Dichlorvos (DDVP); Proposed Determination to Terminate Special Review, 54658-54662 [E7-18861]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
54658
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 26, 2007 / Notices
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
EPA has concluded that, with the
adoption of the risk mitigation measures
evaluated in the N-methyl carbamate
cumulative risk assessment, all of the Nmethyl carbamate pesticide tolerances
assessed in this risk assessment meet
the safety standard set forth in section
408(b)(2)(a) of the FFDCA. For those
tolerances, this conclusion terminates
the tolerance reassessment process
under section 408(q) of the FFDCA. For
all of the chemicals, to the extent that
the safety determination for these uses
based on the cumulative risk assessment
was the only remaining issue to
complete the reregistration eligibility
determination for a particular chemical
under section 4(g)(2)(A) of FIFRA, the
Agency now considers that
determination (consistent with the risk
mitigation measures described in the
cumulative assessment) to be complete.
As noted in the Introduction to the
cumulative risk assessment, certain
tolerances and uses were omitted from
the risk assessment because EPA had
previously determined that these uses or
tolerances did not meet the safety
standards based on their individual,
aggregate risks or should be canceled for
other reasons. These tolerances and uses
are identified in Appendix II.A of the
cumulative risk assessment. The
cumulative assessment does not change
the Agency’s determination with respect
to those uses. Should any risk
mitigation measures identified in the
assessment not subsequently be
implemented, EPA will revise the
assessment as necessary to take those
residues into account.
In June 2006, the Agency determined
that 144 of the N-methyl carbamate
tolerances were insignificant
contributors to the overall dietary
exposure to the N-methyl carbamates.
The uses associated with these 144
tolerances make an insignificant
contribution to the overall N-methyl
carbamate cumulative risk. Therefore,
EPA counted these tolerances as
reassessed before the final N-methyl
carbamate cumulative assessment was
issued. That determination is not
changed by the assessment the Agency
is now issuing. As noted in the previous
paragraph above, EPA has now
determined that those tolerances
assessed in the N-methyl carbamate
cumulative risk assessment meet the
FFDCA safety standard and that no
further dietary risk mitigation is
necessary for any of the pesticides
involved in the cumulative risk
assessment other than the mitigation
measures identified in the individual
chemical or cumulative assessments.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:57 Sep 25, 2007
Jkt 211001
EPA is providing an opportunity,
through this notice, for interested
parties to provide comments and input
on the Agency’s completed cumulative
risk assessment for the N-methyl
carbamate pesticides. Such comments
and input could address the Agency’s
risk assessment methodologies and
assumptions as applied to this
cumulative assessment.
The Agency will consider all
comments received, and make changes,
if appropriate, to the N-methyl
carbamate cumulative risk assessment.
EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people,
regardless of race, color, national origin,
or income, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of
environmental laws, regulations,
andpolicies. To help address potential
environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups
or segments of the population who, as
a result of their location, cultural
practices, or other factors, may have
atypical, unusually high exposure to Nmethyl carbamate pesticides, compared
to the general population.
EPA is applying the principles of
public participation to all pesticides
undergoing reregistration and tolerance
reassessment. The Agency’s Pesticide
Tolerance Reassessment and
Reregistration; Public Participation
Process, published in the Federal
Register on May 14, 2004, (69 FR 26819)
(FRL–7357–9) explains that in
conducting these programs, EPA is
tailoring its public participation process
to be commensurate with the level of
risk, extent of use, complexity of issues,
and degree of public concern associated
with each pesticide. The N-methyl
carbamate pesticides have had extensive
opportunities for public comment as
part of their reregistration and tolerance
reassessment process.
Comments should be limited to issues
raised within the N-methyl carbamate
cumulative risk assessment and
associated documents. Failure to
comment on any such issues as part of
this opportunity will not limit a
commenter’s opportunity to participate
in any later notice and comment
processes on this matter. All comments
should be submitted using the methods
in ADDRESSES, and must be received by
EPA on or before the closing date.
Comments will become part of the
Agency Docket for the N-methyl
carbamate cumulative risk assessment.
Comments received after the close of the
comment period will be marked
<2005
17:57 Sep 25, 2007
Jkt 211001
• 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 Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., 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 Facility telephone number is
(703) 305–5805.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–20060396. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the docket
without change and may be made
available on-line at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov website is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your e-mail address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is
placed in the docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an
electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the docket index available
in regulations.gov. To access the
electronic docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, select ‘‘Advanced
Search,’’ then ‘‘Docket Search.’’ Insert
the docket ID number where indicated
and select the ‘‘Submit’’ button. Follow
the instructions on the regulations.gov
website to view the docket index or
access available documents. Although
listed in the index, some information is
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54659
not publicly available, e.g., 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 OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., 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 Facility telephone
number is (703) 305–5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Bartow, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office
of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–
0001; telephone number: (703) 603–
0065; fax number: (703) 308–8005;
e-mail address: bartow.susan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
This action is directed to the public
in general, and may be of interest to a
wide range of stakeholders including
environmental, human health, and
agricultural advocates; the chemical
industry; pesticide users; and members
of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since
others also may be interested, the
Agency has not attempted to describe all
the specific entities that may be affected
by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare
My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that
you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD-ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD-ROM the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
54660
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 26, 2007 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for preparing your comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
i. Identify the document by docket ID
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
ii. Follow directions. The Agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
iii. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
iv. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
v. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
vi. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns and suggest
alternatives.
