Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 49541

[FR Doc. 05–16813 Filed 8–23–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 20 

RIN 1018–AU04; 1018–AU 09; 1018–AU13; 

1018–AU28 

Migratory Bird Hunting; Approval of 

Tungsten-Iron-Copper-Nickel, IronTungsten-Nickel Alloy, and TungstenBronze (Additional Formulation), and 

Tungsten-Tin-Iron Shot Types as 

Nontoxic for Hunting Waterfowl and 

Coots; Availability of Environmental 

Assessments

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of 

availability. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (we, us, or USFWS) proposes to 

approve four shot types or alloys for 

hunting waterfowl and coots and to 

change the listing of approved nontoxic 

shot types in 50 CFR 20.21(j) to reflect 

the cumulative approvals of nontoxic 

shot types and alloys. 

These four shot types or alloys were 

submitted to us separately, and we 

published advance notices of proposed 

rulemakings for these shot types under 

RINs 1018–AU04, 1018–AU09, 1018–

AU13, and 1018–AU28, respectively. 

We now combine all these actions under 

RIN 1018–AU04. 

In addition, we propose to approve 

alloys of several metals because we have 

approved the metals individually at or 

near 100% in nontoxic shot.

DATES: Send comments on this proposal 

by September 23, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN 1018–AU04, by any of 

the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Agency Web Site: http://

migratorybirds.fws.gov. Follow the links 

to submit a comment. 

• E-mail address for comments: 

George_T_Allen@fws.gov. Include ‘‘RIN 

1018–AU04’’ in the subject line of the 

message. Please submit electronic 

comments as text files; do not use file 

compression or any special formatting. 

• Fax: 703–358–2217. 

• Mail: Chief, Division of Migratory 

Bird Management, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax 

Drive, Mail Stop MBSP–4107, 

Arlington, Virginia 22203–1610. 

• Hand Delivery: Division of 

Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 4501 North Fairfax 

Drive, Room 4091, Arlington, Virginia 

22203–1610. 

For specific instructions on 

submitting or inspecting public 

comments, inspecting the complete file 

for this rule, or requesting a copy of the 

draft environmental assessment, see 

Public Comments in SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

George T. Allen, Division of Migratory 

Bird Management, 703–358–1714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 

(Act) (16 U.S.C. 703–711) and the Fish 

and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978 

(16 U.S.C. 712) implement migratory 

bird treaties between the United States 

and Great Britain for Canada (1916, 

amended), Mexico (1936, amended), 

Japan (1972, amended), and Russia 

(then the Soviet Union, 1978). These 

treaties protect certain migratory birds 

from take, except as permitted under the 

Acts. The Acts authorize the Secretary 

of the Interior to regulate take of 

migratory birds in the United States. 

Under this authority, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service controls the hunting of 

migratory game birds through 

regulations in 50 CFR part 20. 

Deposition of toxic shot and release of 

toxic shot components in waterfowl 

hunting locations are potentially 

harmful to many organisms. Research 

has shown that ingested spent lead shot 

causes significant mortality in migratory 

birds. Since the mid-1970s, we have 

sought to identify shot types that do not 

pose significant toxicity hazards to 

migratory birds or other wildlife. We 

addressed the issue of lead poisoning in 

waterfowl in an Environmental Impact 

Statement in 1976, and again in a 1986 

supplemental EIS. The 1986 document 

provided the scientific justification for a 

ban on the use of lead shot and the 

subsequent approval of steel shot for 

hunting waterfowl and coots that began 

that year, with a complete ban of lead 

for waterfowl and coot hunting in 1991. 

We have continued to consider other 

potential candidates for approval as 

nontoxic shot. We are obligated to 

review applications for approval of 

alternative shot types as nontoxic for 

hunting waterfowl and coots. 

We have received applications for 

approval of four shot types as nontoxic 

for hunting waterfowl and coots. Those 

shot types are: 

1. Tungsten-Iron-Copper-Nickel 

(TICN) shot, of 40–76 percent tungsten, 

10–37 percent iron, 9–16 percent 

copper, and 5–7 percent nickel (70 FR 

3180, January 21, 2005); 

2. Iron-Tungsten-Nickel (ITN) alloys 

composed of 20–70 percent tungsten, 

10–40 percent nickel, and 10–70 percent 

iron (70 FR 22625, May 2, 2005); 

3. Tungsten-Bronze (TB) shot made of 

60 percent tungsten, 35.1 percent 

copper, 3.9 percent tin, and 1 percent 

iron (70 FR 22624, May 2, 2005, Note: 

This formulation differs from the 

Tungsten-Bronze nontoxic shot 

formulation approved in 2004.); and 

4. Tungsten-Tin-Iron (TTI) shot 

composed of 58 percent tungsten, 38 

percent tin, and 4 percent iron. 

The metals in these shot types have 

already been approved in other nontoxic 

shot types. In considering approval of 

these shot types, we were particularly 

concerned about the solubility and 

bioavailability of the nickel and copper 

in them. In addition, because tungsten, 

tin, and iron have already been 

approved at very high proportions of 

other nontoxic shot types with no 

known negative effects of the metals, we 

will propose approval of all alloys of 

these four metals. 

The data provided to us indicate that 

the shot types are nontoxic when 

ingested by waterfowl and should not 

pose a significant danger to migratory 

birds, other wildlife, or their habitats. 

We conclude that they raise no 

particular concerns about deposition in 

the environment or about ingestion by 

waterfowl or predators.

The process for submission and 

evaluation of new shot types for 

approval as nontoxic is given at 50 CFR 

20.134. The list of shot types approved 

as nontoxic for use in hunting migratory 

birds is provided in the table at 50 CFR 

20.21(j). With this proposed rule, we 

also propose to revise the listing of 

approved nontoxic shot types in 

§ 20.21(j) to include the cumulative 

approvals of the shot types considered 

in this proposed rule with the other 

nontoxic shot types already in the table. 

Many hunters believe that some 

nontoxic shot types do not compare 

favorably to lead and that they may 

damage some shotgun barrels, and a 

small percentage of hunters have not 

complied with nontoxic shot 

regulations. Allowing use of additional 

nontoxic shot types may encourage 

greater hunter compliance and 

participation with nontoxic shot 

requirements and discourage the use of 

lead shot. The use of nontoxic shot for 

waterfowl hunting has increased in 

recent years (Anderson et al. 2000), but 

we believe that compliance will 

continue to increase with the 

availability and approval of other 

49542 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

nontoxic shot types. Increased use of 

nontoxic shot will enhance protection of 

migratory waterfowl and their habitats. 

More important, however, is that the 

Fish and Wildlife Service is obligated to 

consider all complete nontoxic shot 

submissions. 

We also propose to add a column to 

the table of approved shot types that 

lists the field testing device suitable for 

each shot type. The information in this 

column is strictly informational, not 

regulatory. Because these regulations are 

used by both waterfowl hunters and law 

enforcement officers, we believe that 

information on suitable testing devices 

is a useful addition to the table. 

Affected Environment 

Waterfowl Populations 

The taxonomic family Anatidae, 

principally subfamily Anatinae (ducks) 

and their habitats, comprise the affected 

environment. Waterfowl habitats and 

populations in North America in 2004 

were described by the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Garrettson et al. 2004). 

In the Breeding Population and Habitat 

Survey traditional survey area (strata 1–

18, 20–50, and 75–77), the total-duck 

population estimate was 32.2 ± 0.6 (± 1 

standard error) million birds, 11 percent 

below the 2003 estimate of 36.2 ± 0.7 

million birds, and 3 percent below the 

1955–2003 long-term average. Mallards 

(Anas platyrhynchos) were estimated at 

7.4 ± 0.3 million, similar to last year’s 

estimate of 7.9 ± 0.3 million birds and 

to the long-term average. Blue-winged 

teal (A. discors) numbered 4.1 ± 0.2 

million, 26 percent below last year’s 

estimate of 5.5 ± 0.3 million and 10 

percent below the long-term average. 

Among other duck species, only 

northern shovelers (A. clypeata, 2.8 ±

0.2 million) and American wigeon (A. 

americana, 2.0 ± 0.1 million) were both 

22 percent below their 2003 estimates. 

As in 2003, gadwall (A. strepera, 2.6 ±

0.2 million, +56 percent), green-winged 

teal (A. crecca, 2.5 ± 0.1 million, +33 

percent), and northern shovelers (+32 

percent) were above their long-term 

averages. Northern pintails (A. acuta, 

2.2 ± 0.2 million, ·48 percent), scaup 

(Aythya affinis and A. marila, 3.8 ± 0.2 

million, ·27 percent), and American 

wigeon (·25 percent) were well below 

their long-term averages in 2004. 

Habitats 

Waterfowl hunting occurs in habitats 

used by many taxa of migratory birds, as 

well as by aquatic invertebrates, 

amphibians and some mammals. Fish 

also may be found in many hunting 

locations. In 2004, total May ponds in 

Prairie Canada, and the north-central 

United States combined were estimated 

at 3.9 ± 0.2 million, which was 24 

percent lower than the figure for 2003 

and 19 percent below the long-term 

average. Pond numbers in both Canada 

(2.5 ± 0.1 million) and the U. S. (1.4 ±

0.1 million) were below 2003 estimates 

(·29 percent in Canada, and ·16 

percent in the United States), and pond 

numbers in Canada were 25 percent 

below the long-term average for the 

region. 

Fall Flight Forecasts 

The projected mallard fall flight index 

was 9.4 ± 0.1 million birds, similar to 

the 2003 estimate of 10.3 ± 0.1 million. 

The 2004 total duck population estimate 

for the eastern survey area (strata 51–56 

and 62–69) was 3.9 ± 0.3 million birds. 

This estimate was similar to the 2003 

estimate of 3.6 ± 0.3 million birds, and 

to the 1996–2003 average. Individual 

species estimates for this area were 

similar to 2003 estimates and to 1996–

2003 averages, with the exception of 

American wigeon (0.1 ± 0.1 million) and 

goldeneyes (Bucephala clangula and B. 

islandica, 0.4 ± 0.1 million), which were 

61 percent and 42 percent below their 

1996–2003 averages, respectively, and 

ring-necked ducks (Aythya collaris, 0.7 

± 0.2 million), which increased by 67 

percent relative to the 2003 estimate of 

their numbers. 

