Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 210 / Monday, October 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules 64649

ACTION: Reopening of comment period.

SUMMARY: This document reopens the

public comment period for abovenamed notice of proposed rulemaking,

published Wednesday, September 20,

2000, at 65 FR 56844–56856. The

deadline for public comments is being

reopened from the original deadline for

public comments of October 20, 2000, to

November 13, 2000. This reopening is in

response to a request received prior to

the close of the original comment

period.

DATES: Written comments must be

received no later than November 13,

2000.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may

submit written comments (in duplicate

if possible) to Public Docket No. A–

2000–16. It is requested that a duplicate

copy be submitted to David Sosnowski

at the address in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section below.

The docket is located at the Air Docket,

Room M–1500 (6102), Waterside Mall

S.W., Washington, DC 20460. The

docket may be inspected between 8:30

a.m. and 12 noon and between 1:30 p.m.

until 3:30 p.m. on weekdays. A

reasonable fee may be charged for

copying docket material.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Sosnowski, Office of Mobile

Sources, Regional and State Programs

Division, 2000 Traverwood, Ann Arbor,

Michigan, 48105. Telephone (734) 214–

4823.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 51

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Intergovernmental relations, Lead,

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile

organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 85

Environmental protection,

Confidential business information,

Imports, Labeling, Motor vehicle

pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Research, Warranties.

Dated: October 19, 2000.

Robert D. Brenner,

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation.

[FR Doc. 00–27404 Filed 10–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AG09

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Reopening of Comment

Period on the Proposed Endangered

Status for Three Plants From the

Mariana Islands and Guam

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of

comment period and notice of public

hearing.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (Service) gives notice of a public

hearing on the proposed endangered

status for three plants, Nesogenes

rotensis, Osmoxylon marianense, and

Tabernaemontana rotensis from the

Mariana Islands and Guam. In addition,

the comment period which originally

closed on July 17, 2000, will be

reopened. The new comment period and

hearing will allow all interested parties

to submit oral or written comments on

the proposal. We are seeking comments

or suggestions from the public, other

concerned governmental agencies, the

scientific community, industry, or any

other interested parties concerning the

proposed rule. Comments already

submitted on the proposed rule need

not be resubmitted as they will be fully

considered in the final determination.

DATES: The comment period for this

proposal now closes on November 29,

2000. Any comments received by the

closing date will be considered in the

final decision on this proposal. The

public hearing will be held from 6 p.m.

to 8 p.m. on Thursday, November 16,

2000, on the island of Rota (Luta),

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana

Islands. Prior to the public hearing, the

Service will be available from 5 to 6

p.m. to provide information and to

answer questions.

ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be

held at the Rota Resort and Country

Club, Rota, CNMI. Comments and

materials concerning this proposal

should be sent to the Field Supervisor,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific

Islands Ecoregion Office, 300 Ala Moana

Boulevard, room 3–122, P.O. Box 50088,

Honolulu, Hawaii 96850. Comments

and materials received will be available

for public inspection, by appointment,

during normal business hours at the

above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul

Henson, at the above address, phone

808–541–3441, facsimile 808–541–3470.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On June 1, 2000, the Service

published a proposed rule to list three

plants from the Mariana Islands and

Guam as endangered species, pursuant

to the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

as amended (Act) in the Federal

Register (65 FR 35025). The original

comment period closed on July 17,

2000. The comment period now closes

on November 29, 2000. Written

comments should be submitted to the

Service (see ADDRESSES section).

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon

marianense are found only on the island

of Rota, Commonwealth of the Northern

Mariana Islands (CNMI).

Tabernaemontana rotensis occurs on

both Rota and the United States

Territory of Guam. The three plant

species and their habitats have been

affected or are now threatened by fire,

development/road work, typhoons/

storms, nonnative plants, and

collecting/trampling by humans. This

proposal, if made final, would

implement the Federal protection and

recovery provisions of the Act.

Section 4(b)(5)(E) of the Act (16 U.S.C.

1531 et seq.), requires that a public

hearing be held if it is requested within

45 days of the publication of a proposed

rule. In response to a request from a

government agency of the CNMI, the

Service will hold a public hearing on

the date and at the address described in

the DATES and ADDRESSES sections

above.

Anyone wishing to make an oral

statement for the record is encouraged

to provide a written copy of their

statement and present it to the Service

at the hearing. In the event there is a

large attendance, the time allotted for

oral statements may be limited. Oral and

written statements receive equal

consideration. There are no limits to the

length of written comments presented at

the hearing or mailed to the Service.

Legal notices announcing the date, time,

and location of the hearing will be

published in newspapers concurrently

with the Federal Register notice.

Comments from the public regarding

the accuracy of this proposed rule are

sought, especially regarding:

(1) Biological, commercial trade, or

other relevant data concerning any

threat (or lack thereof) to these species;

(2) The location of any additional

populations of these species and reasons

why any habitat should or should not be

designated as critical habitat;

(3) Additional information on the

range, distribution, and population size

of these species; and

64650 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 210 / Monday, October 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules

(4) Current or planned activities in the

subject area and their possible impacts

on these species.

Reopening of the comment period

will enable the Service to respond to the

request for a public hearing on the

proposed action. The comment period

on this proposal now closes on

November 29, 2000. Written comments

should be submitted to the Service

office listed in the ADDRESSES section.

Author:

The primary authors of this notice

Benton Pang and Christa Russell (see

ADDRESSES section).

Authority: The authority for this action is

the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Dated: September 22, 2000.

