Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 1997 / Notices 37

Norflurazon is not currently regulated

under the Safe Drinking Water Act

(SWDA). Therefore, no MCL has been

established and water systems are not

required to sample and analyze for it.

Novartis is currently performing

groundwater monitoring studies to

better evaluate the leaching potential of

norflurazon.

Norflurazon is practically non-toxic to

avian species on an acute oral and

subacute dietary basis. Norflurazon is

also practically nontoxic to mammals

and insects (honeybees).

K. International Tolerances

No international tolerances have been

established under CODEX. Therefore,

there is no need to ensure consistency.

II. Public Record

A record has been established for this

notice under docket control number

[PF–718] (including comments and data

submitted electronically as described

below). A public version of this record,

including printed, paper versions of

electronic comments, which does not

include any information claimed as CBI,

is available for inspection from 8:30

a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,

excluding legal holidays. The public

record is located in Rm 1132 of the

Public Response and Program Resources

Branch, Field Operations Division

(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA.

Electronic comments can be sent

directly to EPA at:

opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov

Electronic comments must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption.

The official record for this notice, as

well as the public version, as described

above will be kept in paper form.

Accordingly, EPA will transfer all

comments received electronically into

printed, paper form as they are received

and will place the paper copies in the

official record which will also include

all comments submitted directly in

writing. The official record is the paper

record maintained at the address in

‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the beginning of this

document.

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: March 11, 1997.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division Office of

Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 97–7065 Filed 3–25–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

[PF–727; FRL–5595–6]

Novartis Crop Protection, Inc.;

Pesticide Tolerance Petition Filing

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of filing.

SUMMARY: This notice is a summary of

a pesticide petition proposing the

establishment of a regulation for the

residues of CGA–248757, acetic acid [[2-

chloro-4-fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro-3-oxo1H,3H-[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-

α]pyridazin-1-ylidene)

amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl ester in or

on soybeans. This summary was

prepared by the petitioner.

DATES: Comments, identified by the

docket control number [PF-727], must

be received on or before April 25, 1997.

ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written

comments to: Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring

comments to: Rm. 1132 CM #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA

22202.

Comments and data may also be

submitted electronically by sending

electronic mail (e-mail) to: oppdocket@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic

comments must be submitted as an

ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Comments and data will also be

accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1

file format or ASCII file format. All

comments and data in electronic form

must be identified by the docket number

[PF–727]. Electronic comments on this

notice may be filed online at many

Federal Depository Libraries. Additional

information on electronic submissions

can be found in Unit II. of this

document.

Information submitted as comments

concerning this notice may be claimed

confidential by marking any part or all

of that information as ‘‘Confidential

Business Information’’ (CBI). No CBI

should not be submitted through e-mail.

Information marked as CBI will not be

disclosed except in accordance with

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

A copy of the comment that does not

contain CBI must be submitted for

inclusion in the public record.

Information not marked confidential

may be disclosed publicly by EPA

without prior notice. All written

comments will be available for public

inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address

given above, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Joanne Miller, Product Manager

(PM) 23, Registration Division (7505W),

Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Office location, telephone number, and

e-mail address: Rm. 237, CM #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA,

(703) 305–6224, e-mail:

miller.joanne@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice

of filing of pesticide petition 6F4614

was published in the Federal Register of

June 12, l996 (61 FR 29752) (FRL–5354–

7). The Notice stated that Ciba Crop

Protection, Ciba-Geigy Corporation had

proposed to amend 40 CFR part 180 by

establishing a tolerance for residues of

the herbicide, acetic acid [[2-chloro-4-

fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H-

[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-α]pyridazin-1-

ylidene) amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl

ester in or on the raw agricultural

commodity soybeans at 0.02 part per

million (ppm). The proposed analytic

method for determining residues was

gas chromatographic. On January 1,

l997, Ciba Crop Protection merged with

Sandoz, Inc. to form a new corporation,

Novartis Crop Protection, Inc.

