15704 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 63 / Wednesday, April 2, 1997 / Notices

potential exposure using an anticipated

residue of 0.5 ppm, would 1.7 x 10-8.

The Agency has used a linearized

model to estimate the carcinogenic risk

associated with chlorothalonil, whereas

ISK Biosciences believes that a

threshold based model is appropriate.

Using the overestimated exposure

estimates of EPA, with a threshold

based model and using the conservative

RfD of 0.018 mg/kg bwt/day, the margin

of safety for the general population

would exceed 10,000 and the margin of

safety for infants and children would

exceed 7,000. Using corrected exposure

estimates would obviously yield larger

margins of exposure. Using a

conservative RfD of 0.018 mg/kg/day, as

the Agency has done in recent DRES

analyses, and incorporating corrections

needed in exposure values for

mushrooms and several other lesser

corrections, ISK Biosciences

Corporation calculated the overall

dietary exposure to ‘‘anticipated

residues’’ of chlorothalonil from all

registered uses and pending uses of

chlorothalonil to be 0.36% of the RfD

for the general U.S. population.

Because the worst case assumption for

human exposure from drinking water

indicate that exposure would be only

1% of the dietary exposure, the risk

assessment is not significantly altered

by considering the exposure from

drinking water.

2. Infants and children. There is a

complete data base for chlorothalonil

which includes pre- and post-natal

developmental toxicity data as well as

mechanistic data related to the rodent

specific nephrotoxicity observed in

subchronic and chronic studies. The

toxicological effects of chlorothalonil in

rodents are well understood.

Chlorothalonil has a low level of

toxicity in dogs.

In a two-generation reproduction

study in rats, all reproductive

parameters investigated showed no

treatment-related effects except pup

weight gain. Specifically, the weights of

pups exposed to chlorothalonil were

comparable to controls at parturition

through day 4 of lactation. It was only

after day 4 of lactation, when the pups

begin to consume the test diet, that body

weight gain lags behind controls. This

only occurred at the highest dose tested;

3,000 ppm. The dose of chlorothalonil

the pups would receive would be far in

excess of the estimated adult dose of

150 mg/kg bwt/day (3,000 ppm divided

by 20). The doses for the pups could

have easily exceeded 500 mg/kg bwt/

day. Dose levels of 375 mg/kg bwt and

above have been shown to significantly

affect body weight in the rat. Therefore,

the reduction of body weight gain

observed in the reproduction study is

considered to be comparable to the

effects that have been observed in older

rats. The NOEL for this effect was 1,500

ppm.

In developmental toxicity studies

conducted in the rat and the rabbit,

chlorothalonil did not cause any

developmental effects even at dose

levels that produced significant

maternal toxicity. In the rabbit a dose

level of 20 mg/kg bwt caused maternal

toxicity, but there were no

developmental effects and in the rat, a

dose level of 400 mg/kg bwt caused

maternal toxicity without

developmental toxicity.

The extensive data base that is

available for chlorothalonil is devoid of

any indication that chlorothalonil

would represent any unusual or

disproportionate hazard to infants or

children. Therefore, there is no need to

impose an additional 10x safety factor

for infants or children. The standard

uncertainty factor of 100x should be

used for all segments of the human

population when calculating risks

associated with chlorothalonil.

F. International Tolerances

There is currently no maximum

residue level set for chlorothalonil on

non-bell peppers by the Codex

Alimentarius Commission.

II. Public Record

A record has been established for this

notice under docket control number

[PF–726] (including comments and data

submitted electronically as described

below). A public version of the 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 Room 1132 of the

Public Response and 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

rulemaking, 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 rulemaking

record which will also include all

comments submitted directly in writing.

The official rulemaking record is the

paper record maintained at the 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 24, 1997.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 97–8388 Filed 4–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

Notice of Public Information

Collections Being Reviewed by the

Federal Communications Commission

March 25, 1997.

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications

Commissions, 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, as

required by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. An

agency may not conduct or sponsor a

collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid control

number. No person shall be subject to

any penalty for failing to comply with

a collection of information subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that

does not display a valid control number.

Comments are requested concerning (a)

whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

Commission, including whether the

information shall have practical utility;

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s

burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarify of the

information collected; and (d) ways to

minimize the burden of the collection of

information on the respondents,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology.

DATES: Persons wishing to comment on

this information collection should

submit comments June 2, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to

Dorothy Conway, Federal

Communications Commissions, Room
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 63 / Wednesday, April 2, 1997 / Notices 15705

234, 1919 M St., N.W., Washington, DC

20554 or via internet to

dconway@fcc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

additional information or copies of the

information collections contact Dorothy

Conway at 202–418–0217 or via internet

at dconway@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Approval Number: 3060–####.

