20544 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 79 / Wednesday, April 25, 2007 / Notices 

Section 408(q) of the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 

U.S.C. 346a(q), requires EPA to review 

tolerances and exemptions for pesticide 

residues in effect as of August 2, 1996, 

to determine whether the tolerance or 

exemption meets the requirements of 

section 408(b)(2) or (c)(2) of FFDCA. 

This review is to be completed by 

August 3, 2006. 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, Pesticides 

and pests. 

Dated: April 12, 2007. 

Debra Edwards, 

Director, Special Review and Reregistration 

Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. E7–7766 Filed 4–24–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0255; FRL–8122–9] 

Issuance of an Experimental Use 

Permit 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: EPA has granted an 

experimental use permit (EUP) to the 

following pesticide applicant. An EUP 

permits use of a pesticide for 

experimental or research purposes only 

in accordance with the limitations in 

the permit. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Denise Greenway, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 308–8263; e-mail address: 

greenway.denise@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

This action is directed to the public 

in general. Although this action may be 

of particular interest to those persons 

who conduct or sponsor research on 

pesticides, 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 information in this action, 

consult the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How Can I Get Copies of this 

Document and Other Related 

Information? 

1. Docket. EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–

OPP–2007–0255. 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 Office of 

Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory 

Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. 

Crystal Drive 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. 

2. Electronic access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. 

II. EUP 

EPA has issued the following EUP: 

73049–EUP–3. Issuance. Valent 

BioSciences Corporation, 870 

Technology Way, Libertyville, IL 60048. 

This EUP allows the use of a total of 

15,873 pounds of the plant regulator SAbscisic acid over a three-year period 

on 240 acres of ornamental plants to 

evaluate the experimental product’s 

effectiveness to delay wilting by 

reducing transpiration in the treated 

ornamental plants. The program is 

authorized only in the States of Arizona, 

California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, 

Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New 

Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, 

Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, 

Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin. The 

EUP is effective from February 28, 2007 

to March 1, 2010. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136c. 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, 

Experimental use permits. 

Dated: April 16, 2007. 

Janet L. Andersen, 

Director, Biopesticides and Pollution 

Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide 

Programs. 

[FR Doc. E7–7888 Filed 4–24–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0702; FRL–8116–4] 

Final Stipulated Injunction and Related 

Information Involving Pesticides and 

the California Red-Legged Frog; Notice 

of Availability 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: On October 20, 2006, the 

Federal District Court for the Northern 

District of California issued a Stipulated 

Injunction, resolving a lawsuit filed by 

the Center for Biological Diversity 

against EPA, alleging that EPA failed to 

comply with section 7(a)(2) of the 

Endangered Species Act by not ensuring 

that its registration of 66 named 

pesticide active ingredients will not 

jeopardize the California red-legged 

frog, a federally-listed Threatened 

species. Key terms of the Stipulated 

Injunction are summarized as follows: a 

Court-ordered schedule for EPA to make 

effects determinations for the 66 named 

pesticides; interim injunctive measures 

regarding EPA’s authorization of uses of 

the 66 pesticides in certain parts of 33 

counties in California; and the 

development and distribution of a 

bilingual brochure regarding certain 

aspects of the injunction, pesticides and 

frogs. Today, EPA announces the 

availability on its Web site 

(www.epa.gov/espp) of the bilingual 

brochure, along with maps and 

guidance regarding the interim 

injunctive measures ordered by the 

Court. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arty 

Williams, Environmental Fate and 

Effects Division, Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone 

number: (703) 305-7695; fax number: 

(703) 305-6309; e-mail address: 

williams.arty@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

This action is directed to the public 

in general, and may be of particular 

interest to the Center for Biological 

Diversity, CropLife America, American 

Forest and Paper Association, Western 

Plant Health Association, Oregonians 

for Food and Shelter, and Syngenta 

Crop Protection, Inc., other public 

interest groups, state regulatory 

partners, other interested federal 

agencies, other pesticide registrants and 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 79 / Wednesday, April 25, 2007 / Notices 20545 

pesticide users. Since other entities may 

also be interested, the Agency has not 

attempted to describe all the specific 

entities that may be affected by this 

action. If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

B. How Can I Get Copies of this 

Document and Other Related 

Information? 

1. Docket. EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–

OPP–2006–0702. 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 Office of 

Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory 

Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of 

operation of this Docket Facility are 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket telephone number 

is (703) 305-5805. 

2. Electronic access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. 

II. Background 

On April 2, 2002, the Center for 

Biological Diversity (CBD) filed a 

lawsuit in Federal District Court for the 

Northern District of California, alleging 

that EPA failed to comply with section 

7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act by 

not ensuring that its registration of 66 

named pesticide active ingredients will 

not affect the California red-legged frog, 

a federally-listed threatened species. 

