Ethaboxam; Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition to Establish a Tolerance for a Certain Pesticide Chemical in or on Food, 38918-38921 [05-13262]
Download as PDF
38918
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 6, 2005 / Notices
effects of a particular pesticide’s
residues and ‘‘other substances that
have a common mechanism of toxicity.’’
BAS 510F is a foliar fungicide
chemically belonging to the carboxin
class of fungicides. BAS 510F acts in the
fungal cell by inhibiting mitochondrial
respiration through inhibition of the
succinate-ubiquinone oxidase reductase
system in Complex II of the
mitochondrial electron transport chain.
BAS 510F shares this mode of action
with only one other currently registered
U.S. pesticide - carboxin.
EPA is currently developing
methodology to perform cumulative risk
assessments. At this time, there is no
available data to determine whether
BAS 510F has a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances or how to
include this pesticide in a cumulative
risk assessment. Unlike other pesticides
for which EPA has followed a
cumulative risk approach based on a
common mechanism of toxicity, BAS
510F does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other
substances.
E. Safety Determination
1. U.S. population. Using the
conservative exposure assumptions
described above and based on the
completeness and the reliability of the
toxicity data, BASF has estimated that
dietary exposure to BAS 510F will
utilize 13.0% of the cPAD for the U.S.
population. The aggregate exposure
including food, water, and residential
golf exposure has shown that there is no
concern from the exposure from
drinking water. BASF concludes that
there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result from the aggregate
exposure to residues of BAS 510F,
including anticipated dietary and
drinking water exposures and nonoccupational exposures.
2. Infants and children. Using the
conservative exposure assumptions
described above and based on the
completeness and the reliability of the
toxicity data, BASF has estimated that
dietary exposure to BAS 510F will
utilize 32% of the cPAD for most highly
exposure infant and children subgroup
(children 1–2 years of age). The
aggregate exposure including food,
water, and residential golf exposure has
shown that there is no concern to any
subpopulation from the exposure from
drinking water. BASF concludes that
there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm to infants or children will result
from the aggregate exposure to residues
of BAS 510F, including anticipated
dietary and drinking water exposures
and non-occupational exposures.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:35 Jul 05, 2005
Jkt 205001
F. International Tolerances
A maximum residue level (MRL) has
not been established for boscalid BAS
510F in any crop by the codex
Alimentarius Commission.
[FR Doc. 05–13175 Filed 7–5–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[OPP–2005–0058; FRL–7719–3]
Ethaboxam; Notice of Filing a
Pesticide Petition to Establish a
Tolerance for a Certain Pesticide
Chemical in or on Food
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice announces the
initial filing of a pesticide petition
proposing the establishment of
regulations for residues of a certain
pesticide chemical in or on various food
commodities.
DATES: Comments, identified by docket
identification (ID) number OPP–2005–
0058, must be received on or before
August 5, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted electronically, by mail, or
through hand delivery/courier. Follow
the detailed instructions as provided in
Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bryant Crowe, Registration Division
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–0025; e-mail address:
crowe.bryant@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111)
• Animal production (NAICS code
112)
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311)
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532)
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
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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. How Can I Get Copies of this
Document and Other Related
Information?
1. Docket. EPA has established an
official public docket for this action
under docket ID number OPP–2005–
0058. The official public docket consists
of the documents specifically referenced
in this action, any public comments
received, and other information related
to this action. Although a part of the
official docket, the public docket does
not include Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
The official public docket is the
collection of materials that is available
for public viewing at the Public
Information and Records Integrity
Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall
#2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This
docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The docket
telephone number is (703) 305–5805.
2. Electronic access. You may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
An electronic version of the public
docket is available through EPA’s
electronic public docket and comment
system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA
Dockets at https://www.epa.gov/edocket/
to submit or view public comments,
access the index listing of the contents
of the official public docket, and to
access those documents in the public
docket that are available electronically.
Although not all docket materials may
be available electronically, you may still
access any of the publicly available
docket materials through the docket
facility identified in Unit I.B.1. Once in
the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in
the appropriate docket ID number.
