4014 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2001 / Notices

16. California Independent System

Operator Corporation

[Docket No. ER01–871–000]

Take notice that on January 3, 2001,

the California Independent System

Operator Corporation (ISO), tendered for

filing and acceptance a Utility

Distribution Company Operating

Agreement (UDC Operating Agreement)

between the ISO and the City of Vernon,

California (Vernon).

The ISO requested waiver of the

Commission’s 60-day prior notice

requirement to allow the UDC Operating

Agreement to be made effective as of

January 1, 2001, the date on which

Vernon has requested to become a

Participating TO.

The ISO states that this filing has been

served upon all parties in this

proceeding.

Comment date: January 24, 2001, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

17. Central Maine Power Company

[Docket No. ER01–872–000]

Take notice that on January 3, 2001,

Central Maine Power Company (CMP),

tendered for filing a service agreement

for Long Term Firm Local Point-to-Point

Transmission Service entered into with

Regional Waste System, Inc. Service

will be provided pursuant to CMP’s

Open Access Transmission Tariff,

designated rate schedule CMP—FERC

Electric Tariff, Original Volume No. 3,

as supplemented.

Comment date: January 24, 2001, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

18. Entergy Services, Inc.

[Docket No. ER01–873–000]

Take notice that on January 3, 2001,

Entergy Services, Inc., on behalf of

Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Gulf

States, Inc., Entergy Louisiana, Inc.,

Entergy Mississippi, Inc., and Entergy

New Orleans, Inc., (collectively, the

Entergy Operating Companies) tendered

for filing a Non-Firm Point-To-Point

Transmission Service Agreement and a

Short-Term Firm Point-To-Point

Transmission Service Agreement both

between Entergy Services, Inc., as agent

for the Entergy Operating Companies,

and The Legacy Energy Group, LLC.

Comment date: January 24, 2001, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

19. California Independent System

Operator Corporation

[Docket No. ER01–889–000]

Take notice that on January 4, 2001,

the California Independent System

Operator Corporation (ISO), tendered for

filing Amendment No. 36 to the ISO

Tariff. The ISO states that Amendment

No. 36 is intended to provide a

temporary exemption from

creditworthiness requirements for

Schedule Coordinators that had an

Approved Credit Rating on January 3,

2001, and are either Original

Participating Transmission Owners or

schedule on behalf of Original

Participating Transmission Owners. The

ISO will extend the temporary

exemption on a day to day basis, but in

no event beyond March 3, 2001.

The ISO states that this filing has been

served on the California Public Utilities

Commission, the California Electricity

Oversight Board and all California ISO

Scheduling Coordinators.

Comment date: January 25, 2001, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraphs

E. Any person desiring to be heard or

to protest such filing should file a

motion to intervene or protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC

20426, in accordance with Rules 211

and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211

and 385.214). All such motions or

protests should be filed on or before the

comment date. Protests will be

considered by the Commission in

determining the appropriate action to be

taken, but will not serve to make

protestants parties to the proceeding.

Any person wishing to become a party

must file a motion to intervene. Copies

of these filings are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection. This filing may also be

viewed on the Internet at http://

www.ferc.fed.us/ online/rims.htm (call

202–208–2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–1254 Filed 1–16–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[PF–959; FRL–6599–5]

Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition to

Establish a Tolerance for a Certain

Pesticide Chemical in or on Food

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

initial filing of a pesticide petition

proposing the establishment of

regulations for residues of a certain

pesticide chemical in or on various food

commodities.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket

control number PF–959, must be

received on or before February 16, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be

submitted by mail, electronically, or in

person. Please follow the detailed

instructions for each method as

provided in Unit I.C. of the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure

proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative

that you identify docket control number

PF–959 in the subject line on the first

page of your response.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Mary Waller, Registration Division

(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,

DC 20460; telephone number: (703)

308–9354; e-mail address:

waller.mary@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be affected by this action if

you are an agricultural producer, food

manufacturer or pesticide manufacturer.

Potentially affected categories and

entities may include, but are not limited

to:

Categories NAICS Examples of potentially affected entities

Industry 111 Crop production

112 Animal production

311 Food manufacturing

32532 Pesticide manufacturing

This listing is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

affected by this action. Other types of

entities not listed in the table could also

be affected. The North American

Industrial Classification System

(NAICS) codes have been provided to

assist you and others in determining

whether or not this action might apply

to certain entities. If you have 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 Additional

Information, Including Copies of this

Document and Other Related

Documents?

