Exception to Worker Protection Standard Early Entry Restrictions for Limited Contact Activities

SUMMARY: EPA is granting an administrative exception to the 1992 Worker

Protection Standard (WPS) allowing early entry into pesticide treated

areas to perform certain limited contact activities. The exception is

in response to a petition that the Agency received from many

organizations in the agricultural community. This exception allows

workers to perform tasks, which if delayed would result in significant

economic loss, and that result in minimal contact with pesticide-

treated surfaces, for up to 8 hours per 24-hour period during a

restricted entry interval. EPA is granting this exception because it

believes the benefits of this exception outweigh any resulting risks

and the potential risk from this exception is not unreasonable.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 3, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The Agency invites any interested person who has concerns

about the implementation of this action to submit written comments

identified by docket number ``OPP-250101A'' to: By mail: Public

Response and Program Resources Branch, Field Operations Division

(7506C), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington,

DC 20460. In person, bring comments to: Rm. 1132, Crystal Mall #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.

Comments and data may also be submitted electronically by sending

electronic mail (e-mail) to: [email protected]. Electronic

comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data will also be

accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1 file format or ASCII file

format. All comments and data in electronic form must be identified by

the docket number ``OPP-250101A.'' No Confidential Business Information

(CBI) should be submitted through e-mail. Electronic comments on this

document may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.

Additional information on electronic submissions can be found in Unit

VIII of this document.

Information submitted as a comment concerning this document may be

claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that information as

CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance

with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the comment that

does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public

record. Information not marked confidential may be disclosed publicly

by EPA without prior notice. All written comments will be available for

public inspection in Rm. 1132 at the Virginia address given above from

8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Strauss or Joshua First, Office

of Pesticide Programs (7506C), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. Office location, telephone number

and e-mail: 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Crystal Mall 2, room 1121,

Arlington, VA 22202, (703) 305-7371, [email protected] or

[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is one of a series of Agency actions to

revise elements of the WPS. These actions were published on January 11,

1995 (60 FR 2820), and proposed to:

(1) Shorten the time periods before which employers must train

workers and retrain workers and handlers in pesticide safety.

(2) Exempt those who perform crop advising tasks from certain

requirements.

(3) Allow early entry to pesticide treated areas to perform certain

time-sensitive irrigation activities.

(4) Allow early entry to pesticide treated areas to perform certain

time-sensitive activities resulting in ``limited contact'' with

pesticide treated surfaces.

(5) Allow workers to enter areas treated with certain lower risk

pesticides after 4 hours rather than 12 hours.

This action addresses allowing early entry to pesticide treated areas

to perform certain time-sensitive limited contact activities. Final

determinations on the other four actions mentioned above are being

published at the same time as this action.

I. Background

On August 21, 1992, EPA issued a final rule (57 FR 38102) revising

the Worker Protection Standard (WPS) for agricultural pesticides (40

CFR part 170). The WPS prohibits routine entry by workers into

pesticide treated areas during restricted-entry intervals (REIs). An

REI is the time after the end of a pesticide application during which

entry into the treated area is restricted. Section 170.112(e) of the

WPS provides a process for considering exceptions to this prohibition

against early entry into treated areas.

In July 1994, EPA was petitioned by a coalition of agricultural

organizations to allow individuals to perform tasks involving limited

contact with treated surfaces in pesticide treated areas before the

expiration of the REI.

EPA considered the petition, held several work sessions with the

National Association of State Departments of Agriculture and other co-

signers of the petition exploring the need for and scope of limited

contact tasks, and proposed granting a nationwide exception for limited

contact activities. EPA solicited comments on the proposed exception

and received comments supporting and opposing the proposed exception.

Information received during the public comment period persuaded EPA

that there could be significant economic impacts if certain limited

contact tasks were prohibited during the REI.

A. WPS Early Entry Restrictions

In general, the WPS prohibits agricultural workers from entering a

pesticide-treated area during the REI. REIs are based on the toxicity

of the active ingredient in the product, and other factors. They are

specified on the pesticide product label and typically range from 12 to

72 hours or possibly longer where product-specific REIs have been

determined.

