This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. 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 Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
[[Page 28921]]
information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments, remember to:

i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.

iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.

v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and suggest alternatives.

vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.
II. Background
A. ToleranceSetting Requirements and Petition from USDA IR4 Program to Expand the Existing Crop Grouping System

EPA is authorized to establish tolerances for pesticide chemical residues in food under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) (21 U.S.C. 346a). EPA establishes tolerances for each pesticide based on the potential risks to human health posed by that pesticide. A tolerance is the maximum permissible residue level established for pesticides in raw agricultural produce and processed foods. Tolerances are observed carefully by growers, pesticide users, processors, and food marketers. Food that contains residues of a pesticide for which there is no tolerance is considered to be adulterated. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture together enforce the EPA's tolerance limits. Adulterated food is not permitted in commerce.

To establish a tolerance, a petition is submitted to the Agency requesting the tolerance and furnishing information on the chemical identity and composition of the pesticide, its use pattern on the crop, toxicity data, and extensive residue data on the nature of the residue and the residue levels resulting from the proposed use pattern. The residue chemistry data requirements (40 CFR 158.240) have been identified as a limiting factor in making pesticide licensing and tolerance decisions for minor crops. This is particularly critical for low acreage minor crops where the expense and time investment for satisfying the residue chemistry requirements may preclude a registrant from petitioning the Agency for an individual crop tolerance for that use. A tolerance may be proposed for an individual commodity such as oranges or lemons, or for a group of related commodities in a crop group such as the citrus crop group.

The crop grouping regulations (40 CFR 180.41) enables the establishment of tolerances for a group of crops based on residue data for certain crops that are representative of the group. The crop grouping concept leads to an estimate of maximum level of residue that could occur on any crop within the group. The minimum data required for a group tolerance consists of residue data for all representative commodities for a group. For example, for Crop Group 12 the stone fruits group, the representative commodities are sweet cherry or tart cherry; peach; and plum or fresh prune (Prunus domestica, Prunus spp.). Crop group 12 includes the following commodities: Apricot; cherry; cherry, tart; nectarine; peach; plum; plum, chickasaw; plum, damsom; plum, Japanese; plumcot; prune (fresh). Once the group tolerance is established, the tolerance level applies to all agricultural commodities within the group. It is also possible to request a crop group tolerance with a particular member of the crop excluded. An example of exclusion to a crop group would be a tolerance for the Stone Fruit group 12, except peach. In this crop group residue data for cherry and plum are used to establish a group tolerance for the stone fruit group except peach.

This proposed rule builds on a related crop grouping system initially established via regulation on December 6, 1962 (27 FR 12100). That initial crop grouping scheme has been subsequently replaced and improved upon on two separate occasions (June 29, 1983 (48 FR 29855) and May 17, 1995 (60 FR 26626)). The May 1995 amendments established the current crop grouping scheme and presented the crop groups in tables. Subgroups were also created for 8 of the 19 crop groups, new commodities were added to existing groups and some representative commodities were revised. This provided petitioners with more flexibility in obtaining supporting residue data. During the rulemaking process for the 1995 amendments, EPA received comments requesting the inclusion of additional crop groups in the crop grouping scheme for crops such as oil seed crops, subtropical fruits, and tropical fruits. Those proposed changes were determined to be beyond the scope of the 1995 rulemaking. Nonetheless, EPA welcomed the opportunity to evaluate additional crop group and subgroup proposals submitted by interested parties for future consideration.

In 2002, a nation wide cooperative effort called the USDA Inter regional Research Project No.4 (IR4), along with the governments of Canada and Mexico held the first International Crop Grouping Symposium. One conclusion from the symposium was that EPA's crop group regulation should be updated to incorporate more than 500 ``orphan crops'' (both domestic and imported) which are not currently members of a crop group. The symposium also recommended that many of the existing crop groups in the crop group regulation be revised to facilitate harmonization of crop groups and simplification of commodity terminology for establishing Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) internationally. The full proceedings from this symposium are available at http://www.ir4.rutgers.edu/Other/USDACropGroupingSymposium.pdf .

The International Crop Groupings Consulting Committee (ICGCC) was subsequently convened and is presently composed of over 180 crop, agrichemical and regulatory experts representing more than 40 countries, including the United States, Canada and the European Union (EU) members. The goal of the ICGCC is to harmonize international crop groupings and to that end, involves NAFTA. At the request of IR4, the ICGCC reviews proposals for revised or new crop groups and develops crop petitions to submit to the EPA. The review process is conducted by an ICGCC workgroup which validates the crop group, subgroup, and commodities (including adding or deleting commodities), and provides [[Page 28922]]
commodity information including cultural, nutritional, and medicinal information. The group makes MRL comparisons with Codex and EU crop classification and evaluates world production on relevant commodities. Within this process, growers and commodity experts provide valuable input on commodities and international members provide specific information on the commodities grown in their countries and regions which provides perspectives on harmonization approaches. The ICGCC prepares commodity monographs for each specific crop group as well as information tables for crop group comparison. The draft crop grouping petition is then examined by the workgroup and the final petition is submitted by USDA IR4 to EPA for analysis.

Today's proposal is based upon three petitions developed by the ICGCC workgroup and submitted to EPA by IR4. These petitions and the monographs supporting them have been included in the docket for the proposed rule. EPA expects that a series of additional petitions seeking amendments and changes to the crop groupings regulations (40 CFR 180.41) will originate from the ICGCC workgroup over the next few years.

EPA believes that this proposal is a burdenreducing regulation. It will provide for greater sharing of data by permitting the results from magnitude of residue field trial studies in one crop to be applied to other similar crops. The primary beneficiaries are minor crop producers and consumers. Minor crop producers will benefit because lower registration costs will encourage more products to be registered on minor crops, providing additional tools for pest control. Consumers are expected to benefit by having more affordable and abundant food products available. Secondary beneficiaries are pesticide registrants. Expanded markets for pesticide products will lead to increased sales. EPA's position is that data from representative crops will not underestimate the public exposure to pesticide residues through the consumption of treated crops. The IR4 Project and EPA, which are publicly funded Federal government entities, will also more efficiently use some resources as a result of the rule. Revisions to the crop grouping scheme will result in no appreciable costs or negative impacts to consumers, minor crop producers, pesticide registrants, the environment, or human health. There is also a growing international need for harmonizing crop groupings as the benefits of work sharing become more apparent.