1. Electronically. You may obtain

electronic copies of this document, and

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2001 / Notices 4015

certain other related documents that

might be available electronically, from

the EPA Internet Home Page at http://

www.epa.gov/. To access this

document, on the Home Page select

‘‘Laws and Regulations,’’ ‘‘Regulations

and Proposed Rules,’’ and then look up

the entry for this document under the

‘‘Federal Register—Environmental

Documents.’’ You can also go directly to

the Federal Register listings at http://

www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

2. In person. The Agency has

established an official record for this

action under docket control number PF–

959. The official record consists of the

documents specifically referenced in

this action, any public comments

received during an applicable comment

period, and other information related to

this action, including any information

claimed as confidential business

information (CBI). This official record

includes the documents that are

physically located in the docket, as well

as the documents that are referenced in

those documents. The public version of

the official record does not include any

information claimed as CBI. The public

version of the official record, which

includes printed, paper versions of any

electronic comments submitted during

an applicable comment period, is

available for inspection in the Public

Information and Records Integrity

Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall

#2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The PIRIB telephone number

is (703) 305–5805.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit

Comments?

You may submit comments through

the mail, in person, or electronically. To

ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is

imperative that you identify docket

control number PF–959 in the subject

line on the first page of your response.

1. By mail. Submit your comments to:

Public Information and Records

Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information

Resources and Services Division

(7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP), Environmental Protection

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

2. In person or by courier. Deliver

your comments to: Public Information

and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB),

Information Resources and Services

Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide

Programs (OPP), Environmental

Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal

Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from

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

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The

PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305–

5805.

3. Electronically. You may submit

your comments electronically by e-mail

to: ‘‘opp-docket@epa.gov,’’ or you can

submit a computer disk as described

above. Do not submit any information

electronically that you consider to be

CBI. Avoid the use of special characters

and any form of encryption. Electronic

submissions will be accepted in

Wordperfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file

format. All comments in electronic form

must be identified by docket control

number PF–959. Electronic comments

may also be filed online at many Federal

Depository Libraries.

D. How Should I Handle CBI That I

Want to Submit to the Agency?

Do not submit any information

electronically that you consider to be

CBI. You may claim information that

you submit to EPA in response to this

document as CBI by marking any part or

all of that information as CBI.

Information so marked will not be

disclosed except in accordance with

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

In addition to one complete version of

the comment that includes any

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

version of the official record.

Information not marked confidential

will be included in the public version

of the official record without prior

notice. If you have any questions about

CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI,

please consult the person identified

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.

E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare

My Comments for EPA?

You may find the following

suggestions helpful for preparing your

comments:

1. Explain your views as clearly as

possible.

2. Describe any assumptions that you

used.

3. Provide copies of any technical

information and/or data you used that

support your views.

4. If you estimate potential burden or

costs, explain how you arrived at the

estimate that you provide.

5. Provide specific examples to

illustrate your concerns.

6. Make sure to submit your

comments by the deadline in this

notice.

7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,

be sure to identify the docket control

number assigned to this action in the

subject line on the first page of your

response. You may also provide the

name, date, and Federal Register

citation.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

EPA has received a pesticide petition

as follows proposing the establishment

and/or amendment of regulations for

residues of a certain pesticide chemical

in or on various food commodities

under section 408 of the Federal Food,

Drug, and Comestic Act (FFDCA), 21

U.S.C. 346a. EPA has determined that

this petition contains data or

information regarding the elements set

forth in section 408(d)(2); however, EPA

has not fully evaluated the sufficiency

of the submitted data at this time or

whether the data supports granting of

the petition. Additional data may be

needed before EPA rules on the petition.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection,

Agricultural commodities, Feed

additives, Food additives, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: January 2, 2001.

James Jones,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Summary of Petition

Petitioner summary of the pesticide

petition is printed below as required by

section 408(d)(3) of the FFDCA. The

summary of the petition was prepared

by the petitioner and represents the

views of the petitioner. EPA is

publishing the petition summary

verbatim without editing it in any way.

The petition summary announces the

availability of a description of the

analytical method available to EPA for

the detection and measurement of the

pesticide chemical residues or an

explanation of why no such method is

needed.