Characterization of the Four Shot Types 

TICN Alloys 

Spherical Precision, Inc. of Tustin, 

CA, submitted Tungsten-Iron-CopperNickel (TICN) shot for approval. The 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

for this group of alloys was published in 

the Federal Register on January 21, 

2005, under RIN 1018–AU04 (70 FR 

3180). This is an array of layered alloys 

or metals of 40–76 percent tungsten, 10–

37 percent iron, 9–16 percent copper, 

and 5–7 percent nickel. TICN shot has 

a density ranging from 10.0 to 14.0 

grams per cubic centimeter (g/cm3), is 

noncorrosive, and is magnetic. 

Spherical Precision estimates that the 

volume of TICN shot for use in hunting 

migratory birds in the United States will 

be approximately 50,000 pounds (lb) 

(22,700 kilograms (kg)) during the first 

year of sale, and perhaps 100,000 lb 

(45,400 kg) per year thereafter. 

ITN Alloys 

ENVIRON-Metal of Sweet Home, OR, 

submitted Iron-Tungsten-Nickel (ITN) 

alloys, which are cast alloys containing 

10–70 percent iron, 20–70 percent 

tungsten, and 10–40 percent nickel. The 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

for this group of alloys published in the 

Federal Register on May 2, 2005, under 

RIN 1018–AU09 (70 FR 22625). The 

proposed shot types have densities 

ranging from about 8.5 to about 13.5 g/

cm3. The compositions of the alloys are 

shown in table 1.

TABLE 1.—COMPOSITION OF ITN SHOT ALLOYS

Alloy Density

(g/cm3) 1

Shot weight

(mg) 2

Iron Tungsten Nickel 

Percent Weight

(mg) Percent Weight(mg) Percent Weight(mg) 

1 ....................................... 8.8 165.89 70 116.12 20 33.18 10 16.59 

2 ....................................... 9.0 169.65 40 67.86 20 67.86 40 33.93 

3 ....................................... 9.8 184.73 44 81.28 33 60.96 23 42.49 

4 ....................................... 11.3 213.00 10 21.30 50 106.50 40 85.20 

5 ....................................... 13.3 250.71 20 50.14 70 175.49 10 25.07 

6 ....................................... 13.55 255.42 10 25.54 70 178.79 20 51.08 

Note.—Weights are based on one number 4 shot. 

ENVIRON-Metal estimated that the 

yearly volume of ITN shot types with 

densities between those of steel (7.86 g/

cm3) and lead (11.3 g/cm3) expected for 

use in hunting migratory birds in the 

United States is approximately 200,000 

lb (113,500 kg) during the first year of 

sale. In the second year and beyond, 

sales upwards of 500,000 lb (227,000 kg) 

per year are anticipated. ITN shot types 

with densities greater than that of lead 

may ultimately attain sales levels of 

1,000,000 lb (454,000 kg) per year.

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 49543

TB Shot 

The Olin Corporation of East Alton, 

IL, submitted Tungsten-Bronze (TB) 

shot for approval. The advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this shot type 

was published in the Federal Register

on May 2, 2005, under RIN 1018–AU13 

(70 FR 22624). This is a sintered 

composite with an average composition 

of 60 percent tungsten, 35.1 percent 

copper, 3.9 percent tin, and 1 percent 

iron. The copper and tin make up 39 

percent of the shot as a 90:10 ratio, 

respectively, in the form of a bronze 

alloy. The shot has a density of 12.0 g/

cm3, compared to 11.1–11.3 g/cm3 for 

lead, and 7.9 g/cm3 for steel. Olin 

estimated that the yearly volume of the 

TB shot in hunting migratory birds in 

North America will be approximately 

300,000 lb (136,200 kg). 

TTI Shot 

Tungsten-Tin-Iron (TTI) shot, 

submitted by Nice Shot, Inc., of Albion, 

PA, is a cast alloy composed of 58 

percent tungsten, 38 percent tin, and 4 

percent iron. This shot type has a 

density of 11.0 g/cm3. Nice Shot, Inc. 

estimated that approximately 5,000 lb 

(2,270 kg) of TTI shot are expected to be 

sold for use in hunting migratory birds 

in the United States during the first year 

of sale. TTI shot contains less than 1 

percent lead, and will not be coated. 

Each of the four shot types has a 

residual lead level of less than 1 

percent. To inhibit corrosion, TICN shot 

may be coated with tin, and ITN shot 

may be surface-coated with thin 

petroleum-based films. Neither TB nor 

TTI shot will be coated. 

Environmental Fate of the Metals in the 

Four Shot Types 

All of the metals in these shot types 

have been approved in other nontoxic 

shot types, and the submitters asserted 

that the four shot types pose no adverse 

toxicological risks to waterfowl or other 

forms of terrestrial or aquatic life. Our 

particular concern in considering 

approval of these shot types is the 

solubility and bioavailability of the 

nickel and copper in them. 

The metals in the four shot types are 

insoluble under hot and cold (Weast 

1986). Neither manufacturing the shot 

nor firing shotshells containing the shot 

will alter the metals or change how they 

dissolve in the environment. The shot 

types are not chemically or physically 

altered by firing from a shotgun. 

Iron is naturally widespread. It 

comprises approximately 2 percent of 

the composition of soils and sediments 

in the United States. The iron in the 

shot types is not soluble. 

Elemental tungsten and iron are 

virtually insoluble in water, and 

therefore do not weather and degrade in 

the environment. Tungsten is stable in 

acids and does not easily form 

compounds with other substances. 

Preferential uptake by plants in acidic 

soil suggests uptake of tungsten when it 

has formed compounds with other 

substances rather than when it is in its 

elemental form (Kabata-Pendias and 

Pendias 1984). 

Elemental copper can be oxidized by 

organic and mineral acids that contain 

an oxidizing agent. Elemental copper is 

not oxidized in water (Aaseth and 

Norseth 1986). 

Nickel is common in fresh waters, 

though usually at concentrations of less 

than 1 part per billion (p/b) in locations 

unaffected by human activities. Pure 

nickel is not soluble in water, and 

resists corrosion at temperatures 

between ·20 °C and 30 °C (Chau and 

Kulikovsky-Cordeiro 1995). Free nickel 

may be part of chemical reactions, such 

as sorption, precipitation, and 

complexation. ‘‘Under anaerobic 

conditions, typical of deep groundwater, 

precipitation of nickel sulfide keeps 

nickel concentrations low’’ (Eisler 

1998). Reactions of nickel with anions 

are unlikely. Complexation with organic 

agents is poorly understood (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] 

1986). Water hardness is the dominant 

factor governing nickel effects on biota 

(Stokes 1988). 

Tin is only very slightly soluble at pH 

values from 4 to 11, as found in natural 

settings. Tin occurs naturally in soils at 

2 to 200 mg/g (parts per thousand or 

ppt) with areas of enrichment at 

concentrations up to 1,000 mg/g (WHO 

1980). In general, however, soil 

concentrations in the United States are 

between 1 and 5 parts per million (p/m) 

(Kabata-Pendias and Pendias 1984). 

Possible Environmental Concentrations 

for Metals in the Four Shot Types in 

Terrestrial Systems 

Calculation of the estimated 

environmental concentration (EEC) of a 

candidate shot in a terrestrial ecosystem 

is based on 69,000 shot per hectare (50 

CFR 20.134). These calculations assume 

that the shot dissolves promptly and 

completely after deposition. 

TICN Alloys 

The maximum EEC for TICN shot for 

tungsten in soil is 21.3 p/m. This is 

below the EEC for several other 

tungsten-based shot types that we have 

previously approved. We are not aware 

of any problems associated with those 

shot types. The U.S. EPA does not have 

a biosolids application limit for 

tungsten. 

For TICN shot, if the shot are 

completely dissolved in dry, porous 

soil, the maximum EEC for iron is 7.40 

p/m. Iron is naturally widespread, 

comprising approximately 2 percent of 

the composition of soils and sediments 

in the United States. The EEC for iron 

from TICN shot is much lower than that 

level. 

For copper in TICN shot, the 

maximum EEC in soils is 3.36 p/m. In 

comparison, the ceiling concentration 

limit for biosolids application for 

copper is 4,300 p/m (EPA 2000). 

The maximum EEC for nickel in TICN 

shot in soils is 1.62 p/m. This 

concentration is a small fraction of the 

EPA biosolids application limit of 420 

p/m (EPA 2000).

If TICN shot is coated with tin, the 

EEC for tin in dry soils is 1.31 p/m. 

There is no EPA biosolids application 

limit for tin, but it occurs naturally in 

soils at 2 to 200 p/m, with areas of 

enrichment at concentrations up to 

1,000 p/m (WHO 1980). In general, soil 

concentrations in the United States are 

between 1 and 5 p/m; the suggested 

maximum concentration in surface soil 

tolerated by plants is 50 p/m dry weight 

(Kabata-Pendias and Pendias 1984). 

ITN Alloys 

The terrestrial EECs for the iron and 

tungsten from any ITN alloy (table 2) are 

below those from approved shot types, 

and we do not believe they are a 

problem in soils. Though data on iron 

concentrations in biosolids are 

unavailable, natural soil background 

concentrations range from 5,000 to 

50,000 p/m. This is equivalent to 32,500 

to 325,000 kg per hectare (kg/h). We do 

not believe that the worst-case 

additional 8.01 kg of iron per hectare 

(about 0.025 percent of natural 

background concentrations) would have 

any effect on plants or animals, 

especially since the iron in the shot is 

not in a soluble form.

