Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 97 / Friday, May 17, 1996 / Proposed Rules 24911

Office of Management and Budget has

reviewed this analysis.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance program numbers are 64.104,

64.105, 64.109, and 64.110.

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3

Administrative practice and

procedure, Claims, Health care,

Individuals with disabilities, Pensions,

Veterans.

Approved: October 12, 1995.

Jesse Brown,

Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

Editorial Note: This document was

received at the Office of the Federal Register

on May 13, 1996.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, VA proposes to amend 38

CFR part 3 as follows:

PART 3—ADJUDICATION

Subpart A—Pension, Compensation,

and Dependency and Indemnity

Compensation

1. The authority citation for part 3,

subpart A continues to read as follows:

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless

otherwise noted.

2. In § 3.204, the section heading is

revised, current paragraphs (a) and (b)

are redesignated as paragraphs (b) and

(c), respectively, and a new paragraph

(a) is added to read as follows:

§ 3.204 Evidence of dependents and age.

(a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph

(a)(2) of this section, VA will accept, for

the purpose of determining entitlement

to benefits under laws administered by

VA, the written statement of a claimant

as proof of marriage, dissolution of a

marriage, birth of a child, or death of a

dependent, provided that the statement

contains: the date (month and year) and

place of the event; the full name and

relationship of the other person to the

claimant; and, where the claimant’s

dependent child does not reside with

the claimant, the name and address of

the person who has custody of the child.

In addition, a claimant must provide the

social security number of any

dependent on whose behalf he or she is

seeking benefits (see § 3.216).

(2) VA shall require the types of

evidence indicated in §§ 3.205 through

3.211 where: the claimant does not

reside within a state; the claimant’s

statement on its face raises a question of

its validity; the claimant’s statement

conflicts with other evidence of record;

or, there is a reasonable indication, in

the claimant’s statement or otherwise, of

fraud or misrepresentation of the

relationship in question.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5124)

* * * * *

§ 3.204 [Amended]

3. In § 3.204, redesignated paragraph

(b) is amended by removing the first

sentence and adding in its place ‘‘The

classes of evidence to be furnished for

the purpose of establishing marriage,

dissolution of marriage, age,

relationship, or death, if required under

the provisions of paragraph (a)(2), are

indicated in §§ 3.205 through 3.211 in

the order of preference.’’

§ 3.213 [Amended]

4. In § 3.213, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the first sentence

and adding in its place ‘‘For the purpose

of establishing entitlement to a higher

rate of pension, compensation, or

dependency and indemnity

compensation based on the existence of

a dependent, VA will require evidence

which satisfies the requirements of

§ 3.204.’’

5. In the ‘‘Cross References’’ following

§§ 3.205, 3.206, 3.207, 3.208, 3.209,

3.210, 3.211, 3.212, 3.213, and 3.214,

remove the words ‘‘Evidence other than

evidence of service’’ wherever they

appear and add in their place the words

‘‘Evidence of dependents and age.’’

[FR Doc. 96–12365 Filed 5–16–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 180 and 186

[PP 1E4020 and FAP 2H5619/P655; FRL–

5364–2]

RIN 2070–AC18

Tau-fluvalinate; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to establish

tolerances for residues of the insecticide

tau-fluvalinate in or on the raw

agriculture commodities (RAC) apples,

oriental pears, and kiwi, to increase the

tolerance for the insecticide taufluvalinate in or on the RAC fat of cattle

and to change the chemical

nomenclature in the tolerance. The

proposed regulations to establish the

maximum permissible levels for

residues of the pesticide were requested

pursuant to a petition submitted by

Sandoz Agro, Inc.

DATES: Comments, identified by the

docket control number [PP 1E4020/

P655], must be received on or before

June 17, 1996.

ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written

comments to: Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring

comments to: Rm. 1132 CM #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA

22202.

Comments and data may also be

submitted to OPP by sending electronic

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

comments must be submitted as an

ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Comments and data will also be

accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1

file format or ASCII file format. All

comments and data in electronic form

must be identified by the docket number

[PP 1E4020/P655]. Electronic comments

on this proposed rule may be filed

online at many Federal Depository

Libraries. Additional information on

electronic submissions can be found

below in this document.

Information submitted as a comment

concerning this document may be

claimed confidential by marking any

part or all of that information as

‘‘Confidential Business Information.’’

CBI should not be submitted through email. Information marked as CBI will

not be disclosed except in accordance

with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part

2. A copy of the comment that does not

contain CBI must be submitted for

inclusion in the public record.

Information not marked confidential

may be disclosed publicly by EPA

without prior notice. All written

comments will be available for public

inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address

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

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays.

