Bacillus mycoides isolate J; Temporary Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance, 34263-34267 [E6-9282]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
15 years to assure that the it continues
to meet the FIFRA standard for
registration, including compliance with
any new legislation, regulations or
science policy.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2004–0404. All documents in the
docket are listed on the regulations.gov
web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (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 in the electronic docket
at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the Office of
Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S.
Crystal Drive Arlington, VA. The hours
of operation of this Docket Facility are
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:
Vivian Prunier, Field and External
Affairs Division (7506P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington DC 20460-0001;
telephone number: (703) 308-9341; email address: prunier.vivian@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
This action is directed to the public
in general. It simply announces the
submission of a draft final rule to the
United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) and does not otherwise affect
any specific entities. This action may,
however, be of particular interest to
those persons who register pesticides
under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
or who use pesticides. Since other
entities may also be interested, the
Agency has not attempted to describe all
the specific entities that may be
interested in this action. If you have any
questions regarding the this action,
consult the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
EPA Internet under the ‘‘Federal
Register’’ listings at https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.
II. What Action is EPA Taking?
Section 25(a)(2) of FIFRA requires the
Administrator to provide the Secretary
of Agriculture with a copy of any final
regulation at least 30 days before signing
it for publication in the Federal
Register. The draft final rule is not
available to the public until after it has
been signed by EPA. If the Secretary
comments in writing regarding the draft
final rule within 15 days after receiving
it, the Administrator shall include the
comments of the Secretary, if requested
by the Secretary, and the
Administrator’s response to those
comments in the final rule when
published in the Federal Register. If the
Secretary does not comment in writing
within 15 days after receiving the draft
final rule, the Administrator may sign
the final rule for publication in the
Federal Register anytime after the 15–
day period.
III. Do Any Statutory and Executive
Order Reviews Apply to this
Notification?
No. This document is not a rule, it is
merely a notification of submission to
the Secretary of Agriculture. As such,
none of the regulatory assessment
requirements apply to this document.
IV. Will this Notification be Subject to
the Congressional Review Act?
No. This action is not a rule for
purposes of the Congressional Review
Act (CRA), 5 U.S.C. 804(3), and will not
be submitted to Congress and the
Comptroller General. EPA will submit
the final rule to Congress and the
Comptroller General as required by the
CRA.
List of Subjects in Part 155
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Pesticides and pests
Dated: June 2, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E6–9077 Filed 6–13–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies
of this Document?
In addition to using regulations.gov,
you may access this Federal Register
document electronically through the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 Jun 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34263
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0303; FRL–8072–3]
Bacillus mycoides isolate J;
Temporary Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a
temporary exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of the microbial pesticide Bacillus
mycoides isolate J on sugar beets when
applied/used to control Cercospora Leaf
Spot (Cercospora beticola) in sugar
beets. Montana Microbial Products
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 the temporary exemption
from tolerance. This regulation
eliminates the need to establish a
maximum permissible level for residues
of Bacillus mycoides isolate J. The
temporary tolerance exemption will
expire on December 31, 2007.
DATES: This regulation is effective June
14, 2006. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
August 14, 2006, and must be filed in
accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also
Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION).
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2005–0303. All documents in the
docket are listed in the index for the
docket. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (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 in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–
4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive,
Arlington, VA. The 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.
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\14JNR1.SGM
14JNR1
34264
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anne Ball, Biopesticides and Pollution
Prevention Division (7511P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 204607–
0001; telephone number: (703) 308–
8717; e-mail address:ball.anne@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?
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
In addition to accessing an electronic
copy of this Federal Register document
through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access
this ‘‘Federal Register’’ document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may
also access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s pilot e-CFR site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr. To access the
OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines
referenced in this document, go to the
guidelines at https://www.epa.gov/
opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing
Request?
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 Jun 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
procedural regulations which govern the
submission of objections and requests
for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178.
You must file your objection or request
a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2005–0303 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
requests must be in writing, and must be
mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk
on or before August 14, 2006.
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing that does not
contain any CBI for inclusion in the
public docket that is described in
ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit your
copies, identified by docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0303, by one of
the following methods.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001.
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S.
Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket’s
normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to
4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of January 18,
2006 (71 FR 2932–2933) (FRL–7755–9),
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 5G6983)
by Montana Microbial Products, 510
East Kent Avenue, Missoula MT 59801.
