Urea Sulfate Registration Review; Draft Ecological Risk Assessment; Notice of Availability, 53230-53232 [E9-24812]
Download as PDF
53230
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Notices
If no such motions are filed, the
restricted service list will be effective at
the end of the 15 day period. Otherwise,
a further notice will be issued ruling on
any motion or motions filed within the
15 day period.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–24910 Filed 10–15–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0202; FRL–8793–2]
Urea Sulfate Registration Review; Draft
Ecological Risk Assessment; Notice of
Availability
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: This notice announces the
availability of EPA’s draft ecological risk
assessment for the registration review of
urea sulfate and opens a public
comment period on this document.
Registration review is EPA’s periodic
review of pesticide registrations to
ensure that each pesticide continues to
satisfy the statutory standard for
registration, that is, the pesticide can
perform its intended function without
unreasonable adverse effects on human
health or the environment. As part of
the registration review process, the
Agency has completed a comprehensive
draft ecological risk assessment for urea
sulfate uses, including a determination
that urea sulfate uses will have no effect
on federally listed threatened or
endangered species or their designated
critical habitat. After reviewing
comments received during the public
comment period, EPA will issue a
revised risk assessment, explain any
changes to the draft risk assessment, and
respond to comments and may request
public input on risk mitigation before
completing a proposed registration
review decision for urea sulfate.
Through this program, EPA is ensuring
that each pesticide’s registration is
based on current scientific and other
knowledge, including its effects on
human health and the environment.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 15, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
identified by the docket identification
(ID) number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0202,
by one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Oct 15, 2009
Jkt 220001
• 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
Facility’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
the docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2007–0202. 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
at https://www.regulations.gov. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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: For
pesticide specific information contact:
Andrea Carone, Chemical Review
Manager, Pesticide Re-evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 308–0122; fax number:
(703) 308–8090; e-mail address:
carone.andrea@epa.gov.
For general questions on the
registration review program, contact:
Kevin Costello, Pesticide Re-evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 305–5026; fax number:
(703) 308–8090; e-mail address:
costello.kevin@epa.gov.
For general questions on OPP’s
Endangered Species Protection
Program, contact: Arty Williams,
Environmental Fate and Effects Division
(7507P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–7695; fax number: (703) 308–
4776; e-mail address:
williams.arty@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, farm
worker, 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
chemical review manager 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
E:\FR\FM\16OCN1.SGM
16OCN1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Notices
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that
you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD-ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD-ROM the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for preparing your comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
i. Identify the document by docket ID
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number.
ii. Follow directions. The Agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
iii. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
iv. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
v. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
vi. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns and suggest
alternatives.
vii. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
viii. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to
achieve environmental justice, the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of any group, including minority and/or
low income populations, in the
development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. 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 or
disproportionately high and adverse
human health impacts or environmental
effects from exposure to the pesticide(s)
discussed in this document, compared
to the general population.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Oct 15, 2009
Jkt 220001
II. Authority
EPA is conducting its registration
review of urea sulfate pursuant to
section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
and the Procedural Regulations for
Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155,
subpart C. Section 3(g) of FIFRA
provides, among other things, that the
registrations of pesticides are to be
reviewed every 15 years. Under FIFRA,
a pesticide product may be registered or
remain registered only if it meets the
statutory standard for registration given
in FIFRA section 3(c)(5). When used in
accordance with widespread and
commonly recognized practice, the
pesticide product must perform its
intended function without unreasonable
adverse effects on the environment; that
is, without any unreasonable risk to
man or the environment, or a human
dietary risk from residues that result
from the use of a pesticide in or on food.
III. Registration Reviews
A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
As directed by FIFRA section 3(g),
EPA is reviewing the pesticide
registration for urea sulfate to ensure
that it continues to satisfy the FIFRA
standard for registration— that is, that
urea sulfate can still be used without
unreasonable adverse effects on human
health or the environment. Urea sulfate
is a herbicide used as a desiccant on
cotton as a cotton harvest aid/defoliant.