Certain types of information will not
be placed in the EPA Dockets.
Information claimed as CBI and other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute, which is not
included in the official public docket,
will not be available for public viewing
in EPA’s electronic public docket. EPA’s
policy is that copyrighted material will
not be placed in EPA’s electronic public
E:\FR\FM\06JYN1.SGM
06JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 6, 2005 / Notices
docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public
docket. To the extent feasible, publicly
available docket materials will be made
available in EPA’s electronic public
docket. When a document is selected
from the index list in EPA Dockets, the
system will identify whether the
document is available for viewing in
EPA’s electronic public docket.
Although not all docket materials may
be available electronically, you may still
access any of the publicly available
docket materials through the docket
facility identified in Unit I.B. EPA
intends to work towards providing
electronic access to all of the publicly
available docket materials through
EPA’s electronic public docket.
For public commenters, it is
important to note that EPA’s policy is
that public comments, whether
submitted electronically or in paper,
will be made available for public
viewing in EPA’s electronic public
docket as EPA receives them and
without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. When EPA
identifies a comment containing
copyrighted material, EPA will provide
a reference to that material in the
version of the comment that is placed in
EPA’s electronic public docket. The
entire printed comment, including the
copyrighted material, will be available
in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on
computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be
transferred to EPA’s electronic public
docket. Public comments that are
mailed or delivered to the docket will be
scanned and placed in EPA’s electronic
public docket. Where practical, physical
objects will be photographed, and the
photograph will be placed in EPA’s
electronic public docket along with a
brief description written by the docket
staff.
C. How and to Whom Do I Submit
Comments?
You may submit comments
electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper
receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate
docket ID number in the subject line on
the first page of your comment. Please
ensure that your comments are
submitted within the specified comment
period. Comments received after the
close of the comment period will be
marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not required to
consider these late comments. If you
wish to submit CBI or information that
is otherwise protected by statute, please
follow the instructions in Unit I.D. Do
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:35 Jul 05, 2005
Jkt 205001
not use EPA Dockets or e-mail to submit
CBI or information protected by statute.
1. Electronically. If you submit an
electronic comment as prescribed in this
unit, EPA recommends that you include
your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact
information in the body of your
comment. Also include this contact
information on the outside of any disk
or CD ROM you submit, and in any
cover letter accompanying the disk or
CD ROM. This ensures that you can be
identified as the submitter of the
comment and allows EPA to contact you
in case EPA cannot read your comment
due to technical difficulties or needs
further information on the substance of
your comment. EPA’s policy is that EPA
will not edit your comment, and any
identifying or contact information
provided in the body of a comment will
be included as part of the comment that
is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA’s electronic
public docket. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA’s
electronic public docket to submit
comments to EPA electronically is
EPA’s preferred method for receiving
comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets
at https://www.epa.gov/edocket/, and
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once in the
system, select ‘‘search,’’ and then key in
docket ID number OPP–2005–0058. The
system is an ‘‘anonymous access’’
system, which means EPA will not
know your identity, e-mail address, or
other contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by
e-mail to opp-docket@epa.gov,
Attention: Docket ID Number OPP–
2005–0058. In contrast to EPA’s
electronic public docket, EPA’s e-mail
system is not an ‘‘anonymous access’’
system. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to the docket without going
through EPA’s electronic public docket,
EPA’s e-mail system automatically
captures your e-mail address. E-mail
addresses that are automatically
captured by EPA’s e-mail system are
included as part of the comment that is
placed in the official public docket, and
made available in EPA’s electronic
public docket.
iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit
comments on a disk or CD ROM that
you mail to the mailing address
identified in Unit I.C.2. These electronic
submissions will be accepted in
WordPerfect or ASCII file format. Avoid
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38919
the use of special characters and any
form of encryption.
2. By mail. Send your comments to:
Public Information and Records
Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office
of Pesticide Programs (OPP),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001, Attention: Docket ID
Number OPP–2005–0058.
3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver
your comments to: Public Information
and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB),
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm.
119, Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. Bell St.,
Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID
Number OPP–2005–0058. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
docket’s normal hours of operation as
identified in Unit I.B.1.