The petition requested that 40 CFR part
180 be amended by establishing a
temporary exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of Bacillus mycoides isolate J. This
notice included a summary of the
petition prepared by the petitioner
Montana Microbial Products. One
comment was received in response to
the notice of filing. The commenter
objected to an exemption from the
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
requirement of a tolerance. This
commenter apparently misunderstood
the nature of the product which does
not contain a gene-altered substance.
EPA concludes that Bacillus mycoides
isolate J is ubiquitous in nature and for
purposes of this temporary tolerance
exemption, EPA has determined that it
will be safe when used in agriculture.
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.
E:\FR\FM\14JNR1.SGM
14JNR1
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
An Acute Pulmonary Toxicity/
Pathogenicity study (OPPTS 885.3150)
in rats which were dosed intratracheally
with Bacillus mycoides isolate J at 1.1 x
108 cfu/animal, was reviewed and found
to be supplemental because a clear
pattern of clearance from all organs was
not demonstrated during the study’s 35–
day length. The test substance, however,
did show a pattern of clearance in some
organs. Differential heat treatment of
tissue samples had suggested that most
of the recovered organisms were spores.
No treated animals died nor were there
signs in the animals of toxicity or
pathogenicity. Given the ubiquitous
nature of this spore forming bacterium
which is found on plants, in soil, water,
air and decomposing plant tissue, along
with the lack of mortality of the test
animals and the absence of overt signs
of toxicity or pathogenicity in the
animals during the course of this
pulmonary study, issuance of the
Experimental Use Permit (EUP) can be
justified provided there are instructions
for appropriate respiratory protection
for the applicators specified on the
product label.
The Agency has granted the requests
for waivers for the studies Primary Eye
Irritation ( OPPTS 870.2400) and
Primary Dermal Irritation (OPPTS
870.2500). The registrant had provided
the following rationales for the requests
with which the EPA agrees:
1. The inert ingredient in the Bacillus
mycoides isolate J end product is on the
EPA inert list 4A as safe for food use.
The combination of Bacillus mycoides
isolate J spores with this inert would not
be expected to exacerbate primary
ocular and dermal irritation or infection.
2. Personnel who worked with
Bacillus mycoides isolate J for 2 to 7
years showed no eye or dermal exposure
effects.
3. Eye or dermal exposure to Bacillus
mycoides isolate J will be limited by
supervision and protective equipment.
If eye or dermal exposure did, however,
occur, the spores will rinse out of the
eye with water or wash off the skin with
soap and water because spores are
hydrophilic.
4. Bacillus mycoides isolate J is not
recorded as a human pathogen. Due to
the ubiquitous presence of Bacillus
mycoides isolate J in agricultural soils,
there has been long term human
exposure to Bacillus mycoides isolate J
in crops and to residual Bacillus
mycoides isolate J cells or spores in food
crops. No toxicity or pathogenicity of
Bacillus mycoides isolate J in humans
had been reported in numerous
searched citations.
In connection with the requirement
for reporting Hypersensitivity Incidents
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 Jun 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
(OPPTS 885.3400), the Registrant has
notified the Agency that no recorded or
reported adverse hypersensitivity
reaction to Bacillus mycoides isolate J
has occurred during the period of 2
years in which the substance has been
handled in a laboratory setting.
As stated above, a pattern of complete
clearance from all organs had not been
demonstrated for the acute pulmonary
toxicity/pathogenicity study (OPPTS
885.3150).The requests for waivers on
the following studies are contingent on
demonstrating a pattern of clearance of
the test organism in the acute
pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity study,
and thus the requests for waivers were
not granted.
• Acute Oral Toxicity/Pathogenicity
(OPPTS 885.3050)
• Acute Dermal Toxicity/
Pathogenicity (OPPTS 885.3100)
• Acute Injection Toxicity/
Pathogenicity (OPPTS 885.3200)
• Immune Response (OPPTS
885.3550)
However, as previously stated in this
document, the test substance for the
acute pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity
did show a pattern of clearance in some
organs. There was no mortality of the
test animals, nor were there signs in the
animals of toxicity or pathogenicity
caused by this ubiquitous spore-forming
bacterium. The issuance of the
Experimental Use Permit (EUP) can be
justified provided there are instructions
for appropriate respiratory protection
for the applicators specified on the
product label. The basis for this
conclusion rests not only on the
ubiquitous nature of Bacillus mycoides
isolate J, the absence of mortality, and
of overt adverse reactions in the test
animals, but also on the absence of
reported or cited incidents of
pathogenicity or toxicity in the course of
an extensive literature search.
