Pantoea Agglomerans Strain C9-1; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance, 24590-24596 [06-3856]
Download as PDF
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
24590
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB 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 as required by
Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994); or OMB review or
any other 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 104–13, 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 revocations
of tolerances 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. This analysis
was published on December 17, 1997
(62 FR 66020), and was 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 rule, the Agency hereby
certifies that this final rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. In
a memorandum dated May 25, 2001,
EPA determined that eight conditions
must all be satisfied in order for an
import tolerance or tolerance exemption
revocation to adversely affect a
significant number of small entity
importers, and that there is a negligible
joint probability of all eight conditions
holding simultaneously with respect to
any particular revocation. (This Agency
document is available in the docket of
this final rule). Furthermore, for the
pesticides named in this final rule, the
Agency knows of no extraordinary
circumstances that exist as to the
present revocations that would change
EPA’s previous analysis. In addition, the
Agency has determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Apr 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 final 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
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of
FFDCA. For these same reasons, the
Agency has determined that this 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
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 rule.
VI. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of this final
rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ‘‘major rule ’’as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
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 11, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
§§ 180.152, 180.174, 180.267, 180.488,
180.1024 and 180.1229 [Removed]
2. Sections 180.152, 180.174, 180.267,
180.488, 180.1024 and 180.1229 are
removed.
I
[FR Doc. 06–3853 Filed 4–25–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0267; FRL–7772–6]
Pantoea Agglomerans Strain C9–1;
Exemption from the Requirement of a
Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of the Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1 on pears and
apples when applied or used as a
microbial pesticide. Nufarm, Inc.
submitted a petition to EPA under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), as amended by the Food
Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA),
requesting an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
E:\FR\FM\26APR1.SGM
26APR1
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
for residues of Pantoea agglomerans
strain C9–1.
DATES: This regulation is effective April
26, 2006. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
June 26, 2006.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written
objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in
Unit X. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2006–0267. All documents in the
docket are listed on the regulations.gov
website. (EDOCKET, EPA’s electronic
public docket and comment system was
replaced on November 25, 2005, by an
enhanced federal-wide electronic docket
management and comment system
located at https://www.regulations.gov/.
Follow the on-line instructions).
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in
EDOCKET or in hard copy 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.
• Important Note: OPP will be
moving to a new location the first week
of May 2006. As a result, from Friday,
April 28 to Friday, May 5, 2006, the
OPP Regulatory Public Docket will NOT
be accepting any deliveries at the
Crystal Mall #2 address and this facility
will be closed to the public. Beginning
on May 8, 2006, the OPP Regulatory
Public Docket will reopen at 8:30 a.m.
and deliveries will be accepted in Rm.
S–4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive,
Arlington, VA 22202. The mail code for
the mailing address will change to
(7502P), but will otherwise remain the
same. The OPP Regulatory Public
Docket telephone number and hours of
operation will remain the same after the
move.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Leonard Cole, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511C),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–5412; e-mail address:
cole.leonard@epa.gov.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Apr 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 Access Electronic Copies
of this Document and Other Related
Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET (https://
www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A
frequently updated electronic version of
40 CFR part 180 is available at E-CFR
Beta Site Two at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/. To access the
OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines
referenced in this document, go directly
to the guidelines at https://www.epa.gov/
opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of June, 13,
1997 (62 FR 32331) (FRL–5721–6), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide tolerance petition (PP 7F4817)
by Nufarm, Inc., (formerly Plant Health
Technologies), 1333 Burr Ridge
Parkway, Suite 125A, Burr Ridge, IL
60527. The petition requested that 40
CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing a temporary exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of Pantoea agglomerans (P.
agglomerans) strain C9–1. This notice
included a summary of the petition
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24591
prepared by the petitioner, Nufarm, Inc.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA
allows EPA to establish an exemption
from the requirement for a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the exemption is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Pursuant to
section 408(c)(2)(B), in establishing or
maintaining in effect an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance, EPA
must take into account the factors set
forth in section 408(b)(2)(C), which
require EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and
children to the pesticide chemical
residue in establishing a tolerance and
to ‘‘ensure that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate
exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue....’’ Additionally, section
408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA requires that
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.’’
EPA performs a number of analyses to
determine the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide residues. First,
EPA determines the toxicity of
pesticides. Second, EPA examines
exposure to the pesticide through food,
drinking water, and through other
exposures that occur as a result of
pesticide use in residential settings.
III. Toxicological Profile
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of the FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other
relevant information in support of this
action and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability, and the
relationship of this information to
human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the
variability of the sensitivities of major
identifiable subgroups of consumers,
including infants and children.
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 was
originally isolated from apple stem
tissue in an apple orchard in Michigan
in 1981. Subsequently, a natural
spontaneous mutant derived from the
original strain was obtained which had
E:\FR\FM\26APR1.SGM
26APR1
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
24592
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
streptomycin and rifampicin resistance.
This strain retained the designation C9–
1 and was not derived through genetic
engineering. When first isolated, this
strain was identified as Erwinia
herbicola based on GC-FAME (gas
chromatography-fatty acid methyl ester)
analysis and placed in GC subgroup B.
Members of the group described as E.
herbiocola/lathyri-Enterobacter
agglomerans are found in soil, water
and air, and are associated with plants
and animals, including humans as
commensal microbes. Following GCFAME and substrate utilization
analyses, and most importantly, a
restructuring of the bacterial taxonomy
of this group of microbes, this isolate is
now considered a strain of Pantoea
agglomerans. No reports of plant
pathogenicity exist for the P.
agglomerans species.
The registrant is seeking to register
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 to
control fire blight in apples and pears.
Fire blight is considered one of the most
destructive diseases of fruit trees in
North America. It occurs sporadically
and unpredictably and occasionally
reaches epidemic levels. A severe
outbreak can seriously damage or kill
mature pear, apple, or crab apple trees
in one season.
1. Acute oral toxicity – rats (OPPTS
870.1100). Sprague-Dawley Rats were
dosed at 5g/kg with the test substance
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 and
observed for 14 days Master Record
Identification Number ((MRID) 442120–
02 (Ref. 1)). All animals gained weight
during the study and no clinical
manifestations of treatment were noted.
Gross necropsy revealed no indications
of treatment-related pathology or any
unusual findings. It is concluded that
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 is not
acutely toxic to rats following oral
administration.
