Rule2026-10711
Propylene Oxide; Pesticide Tolerances
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 29, 2026
Effective
May 29, 2026
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of propylene oxide (PPO) in or on sesame, seed; turmeric, roots, dried; ginger, dried; pepper, bell, dried; and pepper, nonbell, dried. ABERCO, Inc., a Balchem Company, submitted a petition to EPA requesting that EPA establish a maximum permissible level for residues of this pesticide in or on the identified commodities.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 103 (Friday, May 29, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 103 (Friday, May 29, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31958-31962]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-10711]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2025-0158; FRL-13382-01-OCSPP]
Propylene Oxide; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
propylene oxide (PPO) in or on sesame, seed; turmeric, roots, dried;
ginger, dried; pepper, bell, dried; and pepper, nonbell, dried. ABERCO,
Inc., a Balchem Company, submitted a petition to EPA requesting that
EPA establish a maximum permissible level for residues of this
pesticide in or on the identified commodities.
DATES: This regulation is effective May 29, 2026. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received July 28, 2026, and must be filed
in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see
also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2025-0158, is available at
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Additional information about dockets
generally, along with instructions for visiting the docket center 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; telephone number:
(202) 566-1030; email address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ca988e8c9884a5bea3a9afb98aafbaabe4ada5bc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="11435557435f7e6578727462517461703f767e67">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
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).
If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
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 Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a. FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(A)(i) allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal limit
for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' FFDCA section
408(b)(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. FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C)
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 . . .''
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 docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2025-0158 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 28, 2026.
The 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 the 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, the 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.
[[Page 31959]]
II. Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of September 5, 2025 (90 FR 42896) (FRL-
12474-06-OCSPP), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section
408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP 5F9175) by ABERCO, Inc., a Balchem Company, 5 Paragon
Drive, Suite 201, Montvale, NJ 07645. The petition requested that 40
CFR part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
fungicide propylene oxide (PPO), in or on sesame, seed; turmeric,
roots, dried; ginger, dried; pepper, bell, dried; and pepper, nonbell,
dried at 300 parts per million (ppm) for PPO, including its metabolites
and degradates, and 6,000 ppm for its reaction product propylene
chlorohydrin (PCH), including its metabolites and degradates. That
document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by ABERCO, Inc.,
a Balchem Company, the registrant, which is available in the docket, ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2025-0158, at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>.
EPA received one comment on the notice of filing. The comment did
not pertain to the PPO or PCH tolerances described in the notice of
filing and provided no information indicating that a safety
determination for these tolerances cannot be supported.
EPA is not establishing the petitioned-for PCH tolerances because
the request was subsequently withdrawn by the petitioner. The reason
for this change is explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Final Tolerance Action
A. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified therein, 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 PPO, including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures
and risks associated with PPO follows.
B. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
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.
Systemic effects in toxicity studies via the inhalation route
suggest that PPO is absorbed locally and systemically, accumulating in
the mucosa of the nose, trachea, and lung, but also reaching the liver;
however, data suggest that inhalation exposure produces adverse effects
only at the portal of entry. Oral and dermal toxicity studies have also
found mostly portal of entry effects, suggesting that PPO is minimally
absorbed systemically via those routes. Hydrolysis of PPO may occur
spontaneously in the acidic environment of the stomach. Under in vitro
conditions similar to the stomach environment, PPO hydrolysis is fast
(half-life of 1 minute) and yields propylene glycol. Conjugation of PPO
to glutathione (GSH), and alkylation to DNA or proteins can also occur,
especially at the portal of entry. Chronic oral gavage dosing induced
forestomach lesions in rats; however, this effect is not relevant for
risk assessment because humans do not have a forestomach or any similar
tissues. Inhalation exposure to PPO decreased non-protein sulfhydryl
(NPSH) levels in respiratory mucosa, lung, and liver, and induced nasal
cavity lesions in rats (olfactory epithelium atrophy, necrosis and
regeneration; respiratory epithelium regeneration; inflammation;
epithelial and squamous metaplasia) and mice (inflammation). For
inhalation exposure, PPO is classified as ``B2; Probable Human
Carcinogen'' by the Integrated Risk Information System, and a cancer
slope factor (Q1*) of 3.7 x 10<SUP>-6</SUP> ([mu]g/m\3\)<SUP>-1</SUP>
based on nasal cavity hemangioma in mice is used for inhalation risk
assessment. There is no offspring susceptibility in the PPO database.