Additionally, workers engaging in early entry work are not

permitted to engage in hand labor, which results in substantial contact

with treated surfaces. The WPS defines hand labor as any agricultural

activity performed by hand or with hand tools that causes a worker to

have substantial contact with surfaces (such as plants or soil) that

may contain pesticide residues.

B. Exceptions to Early Entry Restrictions

Currently, the WPS contains the following exceptions to the general

prohibition against worker early entry: Entry resulting in no contact

with treated areas; entry allowing short-term tasks to be performed

with PPE and other conditions; entry to perform tasks associated with

agricultural emergencies; and an exception process for EPA to determine

on a case-by-case basis whether entry is warranted for activities not

covered in the previous exceptions. [[Page 21956]]

II. EPA's Exception Decision

EPA is granting an exception to the early-entry prohibition to

allow limited contact tasks to be performed. This decision is based on

the information submitted in comments and EPA's experience over many

years of reviewing agricultural practices in connection with pesticide

use. EPA has concluded that this exception appropriately balances the

potential risk of worker exposure and the significant economic impact

which could be incurred if growers are not allowed to perform these

necessary tasks. The exception is designed to minimize risk to workers

conducting early-entry ``limited contact tasks'' while providing

growers the needed flexibility to perform these tasks.

EPA has reviewed information on the risks and benefits associated

with granting an exception for necessary limited contact activities and

believes that the benefits outweigh the risks. This assessment is based

on EPA's evaluation of the risk reduction provided by the provisions

contained in this exception and the benefits which may be obtained by

allowing the exception. Furthermore, where the benefits outweighed the

risks, EPA, in the context of the WPS, has previously made exceptions

to the general prohibition against early entry, even for hand labor

activities. (See Hand Labor Tasks on Cut Flowers and Ferns Exception at

57 FR 38175, August 21, 1992). Because hand labor as defined in the WPS

involves substantial worker contact with surfaces that may contain

pesticide residues, and this exception is restricted to limited contact

tasks where workers' contact with treated surfaces would be minimal and

limited to the workers' feet, lower legs, hands, and forearms, EPA

believes that pesticide exposure to workers performing limited contact

tasks under the terms of this exception would be less than exposures to

workers performing hand labor tasks in the same treated area.

Therefore, EPA believes that early entry under the terms of the

exception (see Unit IV of this document), will not pose unreasonable

risk to workers performing limited contact tasks.

The category of activity envisioned by this exception includes only

those ``limited contact tasks'' which cannot be delayed until the

expiration of the REI. The definition of a task that cannot be delayed

is one that, if not performed before the expiration of the REI, would

cause significant economic loss and where there are no alternative

practices which would prevent the loss. By this definition, EPA has

defined the category of permissible tasks, with significant limits on

the type and duration of activity, and the economic circumstances under

which the exception can be applied. Taken together, these elements

limit the exception to only high-benefit activities.

Further, EPA has included significant provisions which will limit

pesticide exposure and risk to employees performing ``limited contact

tasks.'' This exception specifically: prohibits hand labor activity;

prohibits entry into a treated area during the first 4 hours after a

pesticide application and until applicable ventilation criteria and any

label-specified inhalation exposure level have been met; limits the

time in treated areas under a restricted entry interval for any worker

to 8 hours in any 24-hour period; requires that any contact with

treated areas by a worker be minimal and limited to feet, lower legs,

hands, and forearms; excludes pesticides requiring ``double

notification''; requires PPE; directs the agricultural employer to

notify workers of specific information concerning the exception; and

ensures that the requirements of Sec. 170.112 (c)(3) through (c)(9) are

met. These terms will limit worker exposure and, consequently, worker

risk.

The WPS's general prohibition against early entry is designed to

limit worker exposure during the critical restricted-entry interval. In

granting this exception, EPA has weighed the risk to workers against

the benefits to be gained from early entry to perform ``limited contact

tasks'' and finds justification for this exception. EPA believes that

this exception adequately addresses and balances worker exposure

concerns with the commercial needs of agriculture.

