing
         stocks uses.

     4)  Inspection of registrants with product? .
-------
such stocks are depleted.  Registrants may not sell, or distribute
any toxaphene not labeled for a registered use or not labeled 1n
accordance with the existing stocks provisions of this order.

     Regions will provide the States with all pertinent materials
regarding the order and work closely with the States to develop a
compliance monitoring schedule.

     After initial producer establishment inspections have been
conducted, regions will coordinate marketplace inspections with
the States to determine compliance with the existing stocks pro-
visions of the order.

     Dealer inspections and marketplace surveillance will be
conducted to assure that products are properly labeled and sold.
Existing stocks of toxaphene already on dealer's shelves may be
sold without label modification until December 31, 1983, provided
the registrant has notified EPA within 30 days of their decision
to attempt to qualify for the existing stocks provisions of the
order.  Dealer inspections will become a major activity after
December 31, 1983, the last date existing stocks which do-not
have allowable uses on the label may be sold.

     Use inspections will  become critical  after the...December. 31,
1986 cut-off date for all  uses of existing stocks.  Use inspec-
tions may be conducted before then at the option of the Region
and the State or if problems regarding the use of toxaphene are
noted.
Administrative Considerations	

     Allocation of Resources

     1) EPA Headquarters - EPA headquarters  shall:

          a) Provide Regions with a copy  of  the cancellation
             order,  compliance strategy  and  a  list  of  names  and
             addresses of affected registrants.

          b) Provide the Regions  with  a  list  of those  registrants
             who intend to amend  their regisration  and remain
             registered, registrants who  fntend to  relabel  their
             existing stocks of toxaphene  for  permitted  uses,  and
             those who took  no action  and  therefore  face  cancel-
             lation  of their product.

          c) Provide the Regions  with  the  yearly  inventory  of
             existing stocks of toxaphene.
-------
                          6 •
     d) Provide additional  support and guidance .as the
        Regions may require.

2)  Regions - The regions shall:

     a) Provide the States  with  copies of the materials
        received from headquarters.

     b) Coordinate Inspectlonal  activities related to this
        order with the States.

     c) Provide supporfand guidance as the States may
        requlre.

3)  States - The States shall:

     a) Conduct producer establishment Inspections of
        registrants affected  by  this order.

     b) Conduct dealer Inspections and marketplace surveil-
        lance to determine  compliance with existing stock
        provisions of this  order.
-------
           UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'

                       WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                          OCT 23
                                                         OFFICE OF
                                                 PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Final Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the
          Wood Preservative Uses of Creosote, Pentachlorophenol
          and  Inorganic Arsenicals

FROM:     A. E. Conroy II, Director
          Office of Compliance Monitoring

TO:       Addressees


     Attached  is the final Compliance Monitoring Strategy for
the Wood Preservative Uses of Creosote, Pentachlorophenol , and
Inorganic Arsenicals.  On Jan.uary 10, 1986. the Agency published
the amended Notice of Intent to Cancel in the F_e_d_e_ra_l Regi ster.
The Notice amended the July 13, 1984 Notice of'Tntent to Can-"
eel and incorporated the terms of the settlement agreement which
ended the hearings resulting from the July 13 notice.

     Producer  establishment inspections will  be conducted within
a year of the  November 10, 1986 deadline for relabeling products
and should have been negotiated with the States during the FY87
cooperative agreement negotiations.  Use inspections will be inte-
grated into the priority setting for each State.

     We appreciate the comments made on the draft Strategy.  If
you have any questions with the Strategy, please contact David
Stangel  at FTS 382-7845.

     The final  Strategy has incorporated comments received on
the draft document.  A discussion of the comments follows:

Comme nt:

     Three comments addressed the training program for pole
framing, piling and railroad tie repair where creosote is used.
The comments were that the program was not. coordinated through
the States, that the States will have to conduct inspections
with no way of knowing whether an applicator has been trained,
that the authority for conducting these inspections is unclear,
and that there is no way of judging the adequacy of the training.
-------
                              -2-
Response:

     The January 10, 1986 amended Notice stated that, pursuant
to the September 30, 1985 settlement agreement, the Agency
would not  require restricted use labeling for creosote products
intended for pole framing, piling and railroad tie repair
uses.  The Agency instead required that persons using creosote
products for these uses undergo special training and that this
training be conducted by the wood preservative trade associations
The trade  associations are developing a training program under
extensive  EPA oversight.  At the insistence of EPA, a card will
be issued  at the completion of the training stating that the
holder has successfully completed the training course.  While
EPA cannot require that the card be on the applicator's person
at all times, we have indicated to the trade associations that
if an inspector can assure that a person has been trained at
the time of inspection, it would alleviate the need to contact
the company to get this information.  The labeling for these
creosote products requires that all applicators complete the
training program.  Please note that the amended Notice does
not allow  for application under the direct supervision of a
certified  applicator.  All applicators must be trained.  Appli-
cation by  untrained applicators is a misuse.  In a recent let-
ter (attached to the strategy) the Agency has allowed applica-
tors  certified to use restricted wood preservatives to
apply creosote for the unrestricted uses.  The American Wood
Preservers Institute (AWPI) is coordinating the development
and dissemination of the training materials.  If a Region is
interested in attending a training session they should contact
the. AWPI at (703) 893-4005 to make arrangements to attend a
session.

Comment:

     One comment dealt with who is moaitoring compliance with
the Consumer Awareness Program (CAP).