Therefore, issuance of the Experimental
Use Permit (EUP) can be justified
without the requirement for studies
based on OPPTS 885.3050, 885.3100,
885.3200 and 885.3550, provided there
are instructions for appropriate
respiratory protection for the applicators
specified on the product label.
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).
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34265
A. Dietary Exposure
The proposed EUP is not expected to
result in increased dietary exposures of
Bacillus mycoides isolate J to the general
population. The quantity of Bacillus
mycoides isolate J applied to the beet
foliage, 7.5 x 1011 spores/acre per
application, is small compared to the
natural background levels of Bacillus
mycoides isolate J in agricultural soils
which is reported to typically occur at
about 105 spores per gram. Also, the
titer of Bacillus mycoides isolate J
applied to the foliage declines from 106
spores/cm2 to between 100 and 1,000
spores/cm2 over a 2–week period.
Because the ordinary consumer
encounters only the sugar produced
from sugar beets, (in which the
bacterium is not present), an increased
dietary exposure is not foreseen.
There is, in addition, minimal to
negligible risk that surface water and,
thus, drinking water exposure would
occur with the proposed EUP testing.
The proposed test sites are at least onehalf mile from the nearest surface water.
When spray drift or accidental
application of Bacillus mycoides isolate
J over surface water did occur, the
concentration of Bacillus mycoides
isolate J spores in the water had been
found to be very low. For example an
acre dose of Bacillus mycoides isolate J,
7.5 x 1011 spores to 100 square meters
of surface water 1 meter deep, would
result in a concentration of 750 spores
per cc of water as noted in the EPA
ecological risk assessment for Bacillus
mycoides isolate J which is based on
data submitted by the Montana
Microbial Products.
B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure
EPA concludes that dermal or
inhalation exposure to the general
population as a result of this EUP is not
likely to occur, based on information
submitted in pesticide tolerance petition
5G6983 indicating that the relevant EUP
agricultural sites, which are located in
the Red River Valley of North Dakota
and Minnesota and in eastern Montana,
and which will not exceed 956 acres,
are not accessible to individuals other
than those conducting this EUP
program.
V. Cumulative Effects
Pursuant to FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D)(v), EPA has considered
available information on the cumulative
effects of such residues and other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity. These
considerations included the cumulative
effects on infants and children of such
residues and other substances with a
E:\FR\FM\14JNR1.SGM
14JNR1
34266
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
common method of toxicity. Because
there is no indication of mammalian
toxicity or pathogenicity resulting from
Bacillus mycoides isolate J, we conclude
that there are no cumulative effects for
this bacterium.
VI. Determination of Safety for U.S
Population, Infants and Children
1. U. S. population. The Agency has
determined that there is reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to the
U. S. population from exposure to
residues of Bacillus mycoides isolate J in
connection with the testing for the
proposed EUP program. This
determination includes all anticipated
dietary exposures and other nonoccupational exposures for which there
is reliable information. Oral ingestion of
the organism is unlikely because
consumers will purchase only the sugar
produced from the sugar beets. This
product is not anticipated to contain
any spores or cells derived from the
treatment of the foliage of the sugar
beets. Data submitted in a pulmonary
toxicity/pathogenicity study revealed no
signs of overt toxicity or pathogenicity
in the test animals. The results of an
extensive literature search, which
included numerous citations of the test
organism, yielded no reports of its
pathogenicity for mammals. There will
be no access to persons other than
participants in the program to the test
sites for the EUP. The participants in the
EUP program are required to wear
appropriate respiratory protection.
2. Infants and children. FFDCA
section 408(b)(2)(C) provides that EPA
shall assess the available information
about consumption patterns among
infants and children, special
susceptibility of infants and children to
pesticide chemical residues, and the
cumulative effects on infants and
children of the residues and other
substances with a common mechanism
of toxicity.
In addition, FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(C) also provides that EPA shall
apply an additional tenfold margin of
safety, also referred to as margins of
exposure (MOEs), for infants and
children in the case of threshold effects
to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the
data base unless EPA determines that a
different MOE will be safe for infants
and children.
In this instance, based on all available
information, the Agency concludes that
there is a finding of no toxicity for
Bacillus mycoides isolate J. Thus there
are no threshhold effects of concern to
infants and children when the microbial
is used as a fungicide. Accordingly, the
Agency concludes that the additional
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 Jun 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
MOE is not necessary to protect infants
and children, and that not adding any
additional MOE will be safe for infants
and children.
