Tetrahydrofurfuryl Alcohol (THFA); Proposed Action on Tolerance Exemption, 18689-18693 [E6-5399]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules Resistance Check, Inspection, and Jumper Installation (h) Within 180 days after the effective date of this AD: Perform the insulation resistance check, general visual inspections, and bonding jumper wire installations; in accordance with Shorts Service Bulletin SD330–28–37, SD360–28–23, SD360 SHERPA–28–3, or SD3 SHERPA–28–2; all dated June 2004; as applicable. If any defect or damage is discovered during any inspection or check required by this AD, before further flight, repair the defect or damage using a method approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM– 116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) (or its delegated agent). Note 4: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection is: ‘‘A visual examination of an interior or exterior area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within touching distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be necessary to ensure visual access to all surfaces in the inspection area. This level of inspection is made under normally available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or droplight and may require removal or opening of access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required to gain proximity to the area being checked.’’ Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (i)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Related Information (j) British airworthiness directive G–2004– 0021 R1, dated September 15, 2004, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 4, 2006. Kevin M. Mullin, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–5357 Filed 4–11–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2006–0227; FRL–8054–7] Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). AGENCY: VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:12 Apr 11, 2006 Jkt 208001 ACTION: Proposed rule. Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Al Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947– 4118, petersen.alfred@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposal addresses the following local rule: ADEQ R18–2—Appendix 8. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, we are approving this local rule in a direct final action without prior proposal because we believe these SIP revisions are not controversial. If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in subsequent action based on this proposed rule. We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further information, please see the direct final action. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern procedures for the calculation of sulfur emissions from copper smelters. We are proposing to approve a local rule that helps regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by May 12, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA–R09– OAR–2006–0227, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions. • E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. • Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. 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. Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. PO 00000 18689 Dated: March 22, 2006. Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 06–3407 Filed 4–11–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA–HO–OPP–2006–0251; FRL–7771–3] Tetrahydrofurfuryl Alcohol (THFA); Proposed Action on Tolerance Exemption Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This document proposes under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 408(e)(1) to revoke the existing exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the inert ingredient tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol (THFA) (CAS Reg. No. 97–99–4) under 40 CFR 180.910 because it does not meet the safety requirements of FFDCA section 408(b)(2). While EPA has determined that dietary risks from use of THFA exceed the Agency’s level of concern, limited uses of THFA may be permitted. Therefore, EPA is also proposing to establish for THFA an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance under 40 CFR 180.1263 that includes use limitations. The regulatory action proposed in this document contributes toward the Agency’s tolerance reassessment requirements under FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS 18690 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules of 1996. By law, EPA is required by August 2006 to reassess the tolerances that were in existence on August 2, 1996. The regulatory action proposed in this document pertains to the proposed revocation of one tolerance which would be counted as tolerance reassessment toward the August 2006 review deadline. DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 12, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket identification number (ID) No. EPA–HQ–OPP–2006– 0251, by one of the following methods: • http:/ /www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • Mail. Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. • Hand Delivery. Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2006– 0251. The docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the docket facility is (703) 305–5805. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OPP–2006– 0251. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at https:// www.regulatioris.gov/, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov website is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:12 Apr 11, 2006 Jkt 208001 include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage athttps:// www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. Docket. All documents in the docket are listed in the regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in https:// www.regulations.gov/ or in hard copy at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, 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. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Angulo, Registration Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 703–306–0404; e-mail address: angulo.karen@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 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability provisions in Unit II. 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 www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 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. E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules is proposing to establish a tolerance exemption under § 180.1263 that A. What Action is the Agency Taking? permits: EPA is now in the process of (1) Use as a seed treatment, reassessing all inert ingredient (2) Application at the time of exemptions from the requirement of a planting, (3) Application to cotton, and, tolerance (‘‘tolerance exemptions’’) (4) Use in herbicides with one established prior to August 2, 1996, as application to wheat and barley prior to required by the FFDCA section 408(q), the pre-boot stage. as amended by the FQPA. Inert These limitations significantly reduce ingredient chemicals must meet a high the number of times that THFA may be safety standard in order to merit an applied per season - often to one exemption from the numerical residue application only -- and, therefore, limitations that are imposed in a reduce the potential for dietary tolerance. exposures below the Agency’s level of 1. In evaluating the inert ingredient concern. Contributions to surface/ THFA, the Agency has determined that dietary risks of concern may result from drinking water are not anticipated from the use of THFA-containing pesticide the use of THFA under the current tolerance exemption in 40 CFR 180.910, products under the proposed use limitations considering THFA’s which allows an unlimited amount of physical-chemical properties and THFA to be applied to growing crops biodegradation potential in the and raw agricultural commodities after environment. No residential risks of harvest. concern are anticipated at this time for The hazard characterization of THFA the new tolerance exemption. shows effects of concern. Consistent i. Cumulative effects from substances systemic effects from repeated dermal with a common mechanism of toxicity. and oral exposure to THFA include decreased body weight and body weight Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA requires that, when considering whether gain. Effects were consistent over to establish, modify, or revoke a species and routes of exposure. While tolerance, the Agency consider no neurotoxicity studies were ‘‘available information’’ concerning the performed, whole body spasms were cumulative effects of a particular reported in the subchronic inhalation pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other study. substances that have a common Developmental and reproductive mechanism of toxicity.’’ effects of concern have been identified. Unlike other pesticides for which EPA Alterations in the male reproductive has followed a cumulative risk approach system from subchronic exposure to based on a common mechanism of THFA also indicates a concern for toxicity, EPA has not made a common alterations in the developing male reproductive system. The available data mechanism of toxicity finding as to THFA and any other substances and show there is evidence of increased THFA does not appear to produce a susceptibility (both quantitative and qualitative) of the offspring after in utero toxic metabolite produced by other exposure to THFA, including decreased substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not fetal body weights. assumed that THFA has a common The screening level dietary exposure mechanism of toxicity with other assessment showed that the risks were substances. For information regarding above the Agency’s level of concern for EPA’s efforts to determine which the general population and the most chemicals have a common mechanism highly exposed sub-population of toxicity and to evaluate the (children 1 to 2 years old). Because of cumulative effects of such chemicals, these risk levels, the unlimited see the policy statements released by exemption from a tolerance as is EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs currently granted to THFA under 40 concerning common mechanism CFR 180.910 does not meet the safety determinations and procedures for requirements of FFDCA section cumulating effects from substances 408(b)(2). Therefore, EPA is proposing found to have a common mechanism on to revoke the existing THFA tolerance exemption, revocation to be effective 18 EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/ pesticides/cumulative/. months after publication of the final ii. Determination of safety for U.S. rule. population, infants and children. The assessment documents for THFA Considering that dietary (food and are available electronically under EPA– drinking water) and residential risks are HQ–OPP–2006–0251 at https:// not of concern under the use limitations www.regulations.gov. of the new exemption, EPA finds that 2. EPA has identified uses of THFA exempting THFA with the limitations in that do not pose risks of concern. EPA cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS II. Background and Statutory Findings VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:12 Apr 11, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 18691 § 180.1263 will be safe for the general population including infants and children. iii. Analytical enforcement methodology. An analytical method is not required for the new tolerance exemption for enforcement purposes because the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. B. What is the Agency’s Authority for taking this Action? A ‘‘tolerance’’ represents the maximum level for residues of pesticide chemicals legally allowed in or on raw agricultural commodities and processed foods. Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, as amended by the FQPA of 1996, Public Law 104–170, authorizes the establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerance requirements, modifications in tolerances, and revocation of tolerances for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities and processed foods. Without a tolerance or exemption, food containing pesticide residues is considered to be unsafe and therefore ‘‘adulterated’’ under section 402(a) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 342(a). Such food may not be distributed in interstate commerce (21 U.S.C. 331(a)). For a food-use pesticide to be sold and distributed, the pesticide must not only have appropriate tolerances under the FFDCA, but also must be registered under FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.). Food-use pesticides not registered in the United States must have tolerances in order for commodities treated with those pesticides to be imported into the United States. C. When do these Actions Become Effective? EPA is proposing to revoke THFA’s current tolerance exemption in 40 CFR 180.910, effective 18 months after the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. Any commodities listed in this proposal treated with pesticide products containing the inert ingredient THFA, and in the channels of trade following the tolerance revocations, shall be subject to FFDCA section 408(1)(5), as established by FQPA. Under this section, any residues of these pesticide chemicals in or on such food shall not render the food adulterated so long as it is shown to the satisfaction of the Food and Drug Administration that: (1) The residue is present as the result of an application or use of the pesticide at a time and in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA, and (2) the residue does not exceed the level that was authorized at the time of the application or use to be present on E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1 18692 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules the food under a tolerance or exemption from tolerance. Evidence to show that food was lawfully treated may include records that verify the dates when the pesticide was applied to such food. EPA is proposing that the establishment of a new tolerance exemption under § 180.1263 for use of THFA will become effective on the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. Applications for new pesticide products that include THFA will be subject to the limitations of the new tolerance exemption as of the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS D. What Is the Contribution to Tolerance Reassessment? By law, EPA is required by August 2006 to reassess the tolerancesand exemptions from tolerances that were in existence on August 2, 1996. This document proposes to place an 18 month expiration date on one inert ingredient tolerance exemption, which will be counted in a final rule as a tolerance reassessment toward the August 2006 review deadline under FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by FQPA in 1996. III. Are the Proposed Actions Consistent with International Obligations? The tolerance revocation in this proposal is not discriminatory and is designed to ensure that both domestically-produced and imported foods meet the food safety standard established by the FFDCA. The same food safety standards apply to domestically produced and imported foods. EPA is working to ensure that the U.S. tolerance reassessment program under FQPA does not disrupt international trade. EPA considers Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) in setting U.S. tolerances and in reassessing them. MRLs are established by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, a committee within the Codex Alimentarius Commission, an international organization formed to promote the coordination of international food standards. It is EPA’s policy to harmonize U.S. tolerances with Codex MRLs to the extent possible, provided that the MRLs achieve the level of protection required under FFDCA. EPA’s effort to harmonize with Codex MRLs is summarized in the tolerance reassessment section of individual Reregistration Eligibility Decision documents. EPA has developed guidance concerning submissions for import tolerance support (65 FR 35069, June 1, 2000) VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:12 Apr 11, 2006 Jkt 208001 (FRL–6559–3). This guidance will be made available to interested persons. Electronic copies are available on the internet at https://www.epa.gov/. On the Home Page select ‘‘Laws, Regulations, and Dockets,’’ then select ‘‘Regulations and Proposed Rules’’ and then look up the entry for this document under ‘‘Federal Register--Environmental Documents.’’ You can also go directly to the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at https:// www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews This proposed rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of the FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (0MB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this proposed rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed rule does not contain any information collections subject to 0MB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104–4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or 0MB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C 601 et seq.), the Agency previously assessed whether establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerances, raising of tolerance levels, expansion of exemptions, or revocations might significantly impact a substantial number of small entities and concluded that, as a general matter, PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 these actions do not impose a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. These analyses for tolerance establishments and modifications, and for tolerance revocations were published on May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950) and on December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020), respectively, and were provided to the chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. Taking into account this analysis, and available information concerning the pesticides listed in this proposed rule, the Agency hereby certifies that this proposed action will not have a significant negative economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Specifically, the Agency has concluded in a memorandum dated May 25, 2001 that for import tolerance revocation there is a negligible joint probability of certain defined conditions holding simultaneously which would indicate an RFA/SBREFA concern and require more analysis. (This Agency document is available in the docket of this proposed rule). Furthermore, for the pesticide named in this proposed rule, the Agency knows of no extraordinary circumstances that exist as to the present proposal that would change the EPA’s previous analysis. Any comments about the Agency’s determination should be submitted to the EPA along with comments on the proposal, and will be addressed prior to issuing a final rule. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on 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 Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have federalism implications’’ is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that 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.’’ This proposed rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1 18693 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules provisions of section 408(n)(4) of the FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this proposed rule does not have any ‘‘tribal implications’’ as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal implications’’ is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, 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.’’ This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule. * * * * 3. Section 180.1263 is added to subpart D to read as follows: § 180.1263 Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol; exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol (THFA, CAS Reg. No. 97–99–4) is exempt from the requirement of a tolerance in or on all raw agricultural commodities when used in accordance with good agricultural practices as an inert ingredient applied only: (a) For use as a seed treatment. (b) For application at the time of planting. (c) For use on cotton. (d) For use in herbicides with one application to wheat and barley prior to the pre-boot stage. [FR Doc. E6–5399 Filed 4–11–06; 8:45 arn] BILLING CODE 6560–50–S FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 06–611; MB Docket No. 06–59, RM– 11319] Radio Broadcasting Services; Gravette, AR and Southwest City, MO Jkt 208001 Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. § 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance. * * * Limits * 15:12 Apr 11, 2006 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. * VerDate Aug<31>2005 PART 180—[AMENDED] 2. Section 180.910 is amended by revising the entry for Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol in the table to read as follows: * * Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol (THFA) (CAS Reg. No 97–99–4) Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as follows: List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Inert ingredients AGENCY: Dated: April 6, 2006. Donald R. Stubbs, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. * * * PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 * Uses * * * * Expires [insert date 18 months after date of publication of the Final rule in the FEDERAL REGISTER] * * * * SUMMARY: This document sets forth a proposal to amend the FM Table of Allotments, section 73.202(b) of the Commission’s rules. The Audio Division requests comment on a petition filed by KERM, Inc. pursuant to section 1.420(i) of the Commission’s rules. Petitioner proposes to change the community of license for Station KURM–FM from Southwest City, Missouri, to Gravette, Arkansas, and to change the FM Table of Allotments by deleting Channel 262A at Southwest City, Missouri, and by adding Channel 262A at Gravette, Arkansas, as the community’s first local aural broadcast service. The proposed coordinates for Channel 262A at Gravette, Arkansas, are 36–25–54 NL and 94–30–46 WL. The allotment will require a site restriction of 5.4 km (3.4 miles) west of Gravette. DATES: Comments must be filed on or before May 8, 2006, and reply comments on or before May 23, 2006. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve counsel for the petitioner as follows: Dan J. Alpert, Esq., The Law Office of Dan J. Alpert, 2120 N. 21st Road, Arlington, Virginia 22201. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah A. Dupont, Media Bureau (202) 418–7072. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. * Solvent/cosolvent 06–59; adopted March 15, 2006, and released March 17, 2006. The full text of this Commission document is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission’s copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554, (800) 378–3160, or via the company’s Web site, https:// www.bcpiweb.com. This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden ‘‘for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). The Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible ex parte contacts. E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 12, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18689-18693]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5399]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HO-OPP-2006-0251; FRL-7771-3]