49544 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2.—EXPECTED TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCENTRATIONS OF THE METALS IN ITN ALLOYS

Alloy

(% I/T/N) 

Shot weight

(kg) 

Deposition (kg) Terrestrial EEC (p/m) 

Iron Tungsten Nickel Iron Tungsten Nickel 

1 (70/20/10) .............................................. 11.446 8.01 2.29 1.15 12.33 3.52 1.76 

2 (40/20/40) .............................................. 11.706 4.68 2.34 4.68 7.20 3.60 7.20 

3 (44/33/23) .............................................. 12.746 5.61 4.21 2.93 8.63 6.47 4.51 

4 (10/50/40) .............................................. 14.700 1.47 7.35 5.88 2.26 11.31 9.05 

5 (20/70/10) .............................................. 17.299 3.46 12.11 1.73 5.32 18.63 2.66 

6 (10/70/20) .............................................. 17.624 1.76 12.34 3.52 2.71 18.98 5.42 

Data from biosolid studies indicate 

that tungsten generally is present at 40 

to 180 p/m, about four times the worst 

EEC for tungsten from ITN shot. 

Therefore, it is unlikely that tungsten 

from the shot would exceed 

concentrations obtained from biosolid 

applications. 

The estimated soil concentration (p/m 

soil) of nickel for ITN alloy 4 (the 

highest in nickel) is a very small 

fraction of the 420 p/m maximum 

concentration allowed for terrestrial 

application of biosolids and is two 

orders of magnitude less than the 

maximum cumulative loading rate for 

nickel of 420 kg/h per year (http://

www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/claritgw). We do 

not believe that nickel from ITN shot 

would pose an environmental problem 

in soils. 

TB Shot 

Based on the maximum concentration 

of each metal in any formulation of TB 

shot, the increased concentrations in 

soils for the metals are 14.4 p/m for 

tungsten, 8.43 p/m for copper, 0.94

p/m for tin, and 0.24 p/m for iron. The 

EEC for tungsten is lower than the value 

for ITN shot, and considerably lower 

than the values for previously approved 

shot types. As noted earlier, the ceiling 

concentration limit for biosolids 

application for copper is 4,300 p/m 

(EPA 2000). The EEC for iron from TB 

shot is extremely small. 

TTI Shot 

The EEC for tungsten in TTI shot in 

soil (the increase in soil concentration) 

is 12.77 mg/kg or p/m. This is below the 

EEC for several other tungsten-based 

shot types that we have previously 

approved. We are not aware of any 

problems associated with those shot 

types. The EPA does not have a 

biosolids application limit for tungsten. 

Data from biosolid studies indicate that 

tungsten generally is present at 40 to 

180 p/m, about four times the worst EEC 

for tungsten from ITN shot. Therefore, it 

is unlikely that tungsten from the shot 

would exceed concentrations obtained 

from biosolid applications. 

The EEC for tin in dry soils is 8.37

p/m. In general, soil concentrations in 

the United States are between 1 and 5 

p/m; the suggested maximum 

concentration in surface soil tolerated 

by plants is 50 p/m dry weight (KabataPendias and Pendias 1984), about six 

times the worst-case concentration to be 

expected from TTI shot. 

If the shot are completely dissolved in 

dry, porous soil, the maximum EEC for 

iron is 0.88 p/m. Iron is naturally 

widespread, comprising approximately 

2 percent of the composition of soils 

and sediments in the United States. The 

EEC for iron from TTI shot is much 

lower than that level. 

Though data on iron concentrations in 

biosolids are unavailable, natural soil 

background concentrations range from 

5,000 to 50,000 p/m. This is equivalent 

to 32,500 to 325,000 kg per hectare. We 

do not believe that the extremely small 

addition of the insoluble iron from TTI 

shot would have any effect on plants or 

animals, especially because the iron in 

the shot is not in a soluble form.

Possible Environmental Concentrations 

for Metals in the Four Shot Types in 

Aquatic Systems 

The EEC for water assumes that 

69,000 number 4 shot are completely 

dissolved in 1 hectare of water 1 foot (ft) 

(30.48 cm) deep. The submitter then 

calculates the concentration of each 

metal in the shot if the shot pellets 

dissolve completely. For our analyses, 

we assume complete dissolution of the 

shot type containing the highest 

proportion of each metal in the range of 

alloys submitted. 

TICN Alloys 

For TICN shot, the EEC for tungsten 

is 4.541 milligrams per liter (mg/l). The 

EPA has set no acute or chronic criteria 

for tungsten in aquatic systems. 

The EEC for iron from TICN shot in 

water is 1.579 mg/l. The chronic water 

quality criterion for iron in fresh water 

is 1 mg/l (EPA 1986). EPA has no 

criterion for salt water. 

For copper, the aquatic EEC is 0.717 

mg/l. This value is above both the acute 

and chronic criteria for freshwater and 

saltwater. This issue is discussed in the 

‘‘In Vitro Solubility Evaluation of TICN 

Shot’’ section. 

The aquatic EEC for nickel from TICN 

shot is 0.346 mg/l. The EPA (1986) acute 

criterion for nickel in fresh water is 

1,400 micrograms per liter (μg/l); the 

chronic criterion is 160 μg/l. The acute 

and chronic criteria for salt water are 75 

and 8.3 μg/l, respectively. Based on the 

EEC, the maximum release of nickel 

from TICN shot would be well below 

the fresh water acute criterion for 

protection of aquatic life. 

For the tin in TICN shot, the aquatic 

EEC is 0.280 mg/l. The lowest published 

standard for tin in water is the 4 mg/l 

water quality standard for the state of 

Minnesota. Even in the worst case, the 

tin concentration from dissolved TICN 

shot would be well below this standard. 

ITN Alloys 

The aquatic EECs for the metals in 

ITN shot are shown in table 3. The EEC 

for nickel exceeds aquatic water quality 

criteria (table 4). However, corrosion 

studies demonstrated that corrosion 

rates for all types of ITN shot are 

relatively low in both fresh water and 

seawater. This corrosion is discussed 

under ‘‘In Vitro Solubility Evaluation of 

ITN Shot.’’

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 49545

TABLE 3.—EXPECTED AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCENTRATIONS OF THE METALS IN ITN ALLOYS

Alloy

(% I/T/N) 

Shot weight

(kg) 

Deposition (kg) Aquatic EEC (p/m) 

Iron Tungsten Nickel Iron Tungsten Nickel 

1 (70/20/10) .............................................. 11.446 8.01 2.29 1.15 2,629 751 376 

2 (40/20/40) .............................................. 11.706 4.68 2.34 4.68 1,536 768 1,536 

3 (44/33/23) .............................................. 12.746 5.61 4.21 2.93 1,840 1,380 962 

4 (10/50/40) .............................................. 14.700 1.47 7.35 5.88 482 2,411 1,929 

5 (20/70/10) .............................................. 17.299 3.46 12.11 1.73 1,135 3,973 568 

6 (10/70/20) .............................................. 17.624 1.76 12.34 3.52 578 4,048 1,156 

TABLE 4.—AQUATIC LIFE CRITERIA AND WORST-CASE CONCENTRATIONS OF METALS IN ITN SHOT

Metal 

Acute water quality criterion for aquatic 

life

(μg/l) 

Chronic water quality criterion for 

aquatic life

(μg/l) 

Maximum EEC from 

ITN alloys 

Iron ......................................................... No Criterion .......................................... 1,000 .................................................... 2,629 (Alloy 1). 

Tungsten ................................................ No Criterion .......................................... No Criterion .......................................... 4,048 (Alloy 6). 

Nickel (fresh water) ............................... 1,400 .................................................... 160 ....................................................... 1,929 (Alloy 4). 

Nickel (salt water) .................................. 75 ......................................................... 8.3 ........................................................ 1,929 (Alloy 4). 

TB Shot 

The aquatic EECs for metals in TB 

shot are shown in table 5. The EEC for 

copper is considerably above the criteria 

for protection of fresh water and salt 

water life. However, a solubility study 

for this shot type demonstrated that 

corrosion of TB shot is low. This is 

discussed under ‘‘In Vitro Solubility 

Evaluation of TB Shot.’’

TABLE 5.—AQUATIC LIFE CRITERIA AND CONCENTRATIONS OF METALS IN TB SHOT

Metal 

Acute water quality criterion for aquatic 

life

(μg/l) 

Chronic water quality criterion for aquatic 

life

(μg/l) 

Maximum EEC 

from TB shot 

Tungsten .................................................. No Criterion ............................................. No Criterion ............................................. 3,073 

Copper (Fresh Water) ............................. 13.0 .......................................................... 9.0 ............................................................ 1,797 

Copper (Salt Water) ................................ 4.8 ............................................................ 3.1 ............................................................ 1,797 

Tin ............................................................ 4,0001 1 ................................................... No Criterion ............................................. 199.7 

Iron ........................................................... No Criterion ............................................. 1,000 ........................................................ 51.2 

1 Minnesota water quality standard, no federal standard for comparison. 

TTI Shot 

The EEC for tungsten is 2.72 

milligrams per liter (mg/1). The EPA has 

set no acute or chronic criteria for 

tungsten in aquatic systems. 

The aquatic EEC for tin is 1.78 mg/1. 

The lowest published standard for tin in 

water is the 4 mg/1 water quality 

standard for the state of Minnesota. Tin 

concentration from dissolved TTI shot 

would be well below this standard. 

The EEC for iron from TTI shot in 

water is 0.19 mg/1. The chronic water 

quality criterion for iron in fresh water 

is 1 mg/1 (EPA 1986). EPA has no 

criterion for salt water. 

In Vitro Solubility Evaluation of TICN 

Shot 

When nontoxic shot is ingested by 

waterfowl, both physical breakup of the 

shot, and dissolution of the metals that 

comprise the shot, may occur in the 

highly acidic environment of the 

gizzard. In addition to the standard Tier 

1 application information, Spherical 

Precision provided the results of an in 

vitro gizzard simulation test conducted 

to quantify the release of metals in 

solution under the prevailing pH 

conditions of the avian gizzard. The 

metal concentrations released during 

the simulation test were, in turn, 

compared to known levels of metals that 

cause toxicity in waterfowl. The 

evaluation followed the methodology of 

Kimball and Munir (1971) as closely as 

possible. The average amount of copper 

and nickel released from eight TICN 

shot per day are 1.87 mg and 1.77 mg, 

respectively. 