B. International Considerations

1. NAFTA partner involvement in this proposal. EPA's Chemistry Science Advisory Council (ChemSAC), an internal Agency peer review committee, provided a detailed analysis for each proposed crop group to Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), IR4, and the government of Mexico for their review and comment and invited these parties to participate in the ChemSac meeting to finalize the report.

EPA scientists will present the amended crop grouping to PMRA's Science Management Committee (SMC) for their evaluation. EPA will provide a ``reviewer's guide'' describing the crop grouping amendments and explaining how to express the changes to the crop group in the Federal Register to IR4 and PMRA in support of implementation and to inform the regulatory community.

2. Relationship of this proposal to Codex activities. In 2004 and 2005, Canada and the U.S. Codex delegation discussed possible opportunities that a linkage of the USDA IR4 crop group initiative with ongoing limited revisions of the Codex system of Classification of Foods and Animal Feeds could bring to harmonizing MRL recommendations. In December 2005, the NAFTA TWG executive agreed that the United States and Canada should work together to advance incorporation of U.S. and Canadian bilateral activities on crop groups into the CCPR Codex work. Involvement by NAFTA TWG member countries in the Codex process will facilitate the adoption of the ICGCC crop groups, thereby providing a mechanism for developing residue data using representative crops at the international level. Standardization of commodity terminology within the global context and the adoption of Codex MRLs representative of the ICGCC Crop Groups will greatly facilitate international guideline harmonization. As a result of these efforts, minor crop growers will have easier access to crop protection tools by an improved extrapolation from representative crops to other crops in the same crop group, while a broader harmonization will minimize impediments to trade.

EPA believes that NAFTA partners will pursue such programmatic changes. PMRA will in parallel undertake to follow its procedures under the authority of Canada's Pest Control Products (PCP) Act (2002) to publish its regulatory directives. These regulatory documents will be used to update the Residue Chemistry Guidelines of each NAFTA member country. Once the new or updated crop groups become effective in the United States, Mexico will have them as a reference for the establishment of maximum residue limits in Mexico.

III. Specific Proposed Revisions

This section explains the proposed revisions to the crop group regulations.

A. Phasing out Preexisting Crop Groups

Amending preexisting crop groups may result in uncertainty as to the status of crop group tolerances established prior to such an amendment as well as confusion in distinguishing between groups established before and after the amendment. This problem is particularly acute when the amendment adds or removes commodities from the coverage of the crop group. To avoid potential confusion, EPA is proposing to amend the generic crop group regulations to include an explicit scheme for how revised crop groups will be organized in the regulations.

In brief, EPA is proposing that, when a crop group is amended in a manner that expands or contracts its coverage of commodities, EPA will (1) retain the preexisting crop group in Sec. 180.41; (2) insert the revised crop group immediately after the preexisting crop group in the CFR; and (3) title the revised crop group in a way that clearly differentiates it from the preexisting crop group.

Under the proposed nomenclature the revised crop group will retain roughly the same name and number as the preexisting group except that the number will be followed by a hyphen and the final two digits of the year it is established. For example, today EPA is proposing to revise Crop Group 3: Bulb Vegetables (Allium spp.) Group. The revised group will be titled Crop Group 307: Bulb Vegetables Group. Dropping ``(Allium spp.)'' reflects the revised character of the group.

Where additions to a crop group make the preexisting crop group name misleading, EPA will amend the name as well as the number. For example, today EPA is proposing to revise Crop Group 13: Berries Group. The revised group will be titled Crop Group 1307: Berries and Small Fruit Group. This change is necessary because of the addition of commodities to this group.

Tolerances established for revised crop groups will include the new number (and new name, if applicable) so that it is apparent on the face of the tolerance regulation what commodities are covered. Similarly, it will be clear what tolerances for preexisting crop
[[Page 28923]]
groups are covered since these existing tolerance regulations use the preexisting crop group names.

Although EPA will initially retain preexisting crop groups that have been superceded by revised crop groups, EPA will not establish new tolerances under the preexisting groups. Further, EPA plans to eventually convert tolerances for any preexisting crop groups to tolerances with the coverage of the revised crop group. This conversion will be effected both through the registration review process and in the course of preparing new risk assessments for a pesticide. To this end, EPA requests that petitioners for tolerances address this issue in their petitions. For example, assuming EPA adopts the amendment to Crop Group 3: Bulb Vegetables (Allium spp.) Group, any tolerance petition for a pesticide that has a Group 3 tolerance should include a request that the Group 3 tolerance be amended to a Group 307 tolerance, since the representative commodities are equivalent. When all crop group tolerances for a superceded crop group have been revised or removed, EPA will remove the superceded group from Sec. 180.41.

B. Group 307: Bulb Vegetables Group

EPA is proposing to revise the bulb vegetables crop group in the following manner. EPA will retain the preexisting Crop Group 3 and title the revised group as Crop Group 307.

1. Add commodities. EPA proposes to amend the existing Crop Group 3 from 7 to 25 commodities. The existing crop group consists of the following seven commodities: (1) Garlic (Allium sativum L. var.sativum); (2) Garlic, greatheaded (elephant) (Allium ampeloprasm L. var ampleloprasum); (3) Leek (Alliumporrum L.); (4) Onion, dry bulb and green, (Allium cepa L. var. cepa); (5) Onion, Welsh, (Allium fistulosm L.); (6) Shallot, bulb (Allium cepa var. aggregatum G. Don); and (7) Shallot, fresh leaves (Allium cepa var.aggregatum G. Don).

