Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Notices 16357 

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

www.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. 

II. Background 

What Action is the Agency Taking? 

Under section 18 of the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 

Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136p), at the 

discretion of the Administrator, a 

Federal or State agency may be 

exempted from any provision of FIFRA 

if the Administrator determines that 

emergency conditions exist which 

require the exemption. USDA has 

requested the Administrator to issue a 

quarantine exemption for the use of EtO 

on the interior surfaces of enclosed 

animal isolator units to inactivate forms 

of microbial life in an inanimate 

environment, including all forms of 

vegetative bacteria, bacterial spores, 

fungi, fungal spores, and viruses to 

create a germ free environment for 

animal research. Information in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 166 was 

submitted as part of this request. 

As part of this request, the Applicant 

asserts that there are no control 

products labeled for this use on animal 

isolator units which could provide the 

degree of sterilization required for the 

conduct of this research. Without the 

ability to sterilize the animal isolator 

units, NVSL and NADC would not be 

able to conduct studies of national 

importance. 

The Applicant proposes to make no 

more than 20 applications of the 

chemical per year, using the EPA 

registered product Oxyfume 2002 

ethylene oxide sterilant (a blend of 10% 

ethylene oxide; 90% refrigerant gas), to 

sterilize a maximum of nine tub 

isolators for pigs, nine auxiliary 

isolators that attach to the tub isolators 

for pigs, two tub isolators for calves and 

two auxiliary isolators that attach to the 

tub isolators for calves. A total of five 

pounds of the chemical mixture will be 

used to sterilize each animal isolator 

unit for a maximum of 1,000 lbs of 

Oxyfume 2002 per year. A maximum 

of 100 lbs a.i. will be applied per year. 

The chemical will be used to sterilize 

the animal isolator units on an as 

needed basis to conduct research at 

NVSL and NADC over the period for 

which the quarantine exemption will be 

granted (3 years). 

The regulations governing section 18 

of FIFRA require publication of a Notice 

of Receipt of an application for a 

quarantine exemption under certain 

circumstances. The applicant proposes 

the use of a pesticide containing an 

active ingredient which is the subject of 

a Special Review and that is one of the 

criteria for preparing a Notice of Receipt 

for certain emergency exemption 

requests (40 CFR 166.24). As noted 

above, the Agency has eliminated the 

comment period due to the urgent 

nature of the emergency situation and 

the very narrow and extremely limited 

use being requested. Nonetheless, 

interested parties may still contact the 

Agency with comments about this 

notice and treatment program. 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, Pesticides 

and pests. 

Dated: March 27, 2007. 

Daniel J. Rosenblatt, 

Acting Director, Registration Division, Office 

of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. E7–6249 Filed 4–3–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0204; FRL–8120–9] 

Potential Effects of Atrazine on 

Amphibian Gonadal Development 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In October 2007, EPA will 

make a presentation to the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 

Act (FIFRA) Scientific Advisory Panel 

(SAP) concerning EPA’s evaluation of 

the scientific research investigating 

whether exposure to the herbicide 

atrazine potentially affects amphibian 

gonadal development. The scientific 

research will include studies that were 

conducted by Syngenta Crop Protection, 

Inc. in 2005 and 2006 as well as 

published open literature studies. The 

notice identifies the open literature 

studies that EPA has reviewed and 

requests public comment to ensure that 

the list of publications is complete. The 

studies that have been reviewed focus 

on testing atrazine alone and only on 

atrazine’s potential effects on amphibian 

gonadal development. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 4, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0204, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 

4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays). Special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket telephone number is (703) 305–

5805. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
16358 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Notices 

0204. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the docket 

without change and may be made 

available on-line at http:// 

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 Federal 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 email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the docket 

and made available on the Internet. If 

you submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the docket index available 

in regulations.gov. To access the 

electronic docket, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, select ‘‘Advanced 