Tetrahydrofurfuryl Alcohol (THFA); Proposed Action on Tolerance 
Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document proposes under the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 408(e)(1) to revoke the existing exemption 
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the inert 
ingredient tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol (THFA) (CAS Reg. No. 97-99-4) 
under 40 CFR 180.910 because it does not meet the safety requirements 
of FFDCA section 408(b)(2). While EPA has determined that dietary risks 
from use of THFA exceed the Agency's level of concern, limited uses of 
THFA may be permitted. Therefore, EPA is also proposing to establish 
for THFA an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance under 40 CFR 
180.1263 that includes use limitations. The regulatory action proposed 
in this document contributes toward the Agency's tolerance reassessment 
requirements under FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by the Food Quality 
Protection Act (FQPA)

[[Page 18690]]

of 1996. By law, EPA is required by August 2006 to reassess the 
tolerances that were in existence on August 2, 1996. The regulatory 
action proposed in this document pertains to the proposed revocation of 
one tolerance which would be counted as tolerance reassessment toward 
the August 2006 review deadline.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 12, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket identification 
number (ID) No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0251, by one of the following methods:
     http:/ /www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 
instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail. Public Information and Records Integrity Branch 
(PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001.
     Hand Delivery. Public Information and Records Integrity 
Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801 
S. Bell St., Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0251. The docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the 
docket facility is (703) 305-5805. Such deliveries are only accepted 
during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements 
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ- OPP-
2006-0251. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
https://www.regulatioris.gov/, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov your 
e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of 
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on 
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that 
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. 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. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional 
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center 
homepage athttps://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket. All documents in the docket are listed in the 
regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information 
is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as 
copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in https://www.regulations.gov/ or in hard copy at the Public 
Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of 
Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Angulo, Registration Division 
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone 
number: 703-306-0404; e-mail address: angulo.karen@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. To determine 
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should 
carefully examine the applicability provisions in Unit II. 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 
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 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.