D. How Should I Submit CBI to the
Agency?
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI electronically
through EPA’s electronic public docket
or by e-mail. You may claim
information that you submit to EPA as
CBI by marking any part or all of that
information as CBI (if you submit CBI
on disk or CD ROM, 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
CBI). Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
In addition to one complete version of
the comment that includes any
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 and EPA’s electronic public
docket. If you submit the copy that does
not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM,
mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
clearly that it does not contain CBI.
Information not marked as CBI will be
included in the public docket and EPA’s
electronic public docket without prior
notice. If you have any questions about
CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI,
please consult the person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare
My Comments for EPA?
You may find the following
suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as
possible.
2. Describe any assumptions that you
used.
3. Provide copies of any technical
information and/or data you used that
support your views.
E:\FR\FM\06JYN1.SGM
06JYN1
38920
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 6, 2005 / Notices
4. If you estimate potential burden or
costs, explain how you arrived at the
estimate that you provide.
5. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns.
6. Make sure to submit your
comments by the deadline in this
notice.
7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
be sure to identify the docket ID number
assigned to this action in the subject
line on the first page of your response.
You may also provide the name, date,
and Federal Register citation.
II. What Action is the Agency Taking?
EPA has received a pesticide petition
as follows proposing the establishment
and/or amendment of regulations for
residues of a certain pesticide chemical
in or on various food commodities
under section 408 of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a. EPA has determined that
this petition contains data or
information regarding the elements set
forth in FFDCA section 408(d)(2);
however, EPA has not fully evaluated
the sufficiency of the submitted data at
this time or whether the data support
granting of the petition. Additional data
may be needed before EPA rules on the
petition.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection,
Agricultural commodities, Feed
additives, Food additives, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 23, 2005.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Summary of Petition
The petitioner summary of the
pesticide petition is printed below as
required by FFDCA section 408(d)(3).
The summary of the petition was
prepared by the petitioner and
represents the view of the petitioner.
EPA has not fully evaluated the merits
of the pesticide petition. The summary
may have been edited by EPA if the
terminology used was unclear, the
summary contained extraneous
material, or the summary
unintentionally made the reader
conclude that the findings reflected
EPA’s position and not the position of
the petitioner. The petition summary
announces the availability of a
description of the analytical methods
available to EPA for the detection and
measurement of the pesticide chemical
residues or an explanation of why no
such method is needed.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:35 Jul 05, 2005
Jkt 205001
LG Life Sciences, Ltd.
PP 4E6863
EPA has received a pesticide petition
(4E6863) from LG Life Sciences, Ltd., c/
o Landis International, Inc., P.O. Box
5126, Valdosta, GA 31603–5126
proposing pursuant to section 408(d) of
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to
amend 40 CFR part 180 to establish
tolerances for residues of ethaboxam
(LGC-30473), (RS)-N-(alpha-cyano-2thenyl)-4-ethyl-2-(ethylamino)-1,3thiazole-5-carboxamide, in or on grapes,
grape juice, raisins, and wine. The
tolerances are set at the following
values: Grapes at 3.5 parts per million
(ppm), grape juice at 3.3 ppm, raisins at
5.8 ppm, and wine at 2.5 ppm.
A program of 19 residue trials was
conducted in both Northern and
Southern Europe over a 2–year period
(2001–2002) on vines. In Northern
Europe trials were conducted in France
and Germany, while in Southern Europe
the trials were in France, Italy, and
Spain. Applications of ethaboxam 10%
SC were made at the proposed GAP of
5 x 200 gram active substance/hectare (g
a.s./ha) with a 21-day post harvest
interval (PHI). Of the 19 trials, 8 were
conducted as decline studies, with 5 in
Southern Europe and 3 in Northern
Europe. Residue levels in grapes ranged
from less than the limit of detection (<
0.005 ppm) to 3.4 ppm with a mean
value of 1.07 ppm. The proposed EU
maximum residue level (MRL) for
grapes is 3.5 parts per million (ppm)
and the MRLs for grape processed
commodities based on the
concentration/dilution factors
determined in the processing study are
2.5 ppm for young wine, 1.3 ppm for
wine, 2.3 ppm for juice, and 5.8 ppm for
raisins.