2. Acute oral toxicity/pathogenicity –
rat study (OPPTS 885.3050). SpragueDawley CD rats were challenged orally
with Pantoea agglomerans C9–1 and
heat killed cells (KTS) as an additional
control group. Nine female and 9 male
rats were also placed in a naive control
(NC) group (no dosing) and 6 rats of
each sex were placed into a shelfcontrol (SC) group (placed adjacent to
treated animals, but not dosed) (MRID
442120–03 (Ref.2)). Organs were
sampled on days 0, 3 and 7. Since no
bacteria were recovered from the
samples, the study was terminated on
day 10. No deaths of animals occurred
during the course of this study and no
significant clinical findings were noted.
All animals gained weight and relative
organ weights were normal with no
significant treatment effects observed.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Apr 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 was
considered to clear rapidly from the test
animal in that it was never detected.
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 is
considered to be non-toxic following
oral challenge.
3. Acute pulmonary toxicity/
pathogenicity – rat (OPPTS 885.3150).
Fifty rats, 25 female and 25 male)
received, by intratracheal instillation, a
dose of 9.83 x 107 or 9.00 x 107 colony
forming units (cfu) of Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1 in a 0.1
milliliter (mL) volume (MRID 442120–
05 (Ref.4)). No adverse clinical signs
were recorded for any of the animals
during the study. Four rats died during
dosing and were immediately replaced.
The rats were sacrificed at 7 days and
subjected to necropsy. No clinical signs
related to the test organism or
macroscopic abnormalities were
observed in the rats. It can be concluded
since no test substance was recovered
from any animals that this organism
does not appear to be toxic, infective,
and/or pathogenic to rats at this high
does level. This study is considered
acceptable and classified as Toxicity
Category IV (BPPD DER 05/17/02).
4. Acute dermal toxicity – rabbits
(OPPTS 870.2500 and OPPTS
885.3100). Approximately 2 grams (g) of
test material was applied to the dorsal
epidermis of 10 New Zealand White
Rabbits and maintained there for 24
hours (MIRD 442120–04 (Ref.3)). All
rabbits exhibited very slight to welldefined erythema and three rabbits
exhibited very slight edema. By day 10
all surviving rabbits (9 of 10) had
cleared of any dermal irritations and
remained this way throughout the end
of the study (day 14). No edema scores
greater than 1 and no erythema scores
greater than 2 were recorded during the
study. One rabbit, which died at day 10,
revealed no gross lesions upon
necropsy. This study is considered
acceptable and classified as Toxicity
Catergory IV for irritation and Toxicity
Category III for Toxicity (BPPD DER 05/
17/02)
5. Primary eye irritation (OPPTS
870.2400). Six New Zealand White
Rabbits were administered 0.1 g of test
substance into the right eyelid which
was washed out after 24 hours (MRID
442120–07 (Ref.5)). No mortality,
corneal lesions or iridal effects were
noted at any time during the study.
Pantoea agglomerans C9–1 is
considered to be a mild eye irritant.
This study is considered acceptable and
classified as Toxicity Category III (BPPD
DER 05/17/02).
6. Data waiver requests. Data waiver
requests were made for the following
requirements for the Technical Grade of
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the Active Ingredient/Manufacturinguse Product (TGAI/MP) and
Experimental Product (EP):
(a) Acute Inhalation (OPPTS
870.1300);
(b) Acute Intravenous (IV),
Intracerebral (IC), Intraperitoneal (IP)
injection Toxicity/Pathogenicity
(OPPTS 885.3200);
(c) Cell Culture (OPPTS 885.3500);
(d) Immune Response (OPPTS
880.3800);
(e) Hypersensitivity study;
(f) Hypersensitivity Incidents (OPPTS
885.3400).
i. Acute inhalation toxicity/
pathogenicity. The registrant cited the
acute pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity
study (see Unit III.3., above) to justify
waiving the acute inhalation study. In
the acute pulmonary toxicity/
pathogenicity study Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1, was not found
in any organs or tissues which indicates
that the active ingredient cleared tissues
and was not toxic, infective, or
pathogenic to rats when instilled
intratracheally. Additionally, when this
product is applied, applicators will be
required to wear the necessary
protective equipment to prevent
inhalation, and this justifies granting
this request to waive acute inhalation
data requirements.
ii. Acute IV/IP/IC study. In an acute
oral toxicity/pathogenicity study (see
Unit III.1. and 2. above), no clinical
signs of toxicity were observed in rats
and no Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–
1 was recovered from organs or tissues.
These data show that Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1 was
considered to clear rapidly from the test
animal in that it was never detected.
The active ingredient Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1 is considered
to be non-toxic. Based on the low
toxicity potential indicated by these
observations, the request to waive the
acute IP study was granted.
iii. Cell culture. This study is required
for a virus and is not required for a
bacterial active ingredient such as
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1. The
request to waive this data requirement
was granted.
iv. Immune response. The lack of
pathogenicity seen in the acute oral
toxicity/pathogenicity study with the
active ingredient indicates the immune
system was not adversely affected by
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1. Based
on these considerations, the
justifications to support the request to
waive data requirements for the immune
response studies for the TGAI/MP are
acceptable.
v. Hypersensitivity study. No
incidents of hypersensitivity have
E:\FR\FM\26APR1.SGM
26APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
occurred during the research,
development, or testing of Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1 or the end use
product, Blightban. A hypersensitivity
study is not required at this time, but
may be required in the future if there are
reports of hypersensitivity incidents
associated with this active ingredient
used in pesticides.
vi. Hypersensitivity incidents (OPPTS
885.3400). The registrant requested to
waive reports of hypersensitivity
incidents, because no incidents of
hypersensitivity associated with the
TGAI or the EP have been reported.
However, the registrant agreed to report
hypersensitivity incidents, should they
occur in the future. This guideline
requirement is satisfied at this time. In
order to comply with FIFRA
requirements under Section 6(a)(2), any
incident of hypersensitivity associated
with the use of this pesticide must be
reported to the Agency. This data
requirement has not been waived.
7. Subchronic, chronic toxicity and
oncogenicity, and residue data. Based
on the data generated in accordance
with the Tier I data requirements set
forth in 40 CFR 158.740(c), the Tier II
and Tier III data requirements were not
triggered and, therefore, not required in
connection with this action. In addition,
because the Tier II and Tier III data
requirements were not required, the
residue data requirements set forth in 40
CFR 158.740(b) also were not required.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
IV. Aggregate Exposures
In examining aggregate exposure,
section 408 of the FFDCA directs EPA
to consider available information
concerning exposures from the pesticide
residue in food and all other nonoccupational exposures, including
drinking water from ground water or
surface water and exposure through
pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or
buildings (residential and other indoor
uses).
A. Dietary Exposure
Use of Pantoea agglomerans strain
C9–1 is not likely to cause any harm via
consumption of food or feed treated
with the microbial pesticide, which is
not applied directly to food as discussed
below.