[[Page 18691]]

II. Background and Statutory Findings

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is now in the process of reassessing all inert ingredient 
exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance (``tolerance 
exemptions'') established prior to August 2, 1996, as required by the 
FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by the FQPA. Inert ingredient 
chemicals must meet a high safety standard in order to merit an 
exemption from the numerical residue limitations that are imposed in a 
tolerance.
    1. In evaluating the inert ingredient THFA, the Agency has 
determined that dietary risks of concern may result from the use of 
THFA under the current tolerance exemption in 40 CFR 180.910, which 
allows an unlimited amount of THFA to be applied to growing crops and 
raw agricultural commodities after harvest.
    The hazard characterization of THFA shows effects of concern. 
Consistent systemic effects from repeated dermal and oral exposure to 
THFA include decreased body weight and body weight gain. Effects were 
consistent over species and routes of exposure. While no neurotoxicity 
studies were performed, whole body spasms were reported in the 
subchronic inhalation study.
    Developmental and reproductive effects of concern have been 
identified. Alterations in the male reproductive system from subchronic 
exposure to THFA also indicates a concern for alterations in the 
developing male reproductive system. The available data show there is 
evidence of increased susceptibility (both quantitative and 
qualitative) of the offspring after in utero exposure to THFA, 
including decreased fetal body weights.
    The screening level dietary exposure assessment showed that the 
risks were above the Agency's level of concern for the general 
population and the most highly exposed sub-population (children 1 to 2 
years old). Because of these risk levels, the unlimited exemption from 
a tolerance as is currently granted to THFA under 40 CFR 180.910 does 
not meet the safety requirements of FFDCA section 408(b)(2). Therefore, 
EPA is proposing to revoke the existing THFA tolerance exemption, 
revocation to be effective 18 months after publication of the final 
rule.
    The assessment documents for THFA are available electronically 
under EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0251 at https://www.regulations.gov.
    2. EPA has identified uses of THFA that do not pose risks of 
concern. EPA is proposing to establish a tolerance exemption under 
Sec.  180.1263 that permits:
    (1) Use as a seed treatment,
    (2) Application at the time of planting,
    (3) Application to cotton, and,
    (4) Use in herbicides with one application to wheat and barley 
prior to the pre-boot stage.
These limitations significantly reduce the number of times that THFA 
may be applied per season - often to one application only -- and, 
therefore, reduce the potential for dietary exposures below the 
Agency's level of concern. Contributions to surface/drinking water are 
not anticipated from the use of THFA-containing pesticide products 
under the proposed use limitations considering THFA's physical-chemical 
properties and biodegradation potential in the environment. No 
residential risks of concern are anticipated at this time for the new 
tolerance exemption.
    i. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of 
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA requires that, when 
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the 
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative 
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances 
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative 
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made 
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to THFA and any other 
substances and THFA does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite 
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance 
action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that THFA has a common mechanism 
of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's 
efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of 
toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see 
the policy statements released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs 
concerning common mechanism determinations and procedures for 
cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism on 
EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/ pesticides/cumulative/.
    ii. Determination of safety for U.S. population, infants and 
children. Considering that dietary (food and drinking water) and 
residential risks are not of concern under the use limitations of the 
new exemption, EPA finds that exempting THFA with the limitations in 
Sec.  180.1263 will be safe for the general population including 
infants and children.
    iii. Analytical enforcement methodology. An analytical method is 
not required for the new tolerance exemption for enforcement purposes 
because the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of 
a tolerance.