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, telephone number, and

e-mail address: Rm. 202, CM #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA

22202, (703) 305-6100, e-mail:

larocca.george.gov.epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

Federal Registers of December 13, 1991

(56 FR 65080) and June 10, 1992 (57 FR

24644), EPA issued rules that gave

notice that Sandoz Agro., Inc. (formerly

Sandoz Crop Protection Corp), 1300 East

Touhy Ave., Des Plaines, Illinois 60018-
24912 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 97 / Friday, May 17, 1996 / Proposed Rules

3300, had submitted food/feed additive

petition (FAP) 2H5619 proposing to

amend 40 CFR parts 185 and 186 by

establishing food/feed additive

regulations under section 409 of the

Federal, Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act

(21 U.S.C. 348) for the insecticide taufluvalinate {(RS)-α-cyano-3-

phenoxybenzyl N-(2-chloro-α,α,αtrifluoro-p-tolyl)-D-valinate (formerly

known as (-α-RS,2R)-fluvalinate {RS)-αcyano-3-phenoxybenzyl (R)-2{2-chloro4-(triflurormethyl)anilino}-3-

methylbutanoate}) in or on apple

pomace, dry and wet, from imported

apples at 2.0 parts per million (ppm)

and hops, dry from imported hops at

15.0 ppm. At the same time Sandoz

Agro., Inc. also submitted a pesticide

petition (PP) 1E4020 proposing to

establish tolerances under 408(e) for the

insecticide tau-fluvalinate in or on the

RACs apples imported from France,

Chile and New Zealand at 0.4 ppm;

Nashi imported from New Zealand at

0.4 ppm, and Kiwi imported from New

Zealand at 0.5 ppm.

There were no comments or requests

for referral to an advisory committee

received in response to the proposed

rule.

On April 22, 1994, Sandoz Agro., Inc.

requested voluntary withdrawal of their

petition to establish tolerances in hops

without prejudice to future filing. In the

same letter and at the request of EPA

they proposed to increase tolerances for

the RACs fat of cattle to 0.1 ppm

(previously established at 0.01 ppm),

increase the proposed tolerance for

apples to 0.5 ppm, and revise the

commodity name ‘‘nashi’’ to ‘‘oriental

pears’’ since it is the term used in the

Codex Classification of Food and

Animal Feeds published in the Code of

Federal Regulations. The need for the

increased cattle fat tolerance arises from

the feeding of wet apple pomace to

cattle raised outside the U.S. and then

importing the cattle fat into the U.S.

With respect to the feed additive

proposal for apple pomaces (wet/dry)

the Agency no longer considers dry

apple pomace a feed item, therefore

tolerances are not required for this

commodity (based on EPA’s latest

revision (unpublished) to Table II of the

Pesticide Assessment Guidelines,

Subdivision O (Residue Chemistry)

titled ‘‘Raw Agricultural and Processed

Commodities and Livestock Feeds

Derived from Field Crops’’). With

respect to wet apple pomace, the

Agency has concluded that the

proposed cattle fat tolerance of 0.10

ppm and currently established

tolerances in the meat, meat by-products

and milk of cattle at 0.01 ppm are

adequate to cover the residues expected

from the proposed tolerance on apples.

Since economics and perishability

dictate that wet apple pomace will not

likely be imported into the U.S. (either

from apples processed overseas or

treated apples imported and processed

in the U.S.) the establishment of a

tolerance for the animal feed item wet

apple pomace will not be necessary. On

July 25, 1995, Sandoz Agro., Inc.

withdrew FAP 2H5619 and their request

for a feed additive tolerance on wet

apple pomace. Further, they amended

the tolerance on oriental pears by

increasing it to 0.5 ppm to be consistent

with the tolerance level on apples.

Sandoz Agro., Inc. submitted a letter

dated October 19, 1994, requesting a

name change of fluvalinate to ‘‘taufluvalinate’’ and a change in chemical

nomenclature from (-α-RS,2R)-

fluvalinate {RS)-α-cyano-3-

phenoxybenzyl (R)-2{2-chloro-4-

(triflurormethyl)anilino}-3-methylbutanoate}) to tau-fluvalinate {(RS)-αcyano-3-phenoxybenzyl N-(2-chloroα,α,α-trifluoro-p-tolyl)-D-valinate for all

products registered in the United States

(U.S.). This name has appeared on

pesticide registrations in Europe since

1989 and reflects the half resolved form

of fluvalinate. It is an approved

American National Standards Institute

(ANSI), British Standards Institute (BSI),

and International Organization for

Standardization (ISO) name. EPA

concludes that the name of taufluvalinate is a useful means of

distinguishing the half resolved

fluvalinate from the completely racemic

mixture, and therefore proposes to

revise the current chemical name under

40 CFR 180.427 and 186.3400 to read as

follows: tau-fluvalinate {(RS)-α-cyano-3-

phenoxybenzyl N-(2-chloro-α,α,αtrifluoro-p-tolyl)-D-valinate.

The data submitted in support of this

tolerance and other relevant material

have been reviewed. The toxicological

and metabolism data considered in

support of this tolerance are discussed

in detail in a related document

published in the Federal Register of

August 3, 1989 (54 FR 31972).