The 18 commodities EPA proposes to add to the group are: (1) Chive, fresh leaves (Allium schoenoprasum L.); (2) Chive, Chinese, fresh leaves (Allium tuberosum Rottler ex. Spreng.); (3) Daylily, bulb (Hemerocallis fulva L.) (L. var. fulva); (4) Elegans hosta (Hosta Sieboldiana (Hook) Engl); (5) Fritillaria, bulb, (Fritillaria L. fritillary); (6) Fritillaria, leaves (Fritillaria L. fritillary); (7) Garlic, serpent, bulb, (Allium sativum var. ophioscorodon); (8) Kurrat (Allium kurrat Schweinf. ex. K. Kause) (9) Lady's leek (Allium cernuum Roth); (10) Lily, bulb (Lilium spp. (Lilium Leichtlinii var maximowiczii, Lilium lancifolium)); (11) Onion, Beltsville bunching (Allium x proliferum (Moench) Schrad. Ex. Willd); (12) Onion, Chinese, bulb (Allium chinense G. Don.); (13) Onion, fresh (Allium fistulosum L. var. caespitosum Makino); (14) Onion, macrostem (Allium macrostemom Bunge); (15) Onion, pearl (Allium porrum var. sectivum); (16) Onion, potato, bulb (Allium cepa L. var. aggregatum G. Don); (17) Onion, tree, tops (Allium x proliferum (Moench) Schrad. ex. Willd.); and (18) Wild leek (Allium tricoccum Aiton).

Commodities are being added to this crop group for several reasons. EPA is now able to place many minor or specialty crops that were considered ``orphan crops'' into an appropriate crop group. The publication of the ``Food and Feed Crops of the United States'' includes over 690 crops and provides the necessary information. Additionally, increased demand for these minor fruits and vegetables by U.S. growers and consumers, particularly immigrants, drives the need for pest control tools and thus the need to group crops. Increasing the variety of available pest control tools for a crop enables U.S. growers to develop integrated pest management programs (IPM), which can minimize pest resistance for these high cash value alternative crops.

2. Change the names of representative commodities. EPA proposes to change the names of the representative commodities for the crop group by designating onion, bulb and onion, green as the representative commodities. The representative commodities for the group are currently listed as onion, green and onion dry bulb. This change merely adopts current commodity name designations.

3. Create crop subgroups. EPA proposes to add two crop subgroups to the revised crop group. The subgroups are:

i. Subgroup 307A. Bulb onion subgroup. Representative crop. Onion, bulb. Eleven commodities are included in this subgroup: Daylily, bulb; Fritillaria, bulb; Garlic, bulb; Garlic greatheaded, bulb; Garlic, serpent, bulb; Lily, bulb; Onion, bulb; Onion, Chinese, bulb; Onion, pearl; Onion, potato, bulb; Shallot, bulb.

ii. Subgroup 307B. Green onion subgroup. Representative crop. Onion, green. Fifteen commodities are included in this subgroup: Chive, fresh leaves; Chive, Chinese, fresh leaves; Elegans hosta; Fritillaria, leaves; Kurrat; Lady's leek; Leek; Leek, wild; Onion, Beltsville bunching; Onion, fresh; Onion, green; Onion, macrostem; Onion, tree, tops; Onion, Welsh; Shallots, fresh leaves.

Creation of subgroups provides flexibility in the establishment of crop group tolerances which can be important for international harmonization. EPA has determined that residue data on the designated representative crops will provide adequate information on residue levels in crops and subgroups. This determination is based on similarities in cultural practices, edible food portions (bulb vs. leaves), the fact that none of these crops are used as animal feed items, as well as existing data on residue levels in these crops.

4. Change the format. EPA proposes to convert the current narrative format of the existing group to tabular form. This format will make it easier to read and understand.

5. Change the name. EPA is proposing to drop the descriptor ``(Allium spp.)'' from the name because, commodities not in Allium spp. are now included in the group.

C. Crop Group 1307: Berry and Small Fruit Group

EPA is proposing to revise and expand the berries crop group in the following manner. EPA will retain preexisting Crop Group 13 and title the revised group as Crop Group 1307.

1. Add commodities. Crop Group 13 currently contains the following 11 commodities: (1) Blackberries (Rubus eubatus); (2) Blueberry, highbush; (3) Blueberry, lowbush (Vaccinium spp.); (4) and (5) Currant, black and red(Ribes nigrum L., Ribes rubrum L.); (6) Elderberry (Sambucus spp.); (7) Gooseberry, (Ribes spp.); (8) Huckleberry, (Gaylussacia spp.); (9) Loganberry (Rubus loganobaccus L.H. Bailey); and (10) and (11) Raspberry, black and red (Rubus cccidentalis L., Rubus strigosus Michx., Rubusidaeus L.).