Gowan Company

PP 7F4879

EPA has received a pesticide petition

(PP 7F4879) from Gowan Company, P.O.

Box 5569, Yuma, AZ 85366–5569

proposing, pursuant to section 408(d) of

the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend

40 CFR part 180 by establishing a

tolerance for residues of dicloran (2,6-

dichloro-4-nitroaniline) in or on the raw

agricultural commodities peanuts at 3

parts per million (ppm), in peanut oil at

6 ppm. EPA received an amendment for

two additional tolerances. The existing

tolerances for dicloran on carrots is

limited to residues resulting from postharvest use only and the existing

tolerance for dicloran on tomatoes is

4016 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2001 / Notices

limited to residues from pre-harvest use

only. Gowan has proposed to expand

the tolerances to permit residues

resulting from pre-harvest use on carrots

and post-harvest use on tomatoes. No

numerical change in the current

tolerance of 10 ppm on carrots and 5

ppm on tomatoes is proposed. EPA has

determined that the petition contains

data or information regarding the

elements set forth in section 408(d)(2) of

the FFDCA; however, EPA has not fully

evaluated the sufficiency of the

submitted data at this time or whether

the data support granting of the petition.

Additional data may be needed before

EPA rules on the petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

1. Plant metabolism. The metabolism

of dicloran in peaches, lettuce and

potatoes has been studied. Parent

compound and numerous metabolites

derived by hydroxylation and

acetylation of the nitro group, along

with deamination and hydroxylation of

the amino group, were seen in all crops.

Glutathione conjugation with

simultaneous removal of one or both

chlorine atoms was shown to occur.

2. Analytical method. An adequate

analytical method (EC GLC) is available

for enforcement purposes. Parent

compound is the only analyte in the

tolerance expression.

3. Magnitude of residues. Twenty-five

residue trials were conducted over 4

years. Average residues of 0.61 ppm

were observed in peanuts and the

highest average residue observed was

2.85 ppm. An average concentration

factor of 1.6X in refined peanut oil was

observed.

Five pre-harvest and three combined

pre-harvest plus post-harvest carrot

residue trials were conducted. Residues

from the proposed pre-harvest use

pattern were in all cases well below the

existing post-harvest tolerance of 10

ppm.

Post-harvest tomato residue studies

were conducted. Variables including

dilution rates, application techniques

and the composition and concentration

of various wax emulsions were

investigated. It was concluded that the

proposed post-harvest use pattern will

result in residues which are below the

existing tolerance of 5 ppm for preharvest use.

B. Toxicological Profile

1. Acute toxicity. The acute oral LD50

of technical dicloran is greater than

10,000 milligrams/kilograms (mg/kg),

the acute dermal LD50 is greater than

2,000 mg/kg, and the 4-hour acute

inhalation LC50 is greater than 2

milligrams/liter (mg/L). Dicloran is not

a dermal irritant but is a sensitizer.

Dicloran is a mild eye irritant.

2. Genotoxicity. The following

genotoxicity tests were conducted: gene

mutation (Ames tests), structural

chromosome aberration (in vivo

cytogenetic assay using human

lymphocytes) and unscheduled DNA

synthesis using rat hepatocytes. Results

were generally negative; however, some

Ames tests with the bacterium S.

typhimurium showed a positive

response. Ames tests with E. coli were

negative. In view of the results of

mammalian chronic, oncogenic and

developmental studies, however, it is

considered that the results of the

positive Ames tests are not relevant to

human toxicity.

3. Reproductive and developmental

toxicity. In a rabbit developmental

toxicity study, the maternal no observed

adverse effect level (NOAEL) was 8 mg/

kg/day and the maternal lowest

observed adverse effect level (LOAEL)

as 20 mg/kg/day. The developmental

NOAEL was greater than or equal to 50

mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested.

In a rat developmental toxicity study,

the maternal and embryotoxic NOAEL

was 100 mg/kg/day, and the maternal

and embryotoxic LOAEL was 200 mg/

kg/day. The teratological NOAEL was

greater than or equal to 400 mg/kg/day,

the highest dose tested (HDT).