EPA has received a second notice of

filing of (PP) 6F4614, from Novartis

Crop Protection, Inc., P.O. Box 18300,

Greensboro, NC 27419, proposing

pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal

Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),

21 U.S.C section 346a(d), to amend 40

CFR part 180 by establishing a tolerance

for residues of the herbicide CGA–

248757, acetic acid [[2-chloro-4-fluoro5-[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H-

[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-α]pyridazin-1-

ylidene) amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl

ester in or on the raw agricultural

commodity soybeans at 0.01 ppm. The

proposed analytical method is gas

chromatography using a nitrogen

phosphorus detector and a large-bore

fused silica column.

Pursuant to section 408(d)(2)(A)(i) of

the FFDCA, as amended, Novartis Crop

Protection, Inc. has submitted the

following summary of information, data

and arguments in support of their

pesticide petition. This summary was

prepared by Novartis and EPA has not

fully evaluated the merits of the
38 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 1997 / Notices

petition. EPA edited the summary to

clarify that the conclusions and

arguments were the petitioner’s and not

necessarily EPA’s and to remove certain

extraneous material.

I. Novartis Petition Summary

1. CGA–248757 uses. CGA–248757,

acetic acid [(2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-

[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H-

[1,3,4]thiadiazolo [3,4-α]pyridazin-1-

ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl

ester, is a new herbicide active

ingredient in the imide chemistry class.

It will be formulated as a 4.75%

wettable powder, packaged in watersoluble bags, and sold under the trade

name Action Herbicide. Action is a

highly selective herbicide for use in

soybeans postemergence, and is

particularly effective in controlling

velvetleaf. Control of other broadleaf

weeds in soybeans is enhanced and the

spectrum of control is broadened when

Action is tank mixed with other

postemergence herbicides registered for

use in soybeans.

Action offers effective weed control at

extremely low use rates. The maximum

use rate per season is 0.0089 lb. active

ingredient (3 ounces (oz). of formulated

product) per acre consisting of a

maximum of two applications. There is

a wide application window extending

from the first trifoliate stage of soybean

development through the full flowering

stage, and the amount of Action to apply

depends on the weed species and weed

height. Tank mixing Action with other

postemergence herbicides further

reduces the amount required to control

target weeds.

The purpose of this petition is to

establish a tolerance for CGA–248757 in

soybeans. The tolerance proposed is:

Soybeans—0.01 ppm.

2. CGA–248757 safety. In support of

the petition for tolerance in soybeans,

Novartis submitted a full battery of

toxicology studies including, acute

effects, chronic feeding, oncogenicity,

teratogenicity, mutagenicity, and

reproductive toxicity tests. The studies

indicate that CGA–248757 has a low

order of acute toxicity with acute effects

in catgegory III and IV, is not

neurotoxic, does not pose a genotoxicity

hazard, and is not a reproductive

toxicant or a teratogen.

Potential exposure to CGA–248757

via the diet or drinking water and

through handling is very limited.

Because of rapid environmental

degradation, extremely low residues in

food crops, and water-soluble

packaging, considerable margins of

safety exist for dietary exposure for all

subgroups of the population and for

worker exposure as well.

The following mammalian toxicity

studies have been conducted to support

the proposed tolerance for CGA–248757:

• A rat acute oral study with an LD50

> 5,000 milligram/kilogram (mg/kg).

• A rabbit acute dermal study with an

LD50 2,000 mg/kg.

• A rat inhalation study with an LC50

5.05 mg/liter.

• A primary eye irritation study in

the rabbit showing moderate eye

irritation.

• A primary dermal irritation study in

the rabbit showing no skin irritation.

• A primary dermal sensitization

study in the Guinea pig showing no

sensitization.

• Twenty-eight day dermal toxicity

study in rats with a no-observed effect

level (NOEL) equal to or higher than the

limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg.

• Six-week dietary toxicity study in

dogs with a NOEL of 6,500 ppm in

males and 2,000 ppm in females based

on decreased body weight gain and

modest hematological changes.

