13914 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

[FR Doc. 95–5976 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 180

[PP 4F4373/R2113; FRL–4940–9]

RIN 2070–AB78

Pesticide Tolerance for Avermectin B1

and Its Delta-8,9-Isomer

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document establishes

tolerances for residues of the insecticide

avermectin B1 and its delta-8,9-isomer

in or on the raw agricultural commodity

head lettuce. Merck Research

Laboratories requested this regulation to

establish maximum permissible levels

for residues of the insecticide.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation

becomes effective March 15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and

hearing requests, identified by the

document control number, [PP 4F4373/

R2113], may be submitted to: Hearing

Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection

Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. A copy of any

objections and hearing requests filed

with the Hearing Clerk should be

identified by the document control

number and submitted to: Public

Response and Program Resources

Branch, Field Operations Division

(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

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

person, bring copy of objections and

hearing requests to Rm. 1132, CM #2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington,

VA 22202. Fees accompanying

objections shall be labeled ‘‘Tolerance

Petition Fees’’ and forwarded to: EPA

Headquarters Accounting Operations

Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box

360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: George T. LaRocca, Product

Manager (PM) 13, Registration Division

(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

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

Office location and telephone number:

Rm. 204, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-305-

6100; e-mail:

LaRocca.George@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

issued a notice, published in the

Federal Register of May 29, 1991 (56 FR

24189), which announced that Merck

Sharp & Dohme Research Laboratories,

Division of Merck & Co., Inc.,

Hillsborough Rd., Three Bridges, NJ

08887, had submitted a pesticide

petition (PP 1F3973) to EPA requesting

that the Administrator, pursuant to

section 408(d) of the Federal Food,

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21

U.S.C. 346a(d), establish tolerances for

residues of the pesticide abamectin

(same as avermectin B1) and its delta-8,

9-isomer in or on the raw agricultural

commodities (RAC) lettuce at 0.05 part

per million (ppm) and almonds and

walnuts at 0.005 ppm.

In a letter dated June 9, 1994, Merck

Research Laboratories requested a

separation of PP 1F3973 into two

distinct petitions. Almonds and walnuts

were to be processed under PP 1F3973,

and head lettuce was assigned a new

petition number, PP 4F4373. No

comments were received on the notice

of filing (56 FR 24189, May 29, 1991).

The data submitted in support of this

tolerance and other relevant material

have been reviewed. The toxicological

and metabolism data and analytical

methods for enforcement purposes

considered in support of these

tolerances are discussed in detail in

related documents published in the

Federal Registers of May 31, 1989 (54

FR 23209) for cottonseed and August 2,

1989 (54 FR 31836) for citrus.

The Agency used a two-generation rat

reproduction study with an uncertainty

factor of 300 to establish a Reference

Dose (RfD). The 300-fold uncertainty

factor was utilized for (1) inter- and

intra-species differences, (2) the extreme

seriousness of pup death observed in

the reproduction study, (3) maternal

toxicity (lethality) no-observable-effect

level (NOEL)(0.05 mg/kg/day), and (4)

cleft palate in the mouse developmental

toxicity study with isomer (NOEL = 0.06

mg/kg/day). Thus, based on a NOEL 0f

0.12 mg/kg/day from the two-generation

rat reproduction and an uncertainty

factor of 300, the RfD is 0.0004 mg/kg/

body weight (bwt)/day.

A chronic dietary exposure/risk

assessment has been performed for

abamectin using the above RfD.

Available information on anticipated

residues and 100% crop treated was

incorporated into the analysis to

estimate the Anticipated Residue

Contribution (ARC). The ARC is

generally considered a more realistic

estimate than an estimate based on

tolerance-level residues. The ARC from

established tolerances and the current

action is estimated at 0.000022 mg/kg

bwt/day and utilizes 5.4 percent of the

RfD for the U.S. population. The ARC

for children, aged 1 to 6 years old, and

nonnursing infants (subgroups most

highly exposed) utilizes 13 and 18

percent of the RfD, respectively.

Generally speaking, the Agency has no

cause for concern if anticipated residues

contribution for all published and

proposed tolerances is less than the RfD.

Because of the developmental effects

seen in animal studies, the Agency used

the mouse teratology study (with a

NOEL of 0.06 mg/kg/day for

developmental toxicity for the delta-8,9

isomer) to assess acute dietary exposure

and determine a margin of exposure

(MOE) for the overall U.S. population

and certain subgroups. Since the

toxicological end-point pertains to

developmental toxicity, the population

group of interest for this analysis is

women aged 13 and above, the subgroup

which most closely approximates

women of child-bearing age. The MOE

is calculated as the ratio of the NOEL to

the exposure. For this analysis, the

Agency calculated the MOE for highend exposures for women ages 13 and

above. The MOE for the high-end

exposure is 200. Generally speaking,

MOEs greater than 100 for data derived

from animal studies are acceptable to

the Agency.

The metabolism of the chemical in

plants and livestock for this use is

adequately understood. Any secondary

residues occurring in meat, meat

byproducts, or milk will be covered by

existing tolerances for those

commodities. There is no reasonable

expectation of finite residues in poultry

and swine commodities; therefore, no

tolerances are necessary at this time.

Adequate analytical methodology

(HPLC-Fluorescence Methods) is

available for enforcement purposes.