The maximum tolerable level of 

dietary copper during the long-term 

growth of chickens (Gallus domesticus) 

and turkeys (Meleagris species) has been 

reported to be 300 p/b (Committee on 

Mineral Toxicity in Animals (CMTA) 

1980). At the maximum tolerable level 

for chronic exposure of 300 ppb for 

poultry, a 1.8 kg chicken consuming 100 

g of food per day (Morck and Austic 

1981) would consume 30 mg copper per 

day (16.7 mg of copper per kg of body 

weight per day). The average amount of 

copper released from eight TICN shot is 

1.87 mg per day, which is well below 

concentrations that cause copper 

toxicosis in waterfowl. A bird would 

have to ingest 129 TICN shot to exceed 

the maximum tolerable level. 

No reproductive or other effects were 

observed in mallards that consumed the 

equivalent of 102 mg of nickel as nickel 

sulfate each day for 90 days (Eastin and 

O’Shea 1981). Therefore, the average 

amount of nickel released from eight 

TICN shot/day of 1.77 mg will pose no 

risk of adverse effects to waterfowl. 

Additionally, metallic nickel likely has 

a lower absorption from the 

gastrointestinal tract than does the 

nickel sulfate used in the mallard 

reproduction study, further decreasing 

the absorbed dose of TICN shot 

compared to the published toxicity 

study described above. 

We concluded that TICN shot is very 

resistant to degradation, and that it 

poses no risk to waterfowl if ingested in 

the field. The slow breakdown rate of

49546 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

1.53 mg per shot per day only permits 

the release of 0.233 mg of copper and 

0.221 mg of nickel per shot per day, 

both of which are concentrations that 

are orders of magnitude below toxic 

levels of concern for copper and nickel 

in waterfowl. 

In Vitro Solubility Evaluation of ITN 

Shot 

Fresh water, seawater, and an 

‘‘artificial gizzard’’ environment 

(Kimball and Munir, 1971) were 

evaluated to determine their corrosion 

rates on each of the six alloys, plus steel 

as a standard. The ‘‘artificial gizzard’’ 

test, although developed for lead alloy 

evaluation, proved to reliably simulate 

the mallard gizzard for both steel and 

ITN alloys and constitutes a very 

conservative approach for evaluation of 

nontoxic shot. This test resulted in 

corrosion/erosion rates up to twice 

those measured in steel and TungstenNickel-Iron mallard in-vivo studies 

(January 4, 2001, 66 FR 737). 

The ITN alloys with relatively low 

concentrations of tungsten and nickel 

corrode in a manner similar to that of 

steels. Corrosion rates of such steels are 

roughly linear over a wide range of 

exposure time. This corrosion is in 

contrast with that of alloys such as 

stainless steel, tungsten-nickel iron, or 

‘‘high-alloy’’ varieties of ITN, which 

readily form passivating oxide layers 

that impede further corrosion. 

Assuming that the short-term rate of 

shot weight loss would continue for one 

month in a static aqueous environment 

(a conservative assumption, because 

natural fresh water and seawater 

environments are dynamic, and because 

corrosion products forming on metal 

surfaces tend to progressively retard 

corrosion rates), the actual EECs are 

presented in table 6. These data show 

that the nickel concentration from ITN 

shot actually will be well below both 

the acute and chronic criteria for nickel 

in aquatic settings.

TABLE 6.—ENVIRONMENTAL CONCENTRATIONS OF METALS IN ITN SHOT BASED ON SOLUBILITY TESTING

Alloy

(% I/T/N) 

Fresh Water EEC (μg/l) Salt Water EEC (μg/l) 

Iron Tungsten Nickel Iron Tungsten Nickel 

1 (70/20/10) .............................................................................................. 27.16 7.76 3.87 3.36 0.97 0.23 

2 (40/20/40) .............................................................................................. 1.95 0.97 1.95 0 0 0 

3 (44/33/23) .............................................................................................. 12.61 9.69 6.70 10.66 7.99 2.60 

4 (10/50/40) .............................................................................................. 1.45 7.27 5.82 0 0 0 

5 (20/70/10) .............................................................................................. 6.79 23.77 3.40 2.72 20.37 2.90 

6 (10/70/20) .............................................................................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 

ENVIRON-Metal also provided the 

results of an in-vitro gizzard simulation 

test conducted to quantify the release of 

metals in solution under the prevailing 

pH conditions of the avian gizzard (table 

7). These data also demonstrate that the 

hazards from these alloys to wildlife 

would be very minimal.

TABLE 7.—METAL LOSS FROM ITN ALLOYS IN A SIMULATED GIZZARD OVER A 14-DAY PERIOD. 

Alloy

(% I/T/N) 

Initial weight 

of 10

number 4 

shot

(g) 

Weight Loss (mg) 

Percent 

weight loss Iron Tungsten Nickel 

1 (70/20/10) ............................................................................................. 1.994 179.90 51.40 25.70 12.9 

2 (40/20/40) ............................................................................................. 2.687 64.00 32.00 64.00 5.9 

3 (44/33/23) ............................................................................................. 2.766 72.60 54.45 37.95 5.9 

4 (10/50/40) ............................................................................................. 3.479 13.10 65.50 52.40 3.7 

5 (20/70/10) ............................................................................................. 3.462 18.80 65.80 9.40 2.7 

6 (10/70/20) ............................................................................................. 3.418 19.40 135.80 38.8 5.7 

In Vitro Solubility Evaluation of TB 

Shot 

The EEC for copper EEC was over 138 

times the freshwater acute criterion of 

13 g/l, and 200 times the freshwater 

chronic criterion of 9.0 g/l. However, 

Olin noted that the very conservative 

assumptions used to calculate the 

copper EEC are only an indication of the 

likely effect of deposition of TB shot in 

an aquatic setting. Therefore, as an 

addendum to the application for TB 

shot, Olin had an in-vitro dissolution 

test in water conducted. The test was 

conducted to quantify the release of 

metals from TB shot at pH values of 5.6, 

6.6, and 7.6 in synthetic buffered 

waters. The highest EEC for copper from 

the dissolution evaluations was 0.15

μg/l at pH 5.6. The hardness-adjusted 

chronic water quality criterion for 

copper was 9.7 μg/l, approximately 65 

times the worst-case EEC. Therefore, 

detrimental effects in aquatic systems 

from dissolution of TB shot would be 

highly unlikely. 

Olin provided the results of an invitro gizzard simulation test conducted 

to quantify the release of metals in 

solution under the prevailing pH 

conditions of the avian gizzard. The 

simulation test demonstrated that a 

number 4 TB shot would release about 

0.67 mg of the alloy per day. This, in 

turn, would mean release of 

approximately 0.24 mg of copper per 

day. 

Olin pointed out that the theoretical 

availability of copper from this in-vitro 

gizzard simulation test should be 

considered maximal when compared to 

the Irby et al. (1967) study results or the 

CMTA (1980) guideline. Unlike the invivo gizzard, which resembles an open 

corrosion system in which the products 

of the corrosion process are constantly 

being eliminated (Kimball and Munir 

1971), the test design for this in-vitro 

gizzard simulation was a closed 

corrosion system. Therefore, fine pieces 

of shot that would be released, and 

normally discarded from the gizzard, 

remained in the dissolution medium 

and potentially yielded more copper. 

Additionally, the analytical samples 

were analyzed for total metals with no 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 49547

filtration or centrifugation prior to 

analysis. As a result, the fine pieces of 

shot that were not fully dissolved and 

would normally be excreted were 

included in the total copper 

concentrations reported. 

Summary: Solubility Evaluations 

We have previously approved as 

nontoxic other shot types that contain 

tungsten, iron, and tin. Previous 

assessments of nontoxic shot types 

indicated that the potential release of 

iron, tungsten, or tin from TICN, ITN, or 

TB shot should not harm aquatic or 

terrestrial systems and we believe the 

small amount of tin in TB shot is not 

likely to harm waterfowl. The solubility 

testing further indicates that the release 

of nickel from ITN shot and copper from 

TICN or TB shot is not sufficient to 

present a hazard to aquatic systems or 

to biota. We propose to approve the four 

shot types as nontoxic. Our approval is 

based on the toxicological report, acute 

toxicity studies, reproductive/chronic 

toxicity studies, and other published 

research. The available information 

indicates that the four shot types are 

nontoxic when ingested by waterfowl 

and that they pose no significant danger 

to migratory birds, other wildlife, or 

their habitats. 

Impacts of Approval of the Four Shot 

Types 

Effects of the Metals 

Iron 

Iron is an essential nutrient. Iron 

toxicosis in mammals is primarily a 

phenomenon of overdosing of livestock. 

Maximum recommended dietary levels 

of iron range from 500 p/m for sheep to 

3000 p/m for pigs (National Research 

Council [NRC] 1980). The amount of 

iron in any of the four shot types would 

not pose a hazard to mammals. 

Chickens require at least 55 p/m iron 

in the diet (Morck and Austic 1981). 

There were no ill effects on chickens fed 

1,600 p/m iron in an adequate diet 

(McGhee et al. 1965), and chicks 

tolerated 1,600 p/m iron in the diets that 

included adequate copper, although 

decreased weight gains and increased 

mortality were observed in copperdeficient diets (McGhee et al. 1965). At 

the maximum tolerable level for chronic 

exposure of 1,000 p/m for poultry (NRC 

1980), a 1.8 kg chicken consuming 100 

grams of food per day (Morck and 

Austic 1981) would consume 100 mg 

iron per day (56 mg per kg of body 

weight per day). 

Deobald and Elvehjem (1935) reported 

that 4,500 p/m iron in the diet produced 

rickets in chicks. Adverse effects were 

not observed when turkey poults were 

fed diets amended with 440 p/m iron 

(Woerpel and Balloun 1964). 

Turkey poults fed 440 p/m in the diet 

suffered no adverse effects. The tests, in 

which eight number 4 tungsten-iron 

shot were administered to each mallard 

in a toxicity study indicated that the 45 

percent iron content of the shot had no 

adverse effects on the test animals 

(Kelly et al. 1998). 