vii. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
viii. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background
DDVP is an organophosphate
insecticide and fumigant registered for
use in controlling flies, mosquitos,
gnats, cockroaches, fleas, and other
insect pests. Formulations of DDVP
include pressurized liquids,
emulsifiable concentrates, and
impregnated materials. DDVP is applied
with aerosols and fogging equipment,
with spray equipment, and through
slow release from impregnated
materials, such as resin strips.
DDVP is registered to control insect
pests on agricultural sites; commercial,
institutional and industrial sites; and for
domestic use in and around homes (i.e.,
resin strips). DDVP is used preplant in
mushroom houses, and postharvest in
storage areas for bulk, packaged and
bagged raw and processed agricultural
commodities, food manufacturing/
processing plants, animal premises, and
non-food areas of food-handling
establishments. It is also registered for
direct dermal treatment of cattle and
poultry, and swine, sheep, and goats.
The mechanism of pesticidal action of
DDVP is inhibition of cholinesterase.
Although when the DDVP Special
Review was first initiated, EPA
identified concerns for cancer and liver
effects as well as cholinesterase
inhibition, the Agency has since
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:57 Sep 25, 2007
Jkt 211001
determined that the adverse effects
caused by DDVP that are of primary
concern to human health are
neurological effects related to inhibition
of cholinesterase activity and the
previously-identified cancer and liver
effects do not present risks of concern.
A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
On February 24, 1988, the Agency
published a Notice of Special Review
(PD 1) of pesticide products containing
DDVP based on concerns for cancer,
cholinesterase inhibition, and liver
effects (53 FR 5542). On September 28,
1995, the Agency published a Notice of
Preliminary Determination to Cancel
Certain Registrations and a Draft Notice
of Intent to Cancel (PD 2/3) (60 FR
50337)(FRL–4954–7). For the reasons
discussed below, EPA is now issuing
this proposal to terminate the DDVP
Special Review without taking any
further action against the DDVP
registrations. EPA is taking this action
based upon the requested label
amendments, the voluntary cancellation
of uses by the registrant pursuant to
section 6(f) of FIFRA, and the IRED, in
which EPA determined that the risks
that were the basis of the Special
Review are no longer of concern. The
Agency notes that it has received and is
in the process of responding to a
petition to cancel all DDVP registrations
and revoke all DDVP tolerances. The
breadth and scope of the petition is far
greater than the discrete issues that were
the triggers initiating the DDVP Special
Review. The Agency is proposing to
terminate the Special Review, and to
assess the merits of the petition
separately. Notwithstanding anything in
this proposal or in the reregistration
decision for DDVP, if EPA determines
that some or all of the petition should
be granted, the Agency will pursue
appropriate changes to the terms and
conditions of DDVP registrations.
B. What is the Agency’s Authority for
Taking this Action?
In order to obtain a registration for a
pesticide under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA,
7 U.S.C. 136 et seq., as amended by the
Food Quality Protection Act of 1996,
Public Law 104-170), an applicant must
demonstrate that the pesticide will not
cause unreasonable adverse affects on
the environment when used according
to label directions. (FIFRA section
3(c)(5)). The term unreasonable adverse
effects on the environment means: 1.
Any unreasonable risk to humans or the
environment, taking into account the
economic, social and environmental
costs and benefits of the use of any
pesticide, or 2. A human dietary risk
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
from residues that results from use of a
pesticide in or on any food inconsistent
with the standard under section 408 of
the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic
Act. (FIFRA section 2(bb)).
Tolerances, or the establishment of
maximum permissible levels of
pesticides in foods, are required when a
pesticide or its identifiable degradates
or metabolites are expected to be
present in food. Section 408 of the
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq., as
amended by the Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA) of 1996, (Public Law 104–
170), authorizes EPA to establish a
tolerance if the Agency determines the
tolerance is safe. Without such a
tolerance or an exemption from a
tolerance, a food containing a pesticide
residue is adulterated under section 402
of the FFDCA and may not be legally
moved in interstate commerce.
In determining a pesticide’s safety for
establishing a tolerance or an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance,
section 408 of the FFDCA requires, inter
alia, that EPA examine aggregate
exposures from all sources of pesticide
residues, whether infants and children
have heightened susceptibility to
pesticide residues, and whether there
are cumulative effects of pesticides and
other compounds with a common
mechanism of toxicity. Because it is not
relevant to the outcome of this Special
Review, we will not discuss in detail the
differences between the current
standard in section 408 and the
standard that was in effect when the
Special Review for DDVP was initiated.