III. Summary of Major Issues

EPA received over 80 comments on the proposed exception. Comments

were received from State agencies, grower groups, farm worker groups,

and individuals.

A. Need for Exception

Comments received primarily from growers noted the need for the

exception in order to add flexibility and practicality to the WPS, and

thereby help ensure grower compliance. Without this exception, growers

projected reduced production due to the inability to perform various

tasks which would involve minimal contact with surfaces containing

pesticide residues but which would need to occur during times where

early entry was prohibited. Growers provided examples of situations

that would require early entry to perform limited contact tasks such

as: Opening windows or vents from the inside of a greenhouse, replacing

electrical fuses for pumps, unloading beehives for pollinating crops,

placing small equipment (e.g., weather monitoring stations) in fields,

performing frost protection measures, removing equipment, and removing

livestock from crop areas.

Most comments opposing the exception identified risk to workers as

a primary concern. These comments noted the existence of exceptions to

early entry in the 1992 WPS and questioned the need for this exception,

as well as the ability to properly interpret and enforce the exception.

EPA remains concerned about worker risk during the restricted-entry

interval. Additionally, EPA continues to be concerned that even PPE,

decontamination supplies, and training may not adequately reduce the

risk to workers if an unlimited time is allowed in an area under an

REI.

EPA provided the existing WPS early entry exceptions to address

short term, time-sensitive, critical, emergency situations. EPA

continues to believe that entry to perform routine tasks, particularly

hand labor tasks such as harvesting, is rarely needed, especially when

the REI is 72 hours or less.

While the existing WPS exceptions cover most unanticipated

circumstances necessitating early entry, EPA believes there may be a

few occasions when the existing exceptions do not provide the

flexibility to deal with non-routine, non-hand labor tasks for more

than the one hour that is provided in the short-term entry exceptions.

This exception is designed to address such situations, but EPA expects

that it will rarely be needed.

EPA believes that the entry requirements set out in this exception

acceptably reduces worker contact with pesticide treated surfaces by

limiting the duration of the contact; by limiting contact to feet,

lower legs, hands, and forearms; by requiring PPE to protect the worker

from the treated surfaces; by not allowing hand labor activities, as

defined by the WPS, to be performed, as well as by other conditions.

B. Definition of Limited Contact Task

Most comments supported the EPA definition of limited contact in

the proposal. Some comments, however, suggest expanding the scope to

include hand labor tasks and removing the condition that tasks must be

those that cannot be delayed until after the REI.

EPA believes that the exclusion of hand labor is critical to

eliminate specific tasks that could result in greater exposure and

unacceptable risk. Excluding hand labor tasks from the

[[Page 21957]] definition of ``limited contact task'' will eliminate

specific tasks that could result in greater exposure. EPA determined

that hand labor tasks could not be performed with limited contact. The

WPS defines hand labor as any agricultural activity performed by hand

or with hand tools that causes a worker to have substantial contact

with surfaces (such as plants, plant parts, or soil) that may contain

pesticide residues. Allowing hand labor tasks would result in more

frequent and longer periods of worker entry into the field. Generally,

a worker performing hand labor is likely to have near-constant exposure

to plant foliage, plant stems, and soil and therefore, higher exposure

to pesticide residues. Therefore the Agency has limited the exception

to non-hand labor tasks that are performed by workers that result in

minimal contact with treated surfaces (including but not limited to

soil, water, surfaces of plants, and equipment), and where such contact

with treated surfaces is limited to the forearms, hands, lower legs,

and feet.

To establish offsetting benefits to balance the potential risk to

workers from early entry for ``limited contact tasks,'' EPA is

requiring that the limited contact task must be one that ``cannot be

delayed until after the expiration of the restricted entry interval''

and, therefore, would constitute a significant economic loss if not

undertaken. The Agency wishes to limit entry in the treated area during

the REI and therefore is restricting entry to necessary tasks that

cannot be delayed until the expiration of the REI.

