EPA INCREASES FEES FOR PROCESSING TOLERANCE PETITIONS
Subject: EPA INCREASES FEES FOR PROCESSING TOLERANCE PETITIONS
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:05:04 -0500
From: Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization: Get Set Inc. (http://www.getipm.com/)
To: Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
Director, State
of California, Department of Pesticide Regulation
cc: Christine Whitman whitman.christine@epa.gov
IN
THIS EPA UPDATE:
EPA
INCREASES FEES FOR PROCESSING TOLERANCE PETITIONS FOR PESTICIDES IN FOOD AND
FEED
EPA
has increased the fees charged for processing petitions for tolerances or
legal residue levels in food and feed by 4.94 percent, 3.81 percent and 4.77
percent. These increases reflect the locality pay increases provided to
civilian Federal General Schedule employees working in the Washington,
D.C./Baltimore, M.D. metropolitan areas in January 2000, 2001, and 2002.
Implementation of these fees has been delayed in anticipation of the proposed
Fee for Service Rule that has not been realized. Under the new fee
scale, which goes into effect on April 12, 2002, the basic fee for
establishing a new tolerance will be $77,625. The Federal Food, Drug and
Cosmetic act authorizes EPA to establish pesticide tolerance levels for raw
agricultural commodities and requires the Agency to collect fees to cover,
among other things, the costs of processing petitions for tolerances in order
that the tolerance process be as self-supporting as possible. The
regulation governing tolerances provides for automatic annual adjustments to
the fees based on annual percentage changes in Federal salaries. The
increased fees rule was published in the Federal Register on March 13, 2002
and is available on the Agency's website at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr
.
The
fee increases in this rule do not reflect the requirements of FFDCA Section
408 (m)(1) as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, which states
that the Agency shall collect tolerance fees that, in the aggregate, will
cover all costs associated with processing tolerance actions.
Modifications to the fee schedule to meet the FQPA requirements will be
addressed in a separate action.
Rather
than collect fees for allowable pesticide (POISON) tolerances (CONTAMINATION)
maybe the EPA should define the word "alternative". Until the EPA
can define the word alternative, some "regulators" will not allow
the use of any safe and far more effective alternatives that do not leave
"POISON tolerances" on and in our food. SLT
If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, please email us at list@safe2use.com with "subscribe" in the subject line.