Response:

     The CAP is a voluntary program administered by the trade
associations.  A contractor, Techlaw, Inc., has been selected
to conduct compliance audits at the registrant and dealer
levels.  The results of this audit will be submitted to EPA
for review.  If the rate of noncompliance is unacceptable, EPA
has the option of requiring a mandatory CAP under TSCA.  EPA
has no jurisdiction over this program at the present time,
other than approval of the industry audit program.  All inspec-
tions will be conducted by Techlaw.
-------
                              -3-
Comment:

     Four comments addressed the Permissible Exposure Limita-
tion (PEL) Program.  The comments expressed concern that in-
spectors  didn't have experience with air monitoring method-
ologies or equipment, that the Regions had not been provided
with a list of arsenical wood treatment plants, and questioned
the jurisdiction of State Lead Agencies and state OSHAs  regard-
ing inspections on the state level.

Res ponse:

     The  Office of Compliance Monitoring is providing t.he
Regions with a list of arsenical wood treatment plants (at-
tached to the strategy).  Inspections of plants participating
in the PEL Program will primarily involve inspection of  records.
If an inspector observes employees of an arsenical  wood  treat-
ment plant working without respirators, the inspector should
see if the employer conducted air monitoring and has records
of the results of the monitoring.  Inspectors will  not routinely
take air  samples.  The amended Notice specifically  avoids
listing a particular air monitoring device, hut rather,
lists design criteria.  Any device which meets these criteria
would be  acceptable.  Inspections for compliance with the PEL
Program are clearly the responsibility of EPA.  The settlement
agreement and the amended Notice provide the arsenical wood
treatment plants the opportunity to forego the requirement for
workers to wear respirators.  This requirement is an EPA
requirement, therefore State Lead Agencies must conduct  inspec-
tions under EPA authority.

Comment:

     Two  comments suggested that the title "Allocation of Re-
sources"  be changed to "Allocation of Responsibilities"  since
this section is really talking about who will be doing what.

Res ponse :

The title has been changed.

Comment:

     One  comment remarked on the tone of the Compliance  Monitor-
ing Section regarding state roles.
-------
                             - 4 -
Response:

     The responsibilities of all parties involved in the com-
pliance monitoring of the Notice of Intent to Cancel are clear.
All parties involved wi11 perform certain functions.  It is the
responsibility of the Region to have negotiated the Federal
priorities initially in accordance with the Performance Based
Guidance Document.  In addition, Regions were requested to for-
ward the draft to States for comment.

Comment:

     One comment questioned what was to be accomplished by the
Region reviewing labels of existing stocks of cancelled products
if that review is not in connection with a case.

Res ponse:

     The regional responsibility listed on page 8 of the draft
was included because the Regions were asked to review revised
labeling of existing stocks of products cancelled by the July
13, 1984 NOIC.  Registrants of cancelled products were required
to submit an inventory of existing stocks and have the Region
review the labeling they intended to place on their existing
stocks in order to vacate the Stop Sale, Use or Removal  Order
placed on their product.  As part of the inspection program,
Regions should be reviewing the labeling of cancelled products
to determine if the current labeling is identical to the la-
beling they reviewed in accordance with the Notice.  The lan-
guage has been deleted with the understanding that the Regions
will still be reviewing labels as part of the inspection
program.

Comment:

     One comment expressed concern that certification programs
would not be in place by November 10, 1986, the date by which
products must bear restricted use labeling.

Res ponse:

     This office has been assured that certification programs
will  be in place and applicators certified by November 10,
1986.  States have either created a category for wood preser-
vatives or fit wood preservation into an existing category.
Many States are already training applicators.
-------
I         COMPLIANCE  STRATEGY FOR WOOD PRESERVATIVE PRODUCTS
  CONTAINING CREOSOTE,  PENTACHLOROPHENOL,  AND INORGANIC ARSENICALS
  OVETVIE~W
       In  October 1978,  the  Agency began the administrative review
  process  for  the wood  preservative uses of creosote,  pentachloro-
  phenol  and  inorganic  arsenicals.

       On  July 13,  1984,  the Agency issued  in the F_e_d_e_ra_l^ JLeJLLsJLe_r
  (49  FR  28666)  a Notice  of  Intent to  Cancel  for  the wood ^frTseTr"-"
  vatives  hereafter called  "the  July 13, 1984 Notice".   The Notice
  stated that  if the  terms  and  conditions  of registration were not
  amended,  wood  preservative products  containing  creosote, penta-
  chlorophenol ,  and the  inorganic  arsenicals would  he  cancelled
  within  30 days from the date  of  publication of  the Federaj[
  Register  Notice or  from date  of  receipt  of the  Cancel 1 atfo~n
  Notice,  whichever occurred later.

       Persons who  requested a  hearing  with the  Agency  regarding
  the  Notice  were exempt  from the  requirements  of the  Notice
  until  resolution  of the issues.   The  Office of  Compliance Mon-
  itoring  issued a  Stop  Sale. Use  or Removal  Order (SSURO) to
  those  registrants of  products  cancelled.   A list  of  these is
  attached.   In  order to  sell stocks subject to  a SSURO, the reg-
  istrant  had  to make appropriate  labeling  changes,  report in-
  ventories  of existing  stocks,  and request the  Regional office
  to vacate the  SSURO.   Two  subsequent  F_ed_e_ra_l  R_eg_i_s_t_e_r Notices
  postponed  indefinitely  the requirements  to relabel  those pro-
  ducts  for which the registrant had requested  an amended reg-
  istration  under the terms  of  the July  13  Notice.