• Ninety-day subchronic dietary

toxicity study in rats with a NOEL of

100 ppm based on liver changes and

hematological effects.

• Twenty-four-month combined

chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study

in rats with a NOEL of 50 ppm. Based

on reduced body weight development

and changes in bone marrow, liver,

pancreas and uterus the MTD was

exceeded at 3,000 ppm.

• A positive trend of adenomas of the

pancreas in male rats treated at 3,000

ppm and above may be attributable to

the increased survival of the rats treated

at high doses.

• Eighteen-month oncogenicity study

in mice with a NOEL of 1 ppm. Based

on liver changes, the MTD was reached

at 10 ppm. The incidence of

hepatocellular tumors was increased in

males treated at 100 ppm and 300 ppm.

• Teratology study in rats with a

maternal and developmental NOEL

equal to or greater than 1,000 mg/kg/

day.

• Teratology study in rabbits with a

maternal NOEL greater than or equal to

1,000 mg/kg/day and a fetal NOEL of

300 mg/kg based on a slight delay in

fetal maturation.

• Two-generation reproduction study

in rats with a NOEL of 500 ppm, based

on liver lesions in parental animals and

slightly reduced body weight

development in parental animals and

pups. The treatment had no effect on

reproduction or fertility.

• Acute neurotoxicity study in rats.

• Neurotoxic effects were not

observed. The NOEL was 2,000 mg/kg.

• Ninety-day subchronic

neurotoxicity study in rats. The NOEL

was 10 ppm based on reduced body

weight gain. No clinical or

morphological signs of neurotoxicity

were detected at any dose level.

• In vitro gene mutation tests: Ames

test--negative; Chinese hamster V79 test-

-negative; rat hepatocyte DNA repair

test--negative; E. Coli letal DNA damage

test--negative.

• In vitro chromosomal aberration

tests: Chinese hamster ovary--positive at

cytotoxic doses; Chinese hamster lung-

-positive at cytotoxic doses; human

lymphocyes--positive at cytotoxic doses.

• In vivo chromosome aberration

tests: Micronucleus assays in rat liver--

negative; mouse bone marrow test--

negative.

3. Threshold effects. Using the

Guidelines for Carcinogenic Risk

Assessment published September 24,

1986 (51 FR 33992), Novartis believes

the Agency will classify CGA–248757 as

a Group ‘‘C’’ carcinogen (possible

human carcinogen) based on findings of

benign and malignant liver tumors in

male mice. These tumors most likely

resulted from a chronic regenerative and

proliferative response of the affected

epithelial cells. This response is a nongenotoxic, threshold effect which is due

to the accumulation of cytotoxic

porphyrins. A positive trend of

proliferative pancreatic changes in male

rats is likely attributable to the

increased survival of the rats in the high

dose groups. The lesions observed are

not uncommon in the rat strain used.

Because the effects observed are

threshold effects, Novartis believes that

exposure to CGA–248757 should be

regulated using a margin of exposure

approach. The reference dose (RfD) for

CGA–248757 can be defined at 0.0014

milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg) based

on an 18–month feeding study in mice

with a NOEL of 0.14 mg/kg/day and an

uncertainty factor of 100.

4. Non-threshold effects. Based on the

results of an extensive program of

genotoxicity studies, CGA–248757 is not

mutagenic in vivo. As outlined above,

effects observed in toxicology studies

are attributable to an epigenetic,

cytotoxic mechanism, resulting in

degenerative and inflammatory changes

in the target organs. It is therefore

justified that exposure to CGA–248757

should be regulated using a margin of

exposure approach.

5. Aggregate exposure. In this

assessment, Novartis has conservatively

assumed that 100% of all soybeans used

for human consumption would contain

residues of CGA–248757 and all

residues would be at the level of the

tolerance. The potential dietary

exposure to CGA–248757 was

calculated on the basis of the proposed
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 1997 / Notices 39

tolerance of the LOQ, 0.01 ppm, in

soybeans. The proposed tolerances is set

at the limit of detection in the respective

commodity because, with the available

methodology, there are no detectable

residues of CGA–248757 in soybeans.