In proposing to terminate this Special
Review, EPA is applying the more
stringent standard currently found in
section 408.
The Special Review process, which
was previously called the Rebuttable
Presumption Against Registration
(RPAR), is described in 40 CFR part 154,
published in the Federal Register of
November 25, 1985 (50 FR 49015). EPA
can initiate a Special Review if it
determines that a pesticide may pose a
serious risk to human health or the
environment (40 CFR 154.7). The
purpose of the Special Review process
is then to determine whether the risk is
in fact a serious one, and if so, whether
some or all of the registrations of an
affected pesticide meet the FIFRA
standard for registration, or whether
amendment of the terms and conditions
of registration or cancellation of
portions or all of the registrations is
appropriate.
Prior to formal initiation of a Special
Review, a preliminary notification is
sent to registrants and applicants for
registration pursuant to 40 CFR 154.21
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 26, 2007 / Notices
announcing that the Agency is
considering commencing a Special
Review. Registrants and applicants for
registration are allowed 30 days from
receipt of the notification to comment
on the Agency’s proposal to commence
a Special Review.
If the Agency determines, after
issuance of a notification pursuant to 40
CFR 154.21, that it will initiate a Special
Review, 40 CFR 154.23(c) requires the
Administrator to publish a Notice of
Special Review in the Federal Register.
To conclude the Special Review after a
Special Review has been initiated, 40
CFR 154.31 requires the Administrator
to first publish a Notice of Preliminary
Determination in the Federal Register.
This Notice is a Preliminary
Determination as called for in 40 CFR
154.31.
A Special Review can be concluded in
a number of ways. As noted earlier, the
purpose of a Special Review is to
determine whether a potentially serious
risk (or risks) warrants changes to the
terms and conditions of pesticide
registrations. If the Agency determines
that the scientific bases for the Special
Review were erroneous; that the risks
are not meaningful in light of the
current terms and conditions of affected
registrations; or that risk mitigation is
not feasible and the risks are justified by
the benefits associated with the use of
the pesticide, a Special Review could be
terminated without any changes to
existing registrations. On the other
hand, if the Agency determines that
certain changes to the terms and
conditions of registration are necessary
in order for a pesticide to meet the
FIFRA standard for registration, or that
no changes could enable the pesticide to
meet the FIFRA standard, the Agency
could propose to initiate regulatory
action under section 3(d) or 6 of FIFRA
(and/or section 408 of the FFDCA) to
assure that the affected pesticide
registrations are either cancelled or
appropriate changes to the registrations
are made. Any final decision on a
pesticide’s registration through the
Special Review process is set forth in a
Notice of Final Determination issued in
accordance with 40 CFR 154.33.
Reregistration is another process
under which EPA examines whether an
existing pesticide meets the FIFRA
standard of registration. When Congress
substantially amended FIFRA in 1972, it
directed EPA to examine all existing
pesticides to determine whether they
met the new standards for registration
Congress was promulgating. This
directive to make reregistration
decisions for existing registrations was
formally added to FIFRA as a new
section 4 in 1988. That section now
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:57 Sep 25, 2007
Jkt 211001
requires EPA to make reregistration
eligibility decisions by August 3, 2006
for all food-use chemicals that were first
contained in a registered pesticide
product before November 1, 1984, and
by October 3, 2008 for all other
chemicals subject to reregistration.
(FIFRA section 4(g)(2)(A)).
The reregistration program EPA
developed to comply with this
Congressional directive and the similar
directive adopted in the FQPA to
reassess all existing tolorances against
the new safety standard placed into
section 408 of the FFDCA in 1996, was
a major focus of EPA’s pesticide
program for a number of years. Under
that program, EPA examined hundreds
of pesticide active ingredients,
including DDVP, to determine whether
pesticide products containing DDVP
could meet the FIFRA standard for
registration. As part of the reregistration
process, EPA called in large numbers of
studies from pesticide registrants, and
conducted detailed risk assessments of
many of the affected pesticides. EPA
also issued reregistration eligibility
decisions, called REDs or IREDs, in
which the Agency discussed the risks
posed by particular pesticides, whether
those risks could and should be
mitigated, and whether registrations of
the particular pesticide as modified as
set forth in the RED or IRED met the
FIFRA standard of not causing
unreasonable adverse effects on the
environment. The concerns that gave
rise to the DDVP Special Review were
addressed as part of the reregistration
assessment of DDVP, and for that reason
EPA now proposes to terminate the
Special Review. EPA intends to
continue its assessment of DDVP in light
of the petition to cancel all DDVP
registrations and revoke all DDVP
tolerances. Notwithstanding anything in
this proposal or in the reregistration
decision for DDVP, if EPA determines
that some or all of the petition should
be granted, the Agency will pursue
appropriate changes to the terms and
conditions of DDVP registrations.
C. Why is the Agency Taking this
Action?
On February 24, 1988, the Agency
initiated a Special Review for pesticide
products containing DDVP.(53 FR 5542).