       On  September 30,  1985, EPA  entered  into  a  settlement agree-
  ment  with many of the  parties  who requested a  hearing pursuant
  to the July  13,  1984  Notice.   The settlement  agreement modified
  the  terms  of the  July  13,  1984 Notice. ' As  a  result  of the
  settlement  agreement,  on  January 10,  1986,  the  Agency published
  an amended  Notice of  Intent to Cancel  which incorporated the
  terms  of  the settlement agreement.

       Compliance with  the  Notice  will  be  monitored  through
  State/EPA  inspections  to  determine compliance  wit^ the label-
  ing  provisions of the  January  10, 1986 amended  Notice and the
  SSURO's  issued to registrants  of cancelled  products.   Moni-
  toring will  be accomplished primarily  through  use  and pro-
  ducer  establishment inspections.
-------
                             -2-
REQUIREMENTS
     The July 13, 1984 Notice established the requirements a
registrant would have to meet to avoid cancellation.  Regis-
trants were afforded the opportunity to request a hearing or
amend the labeling of a product.  In addition to relabeling,
registrants of pentachlorophenol products wishing to continue
their registrations were required to amend their Confidential
Statement of Formula to indicate that their products contained
levels of hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (HxCDD) at or below spe-
cified amounts.  Failure to either amend labeling or request
a hearing, resulted in immediate cancellation.  Registrants
of cancelled pesticides were required to relabel in accordance
with the Notice, submit information on inventories of existing
stocks to Regional offices and have the Regional office vacate
the SSURO in order for existing stocks to be sold.  See Unit
IV A-D of the Notice for complete labeling requirements.  All
products in the control or possession of registrants were re-
quired to bear new labeling by November 1, 1984.  Products
in the channels of trade were required to be relabeled by
February 1, 1985.

     On October 31, 1984, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) published a Federal Register Notice (49 FR 43772) which
postponed until  further notice, the requirement to relabel
products for those registrants who requested an amended regis-
tration under the terms of the July 13 Notice.  The October
31 Notice still  required that existing stocks in the control
of perso-ns other than the registrant be relabelled by February
1, 1985.

     On January 30, 1985, EPA published a Federal Regi ster Notice
(50 FR 4269) which postponed until further notice,~Tnerequirement
to relabel products other than those cancelled products in the
control  or possession of registrants.  This applied to both reg-
istered and cancelled products in the channels of trade.  Regis-
trants with cancelled products were still required to relabel
existing stocks in their control or possession in order to
sell them.

     On June 11, 1985, Judge Spencer T. Nissen ruled on a hearing
request brought by the American Wood Preservers Institute and
others (In re Chapman Chemical Co., et al., FIFRA Docket No.
529 et al.).  A summary of the decision is found in Appendix 1.
-------
                               -3-
     On September 30, 1985, the American Wood Preservers Institute,
et al., the National  Forest Products Association, the Society of
American Wood Preservers, Inc., et al., Chapman Chemical Company,
et al . , and the Environmental  Protection Agency entered into a
settlement agreement which resolved most of the issues arising
from the July 13, 1984 Notice  of Intent to Cancel.

     On January 10, 1986, the  Agency published an amended Notice
of Intent to Cancel which incorporated the terms and conditions
of the  settlement agreement and made certain minor modifications
to the  July 13, 1984 Notice.   Registrants were allowed thirty (30)
days from the date of publication of the Notice or date of receipt,
whichever is later, to renew their hearing requests or file requests
for amended registration in accordance with the requirements of the
amended Notice.  Certain registrants of technical pentachlorophenol
products were not party to the AWPI, et a 1. settlement agreement.
Negotiations are continuing with these registrants.  The primary
remaining issues relate to the levels of contaminants in penta-
chlorophenol products.  Except for issues relating to the level of
contaminants in pentachlorophenol products, no signatories to the
settlement agreement raised a  challenge to the amended Notice.
Three companies have filed a hearing request to challenge the
Agency's position on contaminant levels in pentachlorophenol prod-
ucts.  These companies are:

     Vulcan Materials Company, the only registrant of technical
     pentachlorophenol currently producing in this country,

     Reichold Chemical Company, which also holds registra-
     tions for technical pentachlorophenol, but is not cur-
     rently producing the chemical, and

     Idacon, Inc., a registrant of manufacturing-use and
     end-use pentachlorophenol product.s.

To date, no other registrants  have renewed their hearing requests
in response to the January 10, 1986 Notice.  A summary of the No-
ti ce fol 1 ows :


        Summary of the January 10, 1986 Amended Notice


     The three (3) major components of the Amended
     Notice are:

          1) Labeling and Consumer Awareness Program (CAP)
          2) Training
          3) Permissible Exposure Limitation (PEL)
             Program - Arsenicals
-------
                          -4-
1)  Labeling and Consumer Awareness Program (CAP)

     - Registrants are allowed thirty (30) days from
       the date of publication or date of receipt of
       the amended Notice to submit amended labeling.

     - Labeling modifications include restricted use
       (with an exception for certain creosote pro-
       ducts), protective clothing and equipment re-
       quirements, proper use and disposal informa-
       tion, arsenic ambient air level limitations,
       cl.osed emptying and mixing requirements for
       certain formulations, a requirement for no
       visible arsenic surface deposits  on the treat-
       ed wood, a teratogenicity label warning for
       pentachlorophenol  products, a restriction
       against applying pentachlorophenol  to logs
       used in construction of log homes  and certain
       limitations in the level  of contaminants in
       pentachlorophenol  products.

     - All  products must  be relabeled by  November 10,
       1986.

     - On November 10, 1986, only certified applica-
       tors or persons under their direct  supervision
       may apply restricted wood preservatives.

     - CAP is voluntary.