CBD, EPA, and defendant-intervenors 

CropLife America, American Forest and 

Paper Association, Western Plant Health 

Association, Oregonians for Food and 

Shelter, and Syngenta Crop Protection, 

Inc. engaged in discussions to try to 

resolve the case. 

On September 1, 2006, EPA issued a 

notice in the Federal Register (71 FR 

52073; FRL–8090–9), announcing the 

availability of a proposed Stipulated 

Injunction, and opening a 15–day public 

comment period on the draft. EPA 

received numerous comments from the 

public, California state agencies, and 

others, regarding certain aspects of the 

proposed Stipulated Injunction. These 

comments, as well as the proposed and 

final versions of the Stipulated 

Injunction, are available at 

regulations.gov in the public docket, ID 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2006– 0702. 

Based on public comments received 

and subsequent discussion with CBD 

and defendant-intervenors, the federal 

government agreed to the Stipulated 

Injunction with a modification to the 

definition of ‘‘upland habitat’’ in section 

3(b) of the injunction to conform this 

definition, which applies outside 

designated critical habitat, with the 

definition of ‘‘upland habitat’’ used by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in its 

designation of critical habitat for this 

species (71 FR 19244-19346, April 13, 

2006). 

On October, 13, 2006, the Federal 

Government joined CBD and defendantintervenors in asking the Court to issue 

a Stipulated Injunction resolving the 

lawsuit. The Court ordered the 

Stipulated Injunction on October 20, 

2006. The key provisions of the 

Stipulated Injunction are listed below. 

1. Schedule for effects determinations: 

The Stipulated Injunction establishes a 

series of deadlines for the Agency to 

make ‘‘effects determinations’’ for 66 

named pesticides to determine their 

potential effect on the California redlegged frog (a threatened species native 

to California). 

2. Interim injunctive relief: The 

Stipulated Injunction also (with some 

exceptions) enjoins, vacates and sets 

aside EPA’s authorization of uses of the 

66 pesticides in certain parts of 33 

counties in California. The injunctive 

relief, vacatur, and setting aside of 

EPA’s authorizations would terminate 

for a particular use of a pesticide when 

the Agency makes a determination that 

the pesticide’s use has ‘‘no effect’’ on 

the California red-legged frog, or, where 

EPA determined the pesticide’s use may 

affect the species, when EPA completes 

consultation with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service. 

3. Development and distribution of a 

bilingual brochure: The injunction also 

requires EPA to develop and distribute 

a bilingual (English and Spanish) 

brochure regarding certain aspects of the 

injunction, the California red-legged 

frog and frogs in general, and pesticides. 

EPA is required to distribute this 

brochure to all commercial certified 

applicators within California; to all 

private certified applicators residing in 

counties where use authorizations have 

been set aside; to registrants of the 66 

pesticides; the California Departments 

of Pesticide Regulation, and Fish and 

Game; and the Pacific Region of U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition, 

EPA is to distribute 250 copies of the 

brochure to the County Agricultural 

Commissioner and Cooperative 

Extension Agent offices in the affected 

counties. 

In addition to distributing the 

bilingual brochure as required by the 

Stipulated Injunction, EPA has made 

this brochure available on its Web site 

(www.epa.gov/espp). Further, EPA has 

developed and posted on its Web site 

maps of the areas in California where 

the injunctive relief applies and 

information to assist pesticide users in 

determining whether particular areas 

are within the scope of the Stipulated 

Injunction. The full text of the 

Stipulated Injunction and other related 

materials are also available at that Web 

site. 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, 

Endangered species. 

Dated: April 17, 2997. 

Steve Bradbury, 

Director, Environmental Fate and Effects 

Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. E7–7764 Filed 4–24–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE 

UNITED STATES 

Economic Impact Policy 

This notice is to inform the public 

that the Export-Import Bank of the 

United States has received an 

application to finance the export of 

approximately $29.5 million in U.S. 

machine tooling equipment to a 

company in China. The U.S. exports 

will enable the Chinese company to 

establish production of 180 metalstamping dies per year. These products 

will be utilized by companies in China 

to manufacture medium- to large-sized 

auto body parts. A portion of this new 

production will be employed internally 

by the Chinese company itself to 

manufacture medium-to large-sized auto 

body parts for sale to Chinese 

automobile manufacturers/assemblers. 

No automobiles will be produced by 

this Chinese firm. This Chinese 

company’s average annual production 

capacity of auto body parts will be 

enough to contribute to the production 

of approximately 380,000 automobiles 

per year during the 7-year repayment 

term of the loan. Available information 

indicates that all of this new Chinese 

production will be consumed in China. 

Interested parties may submit comments 

on this transaction by e-mail to 

economic.impact@exim.gov or by mail 

to 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Room 

1238, Washington, DC 20571, within 14 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with NOTICES