Search,’’ then ‘‘Docket Search.’’ Insert 

the docket ID number where indicated 

and select the ‘‘Submit’’ button. Follow 

the instructions on the regulations.gov 

web site to view the docket index or 

access available documents. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either in the 

electronic docket at http:// 

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 telephone number 

is (703) 305–5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Steeger, Environmental Fate 

and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: 703–305–5444; fax number: 

703–305–7695; e-mail address: 

steeger.thomas@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 particular 

interest to those persons who hold or 

seek registrations of pesticide products 

containing atrazine under FIFRA. This 

action may also be of particular interest 

to those who have published research 

regarding the potential effects of 

atrazine on amphibian gonadal 

development. Since other entities may 

also be interested, EPA has not 

attempted to describe all the specific 

entities that may be affected by this 

action. If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

When submitting comments 

identifying additional open literature 

studies that should be reviewed by EPA, 

commentors should provide a complete 

citation following the format of the 

studies listed in this notice. If possible, 

a copy of the open literature study 

should be submitted as well. 

II. Background 

A. What Action is the Agency Taking? 

In April 2002, EPA completed a 

revised science chapter that 

characterized the ecological effects of 

atrazine in support of an Interim 

Reregistration Eligibility Decision 

(IRED). At about the same time, 

scientific articles were published 

regarding the potential effects of 

atrazine on amphibian gonadal 

development, and concerns were raised 

that EPA had not sufficiently accounted 

for these data in its risk assessment. In 

response to an amended consent decree 

between EPA and the Natural Resources 

Defense Council (NRDC), EPA issued an 

atrazine IRED in January 31, 2003 which 

stipulated that EPA would issue a 

revised IRED by October 31, 2003. The 

revised IRED would incorporate 

recommendations and comments from a 

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) 

regarding studies, submitted by 

February 28, 2003, on the potential 

effects of atrazine on amphibians. EPA 

also agreed to develop a paper, at least 

three months prior to signing this 

revised IRED, and submit it to the SAP 

for review and comment. 

In accordance with the consent 

decree, EPA conducted an extensive 

review of open literature and registrantsubmitted studies concerning the 

potential effects of atrazine on 

amphibian gonadal development. After 

a thorough assessment of all of these 

studies, EPA concluded there was 

sufficient information to hypothesize 

that atrazine exposure can result in 

effects on amphibian gonadal 

development, but there was insufficient 

evidence to refute or confirm that 

hypothesis because the collective 

studies failed to show that atrazine 

produced consistent, reproducible 

effects across the range of exposure 

concentrations and amphibian species 

tested in the studies. EPA summarized 

the studies and its evaluation of the 

studies in a White Paper and presented 

its analysis, conclusions, and 

recommendations to the SAP during a 

meeting held on June 17 – 20, 2003. 

The SAP concurred with EPA’s 

interpretation of the available data and 

with EPA’s recommendations to seek 

additional data. Additionally, the SAP 

concurred with the study approach 

described in the White Paper for 

addressing uncertainties identified in 

the available studies. (For further 

information regarding this SAP meeting 

and to obtain a copy of the White Paper 

and the SAP’s report, refer to http:// 

www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/meetings/ 

2003/index.htm#061703.) 

In response to the uncertainties 

identified in the White Paper and based 

on the recommendations made by the 

SAP, EPA issued a Data Call-in Notice 

(DCI) on November 12, 2004, to 

Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. 

(Syngenta) and other atrazine 

registrants. The DCI required amphibian 

studies be conducted to determine if 

exposure to atrazine can affect 

amphibian gonadal development. 

Secondary objectives of these studies 

were to provide information on the 

repeatability of previous observations, 

to develop a sound dose-response 

relationship, and to determine the 

developmental sensitivity of the 

amphibian species that are being tested. 

Syngenta has initiated the studies 

according to EPA-approved protocols 

and expects to submit the final study 

results to EPA in 2007. 