     - Trade associations will  administer  the  CAP,
       audit the program  after one year  and report on
       compliance.  Audit to be  submitted  30 days af-
       ter completion.  Within four (4)  months from the
       date of settlement, the trade associations will
       consult with EPA on study protocol  and  selection
       of a contractor.

     - If EPA notes widespread non-compliance  with the
       voluntary program, EPA has the option of taking
       action under TSCA.

2)  Applicator Training

     - Creosote products  for pole framing, piling ap-
       plications, and railroad  tie repair will not re-
       quire a restricted use label.  A  training pro-
       gram administered  by the  trade associations
       will be instituted instead.  Alternatively, ap-
       plicators certified in the use of  restricted
-------
                        -5-
       wood preservatives may also apply these creo-
       sote products per the attached letter dated
       July 17, 1986 to Burton R.  Evans.

     - By April 10, 1986, the parties will  submit, for
       Agency approval, a training program  for these
       applicators.

     - The training program must  be implemented and
       all applicators  trained by  November  10, 1986
       (10 months after the date  of publication of
       the amended Notice).

3)   Permissible Exposure Limitation (PEL)  Program

     - Each arsenical  wood treatment plant  shall  re-
      quire employees  to wear respirators  if they are
       exposed to airborne inorganic arsenic in the
       absence of monitoring.

     - An alternative  is implementation  of  a PEL  Program

     - Exposure over 10 u g / m 3 of  airborne  inorganic ar-
       senic requires  workers to  wear respirators.

     - When exposure is between  5  ug/m3  -  10 ug/m3,
       workers do not  have to wear respirators but the
       employer must repeat monitoring every six  (6)
       months until 2  consecutive  measurements taken
       at least seven  (7) days apart are below 5  ug/m3.

     - If monitoring reveals levels below  5 ug/m3, moni-
       toring may be discontinued.

     - Existing plants  electing  to' adopt a  PEL Program
       must comply with the terms  of the order and com-
       plete testing by July 10,  1986.

     - New plants have  3 months  from the date of  initial
       operation to comply with  the Notice.

     - EPA may request  random remonitoring  of estab-
       1i shments.

     - Employers must  re-evaluate  and remonitor if pro-
       duction changes  in such a  manner  that they answer
       questions on the PEL Checklist in a  positive
       manner.
-------
                                -6-
          - Employers must maintain records and responses to
            the PEL Checkli st.

          - The employer must submit certified monitoring re-
            cords to OCM annually.  This would include nega-
            tive responses to the PEL Checklist.
Regulated Industry
     The regulated industry consists of registrants, distributors,
and users of wood preservative products containing creosote, pen-
tachlorophenol and inorganic arsenicals.
COMPLIANCE MONITCTRING
     Compliance monitoring will  be accomplished through State/
EPA inspections to determine compliance with the SSUROs issued
to registrants of cancelled products and with the labeling provi
sions of the January 10, 1986 amended Notice.  States have pri-
mary use enforcement responsibility in States with delegated pro'
grams.  In non-grant States, Regional personnel will inspect and
enforce the terms of the cancellation order and labeling pro-
vi sions.

     Effective compliance monitoring will depend on close coor-
dination with OCM and OPP to maintain current lists of persons
affected by the July 13, 1984 Notice and the January 10, 1986
amended Notice.  All persons who were issued SSUROs will be
inspected  within the first year of issuance of this strategy
if they have not been already.

     The following types of inspections will be conducted by the
States and EPA (in non-grant States) to monitor compliance with
the requirements of the SSUROs,  the Ju-ly 13, 1984 Notice, and
the January 10, 1986 amended Notice.

     Use inspections and producer establishment inspections will
be the primary compliance monitoring activities for this regula-
tory action.  Marketplace, dealer recordkeepi ng , and import in-
spections  are lower priority activities to be carried out as
part of normal inspectional activities.

     Use inspections will  be conducted to verify that persons
using products bearing restricted use labeling are certified
applicators and adhere to label  directions.  These inspections
will be directed primarily at large-scale pressure treating or
dipping operations.  Use inspections will be conducted to de-
termine if persons using products intended for pole framing,
piling applications and railroad tie repair have undergone
-------
                             -7-
training as required,  Plants using inorganic arsenic products
to treat wood will be inspected to verify compliance with the
requirement for employees to wear respirators or alternatively,
participation in the PEL program.  Misuse complaints and tips
will  be investigated as a high priority, if appropriate.

     Producer establishment inspections will  be conducted to
verify that by November 10, 1986, all  products, including all
existing stocks, are relabeled in accordance  with the January
10, 1986 amended Notice.

     All producers of cancelled products (Attachment A) will
be inspected the first year to assure  compliance with the
SSURO, verify that the products are not being produced, and
verify that the products are in compliance with the require-
ments of Subunit IV of the January 10, 1986 amended Notice.

     Recordkeeping inspections will be conducted to verify
that dealers are maintaining records of sales of RUP's.

     Import inspections will be conducted to  determine if im-
ported wood preservative products are  in compliance with the
January 10, 1986 Notice.

     Marketplace inspections will be conducted to verify that
products are in compliance with the terms of  the January 10,
1986 Not'ice.

ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES

Office of Pesticide Programs/Registration Division(OPP/RD)

0 Will  develop and maintain the list of registrants who have
  requested amendments to their registration  and those regis-
  trations which have been cancelled.

0 Will  provide this information to OCM.

Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM)

0 Will  act as liaison with other Agency offices and
  the Regions to collect information concerning the
  action.

0 Will  provide lists to the Regions on the status of
  products.
-------
                             -8-

0 Will review annual PEL records submissions and provide them
  to the Regions to be compared against previous submitters
  for inspection targetting.