C. Two Year Expiration Date

Under the proposal, this exception would have expired 24 months

after the implementation date. Most comments were opposed to an

expiration date and stated that 2 years was not sufficient time to

gather data concerning any documented increase in poisoning incidents.

Several comments were in favor of the two-year expiration as a period

to be used to monitor the need for further restriction if necessary.

EPA believes that the two-year time period would not provide

adequate time for EPA to evaluate the impact of the exception. In

general, changes in pesticide use practices do not occur suddenly, and

there is often a lag time in reporting and analysis of incident data.

Therefore, EPA expects it might be several years before data would be

available to evaluate the impact of this exception. Therefore, EPA has

decided to remove the 24-month expiration. EPA, of course, may use the

procedure in Sec. 170.112(e)(6) to revoke the exception at any time

that data become available indicating that such action is necessary.

D. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

The Agency has concluded that a generic set of PPE, consisting of

coveralls, chemical-resistant gloves and footwear, and socks, should be

required for this exception. Several comments requested modifications

to this requirement, including removing the requirement for coveralls,

substituting long sleeve shirts and long pants for coveralls to avoid

the effects of heat stress, making PPE optional, and tailoring PPE

requirements to the size of the plant.

Several comments disagreed with eliminating protective eyewear,

given that workers will be in recently-treated areas and that residues

on workers' hands and gloves can be transferred to the eyes. A number

of comments stated that workers should always use label PPE.

EPA is convinced that the use of coveralls, chemical-resistant

gloves and footwear, and socks is appropriate for limited contact

tasks. Given the nature and range of tasks permitted under this

exception EPA has concluded that coveralls are more appropriate than

long-sleeved shirts and long pants.

While the terms of the exception require that contact be limited to

feet, lower legs, hands, and forearms, EPA believes that incidental,

unintended, or unanticipated exposure to other parts of the body

besides the lower legs, feet, forearms and hands may be possible and

thus, is requiring coveralls as part of the generic PPE. The WPS

requires that all PPE, which includes coveralls, be properly cleaned

and maintained by agricultural employers. This PPE maintenance includes

cleaning according to manufacturer's instructions. In the absence of

these instructions, the PPE must be washed thoroughly in detergent and

hot water. The PPE must also be inspected for leaks, holes, tears, or

worn places before each day of use.

EPA has carefully considered comments supporting required eyewear

and reviewed information in its possession that indicates a relatively

low incidence of eye injuries to field workers by pesticides. EPA has

concluded that rather than create a universal standard for eyewear to

be used under the limited contact exception, the use of protective

eyewear should be consistent with the early-entry PPE requirement on

the labeling. Where eyewear is required on the label for early entry,

it is also required for this exception.

In response to concerns regarding heat stress from wearing PPE, EPA

has included in the exception a requirement that the agricultural

employer assure that no worker is allowed or directed to perform the

early-entry activity without implementing, when appropriate, measures

to prevent heat-related illness. See Unit V.(7) of this document.

E. Time Allowed in the Treated Area During an REI

The Agency requested comments on the proposal to allow up to 3

hours allowable time to perform limited contact tasks during the REI,

but for reasons outlined in this action has decided to allow no more

than 8 hours of limited contact activity in a 24-hour period during an

REI. Most of the comments requested an unlimited time be allowed for

limited contact activities.

Some comments stated that the proposed time limit does not provide

the needed flexibility in performing tasks, given the unpredictable and

variable nature of farming and the necessity to perform certain tasks.

Some comments stated further that without sufficient time, workers

might feel pressured to work faster to complete the task, which could

lead to safety risks, heat stress and exhaustion. In addition, several

comments also stated that the proposed time limit would be difficult to

enforce. Finally, several comments supported the proposed time limit

for limited contact activities during the REI.

