Registration Review Proposed Interim Decisions; Notice of Availability, 42786-42790 [2014-17244]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
42786
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 141 / Wednesday, July 23, 2014 / Notices
Dated: July 17, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the
date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register.
[FR Doc. 2014–17304 Filed 7–22–14; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Dated: July 17, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[Docket No. EL14–74–000; Docket No.
EL14–75–000]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
Kansas City Power & Light Company,
KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations
Company; Notice of Institution of
Section 206 Proceeding and Refund
Effective Date
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
On July 17, 2014, the Commission
issued an order in Docket Nos. EL14–
74–000 and EL14–75–000, pursuant to
section 206 of the Federal Power Act
(FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting
an investigation into the justness and
reasonableness of Kansas City Power &
Light Company and KCP&L Greater
Missouri Operations Company’s formula
rate protocols under KCP&L Greater
Missouri Operations Company’s Open
Access Transmission Tariff and
Southwest Power Pool, Inc.’s Open
Access Transmission Tariff. Kansas City
Power & Light Co. and KCP&L Greater
Missouri Operations Co., 148 FERC ¶
61,034 (2014).
The refund effective date in Docket
Nos. EL14–74–000 and EL14–75–000,
established pursuant to section 206(b) of
the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.
Dated: July 17, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–17301 Filed 7–22–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[Docket No. EL14–71–000]
Black Hills Power, Inc.; Notice of
Institution of Section 206 Proceeding
and Refund Effective Date
On July 17, 2014, the Commission
issued an order in Docket No. EL14–71–
000, pursuant to section 206 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C.
824e (2012), instituting an investigation
into the justness and reasonableness of
the formula rate protocols of Black Hills
Power, Inc., as joint administrator,
under the Joint Open Access
Transmission Tariff of Black Hills, Basin
Electric Power Cooperative, and Powder
River Energy Corporation. Black Hills
Power, Inc., 148 FERC ¶ 61,035 (2014).
The refund effective date in Docket
No. EL14–71–000, established pursuant
to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the
date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register.
Dated: July 17, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–17302 Filed 7–22–14; 8:45 am]
[FR Doc. 2014–17298 Filed 7–22–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. EL14–77–000]
[Docket No. EL14–73–000]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Westar Energy, Inc.; Notice of
Institution of Section 206 Proceeding
and Refund Effective Date
On July 17, 2014, the Commission
issued an order in Docket No. EL14–77–
000, pursuant to section 206 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C.
824e (2012), instituting an investigation
into the justness and reasonableness of
Westar Energy, Inc.’s formula rate
protocols under the Westar Open Access
Transmission Tariff and Southwest
Power Pool, Inc. Open Access
Transmission Tariff. Westar Energy,
Inc., 148 FERC ¶ 61,033 (2014).
The refund effective date in Docket
No. EL14–77–000, established pursuant
to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the
date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Jul 22, 2014
Jkt 232001
The Empire District Electric Company;
Notice of Institution of Section 206
Proceeding and Refund Effective Date
On July 17, 2014, the Commission
issued an order in Docket No. EL14–73–
000, pursuant to section 206 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C.
824e (2012), instituting an investigation
into the justness and reasonableness of
The Empire District Electric Company’s
formula rate protocols under the Empire
Open Access Transmission, Energy and
Operating Reserve Markets Tariff, and
Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Open
Access Transmission Tariff. The Empire
District Electric Company, 148 FERC ¶
61,030 (2014).
The refund effective date in Docket
No. EL14–73–000, established pursuant
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0473; FRL–9913–38]
Registration Review Proposed Interim
Decisions; Notice of Availability
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice announces the
availability of EPA’s proposed interim
registration review decisions and opens
a public comment period on the
proposed interim decisions. 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, that the pesticide can perform its
intended function without unreasonable
adverse effects on human health or the
environment. 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 September 22, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by the docket identification
(ID) number for the specific pesticide of
interest provided in the table in Unit
II.A., by one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 141 / Wednesday, July 23, 2014 / Notices
For
pesticide specific information, contact:
The Chemical Review Manager for the
pesticide of interest identified in the
table in Unit II.A.
For general information on the
registration review program, contact:
Richard Dumas, Pesticide Re-Evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 308–8015; email address:
dumas.richard@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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 for the
pesticide of interest identified in the
table in Unit II.A.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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 email. 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Jul 22, 2014
Jkt 232001
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
A. What action is the Agency taking?
Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58, this notice
announces the availability of EPA’s
proposed interim registration review
decisions for the pesticides shown in
the table in this unit, and opens a 60day public comment period on the
proposed interim decisions.
1. Acetaminophen (proposed interim
decision). The registration review
docket for acetaminophen (EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0145) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of
March 28, 2012 (77 FR 18810) (FRL–
9342–1). Acetaminophen is registered
for use as a vertebrate pesticide to
control the invasive brown tree snake in
Guam. The snakes ingest baited mice,
which are lethal to the snake. There are
no registered food/feed uses for
acetaminophen. No pesticide tolerances
have been established. EPA did not
conduct a human health risk assessment
because acetaminophen’s
pharmaceutical use is well-studied and
opportunities for exposure from its
pesticidal use are extremely limited.
The Agency conducted a quantitative
ecological risk assessment for
acetaminophen. Baited mice are not
likely to be consumed or consumed in
quantity by resident animals other than
the brown tree snake, the
acetaminophen in the mice is not likely
to end up in aquatic environments, and
there is little potential for exposure to
plants. The Agency has concluded that
there are no risks of concern for native,
non-target organisms associated with
the pesticidal use of acetaminophen.