Office of Training and Technical Support

0 Will review any amendments to Certification and
  Trai ni ng PIans .

Regi ons

0 Will provide copies of strategy to States.

0 Will negotiate with the States regarding Federal  pri-
  orities during grant negotiations.

0 Will conduct inspections in States without Cooperative
  Enforcement Agreements.

0 Will distribute the list of registrants and registered
  products to the States.

0 Will provide PEL information to States.

States

0 Will conduct inspections and take enforcement action, as
  appropriate, provided they have the authority.

CERTIFICATION AND TRAINING                                   ~

     Registered products are required to bear restricted use
labeling by November 10, 1986 under the'terms of the amended
Notice of January 10, 1986.  Cancelled products were required
to bear restricted use labeling in order to sell existing
stocks under the terms of the July 13, 1984 Notice.  These
conditions of sale require users to be certified or under
the direct supervision of a certified applicator.

     In response to the diverse levels of State preparedness to
train and certify persons, OPTS has formed a committee composed
of the USDA (both HQ and State Cooperative Extension Service
reps), Regional  representatives, a State Lead Agency, and the
Office of Training and Technical Support.  The committee will
consider the needs of both pressure treatment applications
and brc.-h-on applications and will (a) review existing mechan-
isms of State certification and training programs to determine
what is available, (b) review existing training materials and
determine whether it fulfills current needs, and (c) coordi-
nate these efforts with the user associations.
-------
                        APPENDIX 1
Summary of ALJ Spencer T.  Nissen's  Decision  of  June 11,  1985
       The Consumer Awareness Program insofar as  it  requires
       labeling of  pressure-treated wood,  which  is  not  a
       pesticide,  is not  authorized by FIFRA and  may  not  be
       required as  a condition  of .the registration  of the
       pesticides  at issue.

       EPA's authority under FIFRA  to specify required  labeling
       on pesticides in order to prevent  adverse  effects  on
       the environment is extremely broad  and with  a.single
       exception (No.  5 below)  labeling for  nonpressure-treat-
       ment of wood with  the preservatives at issue  is  within
       EPA's authority under the Act.

       Labeling provisions prohibiting use of treated wood
       where the preservatives  at issue may  become  a  component
       of food or  animal  feed may be required by  EPA  under
       FIFRA, because  they complement prohibitions  in effect
       under the Food, Drug  and Cosmetic  Act.

       Pesticide labeling requirements designed  to  prevent
       contamination of drinking water from  pesticides  or
       pesticide residues may be required  under  FIFRA,  not-
       withstanding that  primary jurisdiction to  establish
       contaminant  levels and standards for  drinking  water  is
       conferred upon  EPA by the Safe Drinking Water  Act.

       Because FIFRA §19(a)  specifically  limits  EPA's
       authority over  disposal  to pesticides and  pesticide
       containers,  EPA may not  through a  labeling requirement
       in a FIFRA  cancellation  notice regulate the  disposal
       of treated  wood.

       OSHA has deferred  to  EPA regulation of the workplace
       exposure to  arsenic involving its  application  as  a
       pesticide and EPA  may, under FIFRA, require  a  Permis-
       sible Exposure  Limit  program for workers  in  arsenical
       wood treatment  plants.
-------
Addressees
Douglas D. Campt (TS-766C)
Terrell Hunt     (LE-134A)
Stanley Abramson (LE-132A)
John Seitz       (EN-342)
Ken Shiroishi       "
Phyllis Flaherty
John Martin
John J. Neylan III  "
Ralph Turpin        "
Mike Wood
Dexter Goldman      "

Jake Mackenzie
Western Regional  Compliance Director

A. Charles Lincoln
Eastern Regional  Compliance Director

Louis F. Gitto, Director
Air Management Division, Region I

Barbara Metzger, Director
Environmental Services Division, Region II

Stephen R. Wassersug, Director
Hazardous Waste Management Division, Region III

Winston A. Smith, Director
Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, Region IV

William H. Sanders III, Director
Environmental Services Division, Region V

William B. Hathaway, Director
Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Division, Region VI

William A. Spratlin, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region VII

Irwin L. Dickstein, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region VIII

Jeffrey Zelikson, Acting Director
Toxics and Waste Management Division, Region IX

Gary 0'Neal , Di rector
Air and Toxics Division, Region X

cc: Regional  Pesticides and Toxic Substances Branch Chiefs
    Sue Vogt       (TS-788)
    Jim Lamb       (TS-788)
    Deeohn Ferris  (LE-134P)
-------
                                          Index

The documents in this index are referenced by the Compendium subject/volume abbreviation and the date
of the document.  However, FIFRA Compliance Program Policy Compendium documents are referenced
by the subject/volume abbreviation and the document number. The abbreviations for the subject/volumes
in this index are as follows:

