Rule2026-10267
Aluminum in Pesticide Formulations; Exemption From the Requirement for a Tolerance
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
May 22, 2026
Effective
May 22, 2026
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of aluminum (CAS Reg. No. 7429-90-5) when used as an inert ingredient (seed treatment colorant) for seed treatment only at not more than 5% of pesticide formulation. Steptoe & Johnson, LLP on behalf of Sun Chemical, submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting establishment of an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of aluminum, when used in accordance with the terms of those exemptions.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 99 (Friday, May 22, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30217-30221]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-10267]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0484; FRL-13354-01-OCSPP]
Aluminum in Pesticide Formulations; Exemption From the
Requirement for a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of aluminum (CAS Reg. No. 7429-90-5) when
used as an inert ingredient (seed treatment colorant) for seed
treatment only at not more than 5% of pesticide formulation. Steptoe &
Johnson, LLP on behalf of Sun Chemical, submitted a petition to EPA
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting
establishment of an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of aluminum, when used in accordance with the terms of
those exemptions.
DATES: This regulation is effective May 22, 2026. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 21, 2026 and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of this document).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0484, is available online at
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Additional information about dockets
generally, along with instructions for visiting the docket in-person,
is available at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Smith, Registration Division
(7505T), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number: (202) 566-1030; email address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4c1e080a1e022338252f293f0c293c2d622b233a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="16445250445879627f7573655673667738717960">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
<bullet> Crop production (NAICS code 111).
<bullet> Animal production (NAICS code 112).
<bullet> Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
<bullet> Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
[[Page 30218]]
If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
proposed action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. What is EPA's authority for taking this action?
EPA is issuing this rulemaking under section 408 of the FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a. FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and in residential settings but does not include
occupational exposure. Pursuant to FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''Additionally, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D) requires that the Agency
consider, among other things, ``available information concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues'' and ``other
substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. If you fail to file an objection to the
final rule within the time period specified in the final rule, you will
have waived the right to raise any issues resolved in the final rule.
You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must identify the docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2023-0484 in the subject line on the first page of your submission.
All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing and must
be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before July 21, 2026.
EPA's Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ), in which the
Hearing Clerk is housed, urges parties to file and serve documents by
electronic means only, notwithstanding any other particular
requirements set forth in other procedural rules governing those
proceedings. See ``Order Urging Electronic Filing and Service,'' dated
December 3, 2025, which can be found at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2025-12/2025-12-03-order-urging-electronic-filing-and-service.pdf">https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2025-12/2025-12-03-order-urging-electronic-filing-and-service.pdf</a>. Although EPA's regulations require submission via U.S.
Mail or hand delivery, EPA intends to treat submissions filed via
electronic means as properly filed submissions; therefore, EPA believes
the preference for submission via electronic means will not be
prejudicial. When submitting documents to the OALJ electronically, a
person should utilize the OALJ e-filing system at <a href="https://yosemite.epa.gov/oa/eab/eab-alj_upload.nsf">https://yosemite.epa.gov/oa/eab/eab-alj_upload.nsf</a>.
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. If you wish to
include CBI in your request, please follow the applicable instructions
at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets#rules">https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets#rules</a> and clearly
mark the information that you claim to be CBI. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice.
II. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of October 26, 2023 (88 FR 73571, FRL-
10579-09-OCSPP), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408,
21 U.S.C. 346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-
11737) by Steptoe & Johnson, LLP on behalf of Sun Chemical (5020 Spring
Grove Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45232). The petition requested that 40 CFR
be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of aluminum (CAS Reg. No. 7429-90-5) when used
as an inert ingredient (seed treatment colorant) in pesticide
formulations for seed treatment in occupational settings only at not
more than 20% of pesticide formulation under 40 CFR 180.920. That
document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Steptoe &
Johnson, LLP, the petitioner, which is available in the docket. There
were no relevant comments received in response to the notice of filing.
The originally requested limitation was adjusted to 5%, per the
applicant's request.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no harm to human health. In order
to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the inert in
conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert ingredient
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate
exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance may be established.