These proposed MRLs were combined
with a program of seven trials
conducted in 2004. This program was
conducted in Chile (three trials),
Australia (two trials), Argentina (one
trial), and Mexico (one trial). Residues
were analyzed resulting from five
applications of ethaboxam 10% SC at 2
or 4 Liter/hectare (L/ha), sampled at 21
days following the final application. No
residues of ethaboxam were detected
above the limit of detection of 0.002
ppm in any non-treated samples from
any of the trials. Residues of ethaboxam
detected in grapes ranged from 0.183 to
1.827 ppm in samples sprayed at a rate
of 2 L/ha and from 1.121 to 7.072 ppm
for grapes sprayed at a rate of 4 L/ha.
Residues detected in juice (must)
samples were between 0.64 and 3.24
ppm (2 L/ha rate); in raisins residues
were between 0.39 and 1.68 ppm (2 L/
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
ha rate); in wine residues were between
0.11 and 0.49 ppm (2 L/ha rate).
Combining the residues from the two
programs the following tolerances are
proposed: Grapes at 3.5 ppm, grape
juice at 3.3 ppm, raisins at 5.8 ppm, and
wine at 2.5 ppm.
Neither livestock feeding studies or
livestock metabolism, distribution and
expression of residue studies are
required, as vines will not be utilized
for feeding. The storage stability of
ethaboxam was assessed in grape
homogenates during freezer storage (-18°
C). The results of the analysis show that
ethaboxam was stable for a minimum of
17 months.
The primary metabolic pathways of
ethaboxam in plants were established in
grapes, tomatoes, and potatoes.
Extensive metabolism occurred in the
grape. The proposed bio-transformation
pathway for ethaboxam in grapes is the
formation of LGC-35523 from
ethaboxam (by photolytic degradation)
and incorporation of LGC-35523 into
natural products (sugars). In the potato,
most of the parent compound was
metabolized and incorporated into
starch. Following acid hydrolysis of the
starch fraction to glucose, a substantial
proportion of the radiolabel was
converted to glucosazone. It was
therefore concluded that the radiolabel
was incorporated into the starch
backbone and formed part of the
carbohydrate pool. In the tomato, fruit
taken at harvest showed that the major
component at harvest was unchanged
ethaboxam, accounting for 49–57% total
radioactive residues. Studies of the
absorption, distribution, metabolism
and excretion of ethaboxam (LGC30473) were carried out using [14C]LGC-30473, 14C-thiophene LGC-30473
and [14C-thiazole] LGC-30473 dosed
separately. Studies were performed in
rats of the same strain used for toxicity
assessments at dose levels of 10 or 150
milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg) and oral
gavage dosing in a 1%methylcellulose,
0.1% Tween 80 vehicle.
Excretion of radioactivity following
either a single dose of [14C-thiophene or
14C-thiazole] LGC-30473 or 14
consecutive doses of [14C-thiazole] LGC30473 was rapid with <90% of
radioactivity eliminated in urine or
faeces within 48 hours. Faecal excretion
(66–92% of dose in 120 hours (h))
substantially exceeded urinary excretion
(13-30% of dose in 120 h) with the
percentage excreted in the urine higher
at the lower dose. These factors suggest
capacity limited absorption. This was
supported by the pharmacokinetic data
which showed a slightly less than dose
proportional increase in Cmax and AUC
(area under the plasma concentration-
E:\FR\FM\06JYN1.SGM
06JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 6, 2005 / Notices
time curve) between the 10 and 150 mg/
kg doses (dose ratio 15, AUC ratio 11).
Substantial radioactivity was detected
in bile suggesting first-pass metabolism
was significant. Tmax was around three
times longer at the high dose level (3–
6 hours (h) at 150 mg/kg versus 1–2 h
at 10 mg/kg). The plasma elimination
half-life of 31–41 h was similar for both
doses. The blood cell elimination halflife was considerably longer at 69–162
hours for both doses. AUC 120 was
higher in blood plasma following 14
doses at 10 mg/kg/day than following
one dose (~2 fold) but more notably
higher in blood cells (~5 fold).