1. Food. Residues of Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1 are not
expected on treated food commodities
from the proposed use patterns. The
product, Blightban, containing Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1, is applied at
bloom followed by a second application
at first petal fall-full bloom. After
Blighban is applied, the pesticide
becomes non-viable very rapidly, which
causes the need for more than one
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Apr 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
application. The pesticide itself is not in
direct contact with the food
commodities. This pesticide is applied
prior to fruiting. There is no postharvest treatment directly to the food
commodities. Furthermore, the active
ingredient is not a systemic pesticide.
Thus, detectable residues of Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1 are not
expected on treated fruit trees or their
food commodities. Furthermore, as
previously stated, Pantoea agglomerans
strain C9–1 is found in soil, water and
air. Data submissions to the Agency
show that residues of the Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1 are not found
on the food commodities. Finally, as
discussed in Unit III, the acute oral tests
demonstrate low toxicity potential via
dietary exposure to this Toxicity
Category IV pesticide. Hence, even if the
pesticide was present in or on food
commodities, exposure via the dietary
route is not expected to cause any harm.
Therefore, the Agency has decided that
dietary exposure from the proposed uses
of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 is
not likely to adversely affect the U.S.
adult population, infants and children.
2. Drinking water exposure. No
drinking water exposure is anticipated
because of the use pattern and use sites.
There are no aquatic use sites permitted
for this pesticide, so exposure to
drinking water is not expected. Further,
there is no evidence of adverse effects
from exposure to this organism.
Exposure from the proposed use of
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 is not
likely to pose any incremental risk via
consumption of drinking water to adult
humans, infants and children.
B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure
The proposed product is an end-use
product to be commercially used in
apple and pear orchards. No nonoccupational residential, school or day
care exposure is anticipated because of
the use pattern of this product. The use
of Panteoa agglomerans strain C9–1
should result in minimal to non-existent
non-occupational risk. No indoor
residential, school or daycare uses are
permitted on the label of this product.
1. Dermal exposure. The low toxicity
potential observed in the acute dermal
studies discussed above (Unit III), the
low exposure potential based on low
application rates, and the lack of
persistence of the active ingredient,
leads EPA to conclude that this
pesticide poses minimal risk to human
populations via non-occupational
dermal exposure. Moreover, potential
non-occupational dermal exposure to
Panteoa agglomerans strain C9–1 is
unlikely because the use sites are
commercial and agricultural.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24593
As previously discussed in Units III
and IV, a lack of hypersensitivity
incidents indicates Panteoa
agglomerans strain C9–1 poses minimal
risk to populations via non-occupational
dermal exposure. Thus, the Agency does
not expect pesticides containing
Panteoa agglomerans strain C9–1 to
pose a non-occupational dermal
exposure risk.
2. Inhalation exposure. Nonoccupational inhalation exposure to the
active ingredient itself is not likely to
pose an inhalation risk. No treatmentrelated effects associated with the active
ingredient were observed in the
pulmonary tests reported above. Based
on the low potential for nonoccupational inhalation exposure, the
Agency does not expect Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1 to pose an
inhalation risk.
V. Cumulative Effects
The Agency has considered the
potential for cumulative effects of
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 and
other substances in relation to a
common mechanism of toxicity. These
considerations include the possible
cumulative effects of such residues on
infants and children. As demonstrated
in Unit IV.B., Pantoea agglomerans
strain C9–1 is non-toxic and nonpathogenic to mammals. Because no
mechanism of pathogenicity or toxicity
in mammals has been identified for this
organism, no cumulative effects from
the residues of this product with other
related microbial pesticides are
anticipated.
VI. Determination of Safety for U.S.
Population, Infants and Children
There is reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to the U.S. population,
including infants and children, from
aggregate exposures to residues of
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1, as a
result of its proposed uses. This
includes all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information. As
discussed previously, there appears to
be no potential for harm, from this
bacterium in its use as a microbial
pesticide in apple and pear orchards.
Furthermore, the organism is non-toxic
and non-pathogenic to animals and
humans. The Agency has arrived at this
conclusion based on the very low levels
of mammalian toxicity for acute oral,
pulmonary, and dermal effects with no
toxicity or infectivity at the doses tested
(see Unit III. above). Moreover, potential
non-occupational inhalation or dermal
exposure is not expected to pose any
adverse effects to exposed populations
via aggregate and cumulative exposure
E:\FR\FM\26APR1.SGM
26APR1
24594
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
(see Units IV. and V.). FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(C) provides that EPA shall
apply an additional ten-fold margin of
exposure (safety) for infants and
children in the case of threshold effects
to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the
data base on toxicity and exposure,
unless EPA determines that a different
margin of exposure (safety) will be safe
for infants and children. Margins of
exposure (safety), which are often
referred to as uncertainty factors, are
incorporated into EPA risk assessments
either directly, or through the use of a
margin of exposure analysis, or by using
uncertainty (safety) factors in
calculating a dose level that poses no
appreciable risk. In this instance, based
on all the available information (as
discussed in detail above), the Agency
concludes that the bacterium, Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1, is non-toxic to
mammals, including infants and
children. Because there are no threshold
effects of concern to infants, children
and adults when Pantoea agglomerans
strain C9–1 is used as labeled, the
Agency has determined that the
additional margin of safety is not
necessary to protect infants and
children, and that not adding any
additional margin of safety will be safe
for infants and children.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
VII. Other Considerations
A. Endocrine Disruptors
EPA is required under section 408(p)
of the FFDCA, as amended by FQPA, to
develop a screening program to
determine whether certain substances
(including all pesticide active and other
ingredients) ‘‘may have an effect in
humans that is similar to an effect
produced by a naturally-occurring
estrogen, or other such endocrine effects
as the Administrator may designate.’’
Following the recommendations of its
Endocrine Disruptor Screening and
Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC),
EPA determined that there was
scientific basis for including, as part of
the program, the androgen and thyroid
systems, in addition to the estrogen
hormone system. EPA also adopted
EDSTAC’s recommendation that the
program include evaluations of
potential effects in wildlife. For
pesticide chemicals, EPA will use
FIFRA and, to the extent that effects in
wildlife may help determine whether a
substance may have an effect in
humans, FFDCA authority, to require
the wildlife evaluations. As the science
develops and resources allow, screening
of additional hormone systems may be
added to the Endocrine Disruptor
Screening Program (EDSP).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Apr 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
The Agency is not requiring
information on the endocrine effects of
this active ingredient at this time. The
Agency has considered, among other
relevant factors, available information
concerning whether the microorganism
may have an effect in humans similar to
an effect produced by a naturally
occurring estrogen or other endocrine
effects. There is no known metabolite
produced by this bacterium that acts as
an endocrine disruptor. The submitted
and cited toxicity/pathogenicity studies
in rodents indicate that following
injection and pulmonary routes of
exposure, no test substance was found
in organs or tissues of test animals. This
indicates that the body is able to process
and clear the active ingredient. The
Agency concludes that there will be no
incremental adverse effects to the
endocrine system.