EPA has concluded that up to 8 hours in a 24-hour period in the

treated area is sufficient time to perform almost all limited contact

tasks. The Agency recognizes that, due to the vagaries of weather, pest

populations, etc., unforeseen exigencies frequently occur in

agriculture. These circumstances may necessitate more than the one-hour

time limit currently allowed in the existing early entry exception. If

limited contact activities can be completed in less than 8 hours, the

exception does not authorize workers to remain in the treated areas to

perform tasks that do not meet all of the conditions of the exception.

EPA concludes that early entry will not result in unreasonable

risks to workers performing limited contact tasks, given that the

allowable tasks are confined to those tasks that cannot be delayed

until after the REI expires, that hand labor tasks are not permissible,

and the exception does not apply where ``double notification''

pesticides have been applied. When workers do enter fields, exposure

will be limited because of:

(1) The definition of the tasks. [[Page 21958]]

(2) Entry is prohibited for the first 4 hours after a pesticide

application and until ventilation criteria and inhalation exposure

levels are met.

(3) PPE must be provided and.

(4) The workers must be informed of the safety information on the

product labeling.

The Agency recognizes that a time limit for limited contact tasks

will be more difficult to enforce than universally prohibiting workers

from entering the treated area under any conditions. EPA contends,

however, that in this case, administrative ease must be balanced

against the agricultural industry's need to cope with critical needs.

F. Exclusion of Double-Notification Pesticides

Entry into areas treated with pesticides requiring ``double

notification'' is not allowed under the terms of this exception. The

``double notification'' provision relates to pesticides that are highly

toxic, dermally irritating, or have other health effects that set them

apart from other pesticides and requires growers to both post the

treated area and orally notify workers of the application.

Several commenters opposing the exclusion of double-notification

pesticides asserted that the same tasks are necessary for crops treated

with these pesticides; they said they believed the risks would be low

since workers would have only ``minimal contact with treated

surfaces,'' and that PPE would provide adequate protection. Other

alternatives proposed included: Allowing entry to fields based on the

height of the crop or on the nature of the task, rather than on the

toxicity of the pesticide, and reducing the maximum time allowed in

fields treated with double notification pesticides.

Another commenter stated that other hazardous pesticides as well as

ones posing chronic risk have not been subjected to the double

notification requirement and are, therefore, still included under this

exception.

The Agency is convinced that allowing workers to enter a field

treated with a double-notification pesticide before the expiration of

the REI would pose an unreasonable risk. Incidental exposure to double-

notification and other highly toxic pesticides, such as brushing

against a treated surface, more than with other pesticides, has the

potential to cause an acute illness or a delayed effect. There are

reports of acute poisonings which have occurred after short-term

exposure to many of these highly toxic pesticides. Thus, shortening the

period allowed for early entry may still not provide adequate

protection. EPA has data demonstrating that the majority of pesticides

requiring double-notification are responsible for many reported

incidents of worker poisonings. The Agency is prohibiting early entry

during the REI to fields treated with pesticide products which require

both the posting of treated areas and oral notification to workers

(i.e. double-notification).

EPA acknowledges the concern raised by commenters that exclusion of

double notification pesticides may not guarantee that all hazardous

chemicals are excluded from use under this exception. EPA believes it

has excluded a group of pesticides known to be responsible for many

poisoning incidents because of their acute toxicity. The Agency

believes that worker exposure to other pesticides has been addressed by

the stringent terms of this exception.

IV. Definitions and Examples

A. Definitions

This exception defines a ``limited contact task'' as follows:

A limited contact task is a non-hand labor task performed by

workers that results in minimal contact with treated surfaces

(including but not limited to soil, water, surfaces of plants, and

equipment), and where such contact with treated surfaces is limited

to the forearms, hands, lower legs, and feet.

This exception specifically prohibits hand labor activity, as

defined by the WPS. The WPS defines ``hand labor'' as follows:

Any agricultural activity performed by hand or with hand tools

that causes a worker to have significant contact with surfaces (such

as plants, plant parts, or soil) that may contain pesticide

residues.