On October 9 -12, 2007, EPA will 

return to the SAP with a second White 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Notices 16359 

Paper discussing the results of 

Syngenta’s amphibian studies 

conducted in 2005 - 2006. In addition, 

EPA has continued to review the open 

literature studies investigating whether 

atrazine exposure affects amphibian 

gonadal development. For this second 

SAP meeting, EPA plans to include only 

those studies that tested atrazine alone 

and examined atrazine’s potential 

effects on amphibian gonadal 

development. Studies on mixtures of 

pesticides that include atrazine as well 

as studies of the potential for atrazine to 

cause adverse effects other than or in 

addition to amphibian gonadal 

development are not being considered 

for the SAP meeting. 

In this Federal Register Notice, EPA is 

soliciting public comment on the 

completeness of its list of open 

literature studies on the potential effects 

of atrazine on amphibian gonadal 

development. If other publications 

relevant to these potential effects are 

available and have not been included in 

this list, EPA requests that citations be 

submitted during the comment period. 

If possible, a copy of the publication 

should be submitted as well. 

EPA has reviewed the following list of 

relevant open literature studies in 

preparation for the October SAP 

meeting: 

1. Coady K.K., Murphy M.B., 

Villeneuve D.L., Hecker M., Jones P.D., 

Carr J.A., Solomon K.R., Smith E.E., Van 

der Kraak G., Kendall R.J., and J.P. 

Giesy. 2004. Effects of Atrazine on 

Metamorphosis, Growth, Laryngeal and 

Gonadal Development, Aromatase 

Activity, and Plasma Sex Steroid 

Concentrations in Xenopus laevis. 

Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 

62:160–173. MRID 458677–04. 

2. Coady K.K., Murphy M.B., 

Villeneuve D.L., Hecker M., Jones P.D., 

Carr J.A., Solomon K.R., Smith E.E., Van 

der Kraak G., Kendall R.J., and J.P. 

Giesy. 2004. Effects of Atrazine on 

Metamorphosis, Growth, and Gonadal 

Development in the Green Frog (Rana 

clamitans). Journal of Toxicology and 

Environmental Health, Part A, 67: 941–

957. MRID 458677–03. 

3. DuPreez L.H., Solomon K.R., Carr 

J.A., Giesy J.P., Gross C., R. J. Kendall 

et al. 2005. Population Structure 

Characterization of Clawed Frog 

(Xenopus laevis) in Corn-growing 

Versus Non-corn-growing Areas in 

South Africa. African Journal of 

Herpetology. 54: 61 – 68. 

4. Freeman, J.L. and A.L. Rayburn. 

2005. Developmental Impact of Atrazine 

on Metamorphing Xenopus laevis as 

Revealed by Nuclear Analysis and 

Morphology. Environmental Toxicology 

and Chemistry 24(7): 1648 – 1653. 

5. Forson, D. and A. Storfer. 2005. 

Effects of Atrazine and Iridovirus 

Infections on Survival and Life-history 

Traits of the Long-toed Salamander 

(Ambystoma macrodactylum). 

Environmental Toxicology and 

Chemistry 25(1): 168 – 173. 

6. Hayes, T.B. 2004. There is No 

Denying This: Defusing the Confusion 

about Atrazine. Bioscience 54: 1138 –

1149. 

7. Hayes, T.B. 2005. Comment on 

‘‘Gonadal Development of Larval Male 

Xenopus laevis Exposed to Atrazine in 

Outdoor Microcosms.’’ Environmental 

Science and Technology 39(19) 7757–

7758. 

8. Hayes, T.B. 2005. Welcome to the 

Revolution: Integrative Biology and 

Assessing the Impact of Endocrine 

Disruptors on Environmental and Public 

Health. Journal of Integrative and 

Comparative Biology 45: 321–329. 

9. Hayes T.B., Stuart A.A., Mendoza 

M., Collins A., Noriega N., Vonk A., 

Johnston W., Liu R., and D. Kpodzo. 

2006. Characterization of AtrazineInduced Gonadal Malformations in 

African Clawed Frogs (Xenopus laevis) 

and Comparisons with Effects of an 

Androgen Antagonist (Cyproterone 

Acetate) and Exogenous Estrogen (17-bestradiol): Support for the 

Demasculinization/Feminization 

Hypothesis. Environmental Health 

Perspectives 114: 134 – 141. 

