Phosphatidylcholine in Pesticide Formulations; Exemption From the Requirement for a Tolerance

Issuing agencies

Abstract

This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of phosphatidylcholine (CAS Reg. No. 97281- 47-5) when used as an inert ingredient (adjuvant/carrier) in pesticide contraceptive formulations applied to cervid, porcine, raccoon, and bovine. Compliance Services International on behalf of SpayVac-for- Wildlife, Inc., 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 phosphatidylcholine, when used in accordance with the terms of that exemption.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 190 (Friday, October 2, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 190 (Friday, October 2, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62673-62677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-20219]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2025-0090; FRL-13583-01-OCSPP]


Phosphatidylcholine 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 phosphatidylcholine (CAS Reg. No. 97281-
47-5) when used as an inert ingredient (adjuvant/carrier) in pesticide 
contraceptive formulations applied to cervid, porcine, raccoon, and 
bovine. Compliance Services International on behalf of SpayVac-for-
Wildlife, Inc., 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 phosphatidylcholine, when used in accordance with the terms 
of that exemption.

DATES: This regulation is effective October 2, 2026. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before December 1, 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-2025-0090, 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#94c6d0d2c6dafbe0fdf7f1e7d4f1e4f5baf3fbe2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7f2d3b392d31100b161c1a0c3f1a0f1e51181009">[email&#160;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.
    <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 
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 Federal 
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (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

[[Page 62674]]

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-2025-0090 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 December 1, 2026.
    EPA's Administrative Law Judges Division (ALJD), 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 ALJD electronically, a 
person should utilize the ALJD 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. Petitioned-for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of December 15, 2025 (90 FR 57944, FRL-
12474-08-OCSPP), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 
21 U.S.C. 346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-
11877) by Compliance Services International (7501 Bridgeport Way West 
Lakewood, WA 98499) on behalf of SpayVac-for-Wildlife, Inc. (1202 Ann 
Street Madison, WI 53713). The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.930 
be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a 
tolerance for residues of phosphatidylcholine (CAS Reg. No. 97281-47-5) 
when used as an inert ingredient (adjuvant/carrier) in pesticide 
formulations applied in equine, cervid, bovine, porcine, pinniped, 
elephant, raccoon, feral dog, and feral cat contraceptive formulations. 
That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by 
Compliance Services International on behalf of SpayVac-for-Wildlife, 
Inc., the petitioner, which is available in the docket. There were no 
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is 
establishing the tolerance exemption for the use of phosphatidylcholine 
as an inert ingredient in pesticide contraceptive formulations applied 
to cervid, porcine, raccoon, and bovine. Under section 408(d)(4) of the 
FFDCA, EPA is authorized to establish a tolerance or exemption that 
varies from what is sought by the petitioner. The reasons for the 
variation here is that the following animals for which a tolerance 
exemption was requested cannot be sold in interstate commerce as food 
for human consumption: elephants, feral dogs and cats, pinnipeds, and 
equine animals. Because EPA is authorized only to establish tolerances 
or exemptions for residues of pesticides in or on food intended to 
enter interstate commerce, EPA is not establishing the exemption for 
any residues of this inert ingredient in those animals. Additional 
information regarding this limitation can be found in the Agency's risk 
assessment which can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.govin">https://www.regulations.govin</a> the 
document ``IN-11877; Phosphatidylcholine. Human Health Risk Assessment 
and Ecological Effects Assessment to Support Inert Ingredient Approval 
for use in Pesticide Formulations'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2025-0090.