The Agency has made a ‘‘no effect’’
determination for all federally listed
species and a ‘‘no adverse modification
of critical habitat’’ determination.
Acetaminophen has not been evaluated
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42787
under the Endocrine Disruptor
Screening Program (EDSP). Therefore,
the Agency’s final registration review
decision is dependent on the results of
the evaluation of potential endocrine
disruptor risks. Pending the outcome of
this action, EPA is planning to issue an
interim registration review decision for
acetaminophen.
2. Clofentezine (proposed interim
decision). The registration review
docket for clofentezine (EPA–HQ–OPP–
2006–0240) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of
March 28, 2007 (72 FR 14548) (FRL–
8118–3). Clofentezine is an acaricide
registered for use to control mites. It is
a liquid formulation for use on almonds,
apples, apricots, cherries, Christmas
trees, grapes (except New York),
nectarines, ornamentals (greenhouse
and outdoor), peaches, pears,
persimmons, and walnuts. There are
currently no registered residential uses
of clofentezine. Based on the human
health risk assessment conducted in
support of registration review for
clofentezine, the Agency determined
that there are no human health risks of
concern for the currently registered uses
of clofentezine. Based on the ecological
risk assessment that was completed in
support of registration review for
clofentezine, EPA has determined that
all outdoor uses of clofentezine can
potentially lead to direct adverse effects
to listed and non-listed birds.
The chronic risk level of concern
(LOC) was exceeded by dietary risk
quotients (RQs) for birds. As birds serve
as surrogates to reptiles and terrestrialphase amphibians, risk to these taxa is
also a possibility. The chronic risk to
mammals is uncertain and is expected
to be limited. The dose-based risk
assessment concludes that the chronic
RQs slightly exceeds the chronic LOC
for small to medium mammals feeding
exclusively on short grass, but this was
based on a study which showed no
effects to growth, reproduction, or
survival at the highest dose tested.
Clofentezine is moderately persistent in
the terrestrial environment and is
expected to decline to below toxic levels
approximately 1 to 2 weeks after
application.
Use of clofentezine is not expected to
pose a risk to foraging (adult) bees;
however, there is a potential for risk to
non-listed and listed terrestrial
arthropods because of adverse effects to
reproduction and development. Use of
clofentezine is not expected to cause
direct or indirect adverse effects to nonlisted or listed fish, aquatic
invertebrates, or aquatic plants. Thus, a
‘‘no effect’’ determination is made for all
listed aquatic organisms. Several lines
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
42788
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 141 / Wednesday, July 23, 2014 / Notices
of evidence indicate that clofentezine
has low toxicity to plants. Therefore,
EPA concludes that use of clofentezine
will not pose risk to terrestrial, semiaquatic (monocots, and dicots) or
aquatic plants, and is not expected to
harm listed species of plants. Thus, a
‘‘no effect’’ determination is made for all
listed plants.
This interim decision does not cover
the EDSP component of the clofentezine
registration review case. Additionally,
the ecological risk assessment for
clofentezine did not come to a
conclusion of ‘‘no effect’’ to some listed
species. Therefore, consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) on the potential risk of
clofentezine to some listed species will
be necessary. The Agency is issuing a
proposed interim registration review
decision pending the evaluation of
potential endocrine disruptor risk and
consultation with FWS.
3. Cyromazine (proposed interim
decision). The registration review
docket for cyromazine (EPA–HQ–OPP–
2006–0108) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of
March 28, 2007 (72 FR 14548) (FRL–
8118–3). Cyromazine is a triazine which
acts as an insect growth regulator.
Cyromazine is registered for use on
several agricultural crops such as beans,
peppers, and tomatoes; it is registered
for use on indoor ornamentals, and to
control flies in manure. There are no
residential uses for cyromazine. EPA
conducted a human health occupational
risk assessment and did not identify any
risks of concern. The ecological risk
assessment identified potential risks to
several taxa including birds, mammals,
and bees. To mitigate potential
ecological risks, the Agency is
proposing to increase the application
interval for cyromazine use on potatoes;
add label language for the onion seed
treatment use; add precautionary label
language to reduce risk to bees; use;
and, increase the minimum droplet size
for aerial applications. The proposed
changes will reduce estimated risks, but
will not reach a conclusion of ‘‘no
effect’’ to listed species. Therefore,
consultation with FWS on the potential
risk of cyromazine to listed species will
be necessary. Cyromazine has not been
evaluated under EDSP. Therefore, the
Agency’s final registration review
decision is dependent on the results of
consultation under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16
U.S.C. 1536) with the FWS and the
evaluation of potential endocrine
disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of
these actions, EPA is planning to issue
an interim registration review decision
for cyromazine.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Jul 22, 2014
Jkt 232001
4. Fosthiazate (proposed interim
decision). The registration review
docket for fosthiazate (EPA–HQ–OPP–
2009–0267) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of
June 24, 2009 (74 FR 30077) (FRL–
8422–4). Fosthiazate is an
organophosphate nematicide for use
only on tomatoes, via drip irrigation
under plastic. There are no residential
uses for fosthiazate. EPA conducted a
human health dietary and occupational
risk assessment for fosthiazate and did
not identify any risks of concern. The
ecological risk assessment identified
potential risks to several taxa including
birds, mammals, and soil-bound
terrestrial invertebrates. To mitigate
potential ecological risks, the agency is
proposing to modify the application
directions for fosthiazate. The proposed
change will reduce estimated risks, but
will not reach a conclusion of ‘‘no
effect’’ to listed species. Therefore,
consultation with FWS on the potential
risk of fosthiazate to listed species will
be necessary. Fosthiazate has not been
evaluated under EDSP. Therefore, the
Agency’s final registration review
decision is dependent on the results of
consultation under ESA section 7 with
FWS and the evaluation of potential
endocrine disruptor risk. Pending the
outcome of these actions, EPA is
planning to issue an interim registration
review decision for fosthiazate.