EPA has completed a comprehensive
draft ecological risk assessment,
including an endangered species
assessment, for all urea sulfate uses and
is announcing the availability of the
draft ecological risk assessment.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.53(c), EPA is
providing an opportunity, through this
notice of availability, for interested
parties to provide comments and input
concerning the Agency’s draft ecological
risk assessment for urea sulfate. Such
comments and input could address,
among other things, the Agency’s risk
assessment methodologies and
assumptions, as applied to the draft risk
assessment for the registration review of
urea sulfate. The Agency will consider
all comments received during the public
comment period and make changes, as
appropriate, to the draft ecological risk
assessment. EPA will then issue a
revised risk assessment, explain any
changes to the draft risk assessment, and
respond to comments. In the Federal
Register notice announcing the
availability of the revised risk
assessment, if the revised risk
assessment indicates risks of concern,
the Agency may provide a comment
period for the public to submit
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53231
suggestions for mitigating the risk
identified in the revised risk assessment
before developing a proposed
registration review decision on urea
sulfate. As described in detail in the
Urea Sulfate Summary Document, see
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–
0202, the Agency believes that the
human health risk assessments
completed prior to registration review
are adequate, and there are no dietary or
occupational risks that exceed the
Agency’s level of concern. Thus, no
additional human health data are
needed for the registration review of
urea sulfate.
1. Other related information.
Additional information on urea sulfate
is available on the Pesticide Registration
Review Status webpage for this
pesticide, https://www.epa.gov/
oppsrrd1/registration_review/
urea_sulfate/index.htm. Information on
the Agency’s registration review
program and its implementing
regulation is available at https://
www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/
registration_review.
2. Information submission
requirements. Anyone may submit data
or information in response to this
document. To be considered during a
pesticide’s registration review, the
submitted data or information must
meet the following requirements:
• To ensure that EPA will consider
data or information submitted,
interested persons must submit the data
or information during the comment
period. The Agency may, at its
discretion, consider data or information
submitted at a later date.
• The data or information submitted
must be presented in a legible and
useable form. For example, an English
translation must accompany any
material that is not in English and a
written transcript must accompany any
information submitted as an
audiographic or videographic record.
Written material may be submitted in
paper or electronic form.
• Submitters must clearly identify
the source of any submitted data or
information.
• Submitters may request the
Agency to reconsider data or
information that the Agency rejected in
a previous review. However, submitters
must explain why they believe the
Agency should reconsider the data or
information in the pesticide’s
registration review.
As provided in 40 CFR 155.58, the
registration review docket for each
pesticide case will remain publicly
accessible through the duration of the
registration review process; that is, until
all actions required in the final decision
E:\FR\FM\16OCN1.SGM
16OCN1
53232
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Notices
on the registration review case have
been completed.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection, Pesticides
and pests, Urea sulfate.
Dated: October 6, 2009.
Peter Caulkins,
Acting Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation
Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E9–24812 Filed 10–15–09; 8:45
a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–FRL–8798–4]
Environmental Impact Statements and
Regulations; Availability Of EPA
Comments
Availability of EPA comments
prepared pursuant to the Environmental
Review Process (ERP), under section
309 of the Clean Air Act and Section
102(2)(c) of the National Environmental
Policy Act as amended. Requests for
copies of EPA comments can be directed
to the Office of Federal Activities at
202–564–7146 or https://www.epa.gov/
compliance/nepa/.
An explanation of the ratings assigned
to draft environmental impact
statements (EISs) was published in FR
dated July 17, 2009 (74 FR 34754).
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20090083, ERP No. D–AFS–
L65570–00, Rogue River-Siskiyou
National Forest, Motorized Vehicle
Use, To Enact the Travel Management
Rule, Implementation, Douglas,
Klamath, Jackson, Curry, Coos and
Josephine Counties, OR and Del Norte
and Siskiyou Counties, CA.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about the
adequacy of information available to
analyze the risk of exposure to naturally
occurring asbestos. EPA also raised
concerns related to provisions for
dispersed recreation and
implementation and adaptive
management planning. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20090124, ERP No. D–NOA–
B91030–00, Amendment 16 to the
Northwest Multispecies Fishery
Management Plan, Propose to Adopt,
Approval and Implementation
Measures to Continue Formal
Rebuilding Program for Overfishing
and to End Overfishing on those Stock
where it’s Occurring, Gulf of Maine.
Summary: EPA had no objections and
offered minor comments on the DEIS.