              TG - Technical Guidance (Volume 1);
              SRG - State-Related Guidance (Volume 2);
              ES - Enforcement Strategies (Volume 3);
              ERP - Enforcement Response Policies (Volume 4); and
              FCPP - FIFRA Compliance Program Policy Compendium (Volume 5)
Agricultural use only, FCPP 25.1
Alar. See Daminozide
Aldicarb
     stop sale, ES 04-30-90
Aldrin, TG 02-00-90
Aluminum Phosphide products, FCPP 3.3
Amitraz, TG 02-00-90
Antifouling paints, ES 04-21-83
Antimicrobial pesticide, TG 05-28-86
Application review procedures, SRG 06-13-89
Arsenic Trioxide, ES 06-06-89, TG 02-00-90
Basic registrations, FCPP 3.9
Benomyl, TG 02-00-90
BHC, TG 02-00-90
Bithionol, TG 02-00-90
Books and records. See Recordkeeping and reporting
Bromoxynil, TG 02-00-90
     conditional registration and cancellation of certain
     products, ES 07-06-89
Bromoxynil Butyrate, TG 02-00-90
Bulk shipments, TG 07-11-77
Cadmium, TG 02-00-90
Calcium Arsenate. See Wood Preservatives
Cancellation order, TG 08-21-90
Captafol, TG 02-00-90
Captan, TG 02-00-90
FIFRA Compliance/Enforcement                                           Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                         September 1992
-------
Carbon Tetrachloride, TG 02-00-90
     cancellation, ES 07-11-87
Cedar Chemical Company, ES 06-15-88
Certification plan, FCPP 26.1
Certified applicators, TG 11-29-83, TG 04-25-84, FCPP 2.3,
 FCPP 12.4
Chemigation, FCPP 12.7
Child-resistant packaging, ES 06-08-81, FCPP 25.1
Chloranil, TG 02-00-90
Chlordane/heptachlor, TG 02-00-90
     corn use, ES 08-27-76
     suspension, ES 01-15-76, ES 01-22-76, ES 02-19-76,
     ES 11-23-76
           enforcement strategy, ES 3-23-76
     termiticides
           cancellation and suspension, ES 04-13-88
           revised  compliance strategy, ES 04-13-88
Chlordimeform, TG 02-00-90
     cancellation strategy, ES 06-19-89
     existing stocks, ES 02-09-89, ES 06-19-89
     recall, ES 06-19-89
Chlorobenzilate, TG 02-00-90
Civil compliance, TG 01-16-80
Civil liability, TG 10-22-81
Civil penalties, TG  07-12-79, SRG 02-24-81
Civil penalty
     assessment, TG 01-17-80
     calculation, ERP 07-02-90
     matrix, ERP 02-10-86
Commercial applicator, FCPP 2.3
Communications strategy
     FIFRA and TSCA GLPs, ES 04-25-90
Compliance monitoring inspection, ES 06-15-88
Compound 1080, ES 07-25-86, TG 02-00-90
Confidentiality, FCPP  10.1
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP),  FCPP 3.7
Contract manufacturing, FCPP 3.2
Cooperative agreement, SRG  07-31-89, FCPP 26.1
     application requirements, SRG 06-13-89
     funds, SRG 06-13-89
     implementation, ES 11-22-83
Copper Arsenate, TG 02-00-90
Credentials, SRG 12-18-80
Creosote, ES 10-23-86, TG 02-00-90
Criminal penalties,  TG 07-12-79
Crop rotation restrictions, FCPP 3.7
FIFRA Compliance/Enforcement                                            Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                         September 1992
-------
Cropland, FCPP 3.7
Custom blenders, FCPP 3.4, FCPP 7.1
Cyanazine, TG 02-00-90
Cyhexatin, TG 02-00-90
Daminozide (Alar), TG 02-00-90
     agreement to halt sales, ES 06-14-89
     final compliance monitoring strategy, ES 10-20-86
Data call-in requirements, ES 09-13-85
DBCP, TG 02-00-90
     suspension order, ES 11-07-79
DDD (TDE), TG 02-00-90
Dealer, FCPP 12.4
Dealer/distributor, ES 02-09-89
Diallate, TG 02-00-90
Dibromochloropropane. See DBCP
Dicofol, TG 02-00-90
Dieldrin. See Aldrin
Diluent, FCPP 12.5
Dimethoate, TG 02-00-90
Dinoseb, TG  02-00-90, ES 04-17-87, ES 03-14-88, ES 06-15-88
     amendment to suspension, ES 04-02-87
     cancellation, ES 03-28-88, ES 06-15-88, ES 03-03-89
     emergency suspension, ES 10-07-86
     exemption requirements, ES 04-02-87
     stipulated order, ES 03-28-88
     suspension order, 04-17-87
Direct supervision, FCPP 2.3
Disinfectants, TG 02-00-90
Distributor  registrations,  FCPP 3.2
District court injunction,  ES 03-28-88
Drinking water, TG 08-30-75, ES 10-00-80
EBDC, TG 02-00-90
     compliance strategy, ES 03-12-90(a), ES 03-12-90(b)
EDB, TG 02-00-90
     grain uses, ES 02-03-84, ES 02-06-84(a), ES 02-06-84(b)
     soil fumigation use, ES 10-06-83
     suspension, ES 10-06-83, ES 02-03-84, 02-06-84(a)
Electronic mosquito repelling devices, TG 02-00-90
Emergency exemptions, ES 03-14-88
Enclosed cabs, TG 02-00-90, FCPP 12.6
Endangered species, TG 02-01-88, SRG 06-13-89, SRG 07-31-89
Endrin, TG 02-00-90
FIFRA Compliance/Enforcement                                            Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                        September 1992
-------
Enforcement, FCPP 12.7
Enforcement actions, TG 08-30-75, TG 12-19-79
Enforcement responsibility, primary. See Primacy
Engineering controls, FCPP 12.6
EPN, TG 02-00-90
Establish competency, FCPP 4.1
Establishment registration, ERP 02-10-86,  FCPP 3.5, FCPP 7.1,
 FCPP 10.1
Ethylene bisdithiocarbamate. See EBDC
Ethylene dibromide. See EDB
Evidence, FCPP 26.1
Executive agencies, TG 01-16-80
Exemptions, FCPP 3.1
Experimental use permit (EUP), FCPP 12.1
Exporting
     unregistered pesticides, TG 07-28-80
Existing stocks, TG 08-21-90
     chlordimeform, ES 02-09-89, ES 06-19-89
Exports.  See Imports and exports
Federal facilities, TG 01-16-80
Fertilizer
     pesticide mixture(s), FCPP 2.1, FCPP 3.4
Financial status, TG 10-17-80
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), ES 07-25-80
Fluoroacetamide, TG 02-00-90
Foreign trade zones, FCPP 17.1
Form 10-K. See 10-K Statements
Free ports, FCPP 17.1
Fumigants, ES 04-21-83
Fumigation, FCPP 3.3
Good Laboratory Practices (GLPs)
     and data audits, ES 11-22-83, ES 01-15-85
     notification plan, ES 04-25-90
     question and answer document, TG 05-12-92
Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) Standards
     agreement
          interagency; Department of Health and Human Services,
           National Toxicology Program, ES 01-15-85
          memorandum of; for conduct of laboratory inspections and
           data  audits, ES 01-15-85
     equipment, ES 11-29-83, ES 01-15-85
     inspections,  ES 01-15-85

