2018-07516: Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
Comment Period Closed
Public comment closed .
Get alerted when the next rule lands
New rules open for comment on their own schedule. Pick how you want to hear about them — we email you when one appears.
Publishing to members? Embed a live rule tracker on your own site — the proposed rules in your area and the comment deadlines closing on them, updating themselves. Free, one line of HTML.
Create a free account & build one →Summary
This document announces the Agency's receipt of several initial filings of pesticide petitions requesting the establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various commodities.
The agency’s own summary, as published.
What this changes
Amends 1 part of the Code of Federal Regulations — the standing rules this notice rewrites.
Rulemaking docket
EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0006
4 comments
-
Proposed Rule April 10, 2017Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Proposed Rule June 08, 2017Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Notice July 26, 2017Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Notice September 15, 2017Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Notice October 23, 2017Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Notice November 27, 2017Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Notice December 15, 2017Pesticide Petitions: Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Proposed Rule January 26, 2018Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Proposed Rule February 27, 2018Receipts: Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Proposed Rule March 06, 2018Pesticides: Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Proposed Rule March 21, 2018Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Proposed Rule April 11, 2018Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Proposed Rule May 15, 2018Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities; Correction
-
Proposed Rule May 15, 2018Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities; Correction
-
Proposed Rule May 18, 2018Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Proposed Rule June 14, 2018Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Proposed Rule July 24, 2018Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
-
Notice August 14, 2018Pesticide Petitions: Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities
Public comments
4
comments filed
What people are saying
-
Anonymous commenter 2018-03-12
“DENYH ALL USE AT ALL TIMES OF CHLOROTHALONIL. IT SHOULD NOT BE USED ON BEETS OR ANYTHING ELSE. IT IS ALSO USED IN RESINDS, AND CATALYSTS IN MANUFACTURING - SHOWING IT IS NOT TO BE USED IN NATURE. IT IS AN EYE IRRITANT. IT IS TOXIC WHEN INHALED. IT CAUSES KIDNEY DAMAGE OVER LONG TERM. IT BRINGS ON TUMORS IN ANAIMALS., IT IS PROBABLY CARCINOGENIC TO PEOPLE. IT KILLS BEES AND FISH. THERE IS NO WAY THIS SHOULD BE USED ANYWHERE ON EARTH. WE DONT NEED IT. WE DONT WANT IT. WE DONT WANT TO BE KILLE D BY IT JUST SO SOME LOUSY PROFITEER CAN MAKE MONEY ON THIS SUBSTANCE.”
-
Anonymous commenter 2018-02-02
“yes, remove, remove, remove, Now the Fish and wildlife is doing the right thing. More time should be spent to review others to be removed, especially the ones on list for over 20 years, if they have not been saved by then it is wasting tax payer money. Determination based on a review of the best available scientific and commercial information, which indicates that the threats to many species have been eliminated or reduced to the point where it no longer meets the definition of an endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). If we are looking ...”
377 more characters
-
Anonymous commenter 2018-02-02
“i am totally against increasing the residue on crops, as is requested under this proposal. the residues allowed are already toxic to fish, and your allowing extra toxicity will kill even more fish. thee is no reason to allow this.nobody needs this toxic chemical to be used in higher amounts where it can cause moreenvironmental damage to life on earth. rachel carson told us how bad this use of toxics wasalmostl00 years ago. its time to listen. we are having so many health problems in people these days all caused by toxicity. deny this petition for this proriteer. this agency bends over backw...”
396 more characters
-
Anonymous commenter 2018-01-05
“Wildfires NOT Agriculture, can you imagine Past EPA wanted you to believe sand was bad thing?? What? EPA lacked actual measurements of what agriculture emits in the form of fine particulate. Agriculture is not a major emitter of this pollutant, but Wildfire is sending major PMs ozone emissions , However, nothing has been done to date to correct faulty documentation that overestimates agricultural sources. The data used to develop this inventory was based on erroneous emission factors published by CPA for cattle feed yards, feed mills, grain elevators and dust from farmers' field operations....”
4,364 more characters
Read all comments on Regulations.gov →
Comment volume from Regulations.gov; the comment-submission API was retired in 2025, so comments are filed on Regulations.gov directly.
Don't miss the comment window
One Click Politics alerts you on every deadline, hearing, and rule change.
See all rules with comments due soon →