We are not aware of acute toxicity 

data for iron in waterfowl. Zinc-coated 

iron shot appeared to have little or no 

effect on ducks dosed with eight 

number 6 shot; mortality and weight 

loss for treated ducks were comparable 

to those for control animals (Irby et al.

1967). 

Game-farm mallards administered 

eight number 4 pellets of tungsten-iron 

shot, indicated no adverse effects from 

either the tungsten or the iron (Kelly et 

al. 1998). This shot formulation has a 

much greater iron content (45 percent) 

than do the shot types considered here. 

Tungsten 

Tungsten salts are toxic to mammals. 

Lifetime exposure to 5 p/m tungsten as 

sodium tungstate in drinking water 

produced no discernible adverse effects 

in rats (Rattus species) (Schroeder and 

Mitchener 1975). However, with 100 p/

m tungsten as sodium tungstate in 

drinking water, rats had decreased 

enzyme activity after 21 days (Cohen et 

al. 1973). 

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-HuuChanh 1965), but elemental tungsten is 

virtually insoluble and therefore 

essentially nontoxic. Tungsten powder 

added to the food of young rats at 2, 5, 

and 10 percent by mass for 70 days did 

not affect health or growth (Sax and 

Lewis 1989). A dietary concentration of 

94 p/m did not reduce weight gain in 

growing rats (Wei et al. 1987). Exposure 

to pure tungsten through oral, 

inhalation, or dermal pathways is not 

reported to cause any health effects 

(Sittig 1991). 

Acute tungsten toxicosis results in 

death from respiratory paralysis, often 

preceded by diarrhea and coma. Chronic 

intoxication is most evident in reduced 

growth rates. However, the most 

sensitive sign is reduced xanthine 

oxidase activity. Xanthine oxidase is an 

enzyme that is dependent upon 

molybdenum for proper functioning. It 

is thought that tungsten readily 

substitutes for molybdenum, with 

subsequent reduction in enzyme 

activity; supplemental dietary 

molybdenum will reverse the 

symptoms. The National Research 

Council Committee on Animal Nutrition 

recommends a maximum tolerable dose 

of 20 p/m tungsten in the diet for 

effective rearing of livestock (NRC 

1980). 

The LD50 of tungsten as sodium 

tungstate (Na2WO4) administered by 

intraperitoneal injection is 112 p/b body 

weight in male rats and 79 p/b body 

weight in mice (Mus species) (PhamHuu-Chanh 1965). This would classify 

tungsten as ‘‘very toxic’’ when 

administered intraperitoneally as a 

soluble salt. Kinard and Van de Erve 

(1941) showed that Na2WO4 is the most 

toxic tungsten salt, when compared 

with tungsten oxide and ammonium 

paratungstate. 

Tungsten administered in the diet had 

no effects on rats until reaching 150 p/

m diet when carcinoma incidence was 

increased in female Sprague-Dawley rats 

(Wei et al. 1987). Higgins et al. (1956a, 

b) noted that dietary concentrations of 

45 or 94 p/m tungsten produced no 

adverse effects on weight gain in 

growing rats. Other studies with rats 

indicate that dietary exposure to 5,000 

p/m tungsten oxide (WO3) or Na2WO4

results in 90 percent and 80 percent 

mortality, respectively, by the 70th day 

of exposure (NRC 1980). However, 

lifetime exposure of rats to 5 p/m 

tungsten as Na2WO4 in drinking water 

resulted in no observable adverse effects 

(Schroeder and Michener 1975). At 100 

p/m tungsten as Na2WO4 in drinking 

water, rats had decreased enzyme 

activity after 21 days of exposure 

(Cohen et al. 1973).

Goats (Capra hircus) appear to be less 

tolerant of dietary tungsten. A 5-month 

exposure to 22.5 p/m dietary tungsten as 

Na2WO4 resulted in depressed liver 

xanthine oxidase activity in growing 

kids. Milk production in goats and cows 

(Bos species) was unaffected by a single 

oral exposure to 25.0 p/b body weight 

of Na2WO4 (Owen and Proudfoot 1968). 

Anke and Groppel (1985) established 

that goats require at least 0.06 p/m 

tungsten in their diets for optimal 

reproduction. 

Chickens given a complete diet 

showed no adverse effects of 250 p/m 

sodium tungstate administered for 10 

days in the diet. However, 500 p/m in 

the diet reduced xanthine oxidase 

activity and reduced growth of day-old 

chicks (Teekell and Watts 1959). Adult 

hens had reduced egg production and 

egg weight on a diet containing 1,000

p/m tungsten (Nell et al. 1981). 

Ecological Planning and Toxicology 

(1999) concluded that the No Observed 

49548 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Adverse Effect Level for tungsten for 

chickens should be 250 p/m in the diet; 

the Lowest Observed Adverse Effect 

Level should be 500 p/m. Kelly et al.

(1998) demonstrated no adverse effects 

on mallards dosed with tungsten-iron or 

tungsten-polymer shot according to 

nontoxic shot test protocols. 

Breeder hen exposure to 250 p/m 

tungsten as sodium tungstate for 10 days 

had no adverse effects, but increasing 

the diet to 500 p/m tungsten for an 

additional 20 days resulted in decreased 

xanthine oxidase activity (Teekell and 

Watts 1959). Similarly, day-old chicks 

on a 500 p/m tungsten diet with 

adequate molybdenum showed reduced 

rate of gain (Selle 1942). 

Nell et al. (1981) fed laying hens diets 

containing 1,000 p/m tungsten 

(unspecified salt) for five months; 

control diets contained 0.4 p/m 

tungsten. Hens were artificially 

inseminated and eggs were collected 

and set weekly. Three of 40 hens on the 

high-tungsten diet died, and the 

remaining 37 had reduced egg 

production and egg weight. Egg fertility 

and hatchability were not affected. Liver 

tungsten was significantly elevated in 

treated birds, although there was no 

effect on body weight. 

Day-old white leghorn chickens 

placed on a molybdenum-deficient diet 

for 35 days showed a decreased rate of 

growth and increased mortality at 45

p/m tungsten as sodium tungstate 

(Higgins et al. 1956a, b). However, this 

is not an accurate reflection of tungsten 

toxicity because low molybdenum 

levels potentiate the effects of tungsten 

(NRC 1980). 

Ecological Planning and Toxicology 

(1999) concluded that the No Observed 

Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) for 

tungsten for chickens should be 250

p/m in the diet; the Lowest Observed 

Adverse Effect Level should be 500

p/m. An adult chicken fed a diet of 

1,000 p/m tungsten for 150 days would 

ingest about 100 mg of tungsten per day, 

or a total of 15 grams. In the USFWS 

guidelines for a reproduction study for 

shot, mallards would receive eight 

number 4 shot on four dosing periods. 

A total of 32 TICN shot during the 

course of the study, each containing 

0.2006 grams of tungsten, would result 

in a total exposure of 6.42 grams of 

tungsten, if the tungsten in the shot is 

totally dissolved. This estimated 

exposure of 6.42 grams of tungsten 

during a TICN shot mallard 

reproductive study is about 43 percent 

of the 15 grams demonstrated to cause 

reproductive effects in chickens. 

The effects of ingestion of tungsten by 

mallards as elemental metal in a shot 

pellet were studied by Ringelman et al.

(1993). Birds were given pellets of 39 

percent tungsten, 44.5 percent bismuth, 

and 16.5 percent tin by weight, per bird. 

No evidence of toxicity or other 

histological changes were reported. 

Tungsten was not detected in liver or 

kidney tissue. 

Dosing mallards with eight number 4 

Iron-Tungsten shot (with 55 percent 

tungsten) also produced no tungsten 

toxicity in the ducks (Kelly et al. 1998). 

In that study, birds received eight 

number 4 pellets by oral gavage and 

were observed for changes in serum 

enzymes, organ weights, histology of 

tissues and accumulation of metals in 

bone. Tungsten was detected in femur, 

liver, and kidneys of dosed ducks, but 

no other significant changes were 

measured. Iron-Tungsten shot eroded by 

55 percent and Tungsten-Polymer shot 

eroded by 80 percent over the course of 

the study; however, tissue 

concentrations were lower in the 

Tungsten-Polymer birds than in the 

Iron-Tungsten group. The shot were 55 

percent tungsten for the Iron-Tungsten 

formulation and 95.5 percent tungsten 

for the polymerized shot. The amount of 

tungsten in TICN shot (40–76 percent) is 

similar to that in the Iron-Tungsten shot 

(55 percent). Tungsten-Nickel-Iron shot 

in the study by Ecotoxicology & 

Biosystems Associates, Inc. (2000), 

conducted with a proportion of tungsten 

similar to that in TICN shot, was not 

toxic. 

Kraabel et al. (1996) surgically 

embedded tungsten-bismuth-tin shot in 

the pectoralis muscles of ducks to 

simulate wounding by gunfire and to 

test for toxic effects of the shot. The shot 

produced no toxic effects nor induced 

adverse systemic effects during the 8-

week study. 

Copper 

Copper is a dietary essential for all 

living organisms. In most mammals, 

ingestion of one TICN shot pellet would 

result in release of 8 to 25 mg of copper, 

not all of which would be absorbed. In 

humans, ingestion of a pellet could 

mobilize approximately 8 mg of copper. 

These low levels of copper would not 

pose any risk to mammals. 

Copper requirements in birds may 

vary depending on intake and storage of 

other minerals (Underwood 1971). The 

maximum tolerable level of dietary 

copper during the long-term growth of 

chickens and turkeys is 300 p/m (CMTA 

1980). Eight-day-old ducklings were fed 

a diet supplemented with 100 p/m 

copper as copper sulfate for eight weeks. 

They showed greater growth than 

controls, but some thinning of the caecal 

walls (King 1975). Studying day-old 

chicks, Poupoulis and Jensen (1976) 

reported that no gizzard lining erosion 

could be detected in chicks fed 125

p/m of copper for four weeks, but they 

detected slight gizzard erosion in chicks 

fed 250 p/m copper. The authors found 

that it required 500 to 1,000 p/m of 

copper to depress growth and weight 

gain of chicks. Jensen et al. (1991) found 

that 169 p/m copper in the diet 

produced maximal weight gain in 

chickens. 