A chronic dietary exposure analysis

was performed for tau-fluvalinate using

a reference dose (RfD) of 0.01 mg/kgbwt/day based on a no-observable effect

level (NOEL) of 1.0 mg/kg- bwt/day

from a 2–year rat feeding study with an

uncertainty factor of 100. The end point

effect of concern was decreased body

weight gain in both sexes. The

Theoretical Maximum Residue

Contribution (TMRC) from established

tolerances utilizes 1.6% of the RfD for

the U.S. population and 7.0% of the RfD

for the subpopulation most highly

exposed, non-nursing infants (<1 yr).

Establishing the new tolerances would

utilize 4.9% of the RfD for the U.S.

population and 48.3% for non-nursing

infants (<1 yr). If the new tolerances are

approved, the total percentages of the

RfD utilized for the U.S. population and

non-nursing infants (< 1yr) are 6.5%

and 55.4%, respectively. Generally

speaking, EPA has no cause for concern

if total residue contribution for

published tolerances is less than the

RfD. EPA concludes that the chronic

dietary risk of tau-fluvalinate, as

estimated by the dietary risk

assessment, does not appear to be of

concern.

The metabolism of the chemical in

animals for this use is adequately

understood. An adequate analytical

method, gas-liquid chromatography, is

available for enforcement purposes. The

enforcement methodology has been

submitted to the Food and Drug

Administration for publication in the

Pesticide Analytical Manual Vol. II

(PAM II). Because of the long lead time

for publication of the method in PAM II,

the analytical methodology is being

made available in the interim to anyone

interested in pesticide enforcement

when requested from: Calvin Furlow,

Public Response and Program Resources

Branch, Field Operations Divisions

(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

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) 305-

5232.

There are presently no U.S.

registrations for use of the insecticide

tau-fluvalinate on apples, oriental pears,

and kiwis.

Based on the above information, the

Agency concludes that the tolerances

established by amending 40 CFR part

180 would protect the public health.

Therefore, it is proposed that the

tolerances be established as set forth

below.

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments on the

proposed regulation. Comments must

bear a notation indicating the document

control number, [PP 1E4020/P655]. All

written comments filed in response to

this petition will be available in the

Public Response and Program Resources

Branch, at the address given above from

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

Friday, except legal holidays.

A record has been established for this

rulemaking under docket number [PP

1E4020/P655] (including comments and

data submitted electronically as

described below. A public version of

this record, including printed, paper

version of electronic comments, which
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 97 / Friday, May 17, 1996 / Proposed Rules 24913

does not include any information

claimed as CBI, is available for

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

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The public record is located in

Room 1132 of the Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, Crystal Mall #2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA.

Electronic comments must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption. The official record for

this rulemaking, as well as the public

version, as described above will be kept

in paper form. Accordingly, EPA will

transfer all comments received

electronically into printed, paper form

as they are received and will place the

paper copies in the official rulemaking

record which will also include all

comments submitted directly in writing.

The official rulemaking record is the

paper record maintained at the address

in ‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the beginning of

this document.

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 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. In

addition, this action does not impose

any enforceable duty, or contain any

‘‘unfunded mandates’’ as described in

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4), or

require prior consultation as specified

by Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093,

October 28, 1993), entitled Enhancing

the Intergovernmental Partnership’’ or

special consideration as required by

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,

February 16, 1994).

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 Parts 180 and

186

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: May 2, 1996.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR

part 180 be amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. In part 180:

a. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 348.

b. Section 180.427 is amended by

revising the section heading, the

introductory text of paragraph (a),

revising the entry for cattle fat and by

adding and alphabetically inserting the

commodities apples, kiwi, and oriental

pears in the table therein paragraph (a),

and revising the introductory text of

paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 180.427 Tau-fluvalinate {(RS)-α-cyano-3-

phenoxybenzyl N-(2-chloro-α,α,α-trifluorop-tolyl)-D-valinate; Tolerances for residues.

(a) Tolerances are established for

residues of the insecticide taufluvalinate {(RS)-α-cyano-3-

phenoxybenzyl N-(2-chloro-α,α,αtrifluoro-p-tolyl)-D-valinate in or on the

following commodities:

Commodity Parts per million

Apples 0.5

Cattle, fat 0.1

* * * * *

Kiwi 0.1

* * * * *

Oriental pears 0.5

* * * * *

* * * * *

(b) Tolerances with regional

registration, as defined in § 180.1(n) are

established for residues of the

insecticide tau-fluvalinate {(RS)-αcyano-3-phenoxybenzyl N-(2-chloroα,α,α-trifluoro-p-tolyl)-D-valinate in or

on the following commodities:

* * * * *

PART 186—[AMENDED]

2. In part 186:

a. The authority citation for part 186

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 348.

b. Section 186.3400 is amended by

revising the section heading and

introductory paragraph to read as

follows:

§ 186.3400 Tau-fluvalinate {(RS)-α-cyano3-phenoxybenzyl N-(2-chloro-α,α,α-trifluorop-tolyl)-D-valinate.

A regulation is established to permit

residues of the insecticide taufluvalinate

{(RS)-α-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl N-(2-

chloro-α,α,α-trifluoro-p-tolyl)-D-valinate

in or on the following commodities:

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–12350 Filed 5–16–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F