EPA proposes to expand Crop group 13 by adding 36 commodities as follows: (1) Amur River grape (Vitis amurensis Rupr (Vitaceae)); (2) Aronia berry (Aronia spp. (Rosaceae)); (3) Bayberry (Myrica spp. (Myricaceae)) (4) Bearberry (Arctostaphylos uvaursi (L.) Spreng (Ericaceae)); (5) Bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus L. (Ericaceae )); (6) Buffalo Currant (Ribes aureum Pursh. (Grossulariaceae)); (7) Buffaloberry (Shepherdia argentea (Pursh) Nutt.(Eleagnaceae)); (8) Che (Cudrania tricuspidata Bur. ex Lavallee (Moraceae)); (9) Chilean guava (Myrtus ugni Mol. (Myrtaceae)); (10) Chokecherry (Prunus virginiana L. (Rosaceae)); (11) Cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus L. (Rosaceae)); (12) Cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon Aiton (Ericaceae)); (13) European barberry (Berberis vulgaris L. (Berberidaceae)); (14) Grape (Vitis spp. [[Page 28924]]
(Vitaceae)); (15) Highbush cranberry, (Viburnum opulus L. var. Americanum Aiton (Caprifoliaceae)); (16) Honeysuckle, edible (Lonicera caerula L. var. emphyllocalyx Nakai (Caprifoliaceae)); (17) Jostaberry (Ribes x nidigrolaria Rud. Bauer & A. Bauer. Grossulariaceae (Saxifragaceae)); (18) Juneberry (including Saskatoon
Berry)(Amelanchier spp. (Rosaceae)); (19) Kiwifruit, fuzzy (Actinidia deliciosa (A. Chev.) C.F. Liang & A.R. Ferguson (Actinidaceae)); (20) Kiwifruit, hardy (Actinidia arguta (Siebold & Zucc.) Planch. Ex Miq (Actinidaceae)); (21) Lingonberry (Vaccinium vitisidaea L. (Ericaceae)); (22) Maypop (Passiflora incarnata L. (Passifloraceae)); (23) Mountain Pepper Berries (Tasmannia lanceolata (Poir.) A.C. Sm.(Winteraceae)); (24) (Mulberry (Morus spp. (Moraceae)); (25) Muntries (Kunzea pomifera F. Muell. (Myrtaceae)); (26) (Native currant (Acrotriche depressa R. Br. (Epacridaceae)); (27) Partridgeberry (Mitchella repens L. (Rubiaceae)); (28) Phalsa (Grewia subinaequalis DC. (Tiliaceae)); (29) Pincherry (Prunus pensylvanica L. f. (Rosaceae)); (30) Riberry (Syzygium luehmannii (Myrtaceae)); (31) Salal (Gaultheria shallon Pursh (Ericaceae)); (32) Schisandra berry (Schisandra chinensis (Turcz.) Baill. (Schisandraceae)); (33) Sea buckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides L. (Eleagnaceae)); (34) Serviceberry (Sorbus spp. (Rosaceae)); (35) Strawberry (Fragaria x ananassa Duchesne, (Rosaceae)) and (36) Wild raspberry (Rubus muelleri Lefevre ex P.J. Mull (Rosaceae)).

The proposed addition of crops to this crop group is based on reasons similar to those for expanding the bulb vegetable group. Additionally, newer varieties of specialty berries and small fruits have become available for grower and homeowner use that were not previously in this crop group. These commodities have similarities in cultural practices, edible food portions (mostly berries) and residue levels.

2. Change the crop group name. EPA proposes to change the name of ``Crop Group 13: Berries Group'' to ``Crop Group 1307: Berry and small fruit group.'' This name change reflects the addition of the new commodities to the group.

3. Revise the existing subgroups. EPA is proposing that revised Crop Group 1307 have two subgroups. Subgroup 1307A is similar to existing Subgroup 13A except that wild raspberry has been added. Wild raspberry, like the other members of this subgroup, is a member of the genus ``Rubus spp.,''and the members of this genus have a similar fruit structure and are cultivated as shrubs.

EPA proposes to revise the Bushberry subgroup 13B by adding 9 additional commodities for a total of 16 as follows in the revised Bushberry subgroup 1307B: (1) Aronia berry (2) Blueberry, highbush, and cultivars and/or hybrids of these (3) Blueberry, lowbush (4) Buffalo currant (5) Chilean guava (6) Currrant, black and currant red (7) Elderberry (8) European barberry (9) Gooseberry (10) Highbush cranberry (11) Honeysuckle, edible (12) Huckleberry (13) Jostaberry (14) Native currant (15) Salal (16) Sea Buckthorn.

The crops proposed to be added to this subgroup are all maintained as bushes and all have edible exposed berries. They are all similar in plant biology and cultural practices and are likely to have similar pest problems and the need for pest control products with similar use patterns.

4. Create new subgroups. EPA proposes to add six new subgroups to revised Crop Group 1307 as follows:

i. Large shrub/tree berry subgroup 1307C. (Representative commodities. Elderberry or Mulberry) Bayberry; Buffaloberry; Che; Chokeberry; Elderberry; Juneberry; Mountain pepper berries; Mulberry; Phalsa; Pinchberry; Riberry; Serviceberry.

ii. Small fruit vine climbing subgroup 1307D. (Representative commodities. Grape and Fuzzy kiwifruit) Amur river grape; Gooseberry; Grape; Kiwifruit, fuzzy; Kiwifruit, hardy; Maypop; Schisandra berry.

iii. Small fruit vine climbing subgroup, except grape 1307E. (Representative commodity. Fuzzy kiwifruit) Amur river grape; Gooseberry; Kiwifruit, fuzzy; Kiwifruit, hardy; Maypop; Schisandra berry.

iv. Small fruit vine climbing subgroup except fuzzy kiwifruit, Grape 1307F. (Representative commodity. Grape) Amur river grape; Grape; Kiwifruit, hardy; Maypop; Schisandra berry.

v. Low growing berry subgroup 1307G. (Reprensentative commodity. Strawberry) Bearberry; Bilberry; Blueberry, lowbush; Cloudberry; Cranberry; Lingonberry; Muntries; Partridgeberry; Strawberry.

vi. Low growing berry subgroup, except strawberry 1307H. (Representative commodity. Cranberry) Bearberry; Bilberry; Blueberry, lowbush; Cloudberry; Cranberry; Ligonberry; Muntries; Partridgeberry.

Creation of subgroups provides flexibility in the establishment of crop group tolerances which can be important for international harmonization. EPA has determined that residue data on the designated representative crops will provide adequate information on residue levels in crops and subgroups. This determination is based on similarities in cultural practices, edible food portions, geographical location, the fact that none of these crops are used as animal feed items, as well as existing data on residue levels in these crops.

5. Revise the representative commodities. EPA proposes to revise the representative crops for Crop Group 1307 as follows: ``Any one blackberry or any one raspberry; and blueberry[rdquo,] will be changed to ``Any one blackberry or any one raspberry; highbush blueberry; elderberry or mulberry; grape; fuzzy kiwifruit; and strawberry.'' As explained above, these commodities are representative of their respective subgroups and thus, in combination with other commodities, are representative of the entire group.