Rating LO.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Oct 15, 2009
Jkt 220001
EIS No. 20090223, ERP No. D–AFS–
K65373–NV, Jarbidge Ranger District
Rangeland Management Project,
Proposed Reauthorizing Grazing on 21
Existing Grazing Allotments,
Humboldt Toiyabe National Forest,
Elko County, NV.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about the
achievability of annual use indicators
under the proposed action, and
requested additional information on
implementation and permittee
compliance. EPA recommended more
specific action be taken to protect
stream banks and prevent noxious weed
spread. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20090250, ERP No. D–IBR–
K39119–NV, Walker River Basin
Acquisition Program, To Provide
Water to Walker Lake, an at Risk
Natural Desert Terminal Lake,
Funding, Walker River Basin, NV.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about the longterm feasibility of the water Acquisition
Program given constrained water
supplies and climate change;
compliance with Total Maximum Daily
Load requirements; and disclosure of
mitigation measures. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20090265, ERP No. D–AFS–
L65576–ID, Clearwater National
Forest Travel Planning Project,
Proposes to Manage Motorized and
Mechanized Travel within the
1,827.380-Acre, Clearwater National
Forest, Idaho, Clearwater, Latah and
Shoshone Counties, ID.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about potential
impacts to water quality, fisheries,
riparian habitat and soils. EPA
recommends the incorporation of
additional water quality emphasis
elements. Rating EC2.
Final EISs
EIS No. 20090304, ERP No. F–AFS–
K65354–00, Inyo National Forest
Motorized Travel Management
Project, Implementation, Inyo, Mono,
Fresno, Madera and Tulare Counties,
CA and Mineral and Esmeralda
Counties, NV.
Summary: EPA continues to have
environmental concerns about the scope
of the travel management planning
process and potential impacts from the
designation of associated routes to water
resources.
EIS No. 20090305, ERP No. F–NOA–
K39122–CA, ADOPTION—
PROGRAMMATIC—South Bay Salt
Pond Restoration Project, Restored
Tidal Marsh, Managed Ponds, Flood
Control Measures and Public Access
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Features, Don Edward San Francisco
Bay National Wildlife Refuge,
Alameda, Santa Clara and San Mateo
Counties, CA.
Summary: EPA does not object to the
adoption of the FEIS.
EIS No. 20090311, ERP No. F–USN–
L11040–WA, Naval Base Kitsap—
Bangor, Construct and Operate a
Swimmer Interdiction Security
System (SISS), Silverdale Kitsap
County, WA.
Summary: No formal comment letter
was sent to the preparing agency.
EIS No. 20090316, ERP No. F–FAA–
A12046–00, PROGRAMMATIC—
Streamlining the Processing of
Experimental Permit Applications,
Issuing Experimental Permits for the
Launch and Reentry of Useable
Suborbital Rockets.
Summary: No formal comment letter
was sent to the preparing agency.
EIS No. 20090319, ERP No. F–USA–
L11042–AK, U.S. Army Alaska
(USARAK) Project, Proposes the
Stationing and Training of Increased
Aviation Assts, Fort Wainwright,
Fairbank, AK.
Summary: EPA does not object to the
proposed project.
EIS No. 20090327, ERP No. F–STB–
L59004–AK, Northern Rail Extension
Project, Construct and Operate a Rail
Line between North Pole and Delta
Junction, AK.
Summary: EPA continues to have
environmental concerns about impacts
to water quality and aquatic resources.
EIS No. 20090053, ERP No. FS–COE–
E32070–MS, Gulfport Harbor
Navigation Channel Project, To
Evaluate Proposed Construction of
Authorized Improvements to the
Gulfport Harbor, Harrison County,
MS.
Summary: While many of EPA’s
concerns were resolved, EPA continues
to have environmental concerns about
impacts to biological resources. EPA
also requested the MPRSA Section 103
Evaluation and Sediment Testing Report
to ensure that the disposal material
meets the Ocean Dumping Criteria.
Dated: October 13, 2009.
Ken Mittelholtz
Deputy Director, NEPA Compliance Division,
Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. E9–24923 Filed 10–15–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\16OCN1.SGM
16OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 199 (Friday, October 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53230-53232]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24812]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0202; FRL-8793-2]
Urea Sulfate Registration Review; Draft Ecological Risk
Assessment; Notice of Availability
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's draft
ecological risk assessment for the registration review of urea sulfate
and opens a public comment period on this document. Registration review
is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations to ensure that each
pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory standard for registration,
that is, the pesticide can perform its intended function without
unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. As
part of the registration review process, the Agency has completed a
comprehensive draft ecological risk assessment for urea sulfate uses,
including a determination that urea sulfate uses will have no effect on
federally listed threatened or endangered species or their designated
critical habitat. After reviewing comments received during the public
comment period, EPA will issue a revised risk assessment, explain any
changes to the draft risk assessment, and respond to comments and may
request public input on risk mitigation before completing a proposed
registration review decision for urea sulfate. Through this program,
EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current
scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health
and the environment.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 15, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments identified by the docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0202, 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 Facility'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 the docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2007-0202. 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 at https://www.regulations.gov. 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: For pesticide specific information
contact: Andrea Carone, Chemical Review Manager, Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-0122; fax
number: (703) 308-8090; e-mail address: carone.andrea@epa.gov.
For general questions on the registration review program, contact:
Kevin Costello, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 305-5026;
fax number: (703) 308-8090; e-mail address: costello.kevin@epa.gov.
For general questions on OPP's Endangered Species Protection
Program, contact: Arty Williams, Environmental Fate and Effects
Division (7507P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number: (703) 305-7695; fax number: (703) 308-4776; e-
mail address: williams.arty@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, farm worker, 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 chemical review manager 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
[[Page 53231]]
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number.
ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. 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 or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the
pesticide(s) discussed in this document, compared to the general
population.
II. Authority
EPA is conducting its registration review of urea sulfate pursuant
to section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural Regulations for Registration Review at
40 CFR part 155, subpart C. Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other
things, that the registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every
15 years. Under FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain
registered only if it meets the statutory standard for registration
given in FIFRA section 3(c)(5). When used in accordance with widespread
and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must perform
its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the
environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the
environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the
use of a pesticide in or on food.
III. Registration Reviews
A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
As directed by FIFRA section 3(g), EPA is reviewing the pesticide
registration for urea sulfate to ensure that it continues to satisfy
the FIFRA standard for registration-- that is, that urea sulfate can
still be used without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or
the environment. Urea sulfate is a herbicide used as a desiccant on
cotton as a cotton harvest aid/defoliant. EPA has completed a
comprehensive draft ecological risk assessment, including an endangered
species assessment, for all urea sulfate uses and is announcing the
availability of the draft ecological risk assessment.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.53(c), EPA is providing an opportunity,
through this notice of availability, for interested parties to provide
comments and input concerning the Agency's draft ecological risk
assessment for urea sulfate. Such comments and input could address,
among other things, the Agency's risk assessment methodologies and
assumptions, as applied to the draft risk assessment for the
registration review of urea sulfate. The Agency will consider all
comments received during the public comment period and make changes, as
appropriate, to the draft ecological risk assessment. EPA will then
issue a revised risk assessment, explain any changes to the draft risk
assessment, and respond to comments. In the Federal Register notice
announcing the availability of the revised risk assessment, if the
revised risk assessment indicates risks of concern, the Agency may
provide a comment period for the public to submit suggestions for
mitigating the risk identified in the revised risk assessment before
developing a proposed registration review decision on urea sulfate. As
described in detail in the Urea Sulfate Summary Document, see docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0202, the Agency believes that the human health
risk assessments completed prior to registration review are adequate,
and there are no dietary or occupational risks that exceed the Agency's
level of concern. Thus, no additional human health data are needed for
the registration review of urea sulfate.
1. Other related information. Additional information on urea
sulfate is available on the Pesticide Registration Review Status
webpage for this pesticide, https://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review/urea_sulfate/index.htm. Information on the Agency's
registration review program and its implementing regulation is
available at https://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review.
2. Information submission requirements. Anyone may submit data or
information in response to this document. To be considered during a
pesticide's registration review, the submitted data or information must
meet the following requirements:
To ensure that EPA will consider data or information
submitted, interested persons must submit the data or information
during the comment period. The Agency may, at its discretion, consider
data or information submitted at a later date.
The data or information submitted must be presented in a
legible and useable form. For example, an English translation must
accompany any material that is not in English and a written transcript
must accompany any information submitted as an audiographic or
videographic record. Written material may be submitted in paper or
electronic form.
Submitters must clearly identify the source of any
submitted data or information.
Submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or
information that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However,
submitters must explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider
the data or information in the pesticide's registration review.
As provided in 40 CFR 155.58, the registration review docket for
each pesticide case will remain publicly accessible through the
duration of the registration review process; that is, until all actions
required in the final decision
[[Page 53232]]
on the registration review case have been completed.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests, Urea sulfate.
Dated: October 6, 2009.
Peter Caulkins,
Acting Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. E9-24812 Filed 10-15-09; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S