5. Hexythiazox (proposed interim
decision). The registration review
docket for hexythiazox (EPA–HQ–OPP–
2006–0114) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of
February 2, 2007 (72 FR 5050) (FRL–
8113–1). Hexythiazox is an acaricide
that acts primarily as a mite growth
inhibitor/ovicide and is used to control
mites. It is registered for use on a variety
of agricultural crops, turf, and various
residential plants. The Agency
conducted a human health risk
assessment and did not identify any
risks of concern. The ecological risk
assessment identified areas of potential
risk of uncertainty to terrestrial
invertebrates, bees, and chronic risk to
fish due to lack of data. The Agency is
therefore requiring a bee study to
determine any productive effects to
pollinators. While chronic risk to fish
and non-target invertebrates is uncertain
due to data gaps, the potential risks
expected to be low due to as
hexythiazox is applied only once per
year at a low rate and is not highly
persistent in the environment. The
Agency has completed a partial ESA
analysis and is making a no effect
determination under the ESA for direct
adverse effects to listed mammalian,
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
avian (and reptile surrogates) and
aquatic plant (vascular and
nonvascular). The analysis for indirect
effects to listed species in these taxa or
effects to their designated critical
habitat has not yet been completed.
Therefore, consultation with FWS and
the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) (the Services) on the potential
risk of hexythiazox to listed species will
be necessary. Hexythiazox has not been
evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore,
the Agency’s final registration review
decision is dependent on the result of
consultation under ESA section 7 with
FWS and the evaluation of potential
endocrine disruptor risk. Pending the
outcome of these actions, EPA is
planning to issue an interim registration
review decision for hexythiazox.
6. Lactofen (proposed interim
decision). The registration review
docket for lactofen (EPA–HQ–OPP–
2005–0287) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of
February 2, 2007 (72 FR 5050) (FRL–
8113–1). Lactofen is a light dependent
peroxidizing herbicide (LDPH) with
uses on conifer seedlings, cotton, kenaf,
peanuts, and soybean, with Statespecific uses on fruiting vegetables,
okra, and snap beans. There are no
residential uses for lactofen. EPA
conducted a human health occupational
risk assessment and did not identify any
risks of concern. The ecological risk
assessment identified potential risks to
several different taxa. However, due to
the number of conservative assumptions
included in the assessment, and
additional use and usage information to
help characterize potential risks, the
Agency is not proposing mitigation
changes at this time. The risk
assessment for lactofen did not come to
a conclusion of ‘‘no effect’’ to listed
species. Therefore, consultation with
FWS on the potential risk of lactofen to
listed species will be necessary.
Lactofen has not been evaluated under
EDSP. Therefore, the Agency’s final
registration review decision is
dependent on the results of consultation
under ESA section 7 with FWS and the
evaluation of potential endocrine
disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of
these actions, EPA is planning to issue
an interim registration review decision
for lactofen.
7. Macleaya extract (proposed interim
decision). The registration review
docket for macleaya extract (EPA–HQ–
OPP–2011–0172) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of
March 30, 2011 (76 FR 17646) (FRL–
8868–9). Macleaya extract is a plant
extract of Macleaya cordata, and is
registered for use only in enclosed
commercial greenhouses, as an
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 141 / Wednesday, July 23, 2014 / Notices
ornamental plant fungicide for the
control of foliar fungal diseases. There
are no registered food uses of macleaya
extract. EPA completed a qualitative
draft human health risk assessment for
all macleaya extract uses. No risks of
concern were identified. The Agency
also conducted an ecological risk
assessment and endangered species
effects determination. No risks of
concern were identified and the Agency
has made a ‘‘no effect’’ determination
for federally listed species and a ‘‘No
Habitat Modification’’ determination for
all designated critical habitats under
ESA. Macleaya extract has not been
evaluated under EDSP. Therefore, the
Agency’s final registration review
decision is dependent on the result of
the evaluation of potential endocrine
disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of
this action, EPA is planning to issue an
interim registration review decision for
macleaya extract.
8. Quizalofop (proposed interim
decision). The registration review
docket for quizalofop (EPA–HQ–OPP–
2007–1089) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of
December 19, 2007 (72 FR 71893) (FRL–
8342–9). Quizalofop is a selective postemergence herbicide and appears as two
different isomers: Quizalofop-ethyl and
quizalofop-p-ethyl. Quizalofop-ethyl is a
50/50 racemic mixture of R- and Senantiomers and there are no active
pesticide registrations of this isomer.
Quizalofop is the purified R-enantiomer
and the pesticidally active isomer. For
the Agency’s purposes, both isomers
will be referred to collectively as
quizalofop. Quizalofop is registered to
control annual and perennial grasses in
various crops including Chinese
cabbage, cotton, garlic, grains, legumes,
mint, pineapple, soybean, sugar beets,
and sunflower. Quizalofop is also used
in non-agricultural settings, such as
cottonwood and poplar plantations,
fencerows, roadsides, and other
uncultivated areas. EPA conducted a
risk assessment for both human health
and ecological risk. No risks of concern
were identified in the human health risk
assessment. The ecological risk
assessment indicated potential risks to
amphibians, freshwater fish, non-target
monocots, and terrestrial mammals. The
Agency is proposing mitigation to
reduce spray drift risk to non-target
organisms. The ecological risk
assessment did not come to a
conclusion of ‘‘no effect’’ to listed
species, therefore, consultation with
FWS on the potential risk of quizalofop
to listed species will be necessary.