D. New Crop Group 21: Edible Fungi Group

EPA proposes to add a new crop group, entitled Edible Fungi, as Crop Group 21 and to include in this crop group 20 commodities in 12 fungi families. (1) Blewitt (Lepista nuda(Bull.:Fr.) Cooke (Tricholomataceae)); (2) Bunashimeji (Hypsizygus marmoreus (Agaricaceae)); (3) Chinese mushroom (Volvariella volvacea (Bull.) Singer (Pluteaceae)); (4) Enoke (Flammulina velutipes (Curt.) Singer (Tricholomataceae)); (5) HimeMatsutake (Agaricus blazei Murill (Agaricaceae)); (6) Hirmeola (Auricularia auricula (Auriculariaceae)); (7) Maitake (Grifola frondosa (Polyporaceae)); (8) Morel (Morchella spp. (Morchellaceae)); (9) Nameko (Pholiota nameko, (Strophariaceae)); (10) Net Bearing (Dictyophora Dictyophora indusiata (Phallaceae)); (11) Oyster Mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus (Jacq.) Kummer
(Tricholomataceae)); (12) Pom Pom (Hericium erinaceus (Hydnaceae)); (13) Reishi Mushroom (Ganoderma lucidum (Leyss. Fr.) Karst. (Ganodermataceae)); (14) Rodmans (Agaricus, Agaricus bitorquis (Quel.) Saccardo (Agaricaceae)); (15) Shiitake mushroom (Lentinula edodes (Berk.) Pegl. (Polyporaceae)); (16) Shimeji (Tricholoma conglobatum, (Tricholomataceae)); (17) Stropharia (Stropharia spp. (Strophariaceae)) (18) Truffle Tuber spp. (Tuberaceae); (19) White button mushroom (Agaricus bisporus (Lange) Imbach (Agaricaceae)) and (20) White Jelly fungi (Tremella fuciformis (Tremellaceae)).

Edible Fungi Group 21 is proposed based on similarities in cultural edible food portions, residue levels,
[[Page 28925]]
geographical locations, pest problems, the fact that none of these crops are used as animal feed items and for international harmonization purposes. All members of this crop group are either grown in indoor structures under very strict environmentally controlled conditions or cultivated outdoors as a crop. This new crop group will have no crop subgroup associated with it. The commodities grown in this proposed crop group are principally grown in other countries. This crop group will provide the opportunity for domestic growers to produce these high value minor crops that are in demand, particularly from immigrant populations in the United States.

EPA proposes to define the representative commodities for the Edible Fungi Group 21 as: ``White button mushrooms and any one oyster mushroom or any one Shiitake mushroom.''

These proposed representative commodities were chosen based on their production and economic importance. The cultural practices, pest problems, and commercial production of the different edible fungi are also similar. Specialty mushrooms, which are expanding in the United States, will be represented by the oyster or shiitake mushroom. E. Technical Corrections

EPA proposes that the misspelled commodity ``Onion, Welch'' in Crop Group 3 be corrected to ``Onion, Welsh''. This correction will be made in preexisting Crop Group 3. Additionally, EPA is proposing to list the commodities in preexisting Crop Group 3 in tabular form. EPA proposes to revise the commodity definitions under 40 CFR 180.1(g) pertaining to onions and adding an entry for garlic to clarify these definitions. The proposed changes are:

EPA proposes to revise the commodity definition in 40 CFR 180.1(g) for caneberries as follows:

This proposed amendment will correct the scientific names to the caneberry commodity definition and update the commodity terminology to conform to the ``EPA Food and Feed Commodity Vocabulary'' rules for commodity terminology.

EPA proposes to establish a new commodity definition in 40 CFR 180.1(g) for raspberry as follows:
Raspberry = Rubus spp. (including bababerry, black raspberry, blackcap, caneberry, framboise, frambueso, himbeere, keriberry, mayberry, red raspberry, thimbleberry, tulameen, yellow raspberry, and cultivars and/or hybrids of these).

This proposed commodity definition for raspberry will further clarify the cultivars of raspberry covered in the Caneberry subgroup.

EPA proposes to delete from Sec. 180.41(b) the terms: Mushroom; grape; strawberry, and kiwifruit.

These commodities were listed as not being in a crop group, but are now proposed to become crop group members.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has designated this proposed rule as a notsignificant regulatory action under section 3(f) of the Executive Order.

EPA prepared an analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with this action. This analysis is contained in ``Economic Analysis Proposed Expansion of Crop Grouping Program.'' A copy of the analysis is available in the docket and is briefly summarized here.

This is a burdenreducing regulation. Crop grouping has saved money by permitting the results of pesticide exposure studies for one to be applied to other, similar crops. The regulation exploits the above opportunity for saving money by expanding certain crop groups to include more crops.

The primary beneficiaries of the regulation are minor crop producers and consumers. Specialty crop producers will benefit because lower registration costs will encourage more products to be registered on minor crops, providing additional tools pest control. Consumers will benefit by having a larger supply of imported and domestically produced specialty produce at potentially lower costs. Secondary beneficiaries are pesticide registrants, who benefit because expanded markets for pesticides products will lead to increased sales. The IR4 Project and EPA, which are publicly funded Federal government entities, will also more efficiently use resources as a result of the rule. EPA will also benefit from broader operational efficiency gains, which result from fewer emergency pesticide use requests from specialty crop growers, the ability to conduct risk assessment based on crop grouping, greater ease of establishing import tolerances, greater capacity to assess risks of pesticides used on crops not grown in the United States, further harmonization of crop classification and nomenclature, harmonized commodity import and export standards and increased potential for resource sharing between EPA and other pesticide regulatory agencies. Revisions to the crop grouping program will result in no appreciable costs or negative impacts to consumers, specialty crop producers, pesticide registrants, the environment or human health.

Benefits of the proposed rule can be shown through an example of the impact of the proposed changes to Crop Group 3. The proposed rule expands Crop Group 3, Bulb Vegetables from 7 to 25 crops, an increase of 18 from the original crop group. The addition of these crops would greatly increase the efficiency of IR4 and EPA in registering pesticides on specialty crops. Assuming that the crops added to the crop group require only one field trial to be granted a standalone registration (grown on a regional basis and few acres), to accomplish the same result without expanding Crop Group 3 would require 18 field trials, at a cost of $5.4 million ($300,000 per field trial) and the administrative costs of both the IR4 testing process and the EPA review process. In addition, specialty crop producers will potentially gain access to important pest control tools on 18 bulb vegetable crops, consumers will benefit from the potential for a cheaper, more abundant and varied supply of bulb vegetables, and pesticide registrants will potentially enjoy greater sales.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not contain any new information collection requirements that would need approval by OMB under the provisions of the Paper Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. However, the proposed rule is expected to reduce mandatory paperwork due to a reduction in required studies. The proposed rule will have the effect of reducing the number of residue
[[Page 28926]]
chemistry studies because fewer representative crops would need to be tested under a crop grouping scheme, than it would otherwise be required.