F1FKA Compliance/Enforcement                                           Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                         September 1992
-------
Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) Standards (continued)
     organization and personnel, ES 11-29-83, ES 01-15-85
     quality assurance unit, TG 08-17-89
     records and reports, ES  11-29-83, TG 08-17-89, ES 01-15-85
     regulations, ES 01-15-85
     standard operating procedures, TG 08-17-89
     testing, ES 11-29-83, 01-15-85
     testing facilities, ES 11-29-83, ES 01-15-85, TG 08-17-89
Government agency
     state or local, SRG 02-24-81
Grain uses
     EDB, ES 02-03-84, ES 02-06-84(a),  ES 02-06-84(b)
Grant application forms, SRG 06-13-89
Ground water, SRG 07-31-89, SRG 06-13-89
Heptachlor. See Chlordane/heptachlor
HTLV-III/LAV, TG 05-28-86
Imports, FCPP 17.2
     and exports, TG 11-19-76
Indemnification claims, ES 10-06-83
Inorganic arsenicals, ES 10-23-86, ES 06-06-89
Inspections, FCPP 12.3
     establishment, TG 01-24-77
     Good Laboratory Practice Standards, ES 01-15-85
     labeling, ES 04-21-83
     pesticide use, TG 01-24-77, SRG 12-18-80
Intrastate use, FCPP 24.1
Kepone, TG 02-00-90
Knowledge expert, FCPP 2.1
Label Improvement Program (LIP), ES 04-21-83
Labeling, TG 10-22-81, TG 05-28-86, TG 02-00-90, SRG 09-01-92, FCPP 2.2,
     FCPP 3.3, FCPP 24.1, FCPP 25.1
     changes, TG 02-21-88
     requirements for exported pesticides, devices, and pesticide
      active ingredients, TG 07-28-80
Lead Arsenate.  See Wood Preservatives
Level of action, ERP 07-02-90
F1FRA Compliance/Enforcement     •                                       Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                         September 1992
-------
Lindane, TG 02-00-90
     compliance monitoring strategy, ES 04-25-85
     notice of intent to cancel, ES 07-10-86
LIP Notice. See Label Improvement Program
Livestock protection (LP) collars, ES 07-25-86
Love v. Thomas, ES 03-28-88
Low volume applications, FCPP 12.5
Maintenance fees
     registration, TG 08-21-90
Make available for use, FCPP 12.4
Manufacturing use only, FCPP 3.8
Mercury, TG 02-00-90
     cancellation, ES 10-28-76
     settlement, ES 01-06-77
     biocides, registration, ES 09-12-90
     phenylmercuric acetate, cancellation, ES 09-12-90
Methyl Bromide
     California Fact Sheet, FCPP 3.10
     Label Revision, SRG 09-01-92
Metaldehyde, TG 02-00-90
Mirex, TG 02-00-90
Misuse, FCPP 2.1, FCPP 12.3, FCPP 26.2
Monocrotophos, TG 02-00-90
Multi-use products, FCPP 17.2
OMPA, TG 02-00-90
Oxyfluorfen, TG 02-00-90
Neutral administrative inspection scheme, ES 09-03-85
NOIC, ES 06-15-88
Noncertified applicator, FCPP 2.3
Noncropland, FCPP 3.7
Notice of arrival, FCPP 17.2
Notice of intent to suspend (NOTTS), ES 09-03-85
Outer containers, FCPP 2.2
Parathion, TG 02-00-90
PCBs, TG 02-00-90
PCNB, TG 02-00-90
FIFRA Compliance/Enforcement                                           Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                         September 1992
-------
Penalties
     civil. See Civil penalties
     criminal. See Criminal penalties
Pentachlorophenol.  (See also Wood Preservatives), ES 10-23-80
PEPS (Pesticide Enforcement Policy Statements), TG 04-01-76,
 TG 07-08-76, TG 06-08-79
     institution of, TG 05-05-75
Permissible Exposure Limitation (PEL) Program, ES 10-23-86
Personal protective equipment, FCPP 12.2, FCPP 12.6
Personal use, FCPP 3.8
Pest control
     devices, TG  11-19-76
           electromagnetic, TG 02-00-90
           nonhazardous, TG 12-19-79
           preventive, TG 07-08-76
     nonstructural, TG 06-08-79
     structural, TG 06-08-79
Pesticide
     cancellation,  TG 02-00-90
     restricted use, TG 02-00-90
     suspension, TG 02-00-90
Pesticide dealer, FCPP 2.3
Pesticide Enforcement Policy Statements.  See PEPS
Pesticide use
     at less than label dosage rate, TG 06-08-79
     by veterinarians, TG 11-01-79
     control of pests not named on the label, TG 06-08-79 (See
      also Pest control - nonstructural)
           control of unnamed target pests, TG 06-08-79
     enforcement, TG 01-24-77
     uses which do not appear on label, advocacy of, TG 10-22-81,
      TG 05-28-86
Phenarsazine Chloride, TG 02-00-90
Phosphine gas, FCPP 3.3
Polychlorinated Biphenyls. See PCBs
Polychlorinated Terphenyls, TG 02-00-90
PR Notice 87-1, FCPP 12.7
Primacy, SRG 05-11-81, SRG 01-05-83, SRG 10-02-85, FCPP 26.1,
 FCPP 26.2
     rescission of, ES 11-22-83
Private applicator, SRG 02-24-81, FCPP 2.3
     certification,  FCPP 4.1
Processing, FCPP 17.1
Producer, ERP 02-10-86
Product labeling, ES 04-21-83
Product registration, FCPP 3.5, FCPP 3.8