Distribution of radioactivity after a
single dose at 10 or 150 mg/kg or 14
consecutive doses at 10 mg/kg was
similar at both dose levels and was
highest in thyroid (thiazole label only),
liver and blood cells. Concentrations
120 hours after the 14th dose were 5–
15 fold higher than after the single dose,
but all tissue accumulation was low.
There were no substantial differences in
distribution or excretion pattern
between sexes. Extent of absorption,
assessed in biliary excretion
experiments, was similar between the
sexes at 10 mg/kg (71–72% dose) but
higher in females at 150 mg/kg (males,
48% dose; females 61% dose). All
elements of this study indicate similar
results for both labels and there was
little evidence of cleavage of the intact
molecule. Five major metabolites were
identified each accounting for >5%
dose: LGC-32794, LGC-32800, LGC32801, LGC-32802, and LGC-32803. In
one pathway, ethaboxam was N-deethylated to LGC-32794 followed by
oxidation of the thiazole sulphur to
LGC-32800. Ethaboxam also underwent
enolization. In a second pathway the
enol form underwent hydrolysis to the
amide LGC-32801. In a third pathway
the enol underwent sulphate
conjugation to LGC-32802 and
hydroxylation/sulphate conjugation to
LGC-32803. Ethaboxam was detected as
a major component of faecal extracts at
both dose levels. Destructive catabolism
of the molecule appeared to be
negligible.
[FR Doc. 05–13262 Filed 7–5–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
FEDERAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
ADVISORY BOARD
Notice of Revised Exposure Draft
Accounting for Fiduciary Activities
Board Action: Pursuant to 31 U.S.C.
3511(d), the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), as
amended, and the FASAB Rules of
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:35 Jul 05, 2005
Jkt 205001
Procedure, as amended in April 2004,
notice is hereby given that the Federal
Accounting Standards Advisory Board
(FASAB) has issued a revised exposure
draft, Accounting for Fiduciary
Activities. The proposed Exposure Draft
would enhance reporting on fiduciary
activities by clarifying the definition of
fiduciary activities, reducing the
number of acceptable approaches to
accounting for these activities, and
ensuring adequate disclosure in notes to
the financial statements.
The Exposure Draft is available on the
FASAB home page https://
www.fasab.gov/exposuredraft.htm.
Copies can be obtained by contacting
FASAB at (202) 512–7350. Respondents
are encouraged to comment on any part
of the exposure draft. Written comments
are requested by August 30, 2005, and
should be sent to: Wendy M. Comes,
Executive Director, Federal Accounting
Standards Advisory Board, 441 G Street,
NW., Suite 6814, Mail Stop 6K17V,
Washington, DC 20548.
A public hearing on the proposed
standard has been scheduled for August
17, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wendy Comes, Executive Director, 441
G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20548,
or call (202) 512–7350.
Authority: Federal Advisory Committee
Act, Pub. L. 92–463.
Dated: June 29, 2005.
Charles Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 05–13213 Filed 7–5–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1610–01–M
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
Notice of Public Information
Collection(s) Being Submitted for
Review to the Office of Management
and Budget
June 21, 2005.
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications
Commission, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork burden
invites the general public and other
Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on the
following information collection(s), as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) of 1995, Public Law 104–13.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor
a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control
number. No person shall be subject to
any penalty for failing to comply with
a collection of information subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that
does not display a valid control number.
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38921
Comments are requested concerning (a)
whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s
burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on the respondents,
including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) comments should be
submitted on or before August 5, 2005.
If you anticipate that you will be
submitting PRA comments, but find it
difficult to do so within the period of
time allowed by this notice, you should
advise the contact listed below as soon
as possible.
ADDRESSES: Direct all Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) comments to
Judith B. Herman, Federal
Communications Commission, Room 1–
C804, 445 12th Street, SW., DC 20554 or
via the Internet to JudithB.Herman@fcc.gov. If you would like to
obtain or view a copy of this new or
revised information collection, you may
do so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page
at: https://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information or copies of the
information collection(s), contact Judith
B. Herman at 202–418–0214 or via the
Internet at Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Control No.: 3060–0357.