At that time, the Agency was concerned
that exposure to DDVP from registered
uses might pose a carcinogenic risk of
concern and that there were inadequate
margins of exposure for cholinesterase
inhibition and liver effects to exposed
individuals. In 1995, the Agency
concluded upon further analysis that
although liver toxicity was no longer a
risk of concern, DDVP did pose
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54661
carcinogenic risks of concern to the
general population from dietary
exposure. The Agency also concluded in
1995 that DDVP posed risks of concern
for cholinesterase inhibition to residents
in homes and to individuals mixing,
loading, and applying this pesticide, as
well as to those reentering treated areas.
Subsequently, the Agency issued a
Preliminary Determination to Cancel
Certain Registrations (PD 2/3) and a
Draft Notice of Intent to Cancel the
DDVP uses which posed the greatest
risks. (60 FR 50338, September 28,
1995). In its 1995 PD 2/3, the Agency
concluded that the risks outweighed the
benefits for most uses of DDVP under
the conditions of registration at that
time and, therefore, recommended a
variety of measures to reduce those
risks. The Agency proposed cancellation
of certain uses of DDVP and
cancellation of other uses unless certain
labeling modifications were made to
reduce risk.
Since 1995, additional data became
available and, as part of the
reregistration effort, the Agency
conducted a thorough assessment of all
the risks associated with DDVP
(including, but not limited to, those
risks that gave rise to the Special
Review). This assessment is described
in more detail in the Reregistration
Eligibility Decision for DDVP and in the
associated 2006 Human Health
Assessment. In addition, as part of the
reregistration process, EPA conducted
an intensive and public review of
whether or not DDVP registrations met
the FIFRA standard for reregistration.
As noted above, this determination of
whether a pesticide causes unreasonable
adverse effects is the ultimate focus of
both reregistration and Special Review.
On June 30, 2006, the Agency issued
an Interim Reregistration Eligibility
Determination (IRED) for DDVP.
Subsequently, EPA completed the
organophosphate cumulative
assessment (in which it concluded that,
among other things, the tolerances for
DDVP meet the safety standard of
section 408 of the FFDCA), and on July
31, 2006, EPA issued a determination
that each of the organophosphate
pesticides for which an IRED had been
issued was eligible for reregistration,
including DDVP. See Finalization of
Interim Reregistration Eligibility
Decisions (IREDs) and Interim
Tolerance Reassessment and Risk
Management Decisions (TREDs) for the
Organophosphate Pesticides, and
Completion of the Tolerance
Reassessment and Reregistration
Eligibility Process for the
Organophosphate Pesticides, dated July
31, 2007 (attached to the DDVP IRED at
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
54662
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 26, 2007 / Notices
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
reregistration/REDs/ddvp_ired.pdf).
The IRED was based in part on an
irrevocable request from Amvac
Chemical Corporation (Amvac), the sole
technical product registrant, to cancel
certain uses and include additional pest
strip label restrictions on the DDVP
technical product labels. Pursuant to
section 6(f) of FIFRA, 7 U.S.C.
136d(f)(1), on June 30, 2006, the Agency
published a notice in the Federal
Register that it had received the request
and sought comment on EPA’s intention
to grant the request and cancel the
specified uses. (71 FR 37570)(FRL–
8075–2). On October 20, 2006, EPA
issued the final cancellation order
granting Amvac’s request. (71 FR
61968)(FRL–8075–8).
Specifically on May 9, 2006, Amvac
submitted to EPA a request for
cancellation of several existing DDVP
products, uses and application methods,
including the 100 gram pest strip, the
total release fogger, use on lawn, turf
and ornamentals, residential crack and
crevice use, and hand held fogger
applications in mushroom houses,
greenhouses, and warehouses. Amvac
also requested several label
amendments further restricting
residential use of pest strips and adding
personal protective equipment
requirements and more protective reentry intervals for mushroom and
greenhouse uses. The added restrictions
on the use of the pest strip products
provided, among other things, that large
pest strips could no longer be used in
homes except for garages, attics, crawl
spaces, and sheds that are occupied for
less than 4 hours per day. For a full
description of the registrant’s request,
see the May 9, 2006 letter from AMVAC
to EPA in the DDVP Special Review
docket (EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0396).
Subsequently, in early March, 2007,
Amvac also requested the voluntary
cancellation of all its pet collar and bait
registrations and deletion of those uses
from its technical label. Pursuant to
section 6(f) of FIFRA, Amvac’s requests
to cancel the pet collar and bait
registrations as well as deleting such
uses from the technical label were
published in the Federal Register on
March 23, 2007. (72 FR 13786)(FRL–
8120–7). On June 27, 2007, EPA granted
Amvac’s request and issued a final
cancellation order for the pet collar and
bait registrations. (72 FR 35235)(FRL–
8127–5).
This proposal to conclude Special
Review is based upon the label
amendments requested by Amvac (as set
forth in the May 9, 2006 letter) and
EPA’s determination that DDVP is
eligible for reregistration as set forth in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:57 Sep 25, 2007
Jkt 211001
the June 30, 2006 IRED as well as the
section 6(f) cancellations discussed
above.