B. Examples

Examples of possible limited contact tasks that might qualify for

the exception include, but are not limited to: The operation and repair

of weather monitoring and frost protection equipment; the repair of

greenhouse heating, air conditioning, and ventilation equipment; the

repair of non-application field equipment; the maintenance and moving

of beehives.

Examples of hand labor activity that is specifically prohibited

include, but are not limited to: Harvesting; detasseling; thinning;

weeding; caning; girdling; topping; planting; sucker removal; pruning;

disbudding; roguing; packing produce into containers in the field.

Hand labor does not include operating, moving, or repairing

irrigation or watering equipment or performing the tasks of crop

advisors. Hand labor tasks involve substantial contact and have a

potential for high exposure.

V. Terms of the Exception

The exception described in this Notice may be used unless early

entry is expressly prohibited in product labeling. For example, some

labels prohibit entry -- including entry that would otherwise be

permitted under the WPS and this exception -- by any person other than

trained and equipped handlers performing handling tasks for specified

periods after the application. It should be noted that because this

exception allows tasks to be performed during the REI, all persons

engaged in irrigation tasks permitted under this exception must be

trained.

Under this exception, a trained worker may enter a treated area

during a restricted entry interval to perform a limited contact task if

the agricultural employer ensures that the following requirements are

met:

(1) The need for the task could not have been foreseen and cannot

be delayed until after the expiration of the REI. A task that cannot be

delayed is one that, if not performed before the REI expires, would

cause significant economic loss, and there are no alternative tasks

which would prevent significant loss.

(2) No hand labor activity is performed. (The WPS defines ``hand

labor'' as any agricultural activity performed by hand or with hand

tools that causes a worker to have substantial contact with surfaces

(such as plants, plant parts, or soil) that may contain pesticide

residues.)

(3) The worker's only contact with treated surfaces (including but

not limited to soil, water, surfaces of plants, crops), is minimal and

is limited to feet, lower legs, hands, and forearms.

(4) The personal protective equipment for early entry must be

provided to the worker by the agricultural employer for all tasks. Such

personal protective equipment shall either: (a) Conform with the label

requirements for early entry PPE; or (b) consist of coveralls,

chemical-resistant gloves, socks, and chemical-resistant footwear, and

eyewear (if eyewear is required for early entry PPE by the product

labeling). In either case, the PPE must conform to the standards set

out in Sec. 170.112(c)(4)(i) through (c)(4)(x).

(5) The pesticide product does not have a statement in the

pesticide product labeling requiring both the posting of treated areas

and oral notification to workers (``double

[[Page 21959]] notification''), or a restriction prohibiting any

person, other than an appropriately trained and equipped handler, from

entering during the restricted entry interval.

(6) The time in treated areas under a restricted entry interval for

any worker does not exceed a maximum of 8 hours in any 24-hour period.

(7) For all limited contact tasks, the requirements of

Sec. 170.112(c)(3) through (c)(9) are met. These are WPS requirements

for all early entry situations that involve contact with treated

surfaces, and include:

(a) A prohibition against entry during the first 4 hours, and until

applicable ventilation criteria have been met, and until any label-

specified inhalation exposure level has been reached.

(b) Informing workers of safety information on the product

labeling.

(c) Provision, proper management, and care of personal protective

equipment.

(d) Heat-related illness prevention.

(e) Requirements for decontamination facilities.

(f) Prohibition on taking personal protective equipment home.

(8) The agricultural employer shall notify workers before entering

a treated area, either orally or in writing, in a language the worker

understands, that:

(a) The establishment is relying on this exception to allow workers

to enter treated areas to complete limited contact tasks.

(b) No entry is allowed for the first 4 hours following an

application, and until applicable ventilation criteria have been met,

and until any label-specified inhalation exposure level has been

reached.

(c) The time in a treated area under a restricted-entry interval

for any worker cannot exceed 8 hours in any 24 hour period.

EPA reserves the right to withdraw exceptions, in accordance with

Sec. 170.112(e)(6), if the Agency receives information or any other

data that indicates the health risks posed by activities permitted

under the exception are unreasonable, that the provisions of this

exception are being abused, or that indicates the exception no longer

has benefits that outweigh the risks.