B. What is the Agency's Authority for taking this Action?

    A ``tolerance'' represents the maximum level for residues of 
pesticide chemicals legally allowed in or on raw agricultural 
commodities and processed foods. Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, 
as amended by the FQPA of 1996, Public Law 104-170, authorizes the 
establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerance requirements, 
modifications in tolerances, and revocation of tolerances for residues 
of pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities and 
processed foods. Without a tolerance or exemption, food containing 
pesticide residues is considered to be unsafe and therefore 
``adulterated'' under section 402(a) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 342(a). 
Such food may not be distributed in interstate commerce (21 U.S.C. 
331(a)). For a food-use pesticide to be sold and distributed, the 
pesticide must not only have appropriate tolerances under the FFDCA, 
but also must be registered under FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.). Food-
use pesticides not registered in the United States must have tolerances 
in order for commodities treated with those pesticides to be imported 
into the United States.

C. When do these Actions Become Effective?

    EPA is proposing to revoke THFA's current tolerance exemption in 40 
CFR 180.910, effective 18 months after the date of publication of the 
final rule in the Federal Register. Any commodities listed in this 
proposal treated with pesticide products containing the inert 
ingredient THFA, and in the channels of trade following the tolerance 
revocations, shall be subject to FFDCA section 408(1)(5), as 
established by FQPA. Under this section, any residues of these 
pesticide chemicals in or on such food shall not render the food 
adulterated so long as it is shown to the satisfaction of the Food and 
Drug Administration that: (1) The residue is present as the result of 
an application or use of the pesticide at a time and in a manner that 
was lawful under FIFRA, and (2) the residue does not exceed the level 
that was authorized at the time of the application or use to be present 
on

[[Page 18692]]

the food under a tolerance or exemption from tolerance. Evidence to 
show that food was lawfully treated may include records that verify the 
dates when the pesticide was applied to such food.
    EPA is proposing that the establishment of a new tolerance 
exemption under Sec.  180.1263 for use of THFA will become effective on 
the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. 
Applications for new pesticide products that include THFA will be 
subject to the limitations of the new tolerance exemption as of the 
date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.

D. What Is the Contribution to Tolerance Reassessment?

    By law, EPA is required by August 2006 to reassess the 
tolerancesand exemptions from tolerances that were in existence on 
August 2, 1996. This document proposes to place an 18 month expiration 
date on one inert ingredient tolerance exemption, which will be counted 
in a final rule as a tolerance reassessment toward the August 2006 
review deadline under FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by FQPA in 1996.