In a 2-generation rat reproduction

study, the NOAEL for systemic toxicity

was 250 ppm (21 mg/kg/day) on the

basis of reduced bodyweight gain and

increased liver and kidney weights. The

NOAEL for reproductive and

developmental toxicity was also 250

ppm on the basis of reduced pup

weights. No other reproductive or

developmental parameters were affected

at any treatment level. The highest dose

tested was 1,250 ppm (110 mg/kg/day).

4. Subchronic toxicity. In 90-day rat

studies, the NOAEL was determined to

be 500 ppm in the diet (44 mg/kg/day),

and the LOAEL was based upon

increased liver weights in both sexes

and centrilobular hepatocyte

enlargement in males. Similar effects, as

well as an increase in blood cholesterol

concentration, were observed in 90-day

mouse studies, and the NOAEL was 15

mg/kg/day.

5. Chronic toxicity. EPA has

established the reference dose (RfD) for

dicloran at 0.025 mg/kg/day. The RfD

for dicloran is based on a 2-year dog

feeding study with a NOAEL of 2.5 mg/

kg/day and an uncertainty factor of 100.

The effect of concern was increased

liver weight and histological changes in

hepatocytes.

6. Animal metabolism. Dicloran is

rapidly excreted by rats, goats, and

hens. Numerous metabolites derived by

reduction, acetylation, hydroxylation,

deamination and dechlorination were

observed.

7. Carcinogenicity. In an 80-week

mouse study, dicloran was not

oncogenic when administered at dose

levels up to 600 ppm (103 mg/kg/day).

Heptotoxicity indicated this to be the

approximate maximum tolerance dose.

In a 2-year rat study, dicloran was not

oncogenic when administered at 1,000

ppm (59 mg/kg/day for males and 71

mg/kg/day for females).

8. Endocrine disruption.

Developmental toxicity studies in rats

and rabbits and a reproduction study in

rats gave no indication of any effects on

endocrine function related to

development and reproduction.

Subchronic and chronic treatment did

not induce any morphological changes

in endocrine organs and tissues.

C. Aggregate Exposure

1. Dietary exposure— i. Chronic

exposure. In a theoretical maximum

residue concentration (TMRC) worsecase analysis, it was assumed that

dicloran is used on 100% of the acreage

of all crops on which it is registered,

and that residues on these crops are

equal to the tolerance levels. It was

calculated that the chronic dietary

exposure to the general U.S. population

would be 0.0265 mg/kg/day, or 106% of

the chronic RfD. For non-nursing

infants, the most highly exposed

subgroup, the chronic dietary exposure

from all crops is calculated to be 409%

of the RfD.

Actual dietary chronic exposure is

known to be much lower. The U.S.

Department of Agriculture, the U.S.

Food and Drug Administration, and

California have monitored residues of

dicloran in foods, and tens of thousands

of analyses have been performed. These

databases are readily examined using

the Agency’s own dietary exposure

software, DEEM. It is concluded that the

current actual chronic dietary exposure

to dicloran from all foods is less than

0.002 mg/kg/day (less than 8% of the

RfD) for non-nursing infants, the most

highly exposed subgroup, and less than

0.001 mg/kg/day (less than 4% of the

RfD) for the general U.S. population and

all other subgroups.

Novigen Sciences DEEM software was

used to perform a theoretical maximum

residue concentration (TMRC) analysis

for peanuts, carrots, and tomatoes.

Actual results of peanut and tomato

processing studies with dicloran were

incorporated. Dietary exposure was

calculated to be equivalent to 24% of

the RfD for the U.S. population, 14% for

non-nursing infants and 49% for

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2001 / Notices 4017

children 1–6, the most heavily-exposed

population subgroup. Given these

assumptions, the total dietary exposure

from all current and proposed uses

would be equivalent to no more than

28% of the RfD for the U.S. population,

22% for non-nursing infants and 53%

for children 1–6. These levels of

exposure are acceptable.

ii. Acute exposure. No developmental

or reproductive effects have been

observed which indicate special

perinatal sensitivity. Therefore, an

analysis of acute exposure has not been

conducted.

a. Food. Dicloran is registered for use

on apricots, snap beans, carrots, celery,

sweet cherries, cucumbers, endive,

garlic, grapes, lettuce, nectarines,

onions, peaches, plums, potatoes,

rhubarb, sweet potatoes and tomatoes.

(See 40 CFR 180.200 for specific

tolerances.) The metabolism of dicloran

in plants and animals is adequately

understood for the purposes of these

tolerances. There is a practical

analytical method for detecting and

measuring levels of dicloran in or on

food with a limit of detection that

allows monitoring of food with residues

at or above the levels set in this

tolerance.

b. Drinking water. Dicloran was not

reported in the Agency’s survey of

pesticides in ground water from 1971–

1991, nor in the Agency’s 1988–1990

survey of pesticides in drinking water

wells. The compound has not been

reported in surface water. A small scale

prospective ground water study suggests

that the average residue in ground water

is well below 0.001 ppm. The Agency

has not conducted a detailed analysis of

potential exposure to dicloran via

drinking water; however, it is believed

that chronic exposure from this source

is very small.

2. Non-dietary exposure. Dicloran has

no aquatic, lawn or residential uses.

D. Cumulative Effects

At this time the Agency has not

reviewed available information

concerning the potentially cumulative

effects of dicloran and other substances

that may have a common mechanism of

toxicity. For purposes of this petition

only, the Agency is considering only the

potential risks of dicloran in its

aggregate exposure.

E. Safety Determination

1. U.S. population—Chronic risk. If it

is assumed that all crops on which

dicloran is registered are treated, and if

all residues on crops are assumed to be

equal to the tolerance levels, then it can

be calculated that the theoretical

maximum residue concentration

(TMRC) is equal to 106% of the RfD for

the general U.S. population and 408%

of the RfD for non-nursing infants, the

most highly exposed group.

Actual chronic risk is known to be

much lower. Using anticipated residue

concentrations, it was concluded that

chronic dietary exposure to dicloran

will be no more than 28% of the RfD.

Exposures from drinking water and all

other routes is expected to be negligible.

2. Infants and children. In assessing

the potential for additional sensitivity of

infants and children to residues of

dicloran, EPA considered data from

developmental toxicity studies in the rat

and rabbit and reproduction studies in

the rat. The developmental toxicity

studies are designed to evaluate adverse

effects on the developing organism

resulting from pesticide exposure

during prenatal development to one or

both parents. Reproduction studies

provide information relating to effects

from exposure to the pesticide on the

reproductive capability of mating

animals and data on systemic toxicity.

No teratological effects have been

observed with dicloran. The lowest

embryotoxic NOAEL in these studies

was 100 mg/kg/day, compared to a

chronic NOAEL of 2.5 mg/kg/day. There

is no indication of special perinatal

sensitivity in the absence of maternal

toxicity and thus no suggestion of

special sensitivity of infants and

children. It is concluded that there is a

reasonable certainty of no harm to

infants and children from aggregate

exposure to dicloran residues.

F. International Tolerances

There are no Codex, Canadian or

Mexican maximum residue levels for

dicloran in peanuts. Although no

numerical revisions of existing tolerance

levels are proposed for carrots or

tomatoes, it is noted that Canadian

MRL’s of 5 ppm exist for both carrots

and tomatoes. Codex MRL’s of 10 ppm

for carrots and 0.5 ppm for tomatoes

exist.

[FR Doc. 01–1352 Filed 1–16–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[PF–986; FRL–6755–1]

Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition to

Establish a Tolerance for a Certain

Pesticide Chemical in or on Food

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

initial filing of a pesticide petition

proposing the establishment of

regulations for residues of a certain

pesticide chemical in or on various food

commodities.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket

control number PF–986, must be

received on or before February 16, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be

submitted by mail, electronically, or in

person. Please follow the detailed

instructions for each method as

provided in Unit I.C. of the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure

proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative

that you identify docket control number

PF–961 in the subject line on the first

page of your response.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Sharlene Matten, Biopesticides

and Pollution Prevention Division

(7511C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,

DC 20460; telephone number: (703)

605–0514; e-mail address:

matten.sharlene@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be affected by this action if

you are an agricultural producer, food

manufacturer or pesticide manufacturer.

Potentially affected categories and

entities may include, but are not limited

to:

Categories NAICS

codes

Examples of potentially affected entities

Industry 111 Crop production

112 Animal production

311 Food manufacturing

32532 Pesticide manufacturing

This listing is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

affected by this action. Other types of

entities not listed in the table could also

be affected. The North American

Industrial Classification System

(NAICS) codes have been provided to

assist you and others in determining

whether or not this action might apply

to certain entities. If you have questions

regarding the applicability of this action

to a particular entity, consult the person

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.