In sum, the Agency has determined
that potential liver and cancer effects
are no longer risks of concern, and
based on the IRED and subsequent label
changes that the cholinesterase
inhibition issues have been adequately
addressed through cancellations and
other mitigation actions which limit
exposure to DDVP. This Notice therefore
proposes to terminate the DDVP Special
Review based on the Agency’s
determination that all risks of concern
identified in the PD 1 and earlier PD 2/
3 have been satisfactorily addressed.
Again, termination of this Special
Review does not prejudice the Agency’s
review of the petition to cancel DDVP
registrations and revoke DDVP
tolerances, which will proceed
separately and, if the Agency were to
agree with the petition in whole or in
part, could result in changes to the
terms and conditions of DDVP
registrations. For a complete description
of the toxicity endpoints and risk
assessment, see the DDVP Revised
Human Health Risk Assessment, dated
June 22, 2006, available in the DDVP
reregistration docket (EPA–HQ–OPP–
2002–0302) at https://
www.regulations.gov.
SUMMARY: This notice announces the
availability of EPA’s Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) for the
allethrin series of pesticides
(bioallethrin, esbiol, esbiothrin, and
pynamin forte). The Agency’s risk
assessments and other related
documents also are available in the
allethrins docket. The allethrins are
synthetic pyrethroids used as
insecticides on both indoor (residential
and commercial) and outdoor
(residential, commercial, and
recreational) use sites. EPA has
reviewed the allethrins through the
public participation process that the
Agency uses to involve the public in
developing pesticide reregistration and
tolerance reassessment decisions.
Through these programs, EPA is
ensuring that all pesticides meet current
health and safety standards.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Molly Clayton, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office
of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–
0001; telephone number: (703) 603–
0522; fax number: (703) 308–7070;
e-mail address: clayton.molly@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
III. Evaluation of Comments to PD 1
See section III.G of the September
1995 PD 2/3 for the evaluation of public
comments received on the PD 1. This
document is available in the DDVP
Special Review docket (EPA–HQ–OPP–
2006–0396) at the OPP Regulatory
Public Docket (7508P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA.
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
This action is directed to the public
in general, and may be of interest to a
wide range of stakeholders including
environmental, human health, and
agricultural advocates; the chemical
industry; pesticide users; and members
of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since
others also may be interested, the
Agency has not attempted to describe all
the specific entities that may be affected
by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection, Pesticides
and pests.
Dated: September 19, 2007.
Peter Caulkins,
Director, Special Review and Reregistration
Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E7–18861 Filed 9–25–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0986; FRL–8144–8]
The Allethrins Reregistration Eligibility
Decision
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
I. General Information
B. How Can I Get Copies of this
Document and Other Related
Information?
1. Docket. EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2007–0986. 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 Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 26, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54658-54662]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-18861]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0396; FRL-8148-9]
Dichlorvos (DDVP); Proposed Determination to Terminate Special
Review
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
[[Page 54659]]
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice sets forth EPA's Proposed Determination to
Terminate Special Review for the pesticide Dichlorvos (DDVP). On
February 24, 1988, the Agency published a Notice of Special Review (PD
1) of pesticide products containing DDVP based on concerns for cancer,
cholinesterase inhibition, and liver effects. (53 FR 5542). On
September 28, 1995, the Agency published a Notice of Preliminary
Determination to Cancel Certain Registrations and a Draft Notice of
Intent to Cancel (PD 2/3). (60 FR 50337). In the 1995 PD 2/3, the
Agency determined that exposure to dichlorvos from the registered uses
posed carcinogenic risks of concern as well as risks of concern for
cholinesterase inhibition. However, with respect to liver effects, the
Agency determined that this endpoint was no longer of regulatory
concern. Since the initiation of Special Review and publication of the
PD 2/3, additional data have become available. Based in part on these
data, the Agency has changed its assessment of some of the risks
associated with DDVP, and modified the terms and conditions of DDVP
registrations, accordingly. Moreover, during the recently-concluded
reregistration process for DDVP, EPA conducted an intensive and public
review of whether DDVP registrations meet the FIFRA standard for
registration, culminating in the Agency's 2006 Interim Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (IRED) for DDVP. Through the reregistration
processes the Agency resolved remaining concerns regarding cancer and
cholinesterase effects. Accordingly, EPA has revised its assessment of
DDVP since the time when the PD 1 and the PD 2/3 were published. Based
on the IRED, requested label amendments, and the voluntary cancellation
of uses by the registrant pursuant to section 6(f) of FIFRA, EPA has
determined that the risks that were the basis of the Special Review are
no longer of concern and, therefore, the Agency is proposing to
terminate the Special Review of DDVP. To the extent that the Agency
further revises its assessment of DDVP, it will do so outside of the
Special Review context.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0396, 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
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., 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 Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0396. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available in regulations.gov. To access the electronic docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced Search,'' then ``Docket
Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the
``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov
website to view the docket index or access available documents.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, 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 OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., 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 Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Bartow, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 603-0065; fax
number: (703) 308-8005; e-mail address: bartow.susan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked
[[Page 54660]]
will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background
DDVP is an organophosphate insecticide and fumigant registered for
use in controlling flies, mosquitos, gnats, cockroaches, fleas, and
other insect pests. Formulations of DDVP include pressurized liquids,
emulsifiable concentrates, and impregnated materials. DDVP is applied
with aerosols and fogging equipment, with spray equipment, and through
slow release from impregnated materials, such as resin strips.