10. Jooste A.M., Du Preez L.H., Carr 

J.A., Giesy J.P., Gross T.S., Kendall R.J., 

Smith E.E., Van Der Kraak G.J., and K.R. 

Solomon. 2004. Gonadal Development 

of Larval Male Xenopus laevis Exposed 

to Atrazine in Outdoor Microcosms. 

Environmental Science and Technology 

39: 5255–5261. MRID 458677. 

11. Murphy M.B., Hecker M., Coady 

K.K., Tompsett A.R., Jones,P.D., 

DuPreez L.H., Solomon K.R., Carr J.A., 

Smith, E.E., Kendall R.J., van der Kraak 

G., and J.P. Giesy. 2005. Sediment 

TCDD-Eq’s and EROD and MROD 

Activities in Ranid Frogs from 

Agricultural and Non-agricultural Sites 

in Michigan (USA). Archives of 

Environmental Contamination and 

Toxicology 51(3): 467–477. MRID 

458677–02. 

12. Murphy, M.B, Hecker M., Coady 

K.K., Tompsett A.R., DuPreez L.H., 

Everson G.J., Solomon K.R., Carr J.A., 

Smith E.E., Kendall R.J., van der Kraak 

G., and J.P. Giesy. 2005. Atrazine 

Concentrations, Gonadal Gross 

Morphology, and Histology in Ranid 

Frogs Collected in Michigan 

Agricultural Areas. Aquatic Toxicology 

76: 230–245. MRID 458677–02. 

13. Murphy, M. B., Hecker M., Coady 

K.K., Tompsett A.R., Higley E.B., Jones 

P.D., Du Preez L.H., Solomon K.R., Carr 

J.A., Smith E.E., Kendall R.J., Van Der 

Kraak G., and J. P. Giesy. 2006. Plasma 

Steroid Hormone Concentrations, 

Aromatase Activities and GSI in Ranid 

Frogs Collected from Agricultural and 

Non-Agricultural Sites in Michigan 

(USA). Aquatic Toxicology 77: 153 –

166. 

14. Orton, F., Carr J.A., and R. D. 

Handy. 2006. Effects of Nitrate and 

Atrazine on Larval Development and 

Sexual Differentiation in the Northern 

Leopard Frog Rana pipiens. 

Environmental Toxicology and 

Chemistry 25(1): 65 – 71. 

15. Smith E.E., Du Preez L.H., Gentles 

B.A., Solomon K.R., Tandler B., Carr 

J.A., Van Der Kraak G.J., Kendall R.J., 

Giesy J.P. and Gross T.S. 2005. 

Assessment of Laryngeal Muscle and 

Testicular Cell Types in Xenopus laevis 

(Anura Pipidae) Inhabiting Maize and 

Non-maize Growing Areas of South 

Africa. African Journal of Herpetology 

54(1): 69–76. MRID 458677–10. 

16. Sullivan K. B, and K. M. Spence. 

2003. Effects of Sublethal 

Concentrations of Atrazine and Nitrate 

on Metamorphosis of the African 

Clawed Frog. Environmental Toxicology 

and Chemistry 22(3): 627 – 635. 

B. What is the Agency’s Authority for 

Taking this Action? 

EPA is taking action under 7 U.S.C. 

136b of the FIFRA. 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, atrazine, 

amphibian gonadal development. 

Dated: March 29, 2007. 

Steve Bradbury, 

Director, Environmental Fate and Effects 

Division 

[FR Doc. E7–6253 Filed 4–3–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

Notice of Public Information 

Collection(s) Being Submitted for 

Review to the Office of Management 

and Budget 

March 27, 2007. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications 

Commission, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork burden 

invites the general public and other 

Federal agencies to take this 

opportunity to comment on the 

following information collection(s), as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) of 1995, Pub. L. 104–13. An 

agency may not conduct or sponsor a 

collection of information unless it 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES