### 77480 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 24, 2014 / Notices

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 disrupter risk. Pending the outcome of these actions, EPA is issuing an interim registration review decision for lactofen.

Macleaya Extract (Interim Decision). The registration review docket for macleaya extract (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 0172) opened in March 2011. Macleaya extract is a plant extract of Macleaya cordata, and is registered for use only in enclosed commercial greenhouses, as an 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 did not conduct a comprehensive ecological risk assessment since the use pattern does not likely result in outdoor exposures. However, the Agency completed a qualitative endangered species assessment for the greenhouse
use. No risks of concern were identified and the Agency has made a ‘‘no effect’’ determination for federally listed species and designated critical habitat. Macleaya extract has not been evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, the Agency’s final registration review decision is dependent upon the result of the evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk. The EPA is issuing an interim registration review decision for macleaya extract.

Trinexapac-ethyl (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. Two comments were received for the trinexapac-ethyl proposed
interim decision on the detail of the risk
assessment. These comments did not change the interim decision. 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 issuing an interim registration review decision for trinexapac-ethyl.

Quizalofop (Interim Decision). The registration review docket for quizalofop (EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–1089) opened in2007. 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-p-ethyl is the purified Renantiomer 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 will modify the application directions for quizalofop to reduce spray drift risk to non-target organisms. The screening-level endangered species
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 issuing an interim registration review decision for quizalofop.

Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58(c), the registration review case docket for 4- CPA (Case 2115), Allethrins (Case 0473), Clofentezine (Case 7602), Cyromazine (Case 7439), Fosthiazate (Case 7604), Hexythiazox (Case 7404), Lactofen (Case 7210), Macleaya Extract (Case 7024), Trinexapac-ethyl (Case 7228), and Quizalofop (Case 7215) will remain open until all actions required in the
final/interim decision have been completed.

Background on the registration review program is provided at: http://www.epa. gov/oppsrrd1/registration

_review. Links
to earlier documents related to the registration review of this pesticide are provided at: http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation/individualpesticides-registration-review.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

Dated: December 16, 2014.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,

Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 2014–30214 Filed 12–23–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0814; FRL–9919–24]**

**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. 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,


### 77481 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 24, 2014 / Notices

including its effects on human health
and the environment.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before February 23, 2015.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by 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: http:// 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 http://www. epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is
available at http://www.epa.gov/
dockets.

**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) 305–8015; 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 preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/

comments.html.

II. 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 following Table, and opens a 60-day public comment period on the proposed

interim decisions.



### TABLE

### —R EGISTRATION 

### R EVIEW 

### P ROPOSED 

### I NTERIM 

### D ECISIONS

Registration review case name and No. Pesticide docket ID No. Chemical review manager, telephone number, email address

Acetic acid and sodium diacetate

(Case 4001). EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0016 Carolyn Schroeder, (703) 308–2961, schroeder.carolyn@epa.gov.

Fosetyl-Al (Case 0646) .................... EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0379 Ricardo Jones, (703) 347–0493, jones.ricardo@epa.gov. Picaridin (Case 7433) ...................... EPA HQ–OPP–2014–0341 Ricardo Jones, (703) 347–0493, jones.ricardo@epa.gov. Sodium fluoride (NaF) (Case 3132) EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0655 SanYvette Williams, (703) 305–7702, williams.sanyvette@epa.gov. Yellow mustard seed (Case 7618)

and Sulfonic acid salts (Case 7619). EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0762 Roy Johnson, (703) 347–0492, johnson.roy@epa.gov.

1. Acetic acid and sodium diacetate. Acetic acid (Proposed Interim Decision). The registration review docket for acetic acid and sodium diacetate (EPA–HQ– OPP–2008–0016) opened in March
2008. Acetic acid and sodium diacetate are two different active ingredients:
Sodium diacetate is a salt of acetic acid. Acetic acid is used as a preservative for post harvest stored grains and hay
intended for livestock feed.Additionally, it is also applied as a nonselective herbicide for control of broadleaf weeds and weed grasses. Sodium diacetate is a fungicide and bactericide registered to control molds and bacteria. It is applied to hay to prevent spoilage and to silage as an aid in fermentation. EPA published the Final Work Plan in August 2008. The Agency determined that previous
human health assessments for acetic
acid and sodium diacetate were sufficient for registration review and no
human health risks of concern were identified. The Agency completed a comprehensive ecological risk
assessment for the nonselective herbicide use of acetic acid, including an endangered species assessment, and a qualitative ecological risk assessment for sodium diacetate. The Agency
concludes a ‘‘no effect’’ determination
for acetic acid used as a nonselective herbicide and all currently registered
uses of sodium diacetate for all nontarget organisms; no mitigation measures regarding ecological effects are included in the proposed interim
decision. The risk assessments and proposed interim decision for acetic acid and sodium diacetate are currently available in the docket for public
comment. Acetic acid and sodium
diacetate have not been evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, the Agency’s final registration review decision is dependent upon the results of the
evaluation of acetic acid and sodium diacetate as potential endocrine disruptor risks. Pending the outcome of


### 77482 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 24, 2014 / Notices

this action, EPA is planning to issue an interim registration review decision for
acetic acid and sodium diacetate.

2. Fosetyl-Al. Fosetyl-Al (Proposed Interim Decision). The registration review docket for fosetyl-Al (EPA–HQ– OPP–2007–0379) opened in December 2007. Fosetyl-Al is systemic fungicide used to control diseases caused by oomycetes such as downy mildews. It is registered for use on agricultural crops
as well as residential and commercial areas. EPA published draft human health and ecological risk assessments
in March 2014. There are no human health risks of concern. The Agency also completed an ecological risk
assessment. The results of this quantitative risk assessment indicates that the currently labeled rates of fosestyl-Al pose a potential for adverse effects, i.e., risk, to non-target terrestrial animals, including insects, birds, reptiles, terrestrial-phase amphibians and mammals. In addition, applications may impact sensitive species of dicotyledenous plants (dicots) in
terrestrial habitats. In order to address potential ecological risks, the Agency is proposing changes to product labels which incorporate certain risk mitigation measures meant to reduce
these risks. These measures includerestricting aerial application of fosetylAl for certain uses, reducing the total number of applications that can be made annually for certain uses, and clarifying labels to better define how fosetyl-Al may be applied. The Agency completed a screening-level endangered species assessment and made a ‘‘no effects’’ determination for the following taxa: Fish, aquatic-phase amphibians, aquatic invertebrates, aquatic plants, and monocot plants. For all other species the effects determinations are uncertain. Fosetyl-Al has not been
evaluated under the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) nor has it completed the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7
consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). Therefore, the Agency’s final registration review decision is dependent upon the result of the evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk and consultation with the Service for endangered species. Pending the outcome of these actions, EPA is planning to issue an interim registration review decision for fosetyl-Al.

3. Picaridin. (Combined Work Plan, Preliminary Risk Assessments, and Proposed Interim Decision). The registration review docket for Picaridin (EPA HQ–OPP–2014–0341) is opening for public comment on a Combined Preliminary Work Plan, Final Work Plan, Preliminary Risk Assessments, and Proposed Interim Decision for registration review. Due to the lack of need for additional data to support this decision, the Agency is also issuing Preliminary Ecological and Human Health Risk Assessments for picaridin and opening them for public comment. Picaridin is a broad-spectrum insect repellant registered for use against biting flies, chiggers, fleas, mosquitos
and ticks. Picaridin is labelled for use on human skin, clothing, footwear, and on horses. EPA has completed comprehensive draft human health and ecological risk assessments, including a screening-level endangered species assessment, for all picaridin uses. For human health, only residential exposure was assessed, and the Agency has not identified any risk concerns associated with the registered uses of picaridin.
Due to its use on human skin andclothing, exposure to terrestrial nontarget organisms and plants is expected to be inconsequential. Based on the lack of potential exposure and nontoxic effects, the ecological risk assessment
has made a ‘‘no effect’’ determination for all federally listed species and ‘‘no habitat modification’’ of any designated critical habitat for listed species.
Picaridin has not been evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, the agency’s final registration review decision is dependent upon the result of the evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of this action, the Agency is planning to issue an interim registration review decision for picaridin.

4. Sodium fluoride. (Combined Preliminary Work Plan and Proposed Interim Decision). The registration
review docket for sodium fluoride (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0655) is opening for public comment on a Combined Preliminary Work Plan and Proposed
Interim Decision. Sodium fluoride is registered for use as a wood preservative to protect the groundline portion of existing wooden utility poles. It is formulated as an impregnated pole wrap material. This use is not expected to result in direct or indirect dietary (food) or drinking water exposure. Occupational and residential exposure is minimal by the dermal and inhalation
routes so no assessment is needed. Based on the lack of potential exposure and nontoxic effects to fish, aquatic invertebrates and birds, the ecological
risk assessment has made a ‘‘no effect’’ determination for Federally listed species and designated critical habitat.
Sodium fluoride has not been evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, the agency’s final registration review decision is dependent upon the result of the evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk. Pending the outcome of this action, EPA is planning to issue a combined preliminary work plan and interim registration review decision for
sodium fluoride.

5. Yellow mustard seed/Sulfonic acid
salts (Combined Preliminary Work Plan and Proposed Interim Decision). The registration review docket for yellow
mustard seed and sulfonic acid salts is opening for public comment on a Combined Preliminary Work Plan and Proposed Interim Decision. The registration review docket for Yellow
Mustard Seed/Sulfonic Acid Salts (YMS/SAS) is opening for public comment on a combined Work Plan, Draft Risk Assessments, and a Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision. This product is a rodenticide for the control of the Richardson’s ground squirrel and Wyoming ground squirrel. YMS/SAS is applied by injection under pressure as a foam into burrows inhabited by the pest species in rangeland, ornamental plantings, orchards, golf courses, parks, nurseries, and non-crop rights-of-way. No risks of
concern were identified. YMS/SAS have not been evaluated under the EDSP, nor has an endangered species assessment been conducted. The Agency’s final registration review decision is dependent upon the results of both assessments. Pending the outcome of those assessments, EPA is issuing an interim registration review decision for
YMS/SAS.

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
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, as well as the Agency’s subsequent risk findings and consideration of possible risk mitigation measures. A proposed registration review decision will be supported by the rationales included in those documents. Following public comment on a proposed decision, the Agency will issue an interim registration review decision.

The registration review program is being conducted under congressionally mandated time frames, 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


### 77483 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 24, 2014 / Notices

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 August 2006 and became effective in October 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.

The registration review final rule at 40 CFR 155.58(a) provides for a minimum 60-day public comment period on all proposed interim 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 interim 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 as appropriate. The final registration review decision will explain the effect that any comments had on the decision.

Background on the registration review program is provided at: http://www2. epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation. Information regarding earlier documents related to the registration review of these pesticides can be found at: http:// www2.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation/individual-pesticides-registrationreview.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

Dated: December 17, 2014.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,

Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 2014–30088 Filed 12–23–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION** 
**AGENCY**

**[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0807; FRL–9919–06]**

**Registration Review; Draft Human Health and Ecological Risk**  **Assessments; Notice of Availability**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  This notice announces the availability of EPA’s draft human health and ecological risk assessments for the registration reviews of bentazon, daminozide, and d-limonene and opens a public comment period on these documents. 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 for each case, the Agency has drafted a human health and ecological risk assessment for all uses of the previously listed pesticide chemicals. The ecological risk
assessment includes or will include an assessment of risks to listed species, and the human health and ecological risk
assessments includes or will include a determination of endocrine disrupter effects for the case. After reviewing comments received during the public comment period, EPA may issue revised risk assessments, explain any changes to the draft risk assessments, and respond to comments. The Agency also will request public input on any proposed risk mitigation measures before completing proposed registration review decisions for the previously listed pesticide chemicals. 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 February 23, 2015.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0807, by one of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 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 http://www. epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html

.

Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http:// www.epa.gov/dockets

.
**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  For pesticide specific information contact: Chemical Review Manager identified in the table in Unit III.A. for the pesticide
of interest.

For general questions 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) 305–8015; 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 listed under

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT**

. B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or 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