VI. Reevaluation of the Limited Contact Exception

The Agency is adopting this exception in order to provide the

flexibility to the agriculture sector to avoid significant economic

losses while providing protections for agricultural workers under the

WPS. As discussed more fully above, the Agency believes that any added

risks associated with pesticide exposure of workers from activities

permitted by this action will be limited by the specific conditions

imposed in the exception. The Agency intends over the next several

growing seasons to collect information to evaluate the effectiveness of

this exception. In particular, EPA is interested in determining whether

the conditions imposed by this action successfully protect workers

against pesticide poisonings. EPA is also interested in better

characterizing the circumstances in which this limited contact

exception is being used and in understanding whether the exception

addresses the needs of growers adequately. Finally, EPA would like to

obtain information on the extent of compliance with the conditions in

the exception and any practical problems with enforcement.

To obtain a better understanding of the implementation and impacts

of this limited contact exception, EPA will work with USDA and states

to gather relevant information. The Agency will hold public meetings in

agricultural areas to provide those directly affected by the WPS --

growers, enforcement staff, and agricultural workers -- an opportunity

to comment on these actions and the WPS rule in general. As

appropriate, EPA may conduct surveys and review incident data to assess

how the rules are affecting agriculture. The Agency invites any

interested person who has concerns about the implementation of this

action to send comments to the Agency at the address listed at the

beginning of this document under the ADDRESSES section.

VII. List of Exceptions in 40 CFR 170.112

EPA will be amending Sec. 170.112 of the WPS by adding to

Sec. 170.112 new paragraph (e)(7)(iii) referencing this administrative

exception for ``limited contact'' tasks and its effective date. EPA

will ensure that the regulated community is aware of the terms and

conditions of the exception, and is able to locate this and future

administrative exceptions. This amendment to paragraph (e) of

Sec. 170.112 will be a technical amendment. It does not make any

substantive changes in the WPS or in Sec. 170.112.

VIII. Public Docket

A record has been established for the rulemaking and this

administrative decision under docket number ``OPP-250101A '' (including

comments and data submitted electronically as described below). A

public version of this record, including printed, paper versions of

electronic comments, which does not include any information claimed as

CBI, is available for inspection from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday

through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The public record is located

in Rm. 1132 of the Public Response and Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA.

Electronic comments can be sent directly to EPA at:

[email protected]

Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form of encryption.

The official record for the WPS rulemaking and this administrative

decision, as well as the public version, as described above will be

kept in paper form. Accordingly, EPA will transfer all comments

received electronically into printed, paper form as they are received

and will place the paper copies in the official rulemaking record which

will also include all comments submitted directly in writing. The

official rulemaking record is the paper record maintained at the

address in ``ADDRESSES'' at the beginning of this document.

IX. Consultations and Reviews

A. Statutory Reviews

As required by FIFRA section 25(a), this administrative decision

was provided to the U.S. Department of Agriculture for review and will

be provided to Congress. The FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel waived its

review.

B. OMB Review

This action was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for their informal review. Any comments or changes made during

OMB's review have been documented in the public record.

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995,

which the President signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA has assessed

the effects of this administative decision on State, local, and tribal

governments, and the private sector. This action does not result in the

expenditure of $100 million or more by any State, local or tribal

governments, or by anyone in the private sector. In fact, this action

actually involves a reduction in burden and overall

cost. [[Page 21960]]

In addition to the consultations prior to proposal, EPA has had

several informal consultations regarding the proposed rule with some

States through the EPA regional offices and at regularly scheduled

State meetings. No significant issues or information was identified as

a result of EPA's discussion with the States.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 170

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,

Labeling, Occupational safety and health, Pesticides and pest.

Dated: April 24, 1995.

Lynn R. Goldman,

Assistant Administrator for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic

Substances.

[FR Doc. 95-10875 Filed 5-2-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-F