Title: Request for Designation as a
Recognized Private Operating Agency.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit.
Number of Respondents: 10.
Estimated Time Per Response: 5
hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion
reporting requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 35 hours.
Total Annual Cost: $13,000.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No.
Needs and Uses: The Commission
adopted and released a Report and
Order in IB Docket No. 04–226, FCC 05–
91, which adopted the proposals made
in the preceding Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) of the same title
(FCC 04–133). This rulemaking is
hereinafter referred to as the
International E-Filing R&O. The
International E-Filing R&O eliminates
paper filings and requires applicants to
E:\FR\FM\06JYN1.SGM
06JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 6, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38918-38921]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-13262]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[OPP-2005-0058; FRL-7719-3]
Ethaboxam; Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition to Establish a
Tolerance for a Certain Pesticide Chemical in or on Food
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide
petition proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of a
certain pesticide chemical in or on various food commodities.
DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number OPP-
2005-0058, must be received on or before August 5, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or
through hand delivery/courier. Follow the detailed instructions as
provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bryant Crowe, Registration Division
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-0025; e-mail address: crowe.bryant@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
Crop production (NAICS code 111)
Animal production (NAICS code 112)
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311)
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532)
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. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?
1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under docket ID number OPP-2005-0058. The official public docket
consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any
public comments received, and other information related to this action.
Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not
include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket
is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at
the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119,
Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This docket
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is (703) 305-
5805.
2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
An electronic version of the public docket is available through
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may
use EPA Dockets at https://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official
public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that
are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be
available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly
available docket materials through the docket facility identified in
Unit I.B.1. Once in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the
appropriate docket ID number.
Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets.
Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public
docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic
public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be
placed in EPA's electronic public
[[Page 38919]]
docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the
official public docket. To the extent feasible, publicly available
docket materials will be made available in EPA's electronic public
docket. When a document is selected from the index list in EPA Dockets,
the system will identify whether the document is available for viewing
in EPA's electronic public docket. Although not all docket materials
may be available electronically, you may still access any of the
publicly available docket materials through the docket facility
identified in Unit I.B. EPA intends to work towards providing
electronic access to all of the publicly available docket materials
through EPA's electronic public docket.
For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is
that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper,
will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public
docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment
containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that
material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's
electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the
copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public
docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph
will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief
description written by the docket staff.
C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?
You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the
appropriate docket ID number in the subject line on the first page of
your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the
specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the
comment period will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider
these late comments. If you wish to submit CBI or information that is
otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions in Unit
I.D. Do not use EPA Dockets or e-mail to submit CBI or information
protected by statute.
1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as
prescribed in this unit, EPA recommends that you include your name,
mailing address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in
the body of your comment. Also include this contact information on the
outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter
accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be
identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact
you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
or needs further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's
policy is that EPA will not edit your comment, and any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot
read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to
submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for
receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at https://www.epa.gov/
edocket/, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Once in the system, select ``search,'' and then key in docket ID number
OPP-2005[n]dash;0058. The system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by e-mail to opp-docket@epa.gov,
Attention: Docket ID Number OPP-2005-0058. In contrast to EPA's
electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail system is not an ``anonymous
access'' system. If you send an e-mail comment directly to the docket
without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail
system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail addresses
that are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are included as
part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and
made available in EPA's electronic public docket.
iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM
that you mail to the mailing address identified in Unit I.C.2. These
electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file
format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption.
2. By mail. Send your comments to: Public Information and Records
Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP-2005-0058.
3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver your comments to: Public
Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Office of Pesticide
Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall
2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID
Number OPP-2005-0058. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
docket's normal hours of operation as identified in Unit I.B.1.
D. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency?
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI
electronically through EPA's electronic public docket or by e-mail. You
may claim information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part
or all of that information as CBI (if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM,
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 CBI). Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
any 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 and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit
the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside
of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information
not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's
electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any
questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
[[Page 38920]]
4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this
notice.