Residues in milk, meat, and eggs due to

the feeding of soybean commodities are

not expected and tolerances for milk,

meat, and eggs are not required.

Calculated on the basis of the proposed

tolerance, the dietary exposure of the

U.S. population to CGA–248757 would

correspond to 0.24% of its RfD.

Other potential sources of exposure of

the general population to residues of

pesticides are residues in drinking

water. Although CGA–248757 has a

slight to medium leaching potential; the

risk of the parent compound to leach to

deeper soil layers is negligible under

practical conditions in view of the fast

degradation of the product. For

example, the soil metabolism half-life

was extremely short, ranging from 1.1

days under aerobic conditions to 1.6

days under anaerobic conditions. Even

in the event of very heavy rainfalls

immediately after application, which

could lead to a certain downward

movement of the parent compound,

parent CGA–248757 continues to be

degraded during the transport into

deeper soil zones. Considering the low

application rate of CGA–248757, the

strong soil binding characteristics of

CGA–248757 and its degradates, and the

rapid degradation of CGA–248757 in the

soil, there is no risk of ground water

contamination with CGA–248757 or its

metabolites. Thus, aggregate risk of

exposure to CGA–248757 does not

include drinking water. CGA–248757 is

not registered for any other use and is

proposed for use only on agricultural

crops. Thus, there is no potential for

non-occupational exposure other than

consumption of treated commodities

containing CGA–248757 residue.

Novartis also considered the potential

for cumulative effects of CGA–248757

and other substances. However, a

cumulative exposure assessment is not

appropriate at this time because there is

no information available to indicate that

effects of CGA–248757 in mammals

would be cumulative with those of

another chemical compound. Thus

Novartis is considering only the

potential risk of CGA–248757 in its

aggregate exposure assessment.

6. Safety to the U.S. population. Using

the very conservative exposure

assumptions described above and based

on the completeness and reliability of

the toxicity data for CGA–248757,

Novartis has calculated that aggregate

exposure to CGA–248757 will utilize

0.24% of the RfD for the U.S.

population. Thus, even a worst case

exposure estimate results in human

exposure to CGA–248757 which is

40,000-fold below the NOEL in the most

sensitive species. As anticipated

residues are below tolerance levels and

the market share of CGA–248757 will

not approach 25% of planted soybeans,

the safety margin is likely to be at least

20 times greater. Exposures below 100

percent of the RfD are generally not of

concern because the RfD represents the

level at or below which daily aggregate

dietary exposure over a lifetime will not

pose appreciable risks to human health.

Also the acute dietary risk to

consumers will be far below any

significant level: The lowest NOEL from

a short-term exposure scenario comes

from the teratology study in rabbits with

a NOEL of 300 mg/kg. This NOEL is

2,000-fold higher than the chronic

NOEL which provides the basis for the

RfD (see above). Because chronic

exposure estimates did not result in any

significant exposure, it is anticipated

that the acute dietary risk will also be

negligible with margins of acute

exposure in the hundred thousands

(margins of exposure of 100 or more are

generally considered satisfactory).

Therefore, Novartis concludes that there

is a reasonable certainty that no harm

will result from aggregate exposure to

CGA–248757 residues.

7. Safety to infants and children. In

assessing the potential for additional

sensitivity of infants and children to

residues of CGA–248757, Novartis

considered data from developmental

toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit and

a 2-generation reproduction study in the

rat. A slight delay in fetal maturation

was observed in a teratology study in

rabbits at a daily dose of 1,000 mg/kg.

In a 2-generation reproduction study,

CGA–248757 did not affect the

reproductive performance of the

parental animals or the physiological

development of the pups. The NOEL

was 500 ppm for maternal animals and

their offspring, which is 50,000 fold

higher than the RfD.

Using the same conservative exposure

assumptions as for the determination in

the general population, the percent of

the RfD that will be utilized by aggregate

exposure to residues of CGA–248757 is

0.28% for nursing infants less than 1

year old, 1.16% for non-nursing infants,

0.45% for children 1 to 6 years old and

0.35% for children 7 to 12 years old.