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for aluminum
[[Page 30219]]
including exposure resulting from the exemption established by this
action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with
aluminum follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by aluminum as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in this unit.
The toxicological database of aluminum (aluminum metal) is
supported by data regarding aluminum oxide, aluminum citrate and
aluminum sulfate. EPA has determined that it is appropriate to bridge
aluminum oxide, aluminum citrate and aluminum sulfate data to assess
aluminum as a worse-case scenario. Aluminum is insoluble in water and
it is anticipated to be less toxic than the water-soluble aluminum
salts.
Aluminum exhibits low levels of acute toxicity via the oral and
inhalation routes of exposure. The acute dermal toxicity of aluminum is
anticipated to be low. It is an eye and dermal irritant, but it is not
anticipated to be a dermal sensitizer. Main effects observed in
laboratory animals following repeated exposure to aluminum salts
include neurotoxicity and delayed maturation starting at 100 mg
aluminum/kg/day. The available data indicates that aluminum is not
mutagenic nor carcinogenic.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level, generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD), and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see <a href="https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/overview-risk-assessment-pesticide-program">https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/overview-risk-assessment-pesticide-program</a>.
A combined one-year developmental and chronic neurotoxicity study
with aluminum citrate in rats (Semple, 2010 and Poirier et al, 2011)
was selected as the main study for endpoint selection for aluminum
because it was conducted under a protocol similar to OECD test
guideline 426, it followed good laboratory practices and it is
protective of the neurotoxicity and delayed maturation observed in the
aluminum database. The NOAEL is 30 mg Al/kg/day and the LOAEL is 100 mg
Al/kg/day, based on impaired hind limb grip strength and splayfoot.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to aluminum, EPA considered exposure under the proposed
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from aluminum in food as follows:
In conducting the dietary exposure assessment using the Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 4.02, EPA used food
consumption information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's 2005-
2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America. As to residue levels in food, no residue data were submitted
for aluminum. In the absence of specific residue data, EPA has
developed an approach which uses surrogate information to derive upper
bound exposure estimates for the subject inert ingredient. Upper bound
exposure estimates are based on the highest tolerance for a given
commodity from a list of high-use insecticides, herbicides, and
fungicides. A complete description of the general approach taken to
assess inert ingredient risks in the absence of residue data is
contained in the memorandum titled ``Update to D361707: Dietary
Exposure and Risk Assessments for the Inerts'' (12/21/2021) which can
be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2018-0090.
In the dietary exposure assessments, the Agency assumed that the
residue level of the inert ingredient would be no higher than the
highest tolerance for a given commodity. Implicit in this assumption is
that there would be similar rates of degradation (if any) between the
active and inert ingredient and that the concentration of inert
ingredient in the scenarios leading to these highest levels of
tolerances would be no higher than the concentration of the active
ingredient.
The Agency believes the assumptions used to estimate dietary
exposures lead to an extremely conservative assessment of dietary risk
due to a series of compounded conservatisms. First, assuming that the
level of residue for an inert ingredient is equal to the level of
residue for the active ingredient will overstate exposure. The
concentrations of active ingredients in agricultural products are
generally at least 50 percent of the product and often can be much
higher. Further, pesticide products rarely have a single inert
ingredient; rather there is generally a combination of different inert
ingredients used which additionally reduces the concentration of any
single inert ingredient in the pesticide product in relation to that of
the active ingredient. In the case of aluminum, EPA made a specific
adjustment to the dietary exposure assessment to account for the use
limitations of the amount of aluminum that may be in pesticide
formulations (limited to no more than 5%) present at the maximum
limitation rather than at equal quantities with the active ingredient.
For the purpose of the screening level dietary risk assessment, a
conservative drinking water concentration value of 100 parts per
billion based on screening level modeling was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for the chronic dietary risk assessments
for aluminum.
2. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
However, residential handler exposure is not expected for aluminum
as the use is for occupational (seed treatment) purposes only.
3. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether
[[Page 30220]]
to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider
``available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of a
particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.''
Based on the lack of toxicity in the available database, EPA has
not found aluminum to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any
other substances, and aluminum does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance exemption, therefore, EPA has assumed that aluminum does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA's website at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides">https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides</a>.