Stevenson and Jackson (1979) studied 

the influence of dietary copper addition 

on the body mass and reproduction of 

mature domestic chickens. Hens fed on 

a diet containing 250 p/m copper for 48 

days showed a similar rate of food 

intake as control hens that had no 

copper in their diet. Additionally, the 

mean number of eggs laid daily did not 

differ between hens fed 250 p/m copper 

and the controls. After 4 months of 

being fed at dietary copper levels in 

excess of 500 p/m, negative effects on 

the daily food intake, body mass loss, 

and egg-laying rates were observed. 

At the 300 p/m level for chronic 

exposure for poultry, a 1.8 kg chicken 

consuming 100 g of food per day (Morck 

and Austic 1981) would consume 30 mg 

of copper per day (16.7 mg of copper per 

kg of body weight/day). One number 4 

TICN shot contains a maximum of 31.7 

mg of copper. However, at the 0.233 mg 

of copper per shot per day release rate 

from the solubility testing, a bird would 

have to ingest at least 128 TICN shot to 

exceed the maximum tolerable level. 

Thus, the copper release from the TICN 

shot appears to be well below the level 

that could cause copper toxicosis in 

waterfowl. The average amount of 

copper released from 8 TB nontoxic shot 

per day is 7.87 mg, so a bird would have 

to ingest over 30 shot to exceed the 

maximum tolerable level. 

Day-old poults fed diets containing 

500 p/m ration for 24 weeks showed 

reduced growth and increased gizzard 

histopathology (Kashani et al. 1986). 

Growing domestic turkeys showed no 

long-term effects when fed 300 p/m 

copper in the daily diet, but 800 p/m of 

copper in the diet for 3 weeks inhibited 

growth with no adverse effects on 

survival (Supplee 1964). No effect of 

feeding 400 p/m of copper as copper 

sulfate to turkey poults in the daily diet 

for 21 weeks was reported, and it was 

concluded that poults could tolerate 676 

p/m of copper without deleterious 

effects. Growth was reduced in poults 

fed 800 p/m and 910 p/m of copper over 

the same time (Vohra and Kratzer 1968). 

Their conclusion was supported by 

another study that found that copper in 

the diet of domestic turkeys had to rise 

to 500 to 750 p/m level before signs of 

slight toxicity appeared, assuming that 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 49549

adequate methionine also was present 

(Christmas and Harms 1979).

Henderson and Winterfield (1975) 

reported acute copper toxicity in 3-

week-old Canada geese (Branta 

canadensis) that had ingested water 

contaminated with copper sulfate. The 

authors calculated the copper intake to 

be about 600 mg copper sulfate/kg body 

weight, or 239 mg copper/kg. The 

amount of copper released from eight 

number 4 shot would be 42.26 mg, 

which is much less that the 239 p/b 

toxic level. 

Irby et al. (1967) dosed 24 Mallard 

ducks with 8 number 6 pure copper shot 

to observe if they were toxic over a 60-

day exposure period. They calculated 

that the total mass of copper in the 

gizzard was 0.6 gram, and observed that 

none of the ducks died from copper 

toxicosis after 60 days. TB shot is 35.1 

percent copper by weight, so eight shot 

would contain 0.64 grams of copper. 

International Nontoxic Composites, 

Inc. (2003) reported that pure copper 

control shot breaks down at the rate of 

18.42 mg copper per gram of shot per 

day, or 11.05 mg copper per day for 0.6 

grams of copper shot, under in vitro 

gizzard simulation test conditions. 

However, TB shot releases only 4.35 mg 

copper per gram of shot per day or 7.87 

mg of copper per day for 1.81 grams of 

shot under the same test conditions. 

This indicates that TB shot should not 

be a hazard for wildlife that consume it. 

The EPA (2002) provided both acute 

and chronic freshwater quality criteria 

for copper, which are functions of water 

hardness. The freshwater acute criterion 

for a water body with hardness of 100 

mg/l, for example, is 13 μg/l, and the 

chronic criterion is 9.0 μg copper per 

liter. The EPA acute and chronic 

saltwater quality criteria are not affected 

by hardness, and are 4.8 and 3.1 μg/l. 

Nickel 

Deficiencies have been reported in 

diets ranging from 2 to 40 billion p/b 

nickel (NRC 1980). The dietary 

requirement for nickel has been set at 50 

to 80 p/b for the rat and chick (Nielsen 

and Sandstead 1974). Humans consume 

up to 900 μg per day as a normal dietary 

intake (Nieboer et al. 1988). Though it 

is necessary for some enzymes, nickel 

competes with zinc, calcium, and 

magnesium for binding sites on most of 

the metal-dependent enzymes, resulting 

in various levels of inactivation, 

although it is essential for functioning of 

some enzymes, particularly urease 

(Andrews et al. 1988, Nieboer et al.

1988). Water-soluble nickel salts are 

poorly absorbed from the 

gastrointestinal tract, averaging only 3 

percent to 6 percent assimilation 

efficiency in rats (Nieboer et al. 1988). 

Rats fed nickel carbonate 

concentrations up to 1,000 p/m for 3 to 

4 months did not show treatmentrelated effects, nor was body weight of 

pups affected (Phatak and Patwardhan 

1950). Elevated nickel concentrations in 

pups were observed in the 500 and 

1,000 p/m treatment groups. Young rats 

were fed nickel catalyst (finely divided 

nickel suspended in vegetable oil and 

supported on kieselguhr) at 250 p/m for 

16 months with no effects (Phatak and 

Patwardhan 1952). 

Rats fed 1,000 p/m nickel sulfate for 

2 years exhibited mild effects, such as 

reduced body weight and liver weight, 

but increased heart weight (Ambrose et 

al. 1976). Also, there was an increase in 

the number of stillborn pups and a 

decrease in weanling weights through 

three generations. Nickel chloride was 

most toxic to rats. Young rats decreased 

food consumption and lost body weight 

within 13 days in diets containing 1,000 

p/m nickel as nickel chloride (Schnegg 

and Kirchgessner 1976). 

Calves showed weight loss and 

decreased feed intake, organ size, and 

nitrogen retention when fed 1,000 p/m 

nickel and nickel carbonate for 8 weeks 

(O’Dell et al. 1970a, 1971). Calves fed 

250 p/m nickel did not show effects. 

Lactating dairy cows were not affected 

by 50 or 250 p/m dietary nickel 

(Archibald 1949, O’Dell et al. 1970b). 

Soluble nickel salts are very toxic to 

mammals, with an oral LD50 of 136 p/

b in mice, and 350 p/b in rats (Fairchild 

et al. 1977). Nickel catalyst (finely 

divided nickel in vegetable oil) fed to 

young rats at 250 p/m for 16 months, 

however, produced no detrimental 

effects (Phatak and Patwardhan 1952). 

Water-soluble nickel salts are poorly 

absorbed if ingested by rats (Nieboer et 

al. 1988). Nickel carbonate caused no 

treatment effects in rats fed 1,000 p/m 

for 3 to 4 months (Phatak and 

Patwardhan 1952). Rats fed 1,000 p/m 

nickel sulfate for 2 years showed 

reduced body and liver weights, an 

increase in the number of stillborn 

pups, and decrease in weanling weights 

through three generations (Ambrose et 

al. 1976). Nickel chloride was even 

more toxic; 1,000 p/m fed to young rats 

caused weight loss in 13 days (Schnegg 

and Kirchgestiner 1976). 

In chicks from hatching to 4 weeks of 

age, 300 p/m nickel as nickel carbonate 

or nickel acetate in the diet produced no 

observed adverse effects, but 

concentrations of 500 p/m or more 

reduced growth (Weber and Reid 1968). 

A diet containing 200 p/m nickel as 

nickel sulfate had no observed effects on 

mallard ducklings from 1 to 90 days of 

age. Diets of 800 p/m or more caused 

significant changes in physical 

condition of the ducklings (Cain and 

Pafford 1981). 

Mallard ducklings fed 1,200 p/m 

nickel as nickel sulfate from 1 to 90 

days of age experienced reduced growth 

rates, tremors, paresis, and death (71 

percent within 60 days) (Cain and 

Pafford 1981). Weights of ducklings 

receiving 200 and 800 p/m nickel were 

not significantly different than controls, 

but the humerus weight/length ratio, a 

measure of bone density, was 

significantly lower than controls among 

females in the 800 p/m group and all 

birds in the 1,200 p/m group. There was 

no mortality in the 200 and 800 p/m 

groups. 

Breeding pairs of mallards were fed 

diets containing 0, 12.5, 50, 200, and 

800 p/m nickel as nickel sulfate for 90 

days (Eastin and O’Shea 1981). No 

treatment-related effects were observed 

on egg production, hatchability, or 

survival of ducklings. At the end of the 

90-day treatment period, there were no 

significant differences in hematocrit, 

concentrations of hemoglobin, plasma 

triglycerides, cholesterol, or plasma 

activities of ornithine carbamoyl 

transferase and alanine 

aminotransferase. The only treatmentrelated observation was a black, tarry 

feces in the 800 p/m group. Assuming 

a mean daily consumption of 128 grams 

per bird (Heinz 1979), the 800 p/m 

treatment group would have consumed 

102 mg nickel each day and 9.2 grams 

of nickel during the course of the 90-day 

study. In the nontoxic shot Tier 2 

approval process, birds could be given 

eight number 4 shot. For ITN shot, each 

shot would contain 0.02206 grams of 

nickel, so each duck would receive 

0.176 grams of nickel, assuming 

complete solubilization of the nickel 

from the shot during the study. This is 

a very small fraction of the 9.2 grams of 

total nickel exposure or 102 mg per day 

experienced by the mallards in the 

Eastin and O’Shea (1981) study. 

Therefore, we expect no effect of the 

nickel on birds ingesting the shot.