7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.
II. What Action is the Agency Taking?
EPA has received a pesticide petition as follows proposing the
establishment and/or amendment of regulations for residues of a certain
pesticide chemical in or on various food commodities under section 408
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a.
EPA has determined that this petition contains data or information
regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however,
EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at
this time or whether the data support granting of the petition.
Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the petition.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 23, 2005.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Summary of Petition
The petitioner summary of the pesticide petition is printed below
as required by FFDCA section 408(d)(3). The summary of the petition was
prepared by the petitioner and represents the view of the petitioner.
EPA has not fully evaluated the merits of the pesticide petition. The
summary may have been edited by EPA if the terminology used was
unclear, the summary contained extraneous material, or the summary
unintentionally made the reader conclude that the findings reflected
EPA's position and not the position of the petitioner. The petition
summary announces the availability of a description of the analytical
methods available to EPA for the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues or an explanation of why no such method is
needed.
LG Life Sciences, Ltd.
PP 4E6863
EPA has received a pesticide petition (4E6863) from LG Life
Sciences, Ltd., c/o Landis International, Inc., P.O. Box 5126,
Valdosta, GA 31603-5126 proposing pursuant to section 408(d) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to
amend 40 CFR part 180 to establish tolerances for residues of ethaboxam
(LGC-30473), (RS)-N-(alpha-cyano-2-thenyl)-4-ethyl-2-(ethylamino)-1,3-
thiazole-5-carboxamide, in or on grapes, grape juice, raisins, and
wine. The tolerances are set at the following values: Grapes at 3.5
parts per million (ppm), grape juice at 3.3 ppm, raisins at 5.8 ppm,
and wine at 2.5 ppm.
A program of 19 residue trials was conducted in both Northern and
Southern Europe over a 2-year period (2001-2002) on vines. In Northern
Europe trials were conducted in France and Germany, while in Southern
Europe the trials were in France, Italy, and Spain. Applications of
ethaboxam 10% SC were made at the proposed GAP of 5 x 200 gram active
substance/hectare (g a.s./ha) with a 21[dash]day post harvest interval
(PHI). Of the 19 trials, 8 were conducted as decline studies, with 5 in
Southern Europe and 3 in Northern Europe. Residue levels in grapes
ranged from less than the limit of detection (< 0.005 ppm) to 3.4 ppm
with a mean value of 1.07 ppm. The proposed EU maximum residue level
(MRL) for grapes is 3.5 parts per million (ppm) and the MRLs for grape
processed commodities based on the concentration/dilution factors
determined in the processing study are 2.5 ppm for young wine, 1.3 ppm
for wine, 2.3 ppm for juice, and 5.8 ppm for raisins.
These proposed MRLs were combined with a program of seven trials
conducted in 2004. This program was conducted in Chile (three trials),
Australia (two trials), Argentina (one trial), and Mexico (one trial).
Residues were analyzed resulting from five applications of ethaboxam
10% SC at 2 or 4 Liter/hectare (L/ha), sampled at 21 days following the
final application. No residues of ethaboxam were detected above the
limit of detection of 0.002 ppm in any non-treated samples from any of
the trials. Residues of ethaboxam detected in grapes ranged from 0.183
to 1.827 ppm in samples sprayed at a rate of 2 L/ha and from 1.121 to
7.072 ppm for grapes sprayed at a rate of 4 L/ha. Residues detected in
juice (must) samples were between 0.64 and 3.24 ppm (2 L/ha rate); in
raisins residues were between 0.39 and 1.68 ppm (2 L/ha rate); in wine
residues were between 0.11 and 0.49 ppm (2 L/ha rate). Combining the
residues from the two programs the following tolerances are proposed:
Grapes at 3.5 ppm, grape juice at 3.3 ppm, raisins at 5.8 ppm, and wine
at 2.5 ppm.