EPA is interested in your comments on the estimated reductions as presented in the Economic Analysis prepared for this proposed rule. Direct your comments to EPA using the public docket that has been established for this proposed rule as described in ADDRESSES. The Agency will consider and address comments received as it develops the final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., the Agency hereby certifies that this rule will not have a significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule does not have any direct adverse impacts on small businesses, small nonprofit organizations, or small local governments.

For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business according to the small business size standards established by the Small Business Administration (SBA); (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any notforprofit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.

In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant economic impact on of the proposed rule on small entities'' (5 U.S.C. sections 603 and 604). Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden or otherwise has a positive economic effects on all of the small entities subject to the rule.

This proposed action provides regulatory relief and regulatory flexibility because the new or expanded crop groups ease the process for pesticide manufacturers to obtain pesticide tolerances on greater numbers of crops and make it likely that pesticides will be more widely available to growers for use on crops, particularly specialty crops. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 1044), EPA has determined that this action does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year. Accordingly, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202, 203, 204, and 205 of UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132

Pursuant to Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not have federalism implications, 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, as specified in the Order. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this proposed rule.

F. Executive Order 13175

As required by Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not have tribal implications because it will not have any affect 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, as specified in the Order. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule. G. Executive Order 13045

Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) does not apply to this proposed rule because this action is not designated as an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 (see Unit IV.A.), nor does it establish an environmental standard, or otherwise have a disproportionate effect on children.

H. Executive Order 13211

This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not designated as an regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 (see Unit IV.A.), nor is it likely to have any adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, and sampling procedures) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not impose any technical standards that would require EPA to consider any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898

Under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), the Agency has not considered environmental justicerelated issues because this proposed rule does not have an adverse impact on the environmental and health conditions in lowincome and minority communities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Pesticides and pests.

Dated: May 10, 2007.
James B. Gulliford,
Assistant Administrator for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as follows:

PART 180[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180 would continue to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a, and 371.

2. In the table to Sec. 180.1(g) by revising the entries for ``Caneberries,'' ``Onions,'' ``Onions (dry bulb only),'' and ``Onions, green,'' and by adding entries for ``Garlic,'' and ``Raspberry'' to read as follows:
Sec. 180.1 Definitions and interpretations.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
[[Page 28927]]
A B
* * * * *
Caneberry............................ Rubus spp. (including blackberry; Rubus caesius (youngberry) Rubus loganbaccus (loganberry); Rubus idaeus (red and black raspberries); and varities and/ or hybrids of these. * * * * *
Garlic............................... Garlic, great headed garlic, and serpent garlic.
* * * * *
Onion................................ Bulb onion, green onion, and garlic.
Onion, bulb.......................... Bulb onion: garlic; great headed garlic; serpent garlic; Chinese onion; pearl onion; potato onion; and shallot, bulb. Onion, green......................... Green onion; lady's leek; leek; wild leek; Beltsville bunching onion; fresh onion; tree onion, tops; Welsh, onion; and shallot, fresh leaves.
* * * * *
Raspberry............................ Rubus spp. (including bababerry, black raspberry, blackcap, caneberry, framboise, frambueso, himbeere, keriberry, mayberry, red raspberry, thimbleberry, tulameen, yellow raspberry, and cultivars and /or hybrids of these).

* * * * *

3. In Sec. 180.40 by redesignating paragraph (j) as paragraph (k) and by adding new paragraph (j) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.40 Tolerances for crop groups.
* * * * *
(j) When EPA amends a crop group in a manner that expands or contracts the commodities that are covered by the group, EPA will initially retain the preexisting as well as the revised crop group in the CFR. The revised crop group will have the same number as the pre existing crop group; however, the revised crop group number will be followed by a hyphen and the final two digits of the year in which it was established (e.g., if Crop Group 1 is amended in 2007, the revised group will be designated as Crop Group 107). If the preexisting crop group had crop subgroups, these subgroups will be numbered in a similar fashion in the revised crop group. The name of the revised crop group will not be changed from the preexisting crop group unless the revision so changes the composition of the crop group that the pre existing name is no longer accurate. Once a revised crop group is established, EPA will no longer establish tolerances under the pre existing crop group. At appropriate times, EPA will amend tolerances for crop groups that have been superseded by revised crop groups to conform the preexisting crop group to the revised crop group. Once all of the tolerances for the preexisting crop group have been updated, the preexisting crop group will be removed from the CFR.