No reproductive or other effects were 

observed in mallards consuming the 

equivalent of 102 mg of nickel as nickel 

sulfate each day for 90 days (Eastin and 

O’Shea 1981). Therefore, the 15.3 mg of 

nickel in each TICN shot, if completely 

eroded and absorbed in 24 hours, would 

not be expected to affect waterfowl. 

Based on the 0.221 mg of nickel per shot 

per day rate of release from the 

solubility study, a mallard would have 

to ingest in excess of 450 TICN shot to 

exceed the 102 mg nickel amount. 

Additionally, metallic nickel likely has 

a lower absorption from the 

49550 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

gastrointestinal tract than does the 

nickel sulfate used in the mallard 

reproduction study, further decreasing 

the absorbed dose of TICN shot 

compared to the published toxicity 

study described above. 

Adult mallards dosed with eight 

tungsten-nickel-iron number 4 pellets 

were fed a whole kernel corn and grit 

and observed for signs of toxicity for 30 

days following dosing (January 4, 2001; 

66 FR 737). No adverse effects were 

observed on body weight, food 

consumption or clinical chemistry, 

hematology, and histopathology. The 

tungsten-nickel-iron pellets lost an 

average of 7.9 percent of their initial 

weight during the study, releasing 

nickel at a rate of 1.85 mg per day per 

bird, for a total of 55.5 mg over the 30-

day study. 

In a Tier 2 dosing study under the 

regulations governing approval of 

nontoxic shot, mallard ducks would 

each be given eight number 4 TICN shot 

(each containing 0.02206 grams of 

nickel) during the study. A duck would 

be exposed to 0.176 grams of nickel 

during the study if the nickel were 

completely dissolved. This is much less 

than the nickel exposure experienced by 

the mallards in the Eastin and O’Shea 

(1981) study. We conclude that the 

nickel in TICN shot will not be 

significant to waterfowl that ingest the 

shot. 

Water hardness is the dominant factor 

governing nickel effects on aquatic biota 

(Stokes 1988). Toxicity of nickel to 

aquatic organisms is dependent upon 

water hardness, pH, and organic 

content, as well as other minor 

environmental parameters (Allen and 

Hansen 1996). In soft water, as little as 

7 p/b nickel may be acutely toxic to fish 

fry, while in harder waters toxicity 

thresholds may be an order of 

magnitude higher (Stokes 1988). 

The EPA (1986) acute water quality 

criteria reflect this insensitivity of 

aquatic organisms to nickel. For a water 

body with hardness of 50 mg/l 

(generally associated with highly 

oligotrophic systems that would not 

support large numbers of waterfowl), 

the criterion is 1,400 μg/l. However, 

early fish life stages are more sensitive 

to nickel (Stokes 1988), which is 

reflected in the order of magnitude 

lower Freshwater Chronic Criterion of 

160 μg/l at a hardness of 50 mg/l (EPA 

1986). 

The saltwater chronic criterion of 8.3 

μg/l is much lower than the measured 

mysid shrimp (Mysidopsis bahia) 

chronic value, which is from the only 

chronic saltwater study in the EPA 

guidelines (EPA 1986). 

Toxicity of nickel to aquatic 

organisms is dependent upon water 

hardness, pH, and organic content, as 

well as other minor environmental 

parameters (Allen and Hansen 1996). In 

soft water, as few as 7 p/b may be 

acutely toxic to fish fry, but in harder 

waters toxicity thresholds may be an 

order of magnitude higher. General 

toxicity ranges for aquatic organisms are 

as variable, with an acute toxicity of as 

low as 82 μg/l for some oligochaetes to 

138,000 μg/l for some gastropods; 

chronic toxicity values range from fewer 

than 100 μg/l for some green algae to 

10,000 μg/l for filamentous algae (Stokes 

1988). 

The freshwater criterion maximum 

concentration is dependent on hardness. 

For a water body with hardness of 50 

mg/l (generally associated with highly 

oligotrophic systems that would not 

support large numbers of waterfowl), 

this results in a criterion of 1,400 μg/l. 

However, because early fish life stages 

are more sensitive to nickel, the 

freshwater chronic criterion is 160 μg/l 

at a hardness of 50 mg/l (EPA 1986). 

Tin 

It is generally agreed that inorganic 

tin and tin compounds are 

comparatively harmless (Eisler 1989). 

Inorganic tin and its salts are poorly 

absorbed, their oxides are relatively 

insoluble, and they are rapidly lost from 

tissues (see Eisler 1989 for reviews). 

Reviews indicate that elemental tin is 

not toxic to birds (Cooney 1988, 

Eisler1989). Tin shot designed for 

waterfowl hunting is used in several 

European countries. We are aware of no 

reports that suggest that tin shot causes 

toxicity problems for wildlife. 

Tin (II) chloride was toxic to juvenile 

eels at 6.0 mg/l and 1.2 mg/l, with death 

coming at 2.8 and 50 hours, 

respectively. This inorganic tin salt was 

also toxic to daphnids, at concentrations 

of 2.5 mg/l or more. Metelev et al. (1971) 

found that 1 g/l of Tin (II) chloride 

dihydrate (530 mg of tin per liter) was 

lethal to all fish species tested 

(Bandman 1993). 

Grandy et al. (1968) and the 

Huntingdon Research Centre (1987) 

conducted 30-day and 28-day, 

respectively, acute toxicity tests on 

mallard ducks by placing tin pellets 

inside the digestive tract or tissues of 

ducks. They reported that all treated 

ducks survived without deleterious 

effects. 

Ringelmann et al. (1993) examined 

the effects of Tungsten-Bismuth-Tin 

shot consumption in ducks. The authors 

found no signs of toxicosis, and tin was 

not detected in the liver or kidney (<6 

p/m) during the 32-day test period. In a 

30-day dosing study of game-farm 

mallards dosed with eight number 4 size 

tin shot, there were no overt signs of 

toxicity or treatment-related effects on 

body weight. Tin was not detected in 

any tissues (Gallagher et al. 1999). 

The 2 percent tin in bismuth-tin shot 

produced no toxicological effects in 

ducks during reproduction. It did not 

affect the health of ducks, the 

reproduction by male and female birds, 

or the survival of ducklings over the 

long term (Sanderson et al. 1997). 

Chronic and acute studies 

documenting the nontoxic properties of 

99.9 percent tin shot were conducted for 

the application for USFWS approval of 

tin shot as a nontoxic alternative. A 150-

day chronic toxicity/reproductive study 

conducted for tin shot revealed no 

adverse effects in mallards dosed with 

eight number 4 sized shot. Additionally, 

there were no significant changes in egg 

production, fertility, or hatchability of 

birds dosed with tin when compared to 

steel-dosed birds. A 30-day acute study 

was also completed by the International 

Tin Research Institute (Federal Register

64:17308, 1999). Treatment mallards 

were dosed with eight number 4 tin shot 

and hematocrit and hemoglobin 

concentrations, body weight and 

indications of toxicity were compared to 

those of control (no shot) and steel shotdosed birds. No adverse effects were 

seen in ducks dosed with tin. 

Hematocrit and hemoglobin 

concentrations did not differ from those 

of either negative control group, nor 

were there treatment-related effects on 

body weight. Ducks dosed with tin 

exhibited no sign of toxicity. 

In a study by Kraabel et al. (1996), 

shot pellets containing 39 percent 

tungsten, 44.5 percent bismuth, and 

16.5 percent tin were embedded into the 

breast muscle of mallards. There were 

no adverse systemic effects observed in 

the study and the localized 

inflammatory reactions surrounding the 

shot were reduced in the tin-containing 

shot when compared to the steel shot 

control group. 

Based on the toxicological report and 

toxicity tests, we concluded that shot 

that was 99.9 percent tin posed no 

significant danger to migratory birds or 

other wildlife and their habitats (65 FR 

76886, December 7, 2000). Temporary 

approval was given because field 

detection techniques had not been 

approved, not due to any toxicity 

concerns. In support of the nontoxic 

application, chronic and acute toxicity 

tests demonstrated no adverse effects of 

tin shot on mallards. We do not believe 

the tin in any of the proposed shot types 

that contain it will pose toxicological 

risks due to wildlife. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 49551

Impacts of Approval of Alloys of 

Previously Approved Metals 

We propose to extend the past 

approvals of some nontoxic shot types 

to broader alloys. We have, for example, 

approved nontoxic shot of almost 100 

percent tungsten, and steel shot is 

essentially 100 percent iron. We are not 

aware of any synergistic effects of these 

metals, and approval of other shot types 

containing them in different proportions 

has indicated that negative effects on 

wildlife, fish, or their habitats from 

approval of alloys of these metals are 

very unlikely. Therefore, we propose to 

approve alloys containing any 

proportion of tungsten and 1 percent or 

more iron.

Similarly, as noted above, we gave 

temporary approval to shot of 100 

percent tin (65 FR 76885), though the 

submitter did not seek final approval of 

that shot type. We also propose to 

approve shot alloys with any 

proportions of tungsten and tin and at 

least 1 percent iron. 

Effects of the Approvals on Migratory 

Waterfowl 

Approving additional nontoxic shot 

types will likely result in a minor 

positive long-term impact on waterfowl 

and wetland habitats. Approval of the 

four shot types and additional alloys as 

nontoxic would have a positive impact 

on the waterfowl resource. 

Effects on Endangered and Threatened 

Species 

The impact on endangered and 

threatened species of approval of the 

four shot types and the additional alloys 

would be very small, but positive. The 

metals in all four shot types and the 

additional alloys have been approved in 

other nontoxic shot types, and we see 

no potential effects on threatened or 

endangered species due to approval of 

these shot types. 

Effects on Ecosystems 

Previously approved shot types have 

been shown in test results to be 

nontoxic to the migratory bird resource, 

and we believe that they cause no 

adverse impact on ecosystems. There is 

concern, however, about noncompliance 

and potential ecosystem effects. The use 

of lead shot has a negative impact on 

wetland ecosystems due to the erosion 

of shot, causing sediment/soil and water 

contamination and the direct ingestion 

of shot by aquatic and predatory 

animals. Though we believe 

noncompliance is of concern, approval 

of the four shot types and the additional 

alloys will have little impact on the 

resource. 