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

[[Page 62675]]

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.
    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.''
    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 phosphatidylcholine including 
exposure resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's 
assessment of exposures and risks associated with phosphatidylcholine 
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 phosphatidylcholine 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 phosphatidylcholine is supported by 
data regarding hydrogenated phosphatidylcholine, phosphatidylserine, 
lecithin, soybean lecithins and hydrogenated lecithins. 
Phosphatidylcholine is derived from soybean lecithin and is a glyceride 
of fatty acids linked to a phosphoric acid or phosphoric ester. It is a 
member of the lecithin group associated with soya lecithin and egg yolk 
lecithin. EPA has determined that it is appropriate to bridge 
hydrogenated phosphatidylcholine, phosphatidylserine, lecithin, soybean 
lecithins and hydrogenated lecithins data to assess phosphatidylcholine 
due to similarities in structure, physical and chemical properties.
    Phosphatidylcholine is expected to be of low toxicity. No adverse 
effects are observed in chronic oral toxicity studies in rats or dogs 
at 1,000 milligrams/kilogram body weight/day (mg/kg/day), the limit 
dose. There is no evidence of susceptibility in the available 
developmental toxicity studies in rats, mice, and rabbits. Concern for 
carcinogenicity is low based on the lack of effects in the available 
chronic toxicity study in the dog and negative results in mutagenicity 
and genotoxicity studies.
    No evidence of neurotoxicity or immunotoxicity was observed in the 
available studies.

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 or a reference dose, and a safe margin of 
exposure. 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>.
    The hazard profile of phosphatidylcholine is adequately defined. 
Overall, phosphatidylcholine is expected to be of low acute, 
subchronic, chronic, and developmental toxicity. No systemic toxicity 
is observed up to 1,000 mg/kg/day. Since signs of toxicity were not 
observed, no toxicological endpoints of concern or PODs were 
identified. Therefore, a qualitative risk assessment for 
phosphatidylcholine can be performed.

C. Exposure Assessment

1. Dietary Exposure From Food and Feed Uses
    In evaluating dietary exposure to phosphatidylcholine, EPA 
considered exposure under the proposed exemption from the requirement 
of a tolerance. EPA assessed dietary exposures from phosphatidylcholine 
in food as follows.
    Dietary exposure (food) to phosphatidylcholine may occur following 
ingestion of foods with residues from their use in accordance with this 
exemption. Dietary exposure via drinking water is not expected based on 
the proposed use pattern of phosphatidylcholine. Since a toxicological 
endpoint for risk assessment was not identified, a quantitative dietary 
exposure assessment was not conducted.
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).
    Phosphatidylcholine may be present in non-pesticide products such 
as cosmetics, nutritional compounds and pharmaceuticals. However, a 
quantitative residential exposure assessment was not conducted since a 
toxicological endpoint for risk assessment was not identified.

[[Page 62676]]

3. 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.''
    Based on the lack of toxicity in the available database, EPA has 
not found phosphatidylcholine to share a common mechanism of toxicity 
with any other substances, and phosphatidylcholine does not appear to 
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the 
purposes of this tolerance exemption, therefore, EPA has assumed that 
phosphatidylcholine 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 
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 an assessment of phosphatidylcholine, EPA has concluded 
that there are no toxicological endpoints of concern for the U.S. 
population, including infants and children. Because there are no 
threshold effects associated with phosphatidylcholine, EPA conducted a 
qualitative assessment. As part of that assessment, the Agency did not 
use safety factors for assessing risk, and no additional safety factor 
is needed for assessing risk to infants and children.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    Because no toxicological endpoints of concern were identified, 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 phosphatidylcholine residues.

F. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since 
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a 
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

G. Conclusions

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 
CFR 180.930 is established for residues of phosphatidylcholine (CAS 
Reg. No. 97281-47-5) when used as an inert ingredient (adjuvant/
carrier) in pesticide contraceptive formulations applied to cervid, 
porcine, raccoon, and bovine.

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/and-executive-orders">https://www.epa.gov/laws-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)

    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.

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, 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

[[Page 62677]]

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 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 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: September 29, 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.  180.930, amend Table 1 to Sec.  180.930 by adding, in 
alphabetical order, an entry for ``phosphatidylcholine'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  180.930  Inert ingredients applied to animals; exemptions from 
the requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

                                            Table 1 to Sec.   180.930
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Inert ingredients                              Limits                             Uses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Phosphatidylcholine (CAS Reg. No. 97281-47-   In contraceptive formulations                    Adjuvant/Carrier.
 5).                                           applied to cervid, porcine,
                                               raccoon, and bovine.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2026-20219 Filed 10-1-26; 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>