* * * * *

4. Section 180.41 is amended by removing the commodities: mushroom, grape, strawberry, and kiwifruit from paragraph (b); by revising paragraph (c)(3) and by redesignating paragraphs (c)(4) through (c)(19) as paragraphs (c)(5) through (c)(20), respectively, and by adding a new paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.41 Crop group tables.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) Crop Group 3. Bulb Vegetables (Allium spp.) Group.
(i) Representative commodities. Onion, green; and onion, dry bulb. (ii) Commodities. The following is a list of all the commodities in Crop Group 3.
Crop Group 3: Bulb Vegetable (Allium spp.) GroupCommodities Garlic, bulb (Allium sativum)
Garlic, great headed, (elephant) (Allium ampeloprasum var. ampeloprasum) Leek (Allium ampeloprasum, A. porrum, A. tricoccum)
Onion, dry bulb and green (Allium cepa, A. fistulosum)
Onion, Welsh, (Allium fistulosum)
Shallot (Allium cepa var. cepa)
(4) Crop Group 307. Bulb Vegetables Group.
(i) Representative commodities. Onion, bulb and onion, green. (ii) Table. The following Table 1 lists all the commodities listed in Crop Group 307 and identifies the related crop subgroups. Table 1.Crop Group 307: Bulb Vegetable Group
Commodities Related crop subgroups Chive, fresh leaves Allium schoenoprasum 307B L........................................
Chive, Chinese, fresh leaves Allium 307B tuberosum Rottler ex Spreng..............
Daylily, bulb Hemerocallis fulva (L.) L. 307A var. fulva...............................
Elegans hosta Hosta Sieboldiana (Hook.) 307B Engl.....................................
Fritillaria, bulb Fritillaria L. 307A fritillary...............................
Fritillaria, leaves Fritillaria L. 307B fritillary...............................
Garlic, bulb Allium sativum L. var. 307A sativum (A. sativum Common Garlic Group).
Garlic, great headed, bulb Allium 307A ampeloprasum L. var. ampeloprasum (A.
ampeloprasum Greatheaded Garlic Group)..
Garlic, Serpent, bulb Allium sativum var. 307A ophioscorodon (or A. sativum
Ophioscorodon Group).....................
Kurrat Allium kurrat Schweinf. Ex. K. 307B Krause (or A. ampeloprasum Kurrat Group).
Lady's leek Allium cernuum Roth........... 307B Leek Allium porrum L. (syn:A. ampeloprasum 307B L. var. porrum (L.) J. Gay)
(A.ampeloprasum Leek Group)..............
[[Page 28928]]
Leek, wild Allium tricoccum Aiton......... 307B Lily, bulb Lilium spp. (Lilium Leichtlinii 307A var maximowiczii, Lilium lancifolium)....
Onion, Beltsville bunching Allium x 307B proliferum (Moench) Schrad. (syn: Allium
fistulosum L. x A. cepa L.)..............
Onion, bulb Allium cepa L. var. cepa (A. 307A cepa Common Onion Group).................
Onion, Chinese, bulb Allium chinense G. 307A Don. (syn: A. bakeri Regel)..............
Onion, fresh Allium fistulosum L. var. 307B caespitosum Makino.......................
Onion, green Allium cepa L. var. cepa (A. 307B cepa Common Onion Group).................
Onion, macrostem Allium macrostemom Bunge. 307B Onion, Pearl Allium porrum var. sectivum 307A (or A. ampeloprasum Pearl Onion Group)...
Onion, potato, bulb Allium cepa L. var. 307A aggregatum G. Don. (A. cepa Aggregatum
Group)...................................
Onion, tree, tops Allium x proliferum 307B (Moench) Schrad. ex Willd. (syn: A. cepa
var. proliferum (Moench) Regel; A. cepa
L. var. bulbiferum L.H. Bailey; A. cepa
L. var. viviparum (Metz.) Alef.).........
Onion, Welsh, tops Allium fistulosum L.... 307B Shallot, bulb Allium cepa var. aggregatum 307A G. Don...................................
Shallot, fresh leaves Allium cepa var. 307B aggregatum G. Don........................
(iii) Table. The following Table 2 identifies the crop subgroups for Crop Group 307, specifies the representative commodities for each subgroup and lists all the commodities included in each subgroup. Table 2.Crop Group 307: Subgroup Listing
Representative commodities Commodities Crop subgroup 307A. Onion, bulb, Daylily, bulb; Fritillaria, subgroup. bulb; Garlic, bulb; Garlic, greatheaded, bulb; Garlic, Serpent, bulb; Lily, bulb; Onion, bulb; Onion, Chinese, bulb; Onion, Pearl; Onion, potato, bulb; Shallot, bulb. Crop subgroup 307B. Onion, green, Chive, fresh leaves; Chive, subgroup. Chinese, fresh leaves; Elegans hosta; Fritillaria, leaves; Kurrat; Lady's leek; Leek; Leek, wild; Onion, Beltsville bunching; Onion, fresh; Onion, green; Onion, macrostem; Onion, tree, tops; Welsh onion; Shallot, fresh leaves. * * * * *