Cumulative Impacts 

We foresee no negative cumulative 

impacts of approval of the four shot 

types and the additional alloys for 

waterfowl hunting. Their approval 

should help to further reduce the 

negative impacts of the use of lead shot 

for hunting waterfowl and coots. 

Literature Cited 

For a complete list of the literature 

cited in this proposed rule, contact the 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Public Comments 

In accordance with the 

Administrative Procedures Act and our 

nontoxic shot approval regulations, we 

seek comments on this proposal. Of 

particular relevance is information 

regarding the potential impacts of these 

shot types and the approval of alloys of 

metals already approved in other 

formulations on migratory birds, other 

wildlife, and their habitats. 

In addition, Executive Order 12866 

requires each agency to write 

regulations that are easy to understand. 

We invite comments on how to make 

this rule easier to understand, including 

answers to questions such as the 

following: (1) Are the requirements in 

the rule clearly stated? (2) Does the rule 

contain technical language or jargon that 

interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the 

format of the rule (grouping and order 

of sections, use of headings, 

paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its 

clarity? (4) Would the rule be easier to 

understand if it were divided into more 

(but shorter) sections? (A ‘‘section’’ 

appears in bold type and is preceded by 

the symbol ‘‘§ ’’ and a numbered 

heading; for example, ‘‘§ 20.134 

Approval of nontoxic shot types.’’) (5) Is 

the description of the rule in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

the preamble helpful in understanding 

the rule? What else could we do to make 

the rule easier to understand? 

You may submit written comments on 

this proposal to the location identified 

in the ADDRESSES section, or you may 

submit electronic comments to the 

internet address or the e-mail address 

listed in the ADDRESSES section. We 

must receive your comments before the 

date listed in the DATES section. While 

our normal practice is to open public 

comment periods on our proposed rules 

for 60 days, in this case we are opening 

the comment period for only 30 days. 

We believe a 30-day comment period 

will be sufficient because we have 

approved several other nontoxic shot 

types through the rulemaking process 

and have received very few comments 

on those rulemaking actions and 

because the changes in this proposed 

rule should not be controversial. 

Following review and consideration of 

comments, we will issue a final rule on 

the proposed regulation changes. 

When submitting electronic 

comments, please include your name 

and return address in your message, 

identify it as comments on the nontoxic 

shot proposed rule, and submit your 

comments as an ASCII file, preferably as 

part of the e-mail text. Include RIN 

1018–AU04 in the subject line of your 

message. Do not use special characters 

or any encryption. Written comments on 

this proposed rule must be on 81⁄2-inch 

by 11-inch paper. 

We make comments, including names 

and home addresses of respondents, 

available for public review during 

regular business hours. Individual 

respondents may request that we 

withhold their home address from the 

rulemaking record, which we will honor 

to the extent allowable by law. In some 

circumstances, we would withhold from 

the rulemaking record a respondent’s 

identity, as allowable by law. If you 

wish us to withhold your name or 

address, you must state this 

prominently at the beginning of your 

comment. We will not accept 

anonymous comments. We will make all 

submissions from organizations or 

businesses, and from individuals 

identifying themselves as 

representatives or officials of 

organizations or businesses, available 

for public inspection in their entirety. 

Comments will become part of the 

Administrative Record for the review of 

the application. You may inspect 

comments at the mailing address in 

ADDRESSES during normal business 

hours. 

The Draft Environmental Assessment 

(DEA) for approval of the four shot types 

is available from the Division of 

Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 4501 North Fairfax 

Drive, Room 4091, Arlington, VA 

22203–1610. You may call 703–358–

1825 to request a copy of the DEA.

The complete file for this rule is 

available, by appointment, during 

normal business hours at the same 

address. You may make an appointment 

at 703–358–1825 to review the files. 

Required Determinations 

NEPA Consideration 

In compliance with the requirements 

of section 102(2)(C) of the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4332(C)), and the Council on 

Environmental Quality’s regulations for 

implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500–

49552 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

1508), though all of the metals in these 

shot types have been approved in other 

shot types and are not likely to pose 

adverse toxicity effects on fish, wildlife, 

their habitats, or the human 

environment, we have prepared Draft 

Environmental Assessments for this 

action. We will finalize the 

Environmental Assessments before we 

publish a final rule on this action. 

Endangered Species Act Considerations 

Section 7 of the Endangered Species 

Act (ESA) of 1972, as amended (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), provides that 

Federal agencies shall ‘‘insure that any 

action authorized, funded or carried out 

* * * is not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of any endangered 

species or threatened species or result in 

the destruction or adverse modification 

of (critical) habitat.’’ We have concluded 

that because all of the metals in these 

shot types have been approved in other 

shot types and will not be available to 

biota in significant amounts due to use 

of any of the four shot types, this action 

will not affect endangered or threatened 

species. 

Executive Order 12866 

This rule is not a significant 

regulatory action subject to Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) review 

under Executive Order 12866. This rule 

will not have an annual economic effect 

of $100 million or more or adversely 

affect an economic sector, productivity, 

jobs, the environment, or other units of 

government. Therefore, a cost-benefit 

economic analysis is not required. This 

action will not create inconsistencies 

with other agencies’ actions or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency. No other 

Federal agency has any role in 

regulating nontoxic shot for migratory 

bird hunting. The action is consistent 

with the policies and guidelines of other 

Department of the Interior bureaus. This 

action will not materially affect 

entitlements, grants, user fees, loan 

programs, or the rights and obligations 

of their recipients because it has no 

mechanism to do so. This action will 

not raise novel legal or policy issues 

because the Service has already 

approved several other nontoxic shot 

types. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires the 

preparation of flexibility analyses for 

rules that will have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities, which include 

small businesses, organizations, or 

governmental jurisdictions. This rule 

proposes to approve four additional 

types of nontoxic shot that may be sold 

and used to hunt migratory birds. We 

have determined, however, that this rule 

will have no effect on small entities 

since the approved shot merely will 

supplement nontoxic shot types already 

in commerce and available throughout 

the retail and wholesale distribution 

systems. We anticipate no dislocation or 

other local effects, with regard to 

hunters and others. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This proposed rule is not a major rule 

under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act. This rule will not have an 

annual effect on the economy of $100 

million or more; will not cause a major 

increase in costs or prices for 

consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, State, or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions; and 

does not have significant adverse effects 

on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. We have examined this 

regulation under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501) 

and found it to contain no new 

information collection requirements. 

OMB has assigned control number 

1018–0067 to the collection of 

information that shot manufacturers are 

required to provide to us for the 

nontoxic shot approval process. This 

approval expires December 31, 2006. 

For further information, see 50 CFR 

20.134. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform 

We have determined and certify 

pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that 

this rulemaking will not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments or 

produce a Federal mandate of $100 

million or more in any given year. 

Therefore, this rule does not constitute 

a significant regulatory action under the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order 

12988 

In promulgating this rule, we have 

determined that these regulations meet 

the applicable standards provided in 

Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988. 

Takings 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630, this rule, authorized by the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act, does not 

have significant takings implications 

and does not affect any constitutionally 

protected property rights. This rule will 

not result in the physical occupancy of 

property, the physical invasion of 

property, or the regulatory taking of any 

property. A takings assessment is not 

required.

Federalism Effects 

This rule does not have a substantial 

direct effect on fiscal capacity, change 

the roles or responsibilities of Federal or 

State governments, or intrude on State 

policy or administration. In accordance 

with Executive Order 13132, this 

regulation does not have significant 

federalism effects, nor does it have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment. 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 22951) and 512 

DM 2, we have determined that this rule 

has no effects on Federally recognized 

Indian tribes.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20 

Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife.

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, we propose to amend part 20, 

subchapter B, chapter I of Title 50 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 20—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 20 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703–712; 16 U.S.C. 

742a–j; Pub. L. 106–108.

2. Section 20.21 is proposed to be 

amended by revising paragraph (j)(1) to 

read as follows:

§ 20.21 What hunting methods are illegal?

* * * * *

(j)(1) While possessing loose shot for 

muzzle loading or shotshells containing 

other than the following approved shot 

types.

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules 49553

Approved shot type Percent composition by weight Field testing device 

bismuth-tin .......................................................... 97 bismuth, 3 tin .............................................. Hot Shot*. 

iron (steel) .......................................................... iron and carbon ................................................ Magnet or Hot Shot. 

iron-tungsten ...................................................... any proportion of tungsten, ≥ 1 iron ................ Magnet or Hot Shot. 

iron-tungsten-nickel. ........................................... ≥ 1 iron, any proportion of tungsten, up to 40 

nickel 

Magnet or Hot Shot. 

tungsten-bronze ................................................. 51.1 tungsten, 44.4 copper, 3.9 tin, 0.6 iron 

and 60 tungsten, 35.1 copper, 3.9 tin, 1 

iron. 

Rare Earth Magnet. 

tungsten-iron-copper-nickel. ............................... 40–76 tungsten, 10–37 iron, 9–16 copper, 5–7 

nickel 

Hot Shot or Rare Earth Magnet. 

tungsten-matrix .................................................. 95.9 tungsten, 4.1 polymer .............................. Hot Shot. 

tungsten-polymer ............................................... 95.5 tungsten, 4.5 Nylon 6 or 11 ..................... Hot Shot. 

tungsten-tin-iron ................................................. any proportions of tungsten and tin, ≥ 1 iron. Magnet or Hot Shot. 

tungsten-tin-bismuth ........................................... 49–71 tungsten, 29–51 tin; 0.5–6.5 bismuth, 

0.8 iron. 

Rare Earth Magnet. 

tungsten-tin-iron-nickel ....................................... 65 tungsten, 21.8 tin, 10.4 iron, 2.8 nickel ...... Magnet. 

* The information in the ‘‘Field Testing Device’’ column is strictly informational, not regulatory. 

** The ‘‘Hot Shot’’ field testing device is from Stream Systems of Concord, CA. 

* * * * *

Dated: July 26, 2005. 

Craig Manson, 

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 

Parks.

[FR Doc. 05–16718 Filed 8–23–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P