Quizalofop has not been evaluated
under EDSP. Therefore, the Agency’s
final registration review decision is
dependent on the result of consultation
under ESA section 7 with FWS and the
evaluation of potential endocrine
disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of
these actions, EPA is planning to issue
an interim registration review decision
for quizalofop.
9. Trinexapac-ethyl (proposed interim
decision). The registration review
docket for trinexapac-ethyl (EPA–HQ–
OPP–2008–0657) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of
September 15, 2008 (73 FR 53244)
(FRL–8381–3). Trinexapac-ethyl is a
plant growth regulator registered for use
42789
by homeowners and professional
applicators to manage growth of barley,
grasses grown for seed, oats, sugarcane,
triticale, turf grass, and wheat. Turf
grass uses include athletic fields and
parks, commercial and residential
lawns, golf courses, and sod farms. It is
also registered for application around
flower beds, ornamental trees, and
shrubs.
EPA conducted a human health risk
assessment and did not identify any
risks of concern. In addition, EPA
conducted an ecological risk
assessment. Based on low-risk
estimates, and the conservative nature
of the risk assessment, the Agency does
not anticipate ecological risks of
concern for assessed taxa from currently
registered uses of trinexapac-ethyl. The
Agency is not proposing mitigation
changes at this time. However, the
Agency is proposing that labels clarify
the single-maximum application rate for
liquid turf end-use products. The risk
assessment for trinexapac-ethyl did not
come to a conclusion of ‘‘no effect’’ to
listed species. Therefore, consultation
with the Services on the potential risk
of trinexapac-ethyl to listed species will
be necessary. Trinexapac-ethyl has not
been evaluated under EDSP. Therefore,
the Agency’s final registration review
decision is dependent on the result of
consultation under ESA section 7 with
FWS and the evaluation of potential
endocrine disrupter risk. Pending the
outcome of these actions, EPA is
planning to issue an interim registration
review decision for trinexapac-ethyl.
TABLE—REGISTRATION REVIEW PROPOSED INTERIM DECISIONS
Pesticide docket
identification number
Registration review case name and number
Acetaminophen (Case 7610) ..........................
Clofentezine (Case 7602) ...............................
Cyromazine (Case 7439) ................................
Fosthiazate (Case 7604) ................................
Hexythiazox (Case 7404) ...............................
Lactofen (Case 7210) .....................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Macleaya Extract (Case 7024) .......................
Quizalofop (Case 7215) ..................................
Trinexapac-ethyl (Case 7228) ........................
The registration review docket for a
pesticide includes earlier documents
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Jul 22, 2014
Jkt 232001
EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–
0145.
EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–
0240.
EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–
0108.
EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–
0267.
EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–
0114.
EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–
0287.
EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–
0172.
EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–
1089.
EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–
0657.
Chemical review manager, telephone number, email address
Bonnie Adler, (703) 308–8523, adler.bonnie@epa.gov.
Wilhelmena Livingston, (703) 308–8025, livingston.wilhelmena@
epa.gov.
James Parker, (703) 306–0469, parker.james@epa.gov.
James Parker, (703) 306–0469, parker.james@epa.gov.
Molly Clayton, (703) 603–0522, clayton.molly@epa.gov.
Kelly Ballard, (703) 305–8126, ballard.kelly@epa.gov.
Susan Bartow, (703) 603–0065, bartow.susan@epa.gov.
Khue Nguyen, (703) 347–0248, nguyen.khue@epa.gov.
Kaitlin Keller, (703) 308–8172, keller.kaitlin@epa.gov.
related to the registration review of the
case. For example, the review opened
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
with a Summary Document, containing
a Preliminary Work Plan, for public
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
42790
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 141 / Wednesday, July 23, 2014 / Notices
comment. A Final Work Plan was
placed in the docket following public
comment on the initial docket.
The documents in the dockets
describe EPA’s rationales for conducting
additional risk assessments for the
registration review of the pesticides
included in the table in Unit II.A., as
well as the Agency’s subsequent risk
findings and consideration of possible
risk mitigation measures. These
proposed interim registration review
decisions are supported by the
rationales included in those documents.
Following public comment, the
Agency is planning to issue interim
registration review decisions for
products containing the pesticides listed
in the table in Unit II.A.
The registration review program is
being conducted under congressionally
mandated timeframes, and EPA
recognizes the need both to make timely
decisions and to involve the public.
Section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
(7 U.S.C. 136a(g)) required EPA to
establish by regulation procedures for
reviewing pesticide registrations,
originally with a goal of reviewing each
pesticide’s registration every 15 years to
ensure that a pesticide continues to
meet the FIFRA standard for
registration. The Agency’s final rule to
implement this program was issued in
the Federal Register of August 9, 2006
(71 FR 45720) (FRL–8080–4) and
became effective October 10, 2006, and
appears at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C.
The Pesticide Registration Improvement
Act of 2003 (PRIA) was amended and
extended in September 2007. FIFRA, as
amended by PRIA in 2007, requires EPA
to complete registration review
decisions by October 1, 2022, for all
pesticides registered as of October 1,
2007 (7 U.S.C. 136a(g)).
The registration review final rule at 40
CFR 155.58(a) provides for a minimum
60-day public comment period on all
proposed registration review decisions.