DDVP is registered to control insect pests on agricultural sites;
commercial, institutional and industrial sites; and for domestic use in
and around homes (i.e., resin strips). DDVP is used preplant in
mushroom houses, and postharvest in storage areas for bulk, packaged
and bagged raw and processed agricultural commodities, food
manufacturing/processing plants, animal premises, and non-food areas of
food-handling establishments. It is also registered for direct dermal
treatment of cattle and poultry, and swine, sheep, and goats.
The mechanism of pesticidal action of DDVP is inhibition of
cholinesterase. Although when the DDVP Special Review was first
initiated, EPA identified concerns for cancer and liver effects as well
as cholinesterase inhibition, the Agency has since determined that the
adverse effects caused by DDVP that are of primary concern to human
health are neurological effects related to inhibition of cholinesterase
activity and the previously-identified cancer and liver effects do not
present risks of concern.
A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
On February 24, 1988, the Agency published a Notice of Special
Review (PD 1) of pesticide products containing DDVP based on concerns
for cancer, cholinesterase inhibition, and liver effects (53 FR 5542).
On September 28, 1995, the Agency published a Notice of Preliminary
Determination to Cancel Certain Registrations and a Draft Notice of
Intent to Cancel (PD 2/3) (60 FR 50337)(FRL-4954-7). For the reasons
discussed below, EPA is now issuing this proposal to terminate the DDVP
Special Review without taking any further action against the DDVP
registrations. EPA is taking this action based upon the requested label
amendments, the voluntary cancellation of uses by the registrant
pursuant to section 6(f) of FIFRA, and the IRED, in which EPA
determined that the risks that were the basis of the Special Review are
no longer of concern. The Agency notes that it has received and is in
the process of responding to a petition to cancel all DDVP
registrations and revoke all DDVP tolerances. The breadth and scope of
the petition is far greater than the discrete issues that were the
triggers initiating the DDVP Special Review. The Agency is proposing to
terminate the Special Review, and to assess the merits of the petition
separately. Notwithstanding anything in this proposal or in the
reregistration decision for DDVP, if EPA determines that some or all of
the petition should be granted, the Agency will pursue appropriate
changes to the terms and conditions of DDVP registrations.
B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?
In order to obtain a registration for a pesticide under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et
seq., as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, Public Law
104-170), an applicant must demonstrate that the pesticide will not
cause unreasonable adverse affects on the environment when used
according to label directions. (FIFRA section 3(c)(5)). The term
unreasonable adverse effects on the environment means: 1. Any
unreasonable risk to humans or the environment, taking into account the
economic, social and environmental costs and benefits of the use of any
pesticide, or 2. A human dietary risk from residues that results from
use of a pesticide in or on any food inconsistent with the standard
under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. (FIFRA
section 2(bb)).
Tolerances, or the establishment of maximum permissible levels of
pesticides in foods, are required when a pesticide or its identifiable
degradates or metabolites are expected to be present in food. Section
408 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 301
et seq., as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996,
(Public Law 104-170), authorizes EPA to establish a tolerance if the
Agency determines the tolerance is safe. Without such a tolerance or an
exemption from a tolerance, a food containing a pesticide residue is
adulterated under section 402 of the FFDCA and may not be legally moved
in interstate commerce.
In determining a pesticide's safety for establishing a tolerance or
an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, section 408 of the
FFDCA requires, inter alia, that EPA examine aggregate exposures from
all sources of pesticide residues, whether infants and children have
heightened susceptibility to pesticide residues, and whether there are
cumulative effects of pesticides and other compounds with a common
mechanism of toxicity. Because it is not relevant to the outcome of
this Special Review, we will not discuss in detail the differences
between the current standard in section 408 and the standard that was
in effect when the Special Review for DDVP was initiated. In proposing
to terminate this Special Review, EPA is applying the more stringent
standard currently found in section 408.
The Special Review process, which was previously called the
Rebuttable Presumption Against Registration (RPAR), is described in 40
CFR part 154, published in the Federal Register of November 25, 1985
(50 FR 49015). EPA can initiate a Special Review if it determines that
a pesticide may pose a serious risk to human health or the environment
(40 CFR 154.7). The purpose of the Special Review process is then to
determine whether the risk is in fact a serious one, and if so, whether
some or all of the registrations of an affected pesticide meet the
FIFRA standard for registration, or whether amendment of the terms and
conditions of registration or cancellation of portions or all of the
registrations is appropriate.
