C.F.R. » Title 40 » CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY › SUBCHAPTER E—PESTICIDE PROGRAMS › PART 164—RULES OF PRACTICE GOVERNING HEARINGS, UNDER THE FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE ACT, ARISING FROM REFUSALS TO REGISTER, CANCELLATIONS OF REGISTRATIONS, CHANGES OF CLASSIFICATIONS, SUSPENSIONS OF REGISTRATIONS AND OTHER HEARINGS CALLED PURSUANT TO SECTION 6 OF THE ACT › Subpart D—Rules of Pract…

40 C.F.R. § 164.132

Procedures governing hearing

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The burden of proof in the hearing convened pursuant to § 164.131 shall be on the applicant and he shall proceed first. The issues in the hearing shall be whether: (1) Substantial new evidence exists and (2) such substantial new evidence requires reversal or modification of the existing cancellation or suspension order. The determination of these issues shall be made taking into account the human and environmental risks found by the Administrator in his cancellation or suspension determination and the cumulative effect of all past and present uses, including the requested use, and uses which may reasonably be anticipated to occur in the future as a result of granting the requested reversal or modification. The granting of a particular petition for use may not in itself pose a significant risk to man or the environment, but the cumulative impact of each additional use of the cancelled or suspended pesticide may re-establish, or serve to maintain, the significant risks previously found by the Administrator.

(b) The presiding officer shall make recommendations, including findings of fact and conclusions and to the extent feasible, as determined by the presiding officer, the procedures at the hearing shall follow the Rules of Practice, set forth in subparts A and B of this part 164.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1985–1985 · leading case: Nat'l Cattlemen's Ass'n v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 773 F.2d 268 (10th Cir. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nat'l Cattlemen's Ass'n v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 773 F.2d 268 (10th Cir. 1985). “” 40 C.F.R. § 164.132 (a) (1984). In 1982 the EPA ordered a hearing to evaluate evidence that may have become available since 1972 to determine whether “substantial new evidence” mandated lifting the ban on Compound 1080.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.