This comment period is intended to
provide an opportunity for public input
and a mechanism for initiating any
necessary amendments to the proposed
decision. All comments should be
submitted using the methods in
ADDRESSES, and must be received by
EPA on or before the closing date. These
comments will become part of the
docket for the pesticides included in the
table in Unit II.A. Comments received
after the close of the comment period
will be marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not
required to consider these late
comments.
The Agency will carefully consider all
comments received by the closing date
and will provide a ‘‘Response to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Jul 22, 2014
Jkt 232001
Comments Memorandum’’ in the
docket. The final registration review
decision will explain the effect that any
comments had on the decision and
provide the Agency’s response to
significant comments.
Background on the registration review
program is provided at: https://
www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_
review. Links to earlier documents
related to the registration review of
these pesticides are provided at:
https://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/
registration_review/reg_review_
status.htm.
B. What is the Agency’s authority for
taking this action?
Section 3(g) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C.
136a(g)) and 40 CFR part 155, subpart C,
provide authority for this action.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection,
Acetaminophen, Administrative
practice and procedure, Clofentezine,
Cyromazine, Fosthiazate, Hexythiazox,
Lactofen, Macleaya extract, Pesticides
and pests, Quizalofop, and Trinexapacethyl.
Dated: July 15, 2014.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014–17244 Filed 7–22–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OA–2014–0001: FRL 9914–13–
OA]
Good Neighbor Environmental Board
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Request for Nominations to the
Good Neighbor Environmental Board.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) invites nominations from
a diverse range of qualified candidates
to be considered for appointment to its
Good Neighbor Environmental Board
(GNEB). Vacancies are expected to be
filled by March 9, 2015. Sources in
addition to this Federal Register Notice
may also be utilized in the solicitation
of nominees.
Background: GNEB is a federal
advisory committee chartered under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), Public Law 92–463. GNEB was
created in 1992 by the Enterprise for the
Americas Initiative Act, Public Law
102–532, 7 U.S.C. 5404. Implementing
authority was delegated to the
Administrator of EPA under Executive
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Order 12916. The GNEB is charged by
statute with submitting an annual report
to the President on the need for
implementation of environmental and
infrastructure projects within the states
of the United States contiguous to
Mexico. The statute calls for the GNEB
to have representatives from U.S.
Government agencies; the governments
of the states of Arizona, California, New
Mexico and Texas; and tribal and
private organizations with experience in
environmental and infrastructure issues
along the U.S./Mexico Border. Members
are appointed by the EPA Administrator
for two year terms with the possibility
of reappointment. The GNEB meets
approximately three times annually
either in person or via video/
teleconference. The average workload
for committee members is
approximately 10 to 15 hours per
month. Members serve on the
committees in a voluntary capacity.
Although we are unable to offer
compensation or an honorarium,
members may receive travel and per
diem allowances, according to
applicable federal travel regulations.
The EPA is seeking nominations from a
variety of nongovernmental interests
along the U.S.-Mexico border from the
private sector, including representatives
from business, academia, environmental
groups, health groups, ranching and
grazing, energy, financial, and other
relevant sectors. EPA values and
welcomes diversity. In an effort to
obtain nominations of diverse
candidates, EPA encourages
nominations of women and men of all
racial and ethnic groups.
The following criteria will be used to
evaluate nominees:
• Background and experiences that
would help members contribute to the
diversity of perspectives on the
committee (e.g., geographic, economic,
social, cultural, educational, and other
considerations).
• Representative of a sector or group
that helps to shape border-region
environmental policy or representatives
of a group that is affected by border
region environmental policy.
• Has extensive professional
knowledge and experience with the
particular issues that the GNEB
examines (i.e. environmental and
infrastructure issues along the U.S.Mexico border), including the binational dimension of these issues.
• Bring senior level experience that
will fill a need of the GNEB in bringing
a new and relevant dimension to its
deliberations.
• Possesses a demonstrated ability to
work in a consensus building process
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 141 (Wednesday, July 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42786-42790]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17244]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0473; FRL-9913-38]
Registration Review Proposed Interim Decisions; Notice of
Availability
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's proposed
interim registration review decisions and opens a public comment period
on the proposed interim decisions. 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, that the pesticide can perform its intended function without
unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment.
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 September 22, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by the docket
identification (ID) number for the specific pesticide of interest
provided in the table in Unit II.A., by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
[[Page 42787]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For pesticide specific information,
contact: The Chemical Review Manager for the pesticide of interest
identified in the table in Unit II.A.
For general information on the registration review program,
contact: Richard Dumas, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P),
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 308-8015; email address: dumas.richard@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 for the pesticide of interest
identified in the table in Unit II.A.
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 email. 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.
II. Background
A. What action is the Agency taking?
Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58, this notice announces the availability
of EPA's proposed interim registration review decisions for the
pesticides shown in the table in this unit, and opens a 60-day public
comment period on the proposed interim decisions.
1. Acetaminophen (proposed interim decision). The registration
review docket for acetaminophen (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0145) opened in a
notice published in the Federal Register of March 28, 2012 (77 FR
18810) (FRL-9342-1). Acetaminophen is registered for use as a
vertebrate pesticide to control the invasive brown tree snake in Guam.