III. Are the Proposed Actions Consistent with International 
Obligations?

    The tolerance revocation in this proposal is not discriminatory and 
is designed to ensure that both domestically-produced and imported 
foods meet the food safety standard established by the FFDCA. The same 
food safety standards apply to domestically produced and imported 
foods.
    EPA is working to ensure that the U.S. tolerance reassessment 
program under FQPA does not disrupt international trade. EPA considers 
Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) in setting U.S. tolerances and in 
reassessing them. MRLs are established by the Codex Committee on 
Pesticide Residues, a committee within the Codex Alimentarius 
Commission, an international organization formed to promote the 
coordination of international food standards. It is EPA's policy to 
harmonize U.S. tolerances with Codex MRLs to the extent possible, 
provided that the MRLs achieve the level of protection required under 
FFDCA. EPA's effort to harmonize with Codex MRLs is summarized in the 
tolerance reassessment section of individual Reregistration Eligibility 
Decision documents. EPA has developed guidance concerning submissions 
for import tolerance support (65 FR 35069, June 1, 2000) (FRL-6559-3). 
This guidance will be made available to interested persons. Electronic 
copies are available on the internet at https://www.epa.gov/. On the 
Home Page select ``Laws, Regulations, and Dockets,'' then select 
``Regulations and Proposed Rules'' and then look up the entry for this 
document under ``Federal Register--Environmental Documents.'' You can 
also go directly to the ``Federal Register'' listings at https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This proposed rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of 
the FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office 
of Management and Budget (0MB) has exempted these types of actions from 
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and 
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this proposed rule has 
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack 
of significance, this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed 
rule does not contain any information collections subject to 0MB 
approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as 
described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor does it require any special 
considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to 
Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or 0MB review or any 
Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of 
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, 
April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards 
that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus 
standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer 
and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note).
    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C 601 et 
seq.), the Agency previously assessed whether establishment of 
tolerances, exemptions from tolerances, raising of tolerance levels, 
expansion of exemptions, or revocations might significantly impact a 
substantial number of small entities and concluded that, as a general 
matter, these actions do not impose a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. These analyses for tolerance 
establishments and modifications, and for tolerance revocations were 
published on May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950) and on December 17, 1997 (62 FR 
66020), respectively, and were provided to the chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. Taking into account this 
analysis, and available information concerning the pesticides listed in 
this proposed rule, the Agency hereby certifies that this proposed 
action will not have a significant negative economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Specifically, the Agency has 
concluded in a memorandum dated May 25, 2001 that for import tolerance 
revocation there is a negligible joint probability of certain defined 
conditions holding simultaneously which would indicate an RFA/SBREFA 
concern and require more analysis. (This Agency document is available 
in the docket of this proposed rule). Furthermore, for the pesticide 
named in this proposed rule, the Agency knows of no extraordinary 
circumstances that exist as to the present proposal that would change 
the EPA's previous analysis. Any comments about the Agency's 
determination should be submitted to the EPA along with comments on the 
proposal, and will be addressed prior to issuing a final rule.
    In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not 
have a substantial direct effect on 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 Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, 
August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an 
accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State 
and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations 
that 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.'' This proposed rule directly regulates growers, food 
processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action 
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and 
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption

[[Page 18693]]

provisions of section 408(n)(4) of the FFDCA. For these same reasons, 
the Agency has determined that this proposed rule does not have any 
``tribal implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled 
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 
67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to 
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input 
by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal implications'' is 
defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have 
``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, 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.'' This proposed rule will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 6, 2006.
Donald R. Stubbs,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as 
follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
    2. Section 180.910 is amended by revising the entry for 
Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol in the table to read as follows:


Sec.  180.910  Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions 
from the requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Inert ingredients               Limits               Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              * * * * * * *
Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol        Expires [insert     Solvent/cosolvent
 (THFA) (CAS Reg. No 97-99-4)      date 18 months
                                   after date of
                                   publication of
                                   the Final rule in
                                   the Federal
                                   Register]
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    3. Section 180.1263 is added to subpart D to read as follows:


Sec.  180.1263  Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol; exemption from the 
requirement of a tolerance.

    Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol (THFA, CAS Reg. No. 97-99-4) is exempt 
from the requirement of a tolerance in or on all raw agricultural 
commodities when used in accordance with good agricultural practices as 
an inert ingredient applied only:
    (a) For use as a seed treatment.
    (b) For application at the time of planting.
    (c) For use on cotton.
    (d) For use in herbicides with one application to wheat and barley 
prior to the pre-boot stage.
[FR Doc. E6-5399 Filed 4-11-06; 8:45 arn]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.