Neither livestock feeding studies or livestock metabolism,
distribution and expression of residue studies are required, as vines
will not be utilized for feeding. The storage stability of ethaboxam
was assessed in grape homogenates during freezer storage
(-18[deg] C). The results of the analysis show that
ethaboxam was stable for a minimum of 17 months.
The primary metabolic pathways of ethaboxam in plants were
established in grapes, tomatoes, and potatoes. Extensive metabolism
occurred in the grape. The proposed bio-transformation pathway for
ethaboxam in grapes is the formation of LGC-35523 from ethaboxam (by
photolytic degradation) and incorporation of LGC-35523 into natural
products (sugars). In the potato, most of the parent compound was
metabolized and incorporated into starch. Following acid hydrolysis of
the starch fraction to glucose, a substantial proportion of the
radiolabel was converted to glucosazone. It was therefore concluded
that the radiolabel was incorporated into the starch backbone and
formed part of the carbohydrate pool. In the tomato, fruit taken at
harvest showed that the major component at harvest was unchanged
ethaboxam, accounting for 49-57% total radioactive residues. Studies of
the absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of ethaboxam
(LGC-30473) were carried out using [\14\C]-LGC-30473, \14\C-thiophene
LGC-30473 and [\14\C-thiazole] LGC-30473 dosed separately. Studies were
performed in rats of the same strain used for toxicity assessments at
dose levels of 10 or 150 milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg) and oral gavage
dosing in a 1%methylcellulose, 0.1% Tween 80 vehicle.
Excretion of radioactivity following either a single dose of
[\14\C-thiophene or \14\C-thiazole] LGC-30473 or 14 consecutive doses
of [\14\C-thiazole] LGC-30473 was rapid with <90% of radioactivity
eliminated in urine or faeces within 48 hours. Faecal excretion (66-92%
of dose in 120 hours (h)) substantially exceeded urinary excretion (13-
30% of dose in 120 h) with the percentage excreted in the urine higher
at the lower dose. These factors suggest capacity limited absorption.
This was supported by the pharmacokinetic data which showed a slightly
less than dose proportional increase in C\max\ and AUC (area under the
plasma concentration-
[[Page 38921]]
time curve) between the 10 and 150 mg/kg doses (dose ratio 15, AUC
ratio 11). Substantial radioactivity was detected in bile suggesting
first-pass metabolism was significant. T\max\ was around three times
longer at the high dose level (3-6 hours (h) at 150 mg/kg versus 1-2 h
at 10 mg/kg). The plasma elimination half-life of 31-41 h was similar
for both doses. The blood cell elimination half-life was considerably
longer at 69-162 hours for both doses. AUC 120 was higher in blood
plasma following 14 doses at 10 mg/kg/day than following one dose (2
fold) but more notably higher in blood cells (5 fold).
Distribution of radioactivity after a single dose at 10 or 150 mg/
kg or 14 consecutive doses at 10 mg/kg was similar at both dose levels
and was highest in thyroid (thiazole label only), liver and blood
cells. Concentrations 120 hours after the 14th dose were 5-15 fold
higher than after the single dose, but all tissue accumulation was low.
There were no substantial differences in distribution or excretion
pattern between sexes. Extent of absorption, assessed in biliary
excretion experiments, was similar between the sexes at 10 mg/kg (71-
72% dose) but higher in females at 150 mg/kg (males, 48% dose; females
61% dose). All elements of this study indicate similar results for both
labels and there was little evidence of cleavage of the intact
molecule. Five major metabolites were identified each accounting for
>5% dose: LGC-32794, LGC-32800, LGC-32801, LGC-32802, and LGC-32803. In
one pathway, ethaboxam was N-de-ethylated to LGC-32794 followed by
oxidation of the thiazole sulphur to LGC-32800. Ethaboxam also
underwent enolization. In a second pathway the enol form underwent
hydrolysis to the amide LGC-32801. In a third pathway the enol
underwent sulphate conjugation to LGC-32802 and hydroxylation/sulphate
conjugation to LGC-32803. Ethaboxam was detected as a major component
of faecal extracts at both dose levels. Destructive catabolism of the
molecule appeared to be negligible.
[FR Doc. 05-13262 Filed 7-5-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S