5. Section 180.41 is further amended by redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (c)(15) through (c)(20) as paragraphs (c)(16) through (c)(21), respectively, and by adding a new paragraph (c)(15), and paragraph (c)(22) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.41 Crop group tables.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(15) Crop Group 1307. Berry and Small Fruit Crop Group. (i) Representative commodities. Any one blackberry or any one raspberry; highbush blueberry; elderberry or mulberry; grape; kiwifruit, fuzzy; and strawberry.
(ii) Table. The following Table 1 lists all the commodities listed in Crop Group 1307 and identifies the related crop subgroups. Table 1.Crop Group 1307: Berry and Small Fruit Crop Group Commodities Related crop subgroups Amur river grape (Vitis amurensis Rupr)... 1307D 1307E 1307F Aronia berry (Aronia spp.)................ 1307B Bayberry (Myrica spp.).................... 1307C Bearberry (Arctostaphylos uvaursi)....... 1307G 1307H Bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus L.)......... 1307G 1307H Blackberry (Rubus spp.) (including Andean 1307A blackberry, arctic blackberry,
bingleberry, black satin berry,
boysenberry, brombeere, California
blackberry, Chesterberry, Cherokee
blackberry, Cheyenne blackberry, common
blackberry, coryberry, darrowberry,
dewberry, Dirksen thornless berry,
evergreen blackberry, Himalayaberry,
hullberry, lavacaberry, loganberry,
lowberry, Lucretiaberry, mammoth
blackberry, marionberry, mora, mures
deronce, nectarberry, Northern dewberry,
olallieberry, Oregon evergreen berry,
phenomenalberry, rangeberry, ravenberry,
rossberry, Shawnee blackberry, Southern
dewberry, tayberry, youngberry,
zarzamora, and cultivars and/or hybrids
of these.................................
Blueberry, highbush (Vaccinium spp.)...... 1307B Blueberry, lowbush (Vaccinium 1307B angustifolium Aiton).....................
Buffalo currant (Ribes aureum Pursh)...... 1307B Buffaloberry (Shepherdia argentea (Pursh) 1307C Nutt.)...................................
Che (Cudrania tricuspidata Bur. Ex 1307C Lavallee.................................
Chilean guava (Myrtus ugni Mol.).......... 1307B Chokecherry (Prunus virginiana L.)........ 1307C [[Page 28929]]
Cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus L.)......... 1307G 1307H Cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon Aiton)... 1307G 1307H Currant, black (Ribes nigrum L.).......... 1307B Currant, red (Ribes rubrum L.)............ 1307B Elderberry (Sambucus spp.)................ 1307B 1307C European barberry (Berberis vulgaris L.).. 1307B Gooseberry (Ribes spp.)................... 1307B 1307D 1307E Grape (Vitis spp.)........................ 1307D 1307F Highbush cranberry (Viburnum opulus L. 1307B var. Americanum Aiton)...................
Honeysuckle, edible (Lonicera caerula L. 1307B var. emphyllocalyx Nakai, Lonicera
carrula L var. edulis Turcz. Ex herder)..
Huckleberry (Gaylussacia spp.)............ 1307B Jostaberry (Ribes x nidigrolaria Rud. 1307B Bauer & A. Bauer)........................
Juneberry, Saskatoon berry (Amelanchier 1307B spp.).................................... 1307C Kiwifruit, fuzzy (Actinidia deliciosa A. 1307D Chev.) C.F. Liang & A.R. Ferguson)....... 1307E Kiwifruit, hardy (Actinidia arguta 1307D (Siebold & Zucc.) Planch. Ex Miq)........ 1307E 1307F Lingonberry (Vaccinium vitisidaea L.).... 1307B 1307G 1307H Maypop (Passiflora incarnata L.).......... 1307E 1307F Mountain pepper berries (Tasmannia 1307C lanceolata)..............................
Mulberry Morus spp.)...................... 1307C Muntries (Kunzea pomifera)................ 1307G 1307H Native currant (Acrotriche depressa)...... 1307B Partridgeberry (Mitchella repens L.)...... 1307G 1307H Phalsa (Grewia subinaequalis DC.)......... 1307C Pincherry (Prunus pensylvanica L.f.)...... 1307C Raspberry, black and red (Rubus spp.)..... 1307A Riberry (Syzygium luehmannii)............. 1307C Salal (Gaultheria shallon Pursh).......... 1307B 1307C Schisandra berry (Schisandra chinensis 1307D (Turcz.) Baill........................... 1307E Sea buckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides L.)... 1307B Serviceberry (Sorbus spp.)................ 1307C Strawberry (Fragaria x ananassa Duchesne). 1307G Wild raspberry (Rubus muelleri Lefevre ex 1307A P.J. Mull)...............................
(iii) Table. The following Table 2 identifies the crop subgroups for Crop Group 1307, specifies the representative commodities for each subgroup and lists all the commodities included in each subgroup. [[Page 28930]]
Table 2.Crop Group 1307: Subgroup Listing
Representative commodities Commodities Crop Subgroup 1307A. Caneberry Blackberry; Raspberry, red and subgroup. black; wild raspberry; loganberry; cultivars and/or hybrids of these.
Crop Subgroup 1307B. Bushberry Aronia, berry; blueberry, subgroup. highbush, and cultivars and/or hybrids of these; blueberry, lowbush; currant, buffalo; Chilean,guava; currant, black; and currant, red; elderberry, European, barberry; gooseberry; cranberry, highbush; Honeysuckle, edible; Huckleberry; jostaberry; Juneberry: lingonberry; Native, currant; salal; Sea, buckthorn. Crop Subgroup 1307C. Large shrub/ Bayberry; Buffaloberry; che; tree berry subgroup. chokecherry; elderberry; Juneberry; Mountain pepper, berries; mulberry; Phalsa; pincherry; riberry; salal; serviceberry.
Crop Subgroup 1307D. Small fruit Amur river grape; gooseberry; vine climbing subgroup. grape; kiwifruit, fuzzy; kiwifruit, hardy; Maypop, Schisandra berry.
Crop Subgroup 1307E. Small fruit Amur river grape; gooseberry; vine climbing subgroup, except kiwifruit, fuzzy; kiwifruit, grape. hardy; Maypop; schisandra berry. Crop Subgroup 1307F. Small fruit Amur river grape; grape, vine climbing subgroup except fuzzy Kiwifruit, hardy; maypop; kiwifruit. schisandra berry.
Crop Subgroup 1307G. Lowgrowing Bearberry; bilberry;
berry subgroup. blueberry,lowbush; cloudberry; cranberry; lingonberry; muntries; partridgeberry; strawberry
Crop Subgroup 1307H. Lowgrowing Bearberry; bilberry; blueberry, berry subgroup, except strawberry. lowbush; cloudberry; cranberry; lingonberry; muntries; partridgeberry.
* * * * *
(22) Crop Group 21. Edible fungi Group.
(i) Representative commodities. White button mushroom and any one oyster mushroom or any Shiitake mushroom.
(ii) Table. The following is a list of all the commodities in Crop Group 21. There are no related subgroups.
Crop Group 21: Edible Fungi GroupCommodities
Blewitt, Lepista nuda (Tricholomataceae)
Bunashimeji, Hypsizygus marrmoreus (Agaricaceae)
Chinese mushroom, Volvariella volvacea (Bull.) Singer (Pluteaceae) Enoki, Flammulina velutipes (Curt.) Singer (Tricholomataceae) HimeMatsutake, Agaricus blazei Murill (Agaricaeae)
Hirmeola, Auricularia auricular (Auricularicaceae)
Maitake, Grifola frondosa (Polyporaceae)
Morel, Morchella spp. (Morchellaceae)
Nameko, Pholiota nameko, (Strophariaceae)
Net Bearing Dictyophora, Dictyophora indusiata (Phallaceae) Oyster mushroom, Pleurotus spp. (Tricho

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

Ram[egrave] Cromwell, Field and External Affairs Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 0001; telephone number: (703) 3089068; fax number: (703) 3055884; e mail address: cromwell.rame@epa.gov.