D. Additional Safety Factor for the Protection of Infants and Children
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants and children in
the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of
safety will be safe for infants and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality Protection Act
(FQPA) Safety Factor. In applying this provision, EPA either retains
the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor
when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
Based on the evaluation of available toxicity studies, there is low
concern for pre- and postnatal susceptibility from exposure to
aluminum. The FQPA safety factor has been reduced to 1X because: (1)
the toxicity database is adequate to characterize potential pre- and
postnatal risk; (2) no teratogenic effects were observed in the
available developmental studies; (3) the selected endpoints are
protective of the neurotoxic and delayed maturation effects observed in
the database; and (4) the assumptions for the exposure assessment are
conservative and unlikely to underestimate risk.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
aluminum metal is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
aluminum from food and water will utilize approximately 9.5% and 34.3%
of the cPAD for the U.S. population and children 1-2 years old (the
most highly exposed populations).
3. Short- and intermediate-term aggregate risks. Short- and
intermediate-term aggregate exposures take into account short- and
intermediate-term residential exposures plus chronic exposures to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Residential handler exposure is not expected for aluminum metal as
the use is for occupational (seed treatment) purposes only.
Residential post-application scenarios include short- and
intermediate-term dermal (skin contact with treated surfaces) exposure
for adults and children as well as short-term incidental oral exposure
for children (hand-to-mouth exposure with treated surfaces). However,
residential post-application exposure is not expected for aluminum
metal because it will be used in occupational settings (seed treatment)
only.
F. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is not establishing a numerical tolerance for residues of
aluminum in or on any food commodities. EPA is establishing a
limitation on the amount of aluminum that may be used in pesticide
formulations applied pre-harvest. This limitation will be enforced
through the pesticide registration process under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et
seq. EPA will not register any pesticide formulation for food use that
exceeds 5% aluminum in the final pesticide formulation for seed
treatment only.
G. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established for residues of aluminum (CAS Reg. No. 7429-90-5) when used
as an inert ingredient (seed treatment colorant) for seed treatment
only at not more than 5% of pesticide formulation under 40 CFR 180.920.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders">https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders</a>.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993), because it establishes or modifies a
pesticide tolerance or a tolerance exemption under FFDCA section 408 in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866.
B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
Executive Order 14192 (90 FR 9065, February 6, 2025) does not apply
because actions that establish a tolerance or a tolerance exemption
under FFDCA section 408 are exempted from review under Executive Order
12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because it does not contain any
information collection activities.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
This action is not subject to the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. The RFA
applies only to rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking
requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C.
553, or any other statute. This rule is not subject to the APA but is
subject to FFDCA section 408(d), which does not require notice and
comment rulemaking to take this action in response to a petition.
[[Page 30221]]
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more (in 1995 dollars and adjusted annually for inflation) as described
in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any
state, local or tribal governments or the private sector.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it will
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have Tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because it will
not have substantial direct effects on Tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and the Indian Tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian Tribes.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866 (See Unit VI.A.), and because
EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed
by this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
However, EPA's 2026 Policy on Children's Health applies to this
action. This rule finalizes tolerance actions under the FFDCA, which
requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and
children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance
and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue . . .'' (FFDCA 408(b)(2)(C)). The Agency's
consideration is documented in the pesticide-specific registration
review documents, located in the applicable docket at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355)
(May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This action does not involve technical standards that would require
Agency consideration under NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action does not meet the
criteria set forth in 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 18, 2026.
Charles Smith,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR
chapter I as follows:
PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.920, amend Table 1 to Sec. 180.920 by adding, in
alphabetical order, the entry for ``Aluminum (CAS Reg. No. 7429-90-5)''
to read as follows:
Sec. 180.920 Inert ingredients used pre-harvest; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
* * * * *
Table 1 to Sec. 180.920
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert ingredients Limits Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Aluminum (CAS Reg. No. 7429-90- Not to exceed 5% by Seed treatment
5). weight of pesticide colorant.
formulation for seed
treatment use in
occupational settings
only.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2026-10267 Filed 5-21-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on May 22, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.