Prior to formal initiation of a Special Review, a preliminary
notification is sent to registrants and applicants for registration
pursuant to 40 CFR 154.21
[[Page 54661]]
announcing that the Agency is considering commencing a Special Review.
Registrants and applicants for registration are allowed 30 days from
receipt of the notification to comment on the Agency's proposal to
commence a Special Review.
If the Agency determines, after issuance of a notification pursuant
to 40 CFR 154.21, that it will initiate a Special Review, 40 CFR
154.23(c) requires the Administrator to publish a Notice of Special
Review in the Federal Register. To conclude the Special Review after a
Special Review has been initiated, 40 CFR 154.31 requires the
Administrator to first publish a Notice of Preliminary Determination in
the Federal Register. This Notice is a Preliminary Determination as
called for in 40 CFR 154.31.
A Special Review can be concluded in a number of ways. As noted
earlier, the purpose of a Special Review is to determine whether a
potentially serious risk (or risks) warrants changes to the terms and
conditions of pesticide registrations. If the Agency determines that
the scientific bases for the Special Review were erroneous; that the
risks are not meaningful in light of the current terms and conditions
of affected registrations; or that risk mitigation is not feasible and
the risks are justified by the benefits associated with the use of the
pesticide, a Special Review could be terminated without any changes to
existing registrations. On the other hand, if the Agency determines
that certain changes to the terms and conditions of registration are
necessary in order for a pesticide to meet the FIFRA standard for
registration, or that no changes could enable the pesticide to meet the
FIFRA standard, the Agency could propose to initiate regulatory action
under section 3(d) or 6 of FIFRA (and/or section 408 of the FFDCA) to
assure that the affected pesticide registrations are either cancelled
or appropriate changes to the registrations are made. Any final
decision on a pesticide's registration through the Special Review
process is set forth in a Notice of Final Determination issued in
accordance with 40 CFR 154.33.
Reregistration is another process under which EPA examines whether
an existing pesticide meets the FIFRA standard of registration. When
Congress substantially amended FIFRA in 1972, it directed EPA to
examine all existing pesticides to determine whether they met the new
standards for registration Congress was promulgating. This directive to
make reregistration decisions for existing registrations was formally
added to FIFRA as a new section 4 in 1988. That section now requires
EPA to make reregistration eligibility decisions by August 3, 2006 for
all food-use chemicals that were first contained in a registered
pesticide product before November 1, 1984, and by October 3, 2008 for
all other chemicals subject to reregistration. (FIFRA section
4(g)(2)(A)).
The reregistration program EPA developed to comply with this
Congressional directive and the similar directive adopted in the FQPA
to reassess all existing tolorances against the new safety standard
placed into section 408 of the FFDCA in 1996, was a major focus of
EPA's pesticide program for a number of years. Under that program, EPA
examined hundreds of pesticide active ingredients, including DDVP, to
determine whether pesticide products containing DDVP could meet the
FIFRA standard for registration. As part of the reregistration process,
EPA called in large numbers of studies from pesticide registrants, and
conducted detailed risk assessments of many of the affected pesticides.
EPA also issued reregistration eligibility decisions, called REDs or
IREDs, in which the Agency discussed the risks posed by particular
pesticides, whether those risks could and should be mitigated, and
whether registrations of the particular pesticide as modified as set
forth in the RED or IRED met the FIFRA standard of not causing
unreasonable adverse effects on the environment. The concerns that gave
rise to the DDVP Special Review were addressed as part of the
reregistration assessment of DDVP, and for that reason EPA now proposes
to terminate the Special Review. EPA intends to continue its assessment
of DDVP in light of the petition to cancel all DDVP registrations and
revoke all DDVP tolerances. Notwithstanding anything in this proposal
or in the reregistration decision for DDVP, if EPA determines that some
or all of the petition should be granted, the Agency will pursue
appropriate changes to the terms and conditions of DDVP registrations.
C. Why is the Agency Taking this Action?
On February 24, 1988, the Agency initiated a Special Review for
pesticide products containing DDVP.(53 FR 5542). At that time, the
Agency was concerned that exposure to DDVP from registered uses might
pose a carcinogenic risk of concern and that there were inadequate
margins of exposure for cholinesterase inhibition and liver effects to
exposed individuals. In 1995, the Agency concluded upon further
analysis that although liver toxicity was no longer a risk of concern,
DDVP did pose carcinogenic risks of concern to the general population
from dietary exposure. The Agency also concluded in 1995 that DDVP
posed risks of concern for cholinesterase inhibition to residents in
homes and to individuals mixing, loading, and applying this pesticide,
as well as to those reentering treated areas. Subsequently, the Agency
issued a Preliminary Determination to Cancel Certain Registrations (PD
2/3) and a Draft Notice of Intent to Cancel the DDVP uses which posed
the greatest risks. (60 FR 50338, September 28, 1995). In its 1995 PD
2/3, the Agency concluded that the risks outweighed the benefits for
most uses of DDVP under the conditions of registration at that time
and, therefore, recommended a variety of measures to reduce those
risks. The Agency proposed cancellation of certain uses of DDVP and
cancellation of other uses unless certain labeling modifications were
made to reduce risk.