In animal studies via the oral route, PCH targets primarily the
acinar cells of the pancreas, with lesions that progress from
cytoplasmic alteration and degeneration at 14 days, to fatty change and
focal metaplasia at 90 days of exposure. In prenatal developmental
studies in rat and rabbit, fetuses had decreased weight at the same
dose that showed increased incidence of maternal mortality and pre-term
delivery. In a reproductive study, rat dams showed decreased body
weight at delivery and during lactation at a higher dose than that
causing decreased body weight in pups, indicating offspring
susceptibility. In an acute neurotoxicity study, lower total ambulatory
activity was observed. PCH is classified as ``Not Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans.'' This is based on a lack of treatment-related
tumors observed in male and female mice and rats. There is also low
concern for mutagenicity in vivo.
Specific information on the risk assessment conducted in support of
this action, including on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by PPO and PCH, can be found in the document
titled ``Propylene Oxide. Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed New
Uses on Sesame, seed; Turmeric, roots, dried; Ginger, dried; Pepper,
bell, dried; and Pepper, nonbell, dried'' (hereinafter ``PPO Human
Health Risk Assessment''), which is available in the docket for this
action.
C. 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/human-health-risk-pesticides">https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/human-health-risk-pesticides</a>.
More detailed information on the toxicological endpoints for PPO
and PCH used for human health risk assessment can be found in the PPO
Human Health Risk Assessment, which is available in the docket for this
action.
D. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary Exposure From Food and Feed Uses
In evaluating dietary exposure to PPO and PCH, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as
[[Page 31960]]
well as all existing PPO tolerances in 40 CFR 180.491. A quantitative
dietary exposure assessment was not conducted for PPO, because no
effect of concern was identified in the database for oral exposure
scenarios and no dietary PODs were selected for PPO for any population.
A quantitative dietary exposure assessment was conducted for PCH only.
EPA assessed dietary exposures from PCH in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified
for PCH. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used the Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake
Database (DEEM-FCID) Version 4.02. This model uses 2005-2010 food
consumption information from the United States Department of
Agriculture's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We
Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA
conducted a partially refined acute dietary (food only) exposure and
risk assessment, taking into account the interval between treatment and
availability of treated commodities for consumption. EPA assumed 100
percent crop treated (PCT) for all commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In estimating chronic dietary exposure, EPA
used the DEEM-FCID Version 4.02 and 2005-2010 food consumption
information from the NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA
conducted a partially refined chronic dietary (food only) exposure and
risk assessment, taking into account the interval between treatment and
availability of treated commodities for consumption. EPA assumed 100
PCT for all commodities.
iii. Cancer. PCH has been classified as ``Not Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans,'' and therefore a cancer dietary assessment was
not conducted.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(E) authorizes EPA to use available data and information on
the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the
actual levels of pesticide residues that have been measured in food. If
EPA relies on such information, EPA must require, pursuant to FFDCA
section 408(f)(1), that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is
established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels
in food are not above the levels anticipated. EPA assumed 100 PCT for
both the acute and chronic dietary assessments for this action.
2. Dietary Exposure From Drinking Water
Based on the registered and proposed uses of PPO as an indoor
fumigant, PPO and PCH residues are not expected in surface water or
groundwater, so exposure to PPO and PCH in drinking water is not
expected. A quantitative drinking water exposure assessment therefore
was not conducted for PPO or PCH.
3. From Non-Dietary Exposure
The term ``residential exposure'' is used in this document to refer
to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden
pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick
control on pets). There are no residential uses of PPO registered or
proposed, and no residential handler or residential post-application
exposure is expected. Quantitative residential handler and residential
post-application exposure assessments therefore were not conducted for
PPO or PCH.
4. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of
Toxicity
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether 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.'' Unlike other pesticides for which EPA
has followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of
toxicity, EPA has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to
PPO or PCH and any other substances and they do not appear to produce a
toxic metabolite produced by other substances. Therefore, for the
purposes of this action, EPA has not assumed that neither PPO nor PCH
has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances.
E. Safety Factor for 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 analysis in section 4.1 of the PPO Human Health Risk
Assessment, EPA concludes that there is reliable data to support the
reduction of the FQPA safety factor for PPO and PCH to 1X. That
analysis demonstrates that a FQPA safety factor of 1X will be safe for
infants and children because the available information fully accounts
for the potential for pre- and post-natal toxicity of PPO and PCH and
the toxicological and exposure databases for PPO and PCH are adequate
to characterize potential pre- and post-natal risk for infants and
children.
F. 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
There are no registered or proposed uses of PPO that are expected
to result in drinking water exposure. Therefore, the acute aggregate
risk assessment considers exposures from food only. For PPO, no adverse
effect resulting from oral exposure was identified and no dietary
endpoint was selected. Therefore, PPO is not expected to pose an acute
risk. For PCH, using the exposure assumptions described in this unit
for acute exposure, EPA has concluded that acute exposure to PCH from
food will occupy 16% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest exposure, and is not of
concern.