F1FKA Compliance/Enforcement                                            Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                         September 1992
-------
Production data, FCPP 10.1
Program oversight
     evaluation and reporting, SRG 06-13-89
Pronamide, TG 02-00-90
Purifiers. See water purification devices
Quaternary Ammonium Compounds, TG 02-00-90
Rail cars, FCPP 3.3
Recall
     chlordimeform, ES 06-19-89
     dinoseb, ES 03-14-88
Recordkeeping and reporting, TG 11-19-76, TG 11-29-83,
 TG 04-25-84
Referrals, SRG 10-02-85
Registered use pesticides, TG 11-01-79, SRG 02-24-81
Registrant
     reporting requirements, TG 08-23-78
Registrant/distributor liability, FCPP 3.9
Registration, FCPP 3.4, FCPP 17.1
     of establishments, TG  11-19-76
Repackaging, FCPP 3.2, FCPP 17.1
Reporting. See also Recordkeeping and reporting, ERP 02-10-86,
 FCPP 7.1
Reporting requirements.
     study and experimental data, TG 07-12-79
Request procedures
     large numbers of samples or investigations, TG 07-30-80
     procedures complaint followup, TG 07-30-80
     sample or label, TG 07-30-80
Rescission proceedings, SRG 05-11-81
Respirators, FCPP  12.6
Restricted use pesticides (RUP), TG 02-00-90, FCPP 12.4
Rhone-Poulenc, ES 07-06-89, ES 04-30-90
Safrole, TG 02-00-90
Salt water emesis, ES 04-21-83
Seed treatments, TG 02-00-90
Shipment, FCPP 3.1
Shipping containers, FCPP 2.2
Silvex.  See 2,4,5-T and Silvex
Sodium Arsenate.  See Wood Preservatives
Sodium Arsenite. See Wood Preservatives
FIFRA Compliance/Enforcement                                           Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                         September 1992
-------
Sodium Cyanide, TG 02-00-90
Sodium Fluoride, TG 02-00-90
Sodium Monofluoroacetate. See Compound 1080
Soil fumigation use
     EDB, ES 10-06-83
Special local need, FCPP 24.1
Special packaging. See Child-resistant packaging
Spot fumigation, ES 02-06-84(a), ES 02-06-84(b)
Spot treatment, FCPP 3.7
State authority, FCPP 26.1, FCPP 26.2
Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Order, TG 12-19-79, TG 08-21-90,
 ES 09-03-85,
     aldicarb, ES 04-30-90
     dinoseb, ES 03-14-88, ES 06-15-88
Strategic Planning and Measurement System (SPMS), SRG 10-02-85
Strobane, TG 02-00-90
Strychnine, TG 02-00-90
Supplemental registrations, FCPP 3.2, FCPP 3.9
Suspensions, ES 09-03-85
Target pest, FCPP 2.1
10-K statements, TG 10-17-80
Termiticides, ES 04-21-83
Thallium Sulfate, TG 02-00-90
TOK, TG 02-00-90
Toxaphene, TG 02-00-90
     cancellation, ES 01-01-83
Toxic collar. See Livestock Protection Collars
Transfer, TG 07-11-77
Tributyltin, TG 02-00-90
Trifluralin, TG 02-00-90
Truck fumigation, FCPP 3.3
2,4-D, TG 02-00-90
2,4,5-T and Silvex, TG 02-00-90
     cancellation, ES 03-07-79
     suspension, ES 04-05-79, ES 08-20-79
2,4,5-TCP, TG 02-00-90
Ultra-low volume application, FCPP 12.5
Unregistred pesticides, FCPP 3.1
Use enforcement, FCPP 26.1
Use inconsistent with the labeling, FCPP 2.1
Use inspections, FCPP 12.3
Use recommendations, FCPP 2.1, FCPP 12.1

FIFKA Compliance/Enforcement                                           Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                        September 1992
-------
Vegetable oil diluent, FCPP 12.5
Velsicol Chemical Corporation, ES 04-13-88
Vinyl Chloride, TG 02-00-90
Violation history, TG 10-17-80
Water purification devices, TG 08-30-75, TG 03-15-76, ES 10-00-80
Wood Preservatives, ES 10-23-86, TG 02-00-90
Worker protection program, SRG 06-13-89, SRG 07-31-89
Worker protection statements, TG 02-00-90
Written examinations, FCPP 4.1
F1FKA Compliance/Enforcement                                          Guidance Manual
Policy Compendium                                                        September 1992
                                           10
-------