Since 1995, additional data became available and, as part of the
reregistration effort, the Agency conducted a thorough assessment of
all the risks associated with DDVP (including, but not limited to,
those risks that gave rise to the Special Review). This assessment is
described in more detail in the Reregistration Eligibility Decision for
DDVP and in the associated 2006 Human Health Assessment. In addition,
as part of the reregistration process, EPA conducted an intensive and
public review of whether or not DDVP registrations met the FIFRA
standard for reregistration. As noted above, this determination of
whether a pesticide causes unreasonable adverse effects is the ultimate
focus of both reregistration and Special Review.
On June 30, 2006, the Agency issued an Interim Reregistration
Eligibility Determination (IRED) for DDVP. Subsequently, EPA completed
the organophosphate cumulative assessment (in which it concluded that,
among other things, the tolerances for DDVP meet the safety standard of
section 408 of the FFDCA), and on July 31, 2006, EPA issued a
determination that each of the organophosphate pesticides for which an
IRED had been issued was eligible for reregistration, including DDVP.
See Finalization of Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decisions
(IREDs) and Interim Tolerance Reassessment and Risk Management
Decisions (TREDs) for the Organophosphate Pesticides, and Completion of
the Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration Eligibility Process for
the Organophosphate Pesticides, dated July 31, 2007 (attached to the
DDVP IRED at
[[Page 54662]]
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/REDs/ddvp_ired.pdf).
The IRED was based in part on an irrevocable request from Amvac
Chemical Corporation (Amvac), the sole technical product registrant, to
cancel certain uses and include additional pest strip label
restrictions on the DDVP technical product labels. Pursuant to section
6(f) of FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136d(f)(1), on June 30, 2006, the Agency
published a notice in the Federal Register that it had received the
request and sought comment on EPA's intention to grant the request and
cancel the specified uses. (71 FR 37570)(FRL-8075-2). On October 20,
2006, EPA issued the final cancellation order granting Amvac's request.
(71 FR 61968)(FRL-8075-8).
Specifically on May 9, 2006, Amvac submitted to EPA a request for
cancellation of several existing DDVP products, uses and application
methods, including the 100 gram pest strip, the total release fogger,
use on lawn, turf and ornamentals, residential crack and crevice use,
and hand held fogger applications in mushroom houses, greenhouses, and
warehouses. Amvac also requested several label amendments further
restricting residential use of pest strips and adding personal
protective equipment requirements and more protective re-entry
intervals for mushroom and greenhouse uses. The added restrictions on
the use of the pest strip products provided, among other things, that
large pest strips could no longer be used in homes except for garages,
attics, crawl spaces, and sheds that are occupied for less than 4 hours
per day. For a full description of the registrant's request, see the
May 9, 2006 letter from AMVAC to EPA in the DDVP Special Review docket
(EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0396).
Subsequently, in early March, 2007, Amvac also requested the
voluntary cancellation of all its pet collar and bait registrations and
deletion of those uses from its technical label. Pursuant to section
6(f) of FIFRA, Amvac's requests to cancel the pet collar and bait
registrations as well as deleting such uses from the technical label
were published in the Federal Register on March 23, 2007. (72 FR
13786)(FRL-8120-7). On June 27, 2007, EPA granted Amvac's request and
issued a final cancellation order for the pet collar and bait
registrations. (72 FR 35235)(FRL-8127-5).
This proposal to conclude Special Review is based upon the label
amendments requested by Amvac (as set forth in the May 9, 2006 letter)
and EPA's determination that DDVP is eligible for reregistration as set
forth in the June 30, 2006 IRED as well as the section 6(f)
cancellations discussed above.
In sum, the Agency has determined that potential liver and cancer
effects are no longer risks of concern, and based on the IRED and
subsequent label changes that the cholinesterase inhibition issues have
been adequately addressed through cancellations and other mitigation
actions which limit exposure to DDVP. This Notice therefore proposes to
terminate the DDVP Special Review based on the Agency's determination
that all risks of concern identified in the PD 1 and earlier PD 2/3
have been satisfactorily addressed. Again, termination of this Special
Review does not prejudice the Agency's review of the petition to cancel
DDVP registrations and revoke DDVP tolerances, which will proceed
separately and, if the Agency were to agree with the petition in whole
or in part, could result in changes to the terms and conditions of DDVP
registrations. For a complete description of the toxicity endpoints and
risk assessment, see the DDVP Revised Human Health Risk Assessment,
dated June 22, 2006, available in the DDVP reregistration docket (EPA-
HQ-OPP-2002-0302) at https://www.regulations.gov.
III. Evaluation of Comments to PD 1
See section III.G of the September 1995 PD 2/3 for the evaluation
of public comments received on the PD 1. This document is available in
the DDVP Special Review docket (EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0396) at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket (7508P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm.
S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington,
VA.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.
Dated: September 19, 2007.
Peter Caulkins,
Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E7-18861 Filed 9-25-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S