The snakes ingest baited mice, which are lethal to the snake. There are
no registered food/feed uses for acetaminophen. No pesticide tolerances
have been established. EPA did not conduct a human health risk
assessment because acetaminophen's pharmaceutical use is well-studied
and opportunities for exposure from its pesticidal use are extremely
limited. The Agency conducted a quantitative ecological risk assessment
for acetaminophen. Baited mice are not likely to be consumed or
consumed in quantity by resident animals other than the brown tree
snake, the acetaminophen in the mice is not likely to end up in aquatic
environments, and there is little potential for exposure to plants. The
Agency has concluded that there are no risks of concern for native,
non-target organisms associated with the pesticidal use of
acetaminophen. The Agency has made a ``no effect'' determination for
all federally listed species and a ``no adverse modification of
critical habitat'' determination. Acetaminophen has not been evaluated
under the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP). Therefore, the
Agency's final registration review decision is dependent on the results
of the evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risks. Pending the
outcome of this action, EPA is planning to issue an interim
registration review decision for acetaminophen.
2. Clofentezine (proposed interim decision). The registration
review docket for clofentezine (EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0240) opened in a
notice published in the Federal Register of March 28, 2007 (72 FR
14548) (FRL-8118-3). Clofentezine is an acaricide registered for use to
control mites. It is a liquid formulation for use on almonds, apples,
apricots, cherries, Christmas trees, grapes (except New York),
nectarines, ornamentals (greenhouse and outdoor), peaches, pears,
persimmons, and walnuts. There are currently no registered residential
uses of clofentezine. Based on the human health risk assessment
conducted in support of registration review for clofentezine, the
Agency determined that there are no human health risks of concern for
the currently registered uses of clofentezine. Based on the ecological
risk assessment that was completed in support of registration review
for clofentezine, EPA has determined that all outdoor uses of
clofentezine can potentially lead to direct adverse effects to listed
and non-listed birds.
The chronic risk level of concern (LOC) was exceeded by dietary
risk quotients (RQs) for birds. As birds serve as surrogates to
reptiles and terrestrial-phase amphibians, risk to these taxa is also a
possibility. The chronic risk to mammals is uncertain and is expected
to be limited. The dose-based risk assessment concludes that the
chronic RQs slightly exceeds the chronic LOC for small to medium
mammals feeding exclusively on short grass, but this was based on a
study which showed no effects to growth, reproduction, or survival at
the highest dose tested. Clofentezine is moderately persistent in the
terrestrial environment and is expected to decline to below toxic
levels approximately 1 to 2 weeks after application.
Use of clofentezine is not expected to pose a risk to foraging
(adult) bees; however, there is a potential for risk to non-listed and
listed terrestrial arthropods because of adverse effects to
reproduction and development. Use of clofentezine is not expected to
cause direct or indirect adverse effects to non-listed or listed fish,
aquatic invertebrates, or aquatic plants. Thus, a ``no effect''
determination is made for all listed aquatic organisms. Several lines
[[Page 42788]]
of evidence indicate that clofentezine has low toxicity to plants.
Therefore, EPA concludes that use of clofentezine will not pose risk to
terrestrial, semi-aquatic (monocots, and dicots) or aquatic plants, and
is not expected to harm listed species of plants. Thus, a ``no effect''
determination is made for all listed plants.
This interim decision does not cover the EDSP component of the
clofentezine registration review case. Additionally, the ecological
risk assessment for clofentezine did not come to a conclusion of ``no
effect'' to some listed species. Therefore, consultation with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) on the potential risk of clofentezine
to some listed species will be necessary. The Agency is issuing a
proposed interim registration review decision pending the evaluation of
potential endocrine disruptor risk and consultation with FWS.
3. Cyromazine (proposed interim decision). The registration review
docket for cyromazine (EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0108) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of March 28, 2007 (72 FR 14548) (FRL-
8118-3). Cyromazine is a triazine which acts as an insect growth
regulator. Cyromazine is registered for use on several agricultural
crops such as beans, peppers, and tomatoes; it is registered for use on
indoor ornamentals, and to control flies in manure. There are no
residential uses for cyromazine. EPA conducted a human health
occupational risk assessment and did not identify any risks of concern.
The ecological risk assessment identified potential risks to several
taxa including birds, mammals, and bees. To mitigate potential
ecological risks, the Agency is proposing to increase the application
interval for cyromazine use on potatoes; add label language for the
onion seed treatment use; add precautionary label language to reduce
risk to bees; use; and, increase the minimum droplet size for aerial
applications. The proposed changes will reduce estimated risks, but
will not reach a conclusion of ``no effect'' to listed species.
Therefore, consultation with FWS on the potential risk of cyromazine to
listed species will be necessary. Cyromazine has not been evaluated
under EDSP. Therefore, the Agency's final registration review decision
is dependent on the results of consultation under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1536) with the FWS and the
evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk. Pending the outcome
of these actions, EPA is planning to issue an interim registration
review decision for cyromazine.
4. Fosthiazate (proposed interim decision). The registration review
docket for fosthiazate (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0267) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of June 24, 2009 (74 FR 30077) (FRL-
8422-4). Fosthiazate is an organophosphate nematicide for use only on
tomatoes, via drip irrigation under plastic. There are no residential
uses for fosthiazate. EPA conducted a human health dietary and
occupational risk assessment for fosthiazate and did not identify any
risks of concern. The ecological risk assessment identified potential
risks to several taxa including birds, mammals, and soil-bound
terrestrial invertebrates. To mitigate potential ecological risks, the
agency is proposing to modify the application directions for
fosthiazate. The proposed change will reduce estimated risks, but will
not reach a conclusion of ``no effect'' to listed species. Therefore,
consultation with FWS on the potential risk of fosthiazate to listed
species will be necessary. Fosthiazate has not been evaluated under
EDSP. Therefore, the Agency's final registration review decision is
dependent on the results of consultation under ESA section 7 with FWS
and the evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk. Pending the
outcome of these actions, EPA is planning to issue an interim
registration review decision for fosthiazate.