Novartis concludes that there is a

reasonable certainty that no harm will

result to infants and children from

aggregate exposure to residues of CGA–

248757.

8. Estrogenic effects. Based on the

results of short-term, chronic, and

reproductive toxicity studies there is no

indication that CGA–248757 might

interfere with the endocrine system.

Considering further the low

environmental concentrations and the

lack of bioaccumulation, there is no risk

of endocrine disruption in humans or

wildlife.

9. Chemical residue. The nature of the

residues in soybeans and animals (goat

and hen) is adequately understood

following application of CGA–248757.

Residues do not concentrate in

processed commodities. There are no

Codex maximum residue levels

established for residues of CGA–248757

on soybeans. Ciba has submitted a

practical analytical method for detecting

and measuring the level of CGA–248757

in or on food with a limit of detection

that allows monitoring of food with

residues at or above the levels set for the

proposed tolerance. The limit of

quantification of the method is 0.01

ppm. The analytical method involves

extraction, filtration, and solid phase

clean up. Residue levels of CGA–248757

are determined by gas chromatographic

analysis utilizing a nitrogen phosphorus

detector and a fused-silica column. EPA

can provide information on this method

to FDA. The method will be available to

anyone who is interested in pesticide

residue enforcement from the Field

Operations Division, EPA’s Office of

Pesticide Programs.

The residue of concern in soybeans is

CGA–248757 per se. Twenty field

residue studies were conducted with

soybeans grown in 18 states. Residues of

CGA–248757 in treated soybeans were

less than the method LOQ (0.01 ppm)

which is the proposed tolerance. The

proposed tolerance level is adequate to

cover residues likely to occur when

Action herbicide is applied as directed.

Livestock feeding studies have not

been submitted and tolerances for

residues of CGA–248757 in livestock

commodities have not been requested.

Results of hen and goat metabolism

studies wherein CGA–248757 was fed at

exaggerated rates indicated that CGA–

248757 is poorly absorbed. Based upon

the exaggerated feeding levels in the

goat and hen metabolism studies, the

results of soybean metabolism studies,

the requested tolerance level of 0.01

ppm for soybeans, and the maximum

dietary exposure of beef and dairy cattle

and poultry to CGA–248757, detectable

residues of CGA–248757 or its

metabolite, CGA–300403 (> 0.01 ppm)

are unlikely to occur in meat, milk,

poultry, or eggs.

In studies with processed soybean

fractions, concentration of CGA–248757

was not found and tolerances in

processed commodities will not be
40 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 1997 / Notices

required. In addition, confined

rotational crop studies indicated that

CGA–248757 will not be taken up by

rotational crops.

Novartis analytical Method AG–603A

has been independently validated for

collection of residues of CGA–248757 in

soybeans and processed fractions and

this method has been provided to the

FDA. Residue levels of CGA–248757 are

determined by gas chromatography and

the limit of detection for the method is

0.01 ppm.

10. Environmental fate. Action

degraded rapidly under laboratory and

field conditions. Laboratory hydrolysis

under basic conditions was T1/2 ∼ 5

hours at pH 9 and stable under acidic

conditions (T1/2 ∼ 485 days at pH

5).The soil metabolism half-life was

extremely short, ranging from 1.1 days

under aerobic conditions to 1.6 days

under anaerobic conditions.

Photodegradation was rapid in soil (T1/

2 ∼ 0.5 days) and moderate in solution

at pH 5 (5 days). Because of the

extremely low use rate and very short

half-life in the field, field dissipation

experiments were conducted with

radiolabeled chemical. After bareground application, the half-life of

Action was 1 day in sandy loam and 1.8

days in clay loam. All degradates

identified in the field were also

identified in the laboratory studies.

Parent and aged leaching laboratory

experiments showed that the mobility of

Action ranged from slight to medium by

soil type. Based on estimates of relative

mobility (Koc), Action was classified as

having medium mobility in sand and

low mobility in loam, silt loam and clay.