VII. Other Considerations
A. Endocrine Disruptors
The pesticidal active ingredient,
Bacillus mycoides isolate J is not known
to exert an influence on the endocrine
system.
B. Analytical Method(s)
Analytic methods for Bacillus
mycoides isolate J that are sufficient to
justify the issuance of an Experimental
Use Permit (EUP) have been submitted
to the Agency.
C. Codex Maximum Residue Level
No codex maximum residue levels
exist for the microbial Bacillus
mycoides isolate J.
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes a temporary
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
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(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
E:\FR\FM\14JNR1.SGM
14JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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.
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: June 6, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority : 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.1269 is added to
subpart D to read as follows:
I
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
§ 180.1269 Bacillus mycoides Isolate J on
sugar beets: exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance.
Bacillus mycoides isolate J is
temporarily exempt from the
requirement of a tolerance when used as
a fungicide for control of Cercospora
Leaf Spot (Cercospora beticola) on sugar
beets. This temporary exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance expires
and is revoked on December 31, 2007.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 Jun 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0299; FRL–8069–6]
Potassium Silicate; Exemption from
the Requirement of a Tolerance
IX. Congressional Review Act
[FR Doc. E6–9282 Filed 6–13–06; 8:45 am]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of potassium
silicate in or on all food commodities
when applied/used as a fungicide,
insecticide or miticide so long as the
potassium silicate is not applied at rates
exceeding 1% by weight in aqueous
solution and when used in accordance
with good agricultural practices. PQ
Corporation 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
for residues of potassium silicate.
DATES: This regulation is effective June
14, 2006. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
August 14, 2006, and must be filed in
accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also
Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2006–0299. All documents in the
docket are listed in the index for the
docket. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (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 in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400,
One Potomac Yard (South Building),
2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA.
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 is (703) 305–
5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carol E. Frazer, Biopesticides and
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34267
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 308–8810; e-mail address:
frazer.carol@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?
In addition to accessing an electronic
copy of this Federal Register document
through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may
also access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s pilot e-CFR site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing
Request?
Under section 408(g) of 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.
You must file your objection or request
a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
E:\FR\FM\14JNR1.SGM
14JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 14, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34263-34267]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-9282]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0303; FRL-8072-3]
Bacillus mycoides isolate J; Temporary Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a temporary exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of the microbial pesticide
Bacillus mycoides isolate J on sugar beets when applied/used to control
Cercospora Leaf Spot (Cercospora beticola) in sugar beets. Montana
Microbial Products 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 the temporary exemption from
tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum
permissible level for residues of Bacillus mycoides isolate J. The
temporary tolerance exemption will expire on December 31, 2007.
DATES: This regulation is effective June 14, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before August 14, 2006,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0303. All documents in the
docket are listed in the index for the docket. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (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 in the electronic docket at https://www.regulations.gov, or,
if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in
Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive,
Arlington, VA. The 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.
[[Page 34264]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Ball, Biopesticides and Pollution
Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 204607-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8717; e-mail
address:ball.anne@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?
In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal
Register document through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access this ``Federal Register'' document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a
frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the
Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr. To access the OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines
referenced in this document, go to the guidelines at https://
www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?
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. You must file your objection or
request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by
EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0303 in the
subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be
in writing, and must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or
before August 14, 2006.
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit your copies, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0303, by one of the following methods.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of January 18, 2006 (71 FR 2932-2933) (FRL-
7755-9), 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 5G6983) by Montana Microbial Products, 510 East
Kent Avenue, Missoula MT 59801. The petition requested that 40 CFR part
180 be amended by establishing a temporary exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of Bacillus mycoides isolate J.
This notice included a summary of the petition prepared by the
petitioner Montana Microbial Products. One comment was received in
response to the notice of filing. The commenter objected to an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This commenter
apparently misunderstood the nature of the product which does not
contain a gene-altered substance. EPA concludes that Bacillus mycoides
isolate J is ubiquitous in nature and for purposes of this temporary
tolerance exemption, EPA has determined that it will be safe when used
in agriculture.
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.