5. Hexythiazox (proposed interim decision). The registration review
docket for hexythiazox (EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0114) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of February 2, 2007 (72 FR 5050)
(FRL-8113-1). Hexythiazox is an acaricide that acts primarily as a mite
growth inhibitor/ovicide and is used to control mites. It is registered
for use on a variety of agricultural crops, turf, and various
residential plants. The Agency conducted a human health risk assessment
and did not identify any risks of concern. The ecological risk
assessment identified areas of potential risk of uncertainty to
terrestrial invertebrates, bees, and chronic risk to fish due to lack
of data. The Agency is therefore requiring a bee study to determine any
productive effects to pollinators. While chronic risk to fish and non-
target invertebrates is uncertain due to data gaps, the potential risks
expected to be low due to as hexythiazox is applied only once per year
at a low rate and is not highly persistent in the environment. The
Agency has completed a partial ESA analysis and is making a no effect
determination under the ESA for direct adverse effects to listed
mammalian, avian (and reptile surrogates) and aquatic plant (vascular
and nonvascular). The analysis for indirect effects to listed species
in these taxa or effects to their designated critical habitat has not
yet been completed. Therefore, consultation with FWS and the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (the Services) on the potential risk of
hexythiazox to listed species will be necessary. Hexythiazox has not
been evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, the Agency's final
registration review decision is dependent on the result of consultation
under ESA section 7 with FWS and the evaluation of potential endocrine
disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of these actions, EPA is planning
to issue an interim registration review decision for hexythiazox.
6. Lactofen (proposed interim decision). The registration review
docket for lactofen (EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0287) opened in a notice published
in the Federal Register of February 2, 2007 (72 FR 5050) (FRL-8113-1).
Lactofen is a light dependent peroxidizing herbicide (LDPH) with uses
on conifer seedlings, cotton, kenaf, peanuts, and soybean, with State-
specific uses on fruiting vegetables, okra, and snap beans. There are
no residential uses for lactofen. EPA conducted a human health
occupational risk assessment and did not identify any risks of concern.
The ecological risk assessment identified potential risks to several
different taxa. However, due to the number of conservative assumptions
included in the assessment, and additional use and usage information to
help characterize potential risks, the Agency is not proposing
mitigation changes at this time. The risk assessment for lactofen did
not come to a conclusion of ``no effect'' to listed species. Therefore,
consultation with FWS on the potential risk of lactofen to listed
species will be necessary. Lactofen has not been evaluated under EDSP.
Therefore, the Agency's final registration review decision is dependent
on the results of consultation under ESA section 7 with FWS and the
evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk. Pending the outcome
of these actions, EPA is planning to issue an interim registration
review decision for lactofen.
7. Macleaya extract (proposed interim decision). The registration
review docket for macleaya extract (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0172) opened in a
notice published in the Federal Register of March 30, 2011 (76 FR
17646) (FRL-8868-9). Macleaya extract is a plant extract of Macleaya
cordata, and is registered for use only in enclosed commercial
greenhouses, as an
[[Page 42789]]
ornamental plant fungicide for the control of foliar fungal diseases.
There are no registered food uses of macleaya extract. EPA completed a
qualitative draft human health risk assessment for all macleaya extract
uses. No risks of concern were identified. The Agency also conducted an
ecological risk assessment and endangered species effects
determination. No risks of concern were identified and the Agency has
made a ``no effect'' determination for federally listed species and a
``No Habitat Modification'' determination for all designated critical
habitats under ESA. Macleaya extract has not been evaluated under EDSP.
Therefore, the Agency's final registration review decision is dependent
on the result of the evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk.
Pending the outcome of this action, EPA is planning to issue an interim
registration review decision for macleaya extract.
8. Quizalofop (proposed interim decision). The registration review
docket for quizalofop (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-1089) opened in a notice
published in the Federal Register of December 19, 2007 (72 FR 71893)
(FRL-8342-9). Quizalofop is a selective post-emergence herbicide and
appears as two different isomers: Quizalofop-ethyl and quizalofop-p-
ethyl. Quizalofop-ethyl is a 50/50 racemic mixture of R- and S-
enantiomers and there are no active pesticide registrations of this
isomer. Quizalofop is the purified R-enantiomer and the pesticidally
active isomer. For the Agency's purposes, both isomers will be referred
to collectively as quizalofop. Quizalofop is registered to control
annual and perennial grasses in various crops including Chinese
cabbage, cotton, garlic, grains, legumes, mint, pineapple, soybean,
sugar beets, and sunflower. Quizalofop is also used in non-agricultural
settings, such as cottonwood and poplar plantations, fencerows,
roadsides, and other uncultivated areas. EPA conducted a risk
assessment for both human health and ecological risk. No risks of
concern were identified in the human health risk assessment. The
ecological risk assessment indicated potential risks to amphibians,
freshwater fish, non-target monocots, and terrestrial mammals. The
Agency is proposing mitigation to reduce spray drift risk to non-target
organisms. The ecological risk assessment did not come to a conclusion
of ``no effect'' to listed species, therefore, consultation with FWS on
the potential risk of quizalofop to listed species will be necessary.
Quizalofop has not been evaluated under EDSP. Therefore, the Agency's
final registration review decision is dependent on the result of
consultation under ESA section 7 with FWS and the evaluation of
potential endocrine disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of these
actions, EPA is planning to issue an interim registration review
decision for quizalofop.