Rowan W. Gould,

Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Fish and

Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 00–25907 Filed 10–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

RIN: 1018–AH64

Migratory Bird Hunting; Approval of

Tungsten-Nickel-Iron Shot as Nontoxic

for Hunting Waterfowl and Coots

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: We propose to approve shot

formulated of tungsten, nickel, and iron

as nontoxic for hunting waterfowl and

coots. We assessed possible effects of

the tungsten-nickel-iron (t-n-i) shot, and

have made a preliminary determination

that it is not a significant threat to

wildlife or their habitats and that further

testing of t-n-i shot is not necessary. In

addition, approval of t-n-i shot may

induce more waterfowl hunters to

switch away from lead shot, reducing

lead risks to species and habitats.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule

must be received no later than

November 29, 2000.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments

about this proposal to the Chief,

Division of Migratory Bird Management,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401

North Fairfax Drive, Room 634,

Arlington, Virginia 22203–1610. You

may inspect comments during normal

business hours at the same address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon

Andrew, Chief, or Dr. George T. Allen,

Division of Migratory Bird Management,

703–358–1714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (Act)

(16 U.S.C. 703–712 and 16 U.S.C. 742 a–

j) implements migratory bird treaties

between the United States and Great

Britain for Canada (1916 and 1996 as

amended), Mexico (1936 and 1972 as

amended), Japan (1972 and 1974 as

amended), and Russia (then the Soviet

Union, 1978). These treaties protect

certain migratory birds from take, except

as permitted under the Act. The Act

authorizes the Secretary of the Interior

to regulate take of migratory birds in the

United States. Under this authority, the

Fish and Wildlife Service controls the

hunting of migratory game birds through

regulations in 50 CFR part 20.

Since the mid-1970s, we have sought

to identify shot that does not pose a

significant toxicity hazard to migratory

birds or other wildlife. Compliance with

the use of nontoxic shot has increased

over the last few years (Anderson et al.

2000). We believe that it will continue

to increase with the approval and

availability of other nontoxic shot types.

Currently, steel, bismuth-tin, tungsteniron, tungsten-polymer, and tungstenmatrix shot are approved as nontoxic.

On September 25, 2000 (65 FR 57586–

57588), we published a proposed rule to

grant temporary approval to tin shot.

The purpose of this proposed rule is to

approve the use of t-n-i shot in the

tested formulation (50% tungsten, 35%

nickel, and 15% iron by weight) for

waterfowl and coot hunting. We

propose to amend 50 CFR 20.21 (j),

which describes prohibited types of shot

for waterfowl and coot hunting.

On April 9, 1999 (64 FR 17308–

17309), we announced receipt of an

application from Standard Resources

Corporation (Standard) of Cherry Hill,

New Jersey for nontoxic approval of

HEVI–METAL shot in the 50% tungsten,

35% nickel, 15% iron formulation. The

density of the shot in that formulation

is 11.0 grams/cm3. The manufacturer

believes that the shot does not need a

coating because it is sufficiently

noncorrosive under neutral pH. It is not

chemically or physically altered by

firing from a shotgun.

On April 19, 1999 (64 FR 19191), we

announced that Standard’s application

did not provide sufficient information

for us to conclude that the candidate

shot is not a significant danger to

migratory birds. We advised Standard to

proceed with additional testing of the

candidate shot. Subsequently,

development of HEVI–METAL was

transferred to ENVIRON-Metal, Inc., of

Albany, Oregon (Environ-metal), and

the shot was re-named HEVI–SHOTTM.

On August 10, 2000, Environ-metal

submitted an application for permanent

approval of the t-n-i shot as nontoxic for

hunting waterfowl and coots. The

application included a description of

the shot, results and a toxicological

report of a preliminary 30-day dosing

study of the toxicity of the shot in gamefarm mallards (Ecological Planning and

Toxicology, Inc. [EPT] 1999), and results

of a more comprehensive 30-day acute

toxicity study (Brewer and Fairbrother

2000).

Toxicity Information. Tungsten may

be substituted for molybdenum in

enzymes in mammals. Ingested tungsten

salts reduce growth, and can cause

diarrhea, coma, and death in mammals

(e.g. Bursian et al. 1996, Cohen et al.

1973, Karantassis 1924, Kinard and Van

de Erve 1941, National Research

Council 1980, Pham-Huu-Chanh 1965),

but elemental tungsten is virtually

insoluble and therefore essentially

nontoxic. In rats, a dietary concentration

of 94 parts-per-million (ppm) did not

reduce weight gain in growing rats (Wei

et al. 1987). Lifetime exposure to 5 ppm

tungsten as sodium tungstate in

drinking water produced no discernible

adverse effects in rats (Schroeder and

Mitchener 1975). At 100 ppm tungsten

as sodium tungstate in drinking water,

rats had decreased enzyme activity after

21 days (Cohen et al. 1973). These

studies indicate that tungsten salts are

very toxic to mammals.

Chickens given a complete diet

showed no adverse effects of 250 ppm

sodium tungstate administered for 10

days in the diet. However, 500 ppm in

the diet had detrimental effects on dayold chicks (Teekell and Watts 1959).

Adult hens had reduced egg production

and egg weight on a diet containing

1,000 ppm tungsten (Nell et al. 1981a).

EPT (1999) concluded that 250 ppm in

the diet would produce no observable

adverse effects. Kelly et al. (1998)

demonstrated no adverse effects on

mallards dosed with tungsten-iron or

tungsten-polymer shot according to

nontoxic shot test protocols.

Most toxicity tests reviewed were

based on soluble tungsten compounds

rather than elemental tungsten. As we

found in our reviews of other tungsten

shot types, we believe that there is no

basis for concern about the toxicity of

the tungsten in t-n-i shot to fish,

mammals, or birds.

Nickel is a dietary requirement of

mammals, with necessary consumption

set at 50 to 80 parts per billion for the

rat and chick (Nielsen and Sandstead

1974). Though it is necessary for some

enzymes, nickel can compete with