B. Analytical Method(s)
The acute oral studies discussed
above demonstrate that the active
ingredient, Pantoea agglomerans strain
C9–1 does not pose a dietary risk. In
addition, the active ingredient is not
likely to come into contact with food
commodities. Since residues are not
expected on treated commodities, the
Agency has concluded that an analytical
method to detect residues of this
pesticide on treated food commodities
for enforcement purposes is not needed.
Nevertheless, the Agency has concluded
that for analysis of the pesticide itself,
microbiological and biochemical
methods exist and are acceptable for
enforcement purposes for product
identity of Pantoea agglomerans strain
C9–1. Other appropriate methods are
required for quality control to assure
that product characterization, the
control of human pathogens and other
unintentional metabolites or ingredients
are within regulatory limits, and to
ascertain storage stability and viability
of the pesticidal active ingredient.
C. Codex Maximum Residue Level
There is no Codex maximum residue
level for residues of Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9–1
VIII. Conclusions
The results of the studies discussed
above are sufficient to comply with the
requirements of the FQPA. They
support an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1 on
apples and pears. In addition, the
Agency is of the opinion that, if the
microbial active ingredient is used as
labeled, aggregate and cumulative
exposures are not likely to pose any
undue risk. Submitted and cited data
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
show that Pantoea agglomerans strain
C9–1 do not pose an incremental dietary
and non-dietary risk to the adult human
U.S. population, children and infants.
Therefore, an exemption from tolerance
is granted in response to pesticide
petition 7F4817.
IX. MRID Citation References
1. 442120–02. Johnson, W.D. Acute
Oral Toxicity Study of Erwinia
herbicola Strain C9–1 in Rats (Limit
Test).
2. 442120–03. Mega. W.M. Toxicity/
Paathogenicity Testing of Erwinia
herbicola Strain C9–1 Following Acute
Oral Challenge in Rats
3. 442120–04. Johnson, W.D. Acute
Dermal Toxicity/Irritation Study of
Erwinia herbicola Strain C9–1 in
Rabbits
4. 442120–05. Mega, W.M. Toxicity/
Pathogenicity Testing of Erwinia
herbicola Strain C9–1 Following Acute
Intratracheal Challenge in Rats.
5. 442120–07. Johnson, W.D. Primary
Eye Irritation of Erwinia herbicola
Strain C9–1 in Rabbits.
X. Objections and Hearing Requests
Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as
amended by the FQPA, any person may
file an objection to any aspect of this
regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. The EPA
procedural regulations which govern the
submission of objections and requests
for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178.
Although the procedures in those
regulations require some modification to
reflect the amendments made to the
FFDCA by the FQPA, EPA will continue
to use those procedures, with
appropriate adjustments, until the
necessary modifications can be made.
The new section 408(g) of the FFDCA
provides essentially the same process
for persons to ‘‘object’’ to a regulation
for an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance issued by EPA under new
section 408(d) of the FFDCA, as was
provided in the old sections 408 and
409 of the FFDCA. However, the period
for filing objections is now 60 days,
rather than 30 days.
A. What Do I Need to Do to File an
Objection or Request a Hearing?
You must file your objection or
request a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
provided in this unit and in 40 CFR part
178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
you must identify docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0267 in the subject
line on the first page of your
submission. All requests must be in
writing, and must be mailed or
E:\FR\FM\26APR1.SGM
26APR1
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or
before June 26, 2006.
1. Filing the request. Your objection
must specify the specific provisions in
the regulation that you object to, and the
grounds for the objections (40 CFR
178.25). If a hearing is requested, the
objections must include a statement of
the factual issues on which a hearing is
requested, the requestor’s contentions
on such issues, and a summary of any
evidence relied upon by the objector (40
CFR 178.27). Information submitted in
connection with an objection or hearing
request may be claimed confidential by
marking any part or all of that
information as CBI. Information so
marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2. A copy of the
information that does not contain CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public record. Information not marked
confidential may be disclosed publicly
by EPA without prior notice.
Mail your written request to: Office of
the Hearing Clerk (1900L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001. You may also deliver
your request to the Office of the Hearing
Clerk in Suite 350, 1099 14th St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20005. The Office of
the Hearing Clerk is open from 8 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Office of the Hearing
Clerk is (202) 564–6255.
2. Copies for the Docket. In addition
to filing an objection or hearing request
with the Hearing Clerk as described in
Unit IX.A.1., you should also send a
copy of your request to the PIRIB for its
inclusion in the official record that is
described in ADDRESSES. Mail your
copies, identified by docket ID number
OPP–2006–0267, to: Public Information
and Records Integrity Branch,
Information Technology and Resources
Management Division (7502C), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–
0001. In person or by courier, bring a
copy to the location of the PIRIB
described in ADDRESSES. You may also
send an electronic copy of your request
via e-mail to: opp-docket@epa.gov.
Please use an ASCII file format and
avoid the use of special characters and
any form of encryption. Copies of
electronic objections and hearing
requests will also be accepted on disks
in WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file
format. Do not include any CBI in your
electronic copy. You may also submit an
electronic copy of your request at many
Federal Depository Libraries.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Apr 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
B. When Will the Agency Grant a
Request for a Hearing?
A request for a hearing will be granted
if the Administrator determines that the
material submitted shows the following:
There is a genuine and substantial issue
of fact; there is a reasonable possibility
that available evidence identified by the
requestor would, if established resolve
one or more of such issues in favor of
the requestor, taking into account
uncontested claims or facts to the
contrary; and resolution of the factual
issues in the manner sought by the
requestor would be adequate to justify
the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).
XI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes an
exemption from the tolerance
requirement under section 408(d) of the
FFDCA in response to a petition
submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) 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 rule has been exempted
from review under Executive Order
12866 due to its lack of significance,
this 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 final rule
does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB 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 OMB 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). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are
established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of the FFDCA,
such as the exemption in this final rule,
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24595
do not require the issuance of a
proposed rule, the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. 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 final 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
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of the
FFDCA. For these same reasons, the
Agency has determined that this 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
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 rule.
E:\FR\FM\26APR1.SGM
26APR1
24596
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
XII. Congressional Review Act
ACTION:
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of this final
rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Final rule.
The General Services
Administration (GSA) is amending the
Federal Travel Regulation (FTR), to
clarify existing authority under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
29 U.S.C. 701–796l, and 5 U.S.C. 3102,
that allows agencies to reimburse
employees with special needs for
expenses incurred for the services of an
attendant while on official travel.
Specifically, this final rule amends the
FTR by adding reimbursement for
‘‘services of an attendant traveling with
an employee with special needs’’ as a
miscellaneous expense item. The FTR
and any corresponding documents may
be accessed at GSA’s website at https://
www.gsa.gov/ftr.
This final rule is not required to be
published in the Federal Register for
notice and comment; therefore, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601,
et seq., does not apply.
Effective Date: This final rule is
effective April 26, 2006.
This final rule is also exempt from
congressional review prescribed under 5
U.S.C. 801 since it relates solely to
agency management and personnel.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: April 7, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
The
Regulatory Secretariat (VIR), Room
4035, GS Building, Washington, DC,
20405, (202) 208–7312, for information
pertaining to status or publication
schedules. For clarification of content,
contact Umeki Thorne, Office of
Governmentwide Policy, Travel
Management Policy, at (202) 208–7636.
Please cite FTR Amendment 2006–03;
FTR case 2006–303.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
[FTR Amendment 2006–03; FTR Case 2006–
303]
In order to provide reasonable
accommodations for travel of an
employee with special needs, agencies
are authorized to pay for a variety of
travel expenses as needed by the
employee. Allowable expenses include
the transportation and per diem
expenses incurred by a family member
or other attendant who must travel with
the employee to make the trip possible.
Although authorized by existing
statutes, the FTR has not included a
provision expressly addressing whether
or not agencies may reimburse
employees for expenses incurred for the
actual services performed by an
attendant while on travel with the
employee. Accordingly, this final rule
adds a provision stating that agencies
may reimburse employees for the
expenses of an attendant as a
miscellaneous travel expense.
RIN 3090–AI24
B. Executive Order 12866
Federal Travel Regulation; Travel of an
Employee with Special Needs—
Services of Attendants
This is not a significant regulatory
action and, therefore, was not subject to
review under Section 6(b) of Executive
Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review, dated September 30, 1993. This
rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C.
804.
2. Section 180.1267 is added to
subpart D to read as follows:
§ 180.1267 Pantoea agglomerans strain
C9–1; exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance.
An exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance is established for residues
of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9–1
when used on apples and pears.
[FR Doc. 06–3856 Filed 4–25–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
41 CFR Parts 301–12, 301–13, and 301–
70
Office of Governmentwide
Policy, General Services Administration
(GSA).
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Apr 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The Paperwork Reduction Act does
not apply because the changes to the
FTR do not impose recordkeeping or
information collection requirements, or
the collection of information from
offerors, contractors, or members of the
public that require the approval of the
Office of Management and Budget under
44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
E. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
List of Subjects in 41 CFR Parts 301–12,
301–13, and 301–70
Government employees, Travel and
transportation expenses.
Dated: March 7, 2006.
David L. Bibb,
Acting Administrator of General Services.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, under 5 U.S.C. 5701–5709,
GSA amends 41 CFR parts 301–12, 301–
13, and 301–70 as set forth below:
I
A. Background
I
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
PART 301–12—MISCELLANEOUS
EXPENSES
1. The authority citation for 41 CFR
part 301–12 continues to read as
follows:
I
Authority: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707.
§ 301–12.1
[Amended]
2. Amend section 301–12.1, in the
table, in the first column under the
heading ‘‘General expenses’’, by adding
the entry ‘‘Services of an attendant as
described in § 301–13.3’’ after the entry
‘‘Services of guides, interpreters, and
drivers’’.
I
PART 301–13—TRAVEL OF AN
EMPLOYEE WITH SPECIAL NEEDS
3. The authority citation for 41 CFR
part 301–13 continues to read as
follows:
I
Authority: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707.
4. Amend section 301–13.3 by
revising the introductory sentence,
paragraphs (e) and (f); and adding
paragraph (g), and Note to paragraph (g)
to read as follows:
I
E:\FR\FM\26APR1.SGM
26APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 26, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24590-24596]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-3856]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0267; FRL-7772-6]
Pantoea Agglomerans Strain C9-1; Exemption from the Requirement
of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of the Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 on
pears and apples when applied or used as a microbial pesticide. Nufarm,
Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of
1996 (FQPA), requesting an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum
permissible level
[[Page 24591]]
for residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1.
DATES: This regulation is effective April 26, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 26, 2006.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in Unit X. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0267. All documents in the
docket are listed on the regulations.gov website. (EDOCKET, EPA's
electronic public docket and comment system was replaced on November
25, 2005, by an enhanced federal-wide electronic docket management and
comment system located at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the on-
line instructions). Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy 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.
Important Note: OPP will be moving to a new location the
first week of May 2006. As a result, from Friday, April 28 to Friday,
May 5, 2006, the OPP Regulatory Public Docket will NOT be accepting any
deliveries at the Crystal Mall 2 address and this facility
will be closed to the public. Beginning on May 8, 2006, the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket will reopen at 8:30 a.m. and deliveries will
be accepted in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S.
Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202. The mail code for the mailing
address will change to (7502P), but will otherwise remain the same. The
OPP Regulatory Public Docket telephone number and hours of operation
will remain the same after the move.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leonard Cole, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511C), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-5412; e-mail address: cole.leonard@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 Access Electronic Copies of this Document and Other
Related Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET (https://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may
access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at https://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
is available at E-CFR Beta Site Two at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.
To access the OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines referenced in this document,
go directly to the guidelines at https://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/home/
guidelin.htm.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of June, 13, 1997 (62 FR 32331) (FRL-5721-
6), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of the FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance
petition (PP 7F4817) by Nufarm, Inc., (formerly Plant Health
Technologies), 1333 Burr Ridge Parkway, Suite 125A, Burr Ridge, IL
60527. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing a temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance
for residues of Pantoea agglomerans (P. agglomerans) strain C9-1. This
notice included a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner,
Nufarm, Inc. There were no comments received in response to the notice
of filing.
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FFDCA
defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other
exposures for which there is reliable information.'' This includes
exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does
not include occupational exposure. Pursuant to section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give special consideration
to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue
in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue....''
Additionally, section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA requires that 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.''
EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the
toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings.
III. Toxicological Profile
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA, EPA has reviewed
the available scientific data and other relevant information in support
of this action and considered its validity, completeness, and
reliability, and the relationship of this information to human risk.
EPA has also considered available information concerning the
variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of
consumers, including infants and children.
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 was originally isolated from apple
stem tissue in an apple orchard in Michigan in 1981. Subsequently, a
natural spontaneous mutant derived from the original strain was
obtained which had
[[Page 24592]]
streptomycin and rifampicin resistance. This strain retained the
designation C9-1 and was not derived through genetic engineering. When
first isolated, this strain was identified as Erwinia herbicola based
on GC-FAME (gas chromatography-fatty acid methyl ester) analysis and
placed in GC subgroup B. Members of the group described as E.
herbiocola/lathyri-Enterobacter agglomerans are found in soil, water
and air, and are associated with plants and animals, including humans
as commensal microbes. Following GC-FAME and substrate utilization
analyses, and most importantly, a restructuring of the bacterial
taxonomy of this group of microbes, this isolate is now considered a
strain of Pantoea agglomerans. No reports of plant pathogenicity exist
for the P. agglomerans species.
The registrant is seeking to register Pantoea agglomerans strain
C9-1 to control fire blight in apples and pears. Fire blight is
considered one of the most destructive diseases of fruit trees in North
America. It occurs sporadically and unpredictably and occasionally
reaches epidemic levels. A severe outbreak can seriously damage or kill
mature pear, apple, or crab apple trees in one season.
1. Acute oral toxicity - rats (OPPTS 870.1100). Sprague-Dawley Rats
were dosed at 5g/kg with the test substance Pantoea agglomerans strain
C9-1 and observed for 14 days Master Record Identification Number
((MRID) 442120-02 (Ref. 1)). All animals gained weight during the study
and no clinical manifestations of treatment were noted. Gross necropsy
revealed no indications of treatment-related pathology or any unusual
findings. It is concluded that Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is not
acutely toxic to rats following oral administration.
2. Acute oral toxicity/pathogenicity - rat study (OPPTS 885.3050).
Sprague-Dawley CD rats were challenged orally with Pantoea agglomerans
C9-1 and heat killed cells (KTS) as an additional control group. Nine
female and 9 male rats were also placed in a naive control (NC) group
(no dosing) and 6 rats of each sex were placed into a shelf-control
(SC) group (placed adjacent to treated animals, but not dosed) (MRID
442120-03 (Ref.2)). Organs were sampled on days 0, 3 and 7. Since no
bacteria were recovered from the samples, the study was terminated on
day 10. No deaths of animals occurred during the course of this study
and no significant clinical findings were noted. All animals gained
weight and relative organ weights were normal with no significant
treatment effects observed. Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 was
considered to clear rapidly from the test animal in that it was never
detected. Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is considered to be non-toxic
following oral challenge.
3. Acute pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity - rat (OPPTS 885.3150).
Fifty rats, 25 female and 25 male) received, by intratracheal
instillation, a dose of 9.83 x 10\7\ or 9.00 x 10\7\ colony forming
units (cfu) of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 in a 0.1 milliliter (mL)
volume (MRID 442120-05 (Ref.4)). No adverse clinical signs were
recorded for any of the animals during the study. Four rats died during
dosing and were immediately replaced. The rats were sacrificed at 7
days and subjected to necropsy. No clinical signs related to the test
organism or macroscopic abnormalities were observed in the rats. It can
be concluded since no test substance was recovered from any animals
that this organism does not appear to be toxic, infective, and/or
pathogenic to rats at this high does level. This study is considered
acceptable and classified as Toxicity Category IV (BPPD DER 05/17/02).
4. Acute dermal toxicity - rabbits (OPPTS 870.2500 and OPPTS
885.3100). Approximately 2 grams (g) of test material was applied to
the dorsal epidermis of 10 New Zealand White Rabbits and maintained
there for 24 hours (MIRD 442120-04 (Ref.3)). All rabbits exhibited very
slight to well-defined erythema and three rabbits exhibited very slight
edema. By day 10 all surviving rabbits (9 of 10) had cleared of any
dermal irritations and remained this way throughout the end of the
study (day 14). No edema scores greater than 1 and no erythema scores
greater than 2 were recorded during the study. One rabbit, which died
at day 10, revealed no gross lesions upon necropsy. This study is
considered acceptable and classified as Toxicity Catergory IV for
irritation and Toxicity Category III for Toxicity (BPPD DER 05/17/02)
5. Primary eye irritation (OPPTS 870.2400). Six New Zealand White
Rabbits were administered 0.1 g of test substance into the right eyelid
which was washed out after 24 hours (MRID 442120-07 (Ref.5)). No
mortality, corneal lesions or iridal effects were noted at any time
during the study. Pantoea agglomerans C9-1 is considered to be a mild
eye irritant. This study is considered acceptable and classified as
Toxicity Category III (BPPD DER 05/17/02).
6. Data waiver requests. Data waiver requests were made for the
following requirements for the Technical Grade of the Active
Ingredient/Manufacturing-use Product (TGAI/MP) and Experimental Product
(EP):
(a) Acute Inhalation (OPPTS 870.1300);
(b) Acute Intravenous (IV), Intracerebral (IC), Intraperitoneal
(IP) injection Toxicity/Pathogenicity (OPPTS 885.3200);
(c) Cell Culture (OPPTS 885.3500);
(d) Immune Response (OPPTS 880.3800);
(e) Hypersensitivity study;
(f) Hypersensitivity Incidents (OPPTS 885.3400).
i. Acute inhalation toxicity/pathogenicity. The registrant cited
the acute pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity study (see Unit III.3.,
above) to justify waiving the acute inhalation study. In the acute
pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity study Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1,
was not found in any organs or tissues which indicates that the active
ingredient cleared tissues and was not toxic, infective, or pathogenic
to rats when instilled intratracheally. Additionally, when this product
is applied, applicators will be required to wear the necessary
protective equipment to prevent inhalation, and this justifies granting
this request to waive acute inhalation data requirements.
ii. Acute IV/IP/IC study. In an acute oral toxicity/pathogenicity
study (see Unit III.1. and 2. above), no clinical signs of toxicity
were observed in rats and no Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 was
recovered from organs or tissues. These data show that Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9-1 was considered to clear rapidly from the test
animal in that it was never detected. The active ingredient Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9-1 is considered to be non-toxic. Based on the low
toxicity potential indicated by these observations, the request to
waive the acute IP study was granted.
iii. Cell culture. This study is required for a virus and is not
required for a bacterial active ingredient such as Pantoea agglomerans
strain C9-1. The request to waive this data requirement was granted.
iv. Immune response. The lack of pathogenicity seen in the acute
oral toxicity/pathogenicity study with the active ingredient indicates
the immune system was not adversely affected by Pantoea agglomerans
strain C9-1. Based on these considerations, the justifications to
support the request to waive data requirements for the immune response
studies for the TGAI/MP are acceptable.
v. Hypersensitivity study. No incidents of hypersensitivity have
[[Page 24593]]
occurred during the research, development, or testing of Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9-1 or the end use product, Blightban. A
hypersensitivity study is not required at this time, but may be
required in the future if there are reports of hypersensitivity
incidents associated with this active ingredient used in pesticides.
vi. Hypersensitivity incidents (OPPTS 885.3400). The registrant
requested to waive reports of hypersensitivity incidents, because no
incidents of hypersensitivity associated with the TGAI or the EP have
been reported. However, the registrant agreed to report
hypersensitivity incidents, should they occur in the future. This
guideline requirement is satisfied at this time. In order to comply
with FIFRA requirements under Section 6(a)(2), any incident of
hypersensitivity associated with the use of this pesticide must be
reported to the Agency. This data requirement has not been waived.
7. Subchronic, chronic toxicity and oncogenicity, and residue data.
Based on the data generated in accordance with the Tier I data
requirements set forth in 40 CFR 158.740(c), the Tier II and Tier III
data requirements were not triggered and, therefore, not required in
connection with this action. In addition, because the Tier II and Tier
III data requirements were not required, the residue data requirements
set forth in 40 CFR 158.740(b) also were not required.
IV. Aggregate Exposures
In examining aggregate exposure, section 408 of the FFDCA directs
EPA to consider available information concerning exposures from the
pesticide residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures,
including drinking water from ground water or surface water and
exposure through pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings
(residential and other indoor uses).
A. Dietary Exposure
Use of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is not likely to cause any
harm via consumption of food or feed treated with the microbial
pesticide, which is not applied directly to food as discussed below.
1. Food. Residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 are not
expected on treated food commodities from the proposed use patterns.
The product, Blightban, containing Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1, is
applied at bloom followed by a second application at first petal fall-
full bloom. After Blighban is applied, the pesticide becomes non-viable
very rapidly, which causes the need for more than one application. The
pesticide itself is not in direct contact with the food commodities.
This pesticide is applied prior to fruiting. There is no post-harvest
treatment directly to the food commodities. Furthermore, the active
ingredient is not a systemic pesticide. Thus, detectable residues of
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 are not expected on treated fruit trees
or their food commodities. Furthermore, as previously stated, Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9-1 is found in soil, water and air. Data
submissions to the Agency show that residues of the Pantoea agglomerans
strain C9-1 are not found on the food commodities. Finally, as
discussed in Unit III, the acute oral tests demonstrate low toxicity
potential via dietary exposure to this Toxicity Category IV pesticide.
Hence, even if the pesticide was present in or on food commodities,
exposure via the dietary route is not expected to cause any harm.
Therefore, the Agency has decided that dietary exposure from the
proposed uses of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is not likely to
adversely affect the U.S. adult population, infants and children.
2. Drinking water exposure. No drinking water exposure is
anticipated because of the use pattern and use sites. There are no
aquatic use sites permitted for this pesticide, so exposure to drinking
water is not expected. Further, there is no evidence of adverse effects
from exposure to this organism. Exposure from the proposed use of
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is not likely to pose any incremental
risk via consumption of drinking water to adult humans, infants and
children.
B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure
The proposed product is an end-use product to be commercially used
in apple and pear orchards. No non-occupational residential, school or
day care exposure is anticipated because of the use pattern of this
product. The use of Panteoa agglomerans strain C9-1 should result in
minimal to non-existent non-occupational risk. No indoor residential,
school or daycare uses are permitted on the label of this product.
1. Dermal exposure. The low toxicity potential observed in the
acute dermal studies discussed above (Unit III), the low exposure
potential based on low application rates, and the lack of persistence
of the active ingredient, leads EPA to conclude that this pesticide
poses minimal risk to human populations via non-occupational dermal
exposure. Moreover, potential non-occupational dermal exposure to
Panteoa agglomerans strain C9-1 is unlikely because the use sites are
commercial and agricultural.
As previously discussed in Units III and IV, a lack of
hypersensitivity incidents indicates Panteoa agglomerans strain C9-1
poses minimal risk to populations via non-occupational dermal exposure.
Thus, the Agency does not expect pesticides containing Panteoa
agglomerans strain C9-1 to pose a non-occupational dermal exposure
risk.
2. Inhalation exposure. Non-occupational inhalation exposure to the
active ingredient itself is not likely to pose an inhalation risk. No
treatment-related effects associated with the active ingredient were
observed in the pulmonary tests reported above. Based on the low
potential for non-occupational inhalation exposure, the Agency does not
expect Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 to pose an inhalation risk.
V. Cumulative Effects
The Agency has considered the potential for cumulative effects of
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 and other substances in relation to a
common mechanism of toxicity. These considerations include the possible
cumulative effects of such residues on infants and children. As
demonstrated in Unit IV.B., Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is non-
toxic and non-pathogenic to mammals. Because no mechanism of
pathogenicity or toxicity in mammals has been identified for this
organism, no cumulative effects from the residues of this product with
other related microbial pesticides are anticipated.
VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, Infants and Children
There is reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the U.S.
population, including infants and children, from aggregate exposures to
residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1, as a result of its
proposed uses. This includes all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is reliable information. As discussed
previously, there appears to be no potential for harm, from this
bacterium in its use as a microbial pesticide in apple and pear
orchards. Furthermore, the organism is non-toxic and non-pathogenic to
animals and humans. The Agency has arrived at this conclusion based on
the very low levels of mammalian toxicity for acute oral, pulmonary,
and dermal effects with no toxicity or infectivity at the doses tested
(see Unit III. above). Moreover, potential non-occupational inhalation
or dermal exposure is not expected to pose any adverse effects to
exposed populations via aggregate and cumulative exposure
[[Page 24594]]
(see Units IV. and V.). FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) provides that EPA
shall apply an additional ten-fold margin of exposure (safety) for
infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the data base
on toxicity and exposure, unless EPA determines that a different margin
of exposure (safety) will be safe for infants and children. Margins of
exposure (safety), which are often referred to as uncertainty factors,
are incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly, or through
the use of a margin of exposure analysis, or by using uncertainty
(safety) factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable
risk. In this instance, based on all the available information (as
discussed in detail above), the Agency concludes that the bacterium,
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1, is non-toxic to mammals, including
infants and children. Because there are no threshold effects of concern
to infants, children and adults when Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is
used as labeled, the Agency has determined that the additional margin
of safety is not necessary to protect infants and children, and that
not adding any additional margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children.
VII. Other Considerations
A. Endocrine Disruptors
EPA is required under section 408(p) of the FFDCA, as amended by
FQPA, to develop a screening program to determine whether certain
substances (including all pesticide active and other ingredients) ``may
have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by a
naturally-occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine effects as the
Administrator may designate.'' Following the recommendations of its
Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC),
EPA determined that there was scientific basis for including, as part
of the program, the androgen and thyroid systems, in addition to the
estrogen hormone system. EPA also adopted EDSTAC's recommendation that
the program include evaluations of potential effects in wildlife. For
pesticide chemicals, EPA will use FIFRA and, to the extent that effects
in wildlife may help determine whether a substance may have an effect
in humans, FFDCA authority, to require the wildlife evaluations. As the
science develops and resources allow, screening of additional hormone
systems may be added to the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program
(EDSP).
The Agency is not requiring information on the endocrine effects of
this active ingredient at this time. The Agency has considered, among
other relevant factors, available information concerning whether the
microorganism may have an effect in humans similar to an effect
produced by a naturally occurring estrogen or other endocrine effects.
There is no known metabolite produced by this bacterium that acts as an
endocrine disruptor. The submitted and cited toxicity/pathogenicity
studies in rodents indicate that following injection and pulmonary
routes of exposure, no test substance was found in organs or tissues of
test animals. This indicates that the body is able to process and clear
the active ingredient. The Agency concludes that there will be no
incremental adverse effects to the endocrine system.
B. Analytical Method(s)
The acute oral studies discussed above demonstrate that the active
ingredient, Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 does not pose a dietary
risk. In addition, the active ingredient is not likely to come into
contact with food commodities. Since residues are not expected on
treated commodities, the Agency has concluded that an analytical method
to detect residues of this pesticide on treated food commodities for
enforcement purposes is not needed. Nevertheless, the Agency has
concluded that for analysis of the pesticide itself, microbiological
and biochemical methods exist and are acceptable for enforcement
purposes for product identity of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1. Other
appropriate methods are required for quality control to assure that
product characterization, the control of human pathogens and other
unintentional metabolites or ingredients are within regulatory limits,
and to ascertain storage stability and viability of the pesticidal
active ingredient.
C. Codex Maximum Residue Level
There is no Codex maximum residue level for residues of Pantoea
agglomerans strain C9-1
VIII. Conclusions
The results of the studies discussed above are sufficient to comply
with the requirements of the FQPA. They support an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain
C9-1 on apples and pears. In addition, the Agency is of the opinion
that, if the microbial active ingredient is used as labeled, aggregate
and cumulative exposures are not likely to pose any undue risk.
Submitted and cited data show that Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 do
not pose an incremental dietary and non-dietary risk to the adult human
U.S. population, children and infants. Therefore, an exemption from
tolerance is granted in response to pesticide petition 7F4817.
IX. MRID Citation References
1. 442120-02. Johnson, W.D. Acute Oral Toxicity Study of Erwinia
herbicola Strain C9-1 in Rats (Limit Test).
2. 442120-03. Mega. W.M. Toxicity/Paathogenicity Testing of Erwinia
herbicola Strain C9-1 Following Acute Oral Challenge in Rats
3. 442120-04. Johnson, W.D. Acute Dermal Toxicity/Irritation Study
of Erwinia herbicola Strain C9-1 in Rabbits
4. 442120-05. Mega, W.M. Toxicity/Pathogenicity Testing of Erwinia
herbicola Strain C9-1 Following Acute Intratracheal Challenge in Rats.
5. 442120-07. Johnson, W.D. Primary Eye Irritation of Erwinia
herbicola Strain C9-1 in Rabbits.
X. Objections and Hearing Requests
Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any
person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may
also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural
regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for
hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. Although the procedures in those
regulations require some modification to reflect the amendments made to
the FFDCA by the FQPA, EPA will continue to use those procedures, with
appropriate adjustments, until the necessary modifications can be made.
The new section 408(g) of the FFDCA provides essentially the same
process for persons to ``object'' to a regulation for an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance issued by EPA under new section 408(d)
of the FFDCA, as was provided in the old sections 408 and 409 of the
FFDCA. However, the period for filing objections is now 60 days, rather
than 30 days.
A. What Do I Need to Do to File an Objection or Request a Hearing?
You must file your objection or request a hearing on this
regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in this unit
and in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0267 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and
must be mailed or
[[Page 24595]]
delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before June 26, 2006.
1. Filing the request. Your objection must specify the specific
provisions in the regulation that you object to, and the grounds for
the objections (40 CFR 178.25). If a hearing is requested, the
objections must include a statement of the factual issues on which a
hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions on such issues, and a
summary of any evidence relied upon by the objector (40 CFR 178.27).
Information submitted in connection with an objection or hearing
request may be claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that
information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except
in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the
information that does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion
in the public record. Information not marked confidential may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice.
Mail your written request to: Office of the Hearing Clerk (1900L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. You may also deliver your request to the
Office of the Hearing Clerk in Suite 350, 1099 14th St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20005. The Office of the Hearing Clerk is open from 8
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Office of the Hearing Clerk is (202) 564-6255.
2. Copies for the Docket. In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit IX.A.1.,
you should also send a copy of your request to the PIRIB for its
inclusion in the official record that is described in ADDRESSES. Mail
your copies, identified by docket ID number OPP-2006-0267, to: Public
Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Technology and
Resources Management Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. In person or by courier, bring a copy to the
location of the PIRIB described in ADDRESSES. You may also send an
electronic copy of your request via e-mail to: opp-docket@epa.gov.
Please use an ASCII file format and avoid the use of special characters
and any form of encryption. Copies of electronic objections and hearing
requests will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII
file format. Do not include any CBI in your electronic copy. You may
also submit an electronic copy of your request at many Federal
Depository Libraries.
B. When Will the Agency Grant a Request for a Hearing?
A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator
determines that the material submitted shows the following: There is a
genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable
possibility that available evidence identified by the requestor would,
if established resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the
requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts to the
contrary; and resolution of the factual issues in the manner sought by
the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested (40 CFR
178.32).
XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes an exemption from the tolerance
requirement under section 408(d) of the FFDCA in response to a petition
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 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 rule has been exempted from review under Executive
Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this 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 final rule does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB 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 OMB 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). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a
petition under section 408(d) of the FFDCA, such as the exemption in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply. 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 final 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 provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of the FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency
has determined that this 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 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 rule.
[[Page 24596]]
XII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
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 7, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Section 180.1267 is added to subpart D to read as follows:
Sec. 180.1267 Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1; exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance.
An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established for
residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 when used on apples and
pears.
[FR Doc. 06-3856 Filed 4-25-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S