9. Trinexapac-ethyl (proposed interim decision). The registration
review docket for trinexapac-ethyl (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0657) opened in a
notice published in the Federal Register of September 15, 2008 (73 FR
53244) (FRL-8381-3). Trinexapac-ethyl is a plant growth regulator
registered for use by homeowners and professional applicators to manage
growth of barley, grasses grown for seed, oats, sugarcane, triticale,
turf grass, and wheat. Turf grass uses include athletic fields and
parks, commercial and residential lawns, golf courses, and sod farms.
It is also registered for application around flower beds, ornamental
trees, and shrubs.
EPA conducted a human health risk assessment and did not identify
any risks of concern. In addition, EPA conducted an ecological risk
assessment. Based on low-risk estimates, and the conservative nature of
the risk assessment, the Agency does not anticipate ecological risks of
concern for assessed taxa from currently registered uses of trinexapac-
ethyl. The Agency is not proposing mitigation changes at this time.
However, the Agency is proposing that labels clarify the single-maximum
application rate for liquid turf end-use products. The risk assessment
for trinexapac-ethyl did not come to a conclusion of ``no effect'' to
listed species. Therefore, consultation with the Services on the
potential risk of trinexapac-ethyl to listed species will be necessary.
Trinexapac-ethyl has not been evaluated under EDSP. Therefore, the
Agency's final registration review decision is dependent on the result
of consultation under ESA section 7 with FWS and the evaluation of
potential endocrine disrupter risk. Pending the outcome of these
actions, EPA is planning to issue an interim registration review
decision for trinexapac-ethyl.
Table--Registration Review Proposed Interim Decisions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical review
Registration review case name Pesticide docket manager, telephone
and number identification number, email
number address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetaminophen (Case 7610)....... EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-01 Bonnie Adler,
45. (703) 308-8523,
adler.bonnie@epa.gov.
Clofentezine (Case 7602)........ EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-02 Wilhelmena
40. Livingston, (703)
308-8025,
livingston.wilhelmena@epa.gov.
Cyromazine (Case 7439).......... EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-01 James Parker,
08. (703) 306-0469,
parker.james@epa.gov.
Fosthiazate (Case 7604)......... EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-02 James Parker,
67. (703) 306-0469,
parker.james@epa.gov.
Hexythiazox (Case 7404)......... EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-01 Molly Clayton,
14. (703) 603-0522,
clayton.molly@epa.gov.
Lactofen (Case 7210)............ EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-02 Kelly Ballard,
87. (703) 305-8126,
ballard.kelly@epa.gov.
Macleaya Extract (Case 7024).... EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-01 Susan Bartow,
72. (703) 603-0065,
bartow.susan@epa.gov.
Quizalofop (Case 7215).......... EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-10 Khue Nguyen, (703)
89. 347-0248,
nguyen.khue@epa.gov.
Trinexapac-ethyl (Case 7228).... EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-06 Kaitlin Keller,
57. (703) 308-8172,
keller.kaitlin@epa.gov.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The registration review docket for a pesticide includes earlier
documents related to the registration review of the case. For example,
the review opened with a Summary Document, containing a Preliminary
Work Plan, for public
[[Page 42790]]
comment. A Final Work Plan was placed in the docket following public
comment on the initial docket.
The documents in the dockets describe EPA's rationales for
conducting additional risk assessments for the registration review of
the pesticides included in the table in Unit II.A., as well as the
Agency's subsequent risk findings and consideration of possible risk
mitigation measures. These proposed interim registration review
decisions are supported by the rationales included in those documents.
Following public comment, the Agency is planning to issue interim
registration review decisions for products containing the pesticides
listed in the table in Unit II.A.
The registration review program is being conducted under
congressionally mandated timeframes, and EPA recognizes the need both
to make timely decisions and to involve the public. Section 3(g) of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C.
136a(g)) required EPA to establish by regulation procedures for
reviewing pesticide registrations, originally with a goal of reviewing
each pesticide's registration every 15 years to ensure that a pesticide
continues to meet the FIFRA standard for registration. The Agency's
final rule to implement this program was issued in the Federal Register
of August 9, 2006 (71 FR 45720) (FRL-8080-4) and became effective
October 10, 2006, and appears at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C. The
Pesticide Registration Improvement Act of 2003 (PRIA) was amended and
extended in September 2007. FIFRA, as amended by PRIA in 2007, requires
EPA to complete registration review decisions by October 1, 2022, for
all pesticides registered as of October 1, 2007 (7 U.S.C. 136a(g)).
The registration review final rule at 40 CFR 155.58(a) provides for
a minimum 60-day public comment period on all proposed registration
review decisions. This comment period is intended to provide an
opportunity for public input and a mechanism for initiating any
necessary amendments to the proposed decision. All comments should be
submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES, and must be received by EPA
on or before the closing date. These comments will become part of the
docket for the pesticides included in the table in Unit II.A. Comments
received after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.''
EPA is not required to consider these late comments.
The Agency will carefully consider all comments received by the
closing date and will provide a ``Response to Comments Memorandum'' in
the docket. The final registration review decision will explain the
effect that any comments had on the decision and provide the Agency's
response to significant comments.
Background on the registration review program is provided at:
https://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review. Links to earlier
documents related to the registration review of these pesticides are
provided at: https://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review/reg_review_status.htm.
B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?
Section 3(g) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136a(g)) and 40 CFR part 155,
subpart C, provide authority for this action.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection, Acetaminophen, Administrative practice
and procedure, Clofentezine, Cyromazine, Fosthiazate, Hexythiazox,
Lactofen, Macleaya extract, Pesticides and pests, Quizalofop, and
Trinexapac-ethyl.
Dated: July 15, 2014.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014-17244 Filed 7-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