The major degradation products of

Action were found to have high to low

mobility classifications based on Koc

estimations. Although the data suggest

that some of the degradates are highly

mobile, a high degree of soil binding is

expected based on results of the

laboratory and the field experiments.

Because weeds and crop will intercept

the majority of this product when it is

applied, and given the extremely low

use rate and high degree of soil binding,

Action herbicide is not expected to

leach into groundwater.

II. Public Record

Interested persons are invited to

submit comments on this notice of

filing. Comments must bear a notation

indicating the docket control number,

[PF–727]. A record has been established

for this document under docket control

number [PF–727] (including comments

and data submitted electronically as

described below). A public version of

this record, including printed, paper

versions of electronic comments, which

does not include any information

claimed as CBI, is available for

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

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The public record is located in

Rm. 1132 of the Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, Crystal Mall #2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA.

Electronic comments may be sent

directly to EPA at:

opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov.

Electronic comments must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption. The official record for

this notice, as well as the public

version, as described above will be kept

in paper form. Accordingly, EPA will

transfer all comments received

electronically into printed, paper form

as they are received and will place the

paper copies in the official notice record

which will also include all comments

submitted directly in writing. The

official rulemaking record is the paper

record maintained at the Virginia

address in ‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the

beginning of this document.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: March 12, 1997.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 97–7222 Filed 3–25–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

[OPP–181039; FRL–5594–5]

Emergency Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: EPA has granted specific

exemptions for the control of various

pests to nine States listed below. Six

crisis exemptions were initiated by

various States and one by the United

States Department of Agriculture. These

exemptions, issued during the months

of July, August, September, October,

November, and December 1996 and

January and February 1997, are subject

to application and timing restrictions

and reporting requirements designed to

protect the environment to the

maximum extent possible. Information

on these restrictions is available from

the contact persons in EPA listed below.

DATES: See each specific and crisis

exemption for its effective date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: See

each emergency exemption for the name

of the contact person. The following

information applies to all contact

persons: By mail: Registration Division

(7505W), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Office location and telephone number:

6th Floor, CS 1B1, 2800 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA (703–308–

8417); e-mail:

group.ermus@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has

granted specific exemptions to the:

1. Arkansas State Plant Board for the

use of metolachlor on spinach to control

weeds; December 2, 1996, to February 2,

1997. (Margarita Collantes)

2. California Department of Pesticide

Regulations for the use of bifenthrin on

broccoli and cauliflower to control the

silverleaf whitefly; January 30, 1997, to

February 30, 1997. (Margarita Collantes)

3. California Department of Pesticide

Regulations for the use of imidacloprid

on beets and turnips to control aphids;

January 29, 1997, to Auqust 4, 1997.

California had initiated a crisis

exemption for this use. (Margarita

Collantes)

4. Minnesota Department of

Agriculture for the use of triclopyr on

infested water bodies to control purple

loosestrife; July 31, 1996, to September

15, 1996. (Margarita Collantes)

5. New Jersey Department of

Environmental Protection for the use of

tebufenozide on apples to control tufted

apple bud moth; August 1, 1996, to

September 30, 1996. (Pat Cimino)

6. New Mexico Department of

Agriculture for the use of tebufenozide

on chile peppers to control beet

armyworms; December 17, 1996, to

December 30, 1997. (Margarita

Collantes)

7. Oklahoma Department of

Agriculture for the use of metolachlor

on spinach to control weeds; December

2, 1996, to March 31, 1997. (Margarita

Collantes)

8. Texas Department of Agriculture

for the use of metolachlor on spinach to

control weeds; December 2, 1996, to

August 15, 1997. (Margarita Collantes)

9. Texas Department of Agriculture

for the use of propiconazole on grain

sorghum to control northern leaf blight;

November 6, 1996, to October 31, 1997.

Texas had initiated a crisis exemption

for this use. (Pat Cimino)

10. Virginia Department of

Agriculture for the use of metolachlor