Prior to publication in the Pesticide

Analytical Manual, Vol. II, the

enforcement methodology is being made

available in the interim to anyone who

is interested in pesticide enforcement

when requested from: Calvin Furlow,

Public Reponse and Program Resource

Branch, Field Operations Division

(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

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

Office location and telephone number:

Rm 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-304-

5232.

The tolerances established by

amending 40 CFR part 180 will be

adequate to cover residues in or on

lettuce. There are currently no actions

pending against the continued

registration of this chemical. Based on

the information and data considered,

the Agency has determined that the

tolerances established by amending 40

CFR part 180 will protect the public

health. Therefore, the tolerance is

established as set forth below.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13915

Any person adversely affected by this

regulation may, within 30 days after

publication of this document in the

Federal Register, file written objections

to the regulation and may also request

a hearing on those objections.

Objections and hearing requests must be

filed with the Hearing Clerk, at the

address given above (40 CFR 178.20). A

copy of the objections and/or hearing

requests filed with the Hearing Clerk

should be submitted to the OPP docket

for this rulemaking. The objections

submitted must specify the provisions

of the regulation deemed objectionable

and the grounds for the objections (40

CFR 178.25). Each objection must be

accompanied by the fee prescribed by

40 CFR 180.33(i). If a hearing is

requested, the objections must include a

statement of the factual issue(s) on

which a hearing is requested, the

requestor’s contentions on such issues,

and a summary of any evidence relied

upon by the objector (40 CFR 178.27). A

request for a hearing will be granted if

the Administrator determines that the

material submitted shows the following:

There is genuine and substantial issue

of fact; there is a reasonable possibility

that available evidence identified by the

requestor would, if established, resolve

one or more of such issues in favor of

the requestor, taking into account

uncontested claims or facts to the

contrary; and resolution of the factual

issue(s) in the manner sought by the

requestor would be adequate to justify

the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency must

determine whether the regulatory action

is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to

all the requirements of the Executive

Order (i.e., Regulatory Impact Analysis,

review by the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB)). Under section 3(f), the

order defines ‘‘significant’’ as those

actions likely to lead to a rule (1) having

an annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more, or adversely and

materially affecting a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition,

jobs, the environment, public health or

safety, or State, local, or tribal

governments or communities (also

known as ‘‘economically significant’’);

(2) creating serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfering with an action

taken or planned by another agency; (3)

materially altering the budgetary

impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees,

or loan programs; or (4) raising novel

legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President’s priorities, or

the principles set forth in this Executive

Order.

Pursuant to the terms of this

Executive Order, EPA has determined

that this rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and is

therefore not subject to OMB review.

Pursuant to the requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-

354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612),

the Administrator has determined that

regulations establishing new tolerances

or raising tolerance levels or

establishing exemptions from tolerance

requirements do not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. A certification

statement to this effect was published in

the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46

FR 24950).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: March 3, 1995.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is

amended as follows:

PART 180—AMENDED

1. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.

2. In § 180.449, by revising paragraph

(b), to read as follows:

§ 180.449 Avermectin B1 and its delta-8,9-

isomer; tolerances for residues.

* * * * *

(b) Tolerances are established for the

combined residues of the insecticide

avermectin B1 and its delta-8,9-isomer [a

mixture of avermectin containing

greater than 80 percent avermectin B1a

(5-O-demethyl avermectin A1a) and less

than 20 percent avermectin B1b (5-Odemethyl-25-di(1-methylpropyl)-25-(1-

methylethyl) avermectin A1a)] in or on

the following commodities:

Commodity Parts per

million

Celery ........................................ 0.05

Lettuce, head ............................ 0.05

Strawberry ................................. 0.02

Tomatoes, fresh ........................ 0.01

[FR Doc. 95–6416 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Public Land Order 7124

[NM–930–1430–01; NMNM 88049]

Public Land Order No. 7067,

Correction; Withdrawal of National

Forest System Land for Guadalupe

Canyon Zoological Botanical Area;

New Mexico

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Public land order.

SUMMARY: This order will correct an

error in the land description in Public

Land Order No. 7067.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeanette Espinosa, BLM New Mexico

State Office, P.O. Box 27115, Santa Fe,

New Mexico 87502, 505–438–7597.

By virtue of the authority vested in

the Secretary of the Interior by Section

204 of the Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C.

1714 (1988), it is ordered as follows:

The land description in Public Land

Order 7067, 59 FR 35859, July 14, 1994,

is hereby corrected as follows:

The third column, line 3, which reads

‘‘sec. 24, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4 and S1⁄2SE1⁄4;’’ is

hereby corrected to read ‘‘sec. 24,

NE1⁄4SE1⁄4 and S1⁄2SE1⁄4;’’.

Dated: March 2, 1995.

Bob Armstrong,

Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

[FR Doc. 95–6279 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–FB–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 24

[GEN Docket No. 90–314, ET Docket No.

92–100, FCC 95–92]

Personal Communications Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; petition for

reconsideration.

SUMMARY: On March 3, 1995, the

Commission released a Memorandum

Opinion and Order revising certain

sections of its Rules governing the

Personal Communications Services

(PCS). The action in the instant Order

responds to petitions for reconsideration

filed by Morgan Stanley Partnerships on

September 6 and October 7, 1994 in the

Commission’s broadband and