[[Page 34265]]
An Acute Pulmonary Toxicity/Pathogenicity study (OPPTS 885.3150) in
rats which were dosed intratracheally with Bacillus mycoides isolate J
at 1.1 x 108 cfu/animal, was reviewed and found to be
supplemental because a clear pattern of clearance from all organs was
not demonstrated during the study's 35-day length. The test substance,
however, did show a pattern of clearance in some organs. Differential
heat treatment of tissue samples had suggested that most of the
recovered organisms were spores. No treated animals died nor were there
signs in the animals of toxicity or pathogenicity. Given the ubiquitous
nature of this spore forming bacterium which is found on plants, in
soil, water, air and decomposing plant tissue, along with the lack of
mortality of the test animals and the absence of overt signs of
toxicity or pathogenicity in the animals during the course of this
pulmonary study, issuance of the Experimental Use Permit (EUP) can be
justified provided there are instructions for appropriate respiratory
protection for the applicators specified on the product label.
The Agency has granted the requests for waivers for the studies
Primary Eye Irritation ( OPPTS 870.2400) and Primary Dermal Irritation
(OPPTS 870.2500). The registrant had provided the following rationales
for the requests with which the EPA agrees:
1. The inert ingredient in the Bacillus mycoides isolate J end
product is on the EPA inert list 4A as safe for food use. The
combination of Bacillus mycoides isolate J spores with this inert would
not be expected to exacerbate primary ocular and dermal irritation or
infection.
2. Personnel who worked with Bacillus mycoides isolate J for 2 to 7
years showed no eye or dermal exposure effects.
3. Eye or dermal exposure to Bacillus mycoides isolate J will be
limited by supervision and protective equipment. If eye or dermal
exposure did, however, occur, the spores will rinse out of the eye with
water or wash off the skin with soap and water because spores are
hydrophilic.
4. Bacillus mycoides isolate J is not recorded as a human pathogen.
Due to the ubiquitous presence of Bacillus mycoides isolate J in
agricultural soils, there has been long term human exposure to Bacillus
mycoides isolate J in crops and to residual Bacillus mycoides isolate J
cells or spores in food crops. No toxicity or pathogenicity of Bacillus
mycoides isolate J in humans had been reported in numerous searched
citations.
In connection with the requirement for reporting Hypersensitivity
Incidents (OPPTS 885.3400), the Registrant has notified the Agency that
no recorded or reported adverse hypersensitivity reaction to Bacillus
mycoides isolate J has occurred during the period of 2 years in which
the substance has been handled in a laboratory setting.
As stated above, a pattern of complete clearance from all organs
had not been demonstrated for the acute pulmonary toxicity/
pathogenicity study (OPPTS 885.3150).The requests for waivers on the
following studies are contingent on demonstrating a pattern of
clearance of the test organism in the acute pulmonary toxicity/
pathogenicity study, and thus the requests for waivers were not
granted.
Acute Oral Toxicity/Pathogenicity (OPPTS 885.3050)
Acute Dermal Toxicity/Pathogenicity (OPPTS 885.3100)
Acute Injection Toxicity/Pathogenicity (OPPTS 885.3200)
Immune Response (OPPTS 885.3550)
However, as previously stated in this document, the test substance
for the acute pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity did show a pattern of
clearance in some organs. There was no mortality of the test animals,
nor were there signs in the animals of toxicity or pathogenicity caused
by this ubiquitous spore-forming bacterium. The issuance of the
Experimental Use Permit (EUP) can be justified provided there are
instructions for appropriate respiratory protection for the applicators
specified on the product label. The basis for this conclusion rests not
only on the ubiquitous nature of Bacillus mycoides isolate J, the
absence of mortality, and of overt adverse reactions in the test
animals, but also on the absence of reported or cited incidents of
pathogenicity or toxicity in the course of an extensive literature
search. Therefore, issuance of the Experimental Use Permit (EUP) can be
justified without the requirement for studies based on OPPTS 885.3050,
885.3100, 885.3200 and 885.3550, provided there are instructions for
appropriate respiratory protection for the applicators specified on the
product label.
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
The proposed EUP is not expected to result in increased dietary
exposures of Bacillus mycoides isolate J to the general population. The
quantity of Bacillus mycoides isolate J applied to the beet foliage,
7.5 x 1011 spores/acre per application, is small compared to
the natural background levels of Bacillus mycoides isolate J in
agricultural soils which is reported to typically occur at about
105 spores per gram. Also, the titer of Bacillus mycoides
isolate J applied to the foliage declines from 106 spores/
cm2 to between 100 and 1,000 spores/cm2 over a 2-
week period. Because the ordinary consumer encounters only the sugar
produced from sugar beets, (in which the bacterium is not present), an
increased dietary exposure is not foreseen.
There is, in addition, minimal to negligible risk that surface
water and, thus, drinking water exposure would occur with the proposed
EUP testing. The proposed test sites are at least one-half mile from
the nearest surface water. When spray drift or accidental application
of Bacillus mycoides isolate J over surface water did occur, the
concentration of Bacillus mycoides isolate J spores in the water had
been found to be very low. For example an acre dose of Bacillus
mycoides isolate J, 7.5 x 1011 spores to 100 square meters
of surface water 1 meter deep, would result in a concentration of 750
spores per cc of water as noted in the EPA ecological risk assessment
for Bacillus mycoides isolate J which is based on data submitted by the
Montana Microbial Products.
B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure
EPA concludes that dermal or inhalation exposure to the general
population as a result of this EUP is not likely to occur, based on
information submitted in pesticide tolerance petition 5G6983 indicating
that the relevant EUP agricultural sites, which are located in the Red
River Valley of North Dakota and Minnesota and in eastern Montana, and
which will not exceed 956 acres, are not accessible to individuals
other than those conducting this EUP program.
V. Cumulative Effects
Pursuant to FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D)(v), EPA has considered
available information on the cumulative effects of such residues and
other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity. These
considerations included the cumulative effects on infants and children
of such residues and other substances with a
[[Page 34266]]
common method of toxicity. Because there is no indication of mammalian
toxicity or pathogenicity resulting from Bacillus mycoides isolate J,
we conclude that there are no cumulative effects for this bacterium.
VI. Determination of Safety for U.S Population, Infants and Children
1. U. S. population. The Agency has determined that there is
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the U. S. population
from exposure to residues of Bacillus mycoides isolate J in connection
with the testing for the proposed EUP program. This determination
includes all anticipated dietary exposures and other non-occupational
exposures for which there is reliable information. Oral ingestion of
the organism is unlikely because consumers will purchase only the sugar
produced from the sugar beets. This product is not anticipated to
contain any spores or cells derived from the treatment of the foliage
of the sugar beets. Data submitted in a pulmonary toxicity/
pathogenicity study revealed no signs of overt toxicity or
pathogenicity in the test animals. The results of an extensive
literature search, which included numerous citations of the test
organism, yielded no reports of its pathogenicity for mammals. There
will be no access to persons other than participants in the program to
the test sites for the EUP. The participants in the EUP program are
required to wear appropriate respiratory protection.
2. Infants and children. FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) provides that
EPA shall assess the available information about consumption patterns
among infants and children, special susceptibility of infants and
children to pesticide chemical residues, and the cumulative effects on
infants and children of the residues and other substances with a common
mechanism of toxicity.
In addition, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) also provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold margin of safety, also referred to as
margins of exposure (MOEs), for infants and children in the case of
threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and
the completeness of the data base unless EPA determines that a
different MOE will be safe for infants and children.
In this instance, based on all available information, the Agency
concludes that there is a finding of no toxicity for Bacillus mycoides
isolate J. Thus there are no threshhold effects of concern to infants
and children when the microbial is used as a fungicide. Accordingly,
the Agency concludes that the additional MOE is not necessary to
protect infants and children, and that not adding any additional MOE
will be safe for infants and children.
VII. Other Considerations
A. Endocrine Disruptors
The pesticidal active ingredient, Bacillus mycoides isolate J is
not known to exert an influence on the endocrine system.
B. Analytical Method(s)
Analytic methods for Bacillus mycoides isolate J that are
sufficient to justify the issuance of an Experimental Use Permit (EUP)
have been submitted to the Agency.
C. Codex Maximum Residue Level
No codex maximum residue levels exist for the microbial Bacillus
mycoides isolate J.
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes a temporary 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
[[Page 34267]]
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.
IX. 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: June 6, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART180--[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 180.1269 is added to subpart D to read as follows:
Sec. 180.1269 Bacillus mycoides Isolate J on sugar beets: exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance.
Bacillus mycoides isolate J is temporarily exempt from the
requirement of a tolerance when used as a fungicide for control of
Cercospora Leaf Spot (Cercospora beticola) on sugar beets. This
temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance expires and is
revoked on December 31, 2007.
[FR Doc. E6-9282 Filed 6-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S