2. Chronic Risk
There are no registered or proposed uses of PPO that are expected
to result in drinking water exposure or direct residential exposure.
Therefore, the chronic aggregate risk assessment considers exposures
from food only. For PPO, no adverse effect resulting from oral exposure
was identified and no dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, PPO is
not expected to pose a chronic risk. For PCH, using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has
[[Page 31961]]
concluded that chronic exposure to PCH from food will utilize 8.0% of
the cPAD for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure, and is not of concern.
3. Short-Term Risk
Short-term aggregate exposure takes into account short-term
residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level). Because there are no
registered or proposed uses of PPO resulting in direct residential
exposures, and no residues expected in drinking water, the short-term
risk is equal to the chronic dietary risk described above.
4. Intermediate-Term Risk
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account
intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Because there
are no registered or proposed uses of PPO resulting in direct
residential exposures, and no residues expected in drinking water, the
intermediate-term risk is equal to the chronic dietary risk described
above.
5. Aggregate Cancer Risk for U.S. Population
No dietary cancer risks of concern were identified for PPO or PCH.
The Agency did not conduct an oral quantitative cancer risk assessment
for PPO, based on the available information (i.e., no effects relevant
to humans were identified as a result of oral exposure to PPO).
Similarly, no cancer risk of concern was identified for PCH. PCH is
classified as ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans''.
6. Determination of Safety
Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children, from aggregate exposure to PPO
residues, including its metabolites and degradates. More detailed
information about the Agency's analysis can be found in the PPO Human
Health Risk Assessment, which is available in the docket for this
action.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The available analytical enforcement method, ABC METHOD 46306-PPO/
Hydrins Rev 1.0, is able to quantitate the residues of PPO in various
commodities using head space gas chromatography with flame ionization
detection (GC/FID). A confirmatory method has been validated for PPO
and PCH, utilizing GC with electron impact ionization mass spectrometry
(EIMS) for quantitation of PPO, and either GC/EIMS or GC/ELCD (electron
capture detection) for quantitation of the isomers of PCH. More
detailed information about analytical enforcement methodology can be
found in the PPO Human Health Risk Assessment, which is available in
the docket for this action.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRL) established by
the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section
408(b)(4). Codex is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it
is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party.
EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL;
however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons
for departing from the Codex level.
Codex has not established a MRL for PPO in or on ginger, bell or
nonbell pepper, sesame seed, or turmeric, roots.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
During the registration review of PPO conducted under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA determined
that PCH tolerances are not needed since PPO residues alone are
adequate for detection of PPO misuse for enforcement activities, and
there are no established Codex MRLs for PCH. For regulatory clarity,
and to ensure residues of PPO reaction products (including PCH and
propylene bromohydrin) remain covered under the PPO tolerances, the
Agency proposed and finalized a rule under the FFDCA removing all PCH
tolerances from 40 CFR 180.491 and revising the tolerance expression
for PPO to specify the inclusion of these reaction products. See 90 FR
42896, June 9, 2025 (FRL-12765-01-OCSPP), and 91 FR 21386, April 22,
2026 (FRL-12765-02-OCSPP). As a result, the petitioner withdrew its
request that EPA establish the petitioned-for PCH tolerances, and EPA
is not establishing these tolerances.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of propylene
oxide in or on ginger, dried; pepper, bell, dried; pepper, nonbell,
dried; sesame, seed; and turmeric, roots, dried at 300 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and executive orders
can be found at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/regulations/and-executive-orders">https://www.epa.gov/regulations/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 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)
Since tolerance actions that are established on the basis of a
petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., do not apply to this
action.
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 on the private sector.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive
[[Page 31962]]
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 tolerance actions like this one are exempt from
review under Executive Order 12866.
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 summarized in Unit III.E.
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 is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 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 set forth in the preamble, EPA is amending 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. Amend Sec. 180.491 by adding, in alphabetical order, the entries
``Ginger, dried'', ``Pepper, bell, dried'', ``Pepper, nonbell, dried'',
``Sesame, seed'', and ``Turmeric, roots, dried'' to table 1 to
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.491 Propylene oxide; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Ginger, dried............................................... 300
* * * * *
Pepper, bell, dried......................................... 300
Pepper, nonbell, dried...................................... 300
* * * * *
Sesame, seed................................................ 300
Turmeric, roots, dried...................................... 300
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-10711 Filed 5-28-26; 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 29, 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.