Title: Section 90.176 Coordination

notification requirements on frequencies

below 512 MHz.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: New collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Number of Respondents: 15.

Estimated Time Per Response: .25

hours.

Total Annual Burden: 975 hours.

Total Annual Cost: 0.

Needs and Uses: The reporting

requirement in 90.176 is a result of

comments sought in the Report and

Order and Further Notice of Proposed

Rule Making in PR Dck No. 92–235 and

requires each Private Land Mobile

frequency coordinator provide, within

one business day, a listing of their

frequency recommendations to all other

frequency coordinators in their

respective pool, and, if requested, an

engineering analyses. This requirement

is necessary to avoid situations where

harmful interference is created because

two or more coordinators recommend

the same frequency in the same area at

approximately the same time to

different applicants.

OMB Approval Number: 3060–0051.

Title: Application for Renewal of

Ship/Aircraft Radio Station License.

Form No.: FCC 405B.

Type of Review: Revision of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Individuals, State or

Local Governments, Business or other

For-Profit, Non-profit institutions.

Number of Respondents: 10,500.

Estimated Time Per Response: 10

minutes.

Total Annual Burden: 1,743 hours.

Needs and Uses: This form is used to

verify existence of a station and to

renew a license authorization when

there are no changes or only certain

minor changes to administrative data.

FCC Rules require a Ship or Aircraft

radio station license to be renewed

every ten years. The Commission will

use the information collected to update

the existing database and to issue a

renewed authorization.

The form is required by the

Communications Act; International

Treaties and FCC Rules—47 CFR Parts

1.922,1.926, 80.19 and 87.21.

During the last OMB cycle, the

Commission separated the Ship and

Aircraft renewal form into two separate

collections, 3060–0051 and 3060–

0615(FCC Form 405S), due to the large

quantity of applications received. Since

that submission, the Commission

adopted a Report and Order to delicense the majority of Ship and Aircraft

stations. Therefore, we are re-combining

the Ship and Aircraft collections as

3060–0051(FCC Form 405B) and will let

the collection for 3060–0615 expire. The

number of respondents and burden have

been adjusted accordingly due to the delicensing and re-combining of the

collections.

A space for the applicant to provide

an Internet address is being added to the

form. This will provide an additional

option of reaching the applicant should

the FCC have any questions concerning

the application. In addition, the

Commission is required to collect the

Taxpayer Identification Number to

comply with the Debt Collection

Improvement Act of 1996.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–8343 Filed 4–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

Notice of Public Information

Collections Being Reviewed by the

Federal Communications Commission

March 26, 1997.

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, as

required by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. An

agency may not conduct or sponsor a

collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid control

number. No person shall be subject to

any penalty for failing to comply with

a collection of information subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that

does not display a valid control number.

Comments are requested concerning (a)

whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

Commission, including whether the

information shall have practical utility;

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s

burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarify of the

information collected; and (d) ways to

minimize the burden of the collection of

information on the respondents,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology.

DATES: Persons wishing to comment on

this information collection should

submit comments June 2, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to

Dorothy Conway, Federal

Communications Commission, Room

234, 1919 M St., N.W., Washington, DC

20554 or via internet to

dconway@fcc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

additional information or copies of the

information collections contact Dorothy

Conway at 202–418–0217 or via internet

at dconway@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Approval Number: 3060–####.

Title: Compliance and Information

Customer Satisfaction Survey.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: New collection.

Respondents: Individuals or

households; business or other for-profit;

not-for-profit institutions; federal, state,

local or tribal government(s).

Number of Respondents: 1,800.

Estimated Time Per Response: 5

minutes.

Total Annual Burden: 150 hours.

Total Annual Cost: 0.

Needs and Uses: The FCC Compliance

and Information Bureau in order to

assess their customer stasfaction

programs is develping customer

survey(s) on how they are handling their

customer complaints, inquiries and

requests for information. This survey

will ensure that CIB is in compliance

with the Commission’s customer

satisfaction mandate. This survey will

measure response time, customer

statisfaction and CIB outreach programs.

The data will be used to plan future

outreach programs and target areas of

needed employee training.

OMB Number: 3060–0604.

Title: Implementation of Section

309(j) of the Communications Act,

Competitive Bidding, Third Report and

Order and Third Memorandum Opinion

and Order and Further NPRM.

Type of Review: Extension of existing

collection.

Form Number: N/A.

Respondents: Individuals; State or

local governments; Businesses or other

for-profit; Small businesses or

organizations.

Number of Respondents: 10–17,770.

Estimated Time Per Response: .50 to

20 hours.

Total Annual Burden: 45,654 hours.

Needs and Uses: Collection of

information is required so that the

Commission can determine whether