Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0194-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Notice
Title: Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition to Establish a Tolerance for a Certain Pesticide Chemical in or on Food
Posted Date: 2003-06-11T04:00Z

34950
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
112
/
Wednesday,
June
11,
2003
/
Notices
comment
and
allows
EPA
to
contact
you
in
case
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
or
needs
further
information
on
the
substance
of
your
comment.
EPA's
policy
is
that
EPA
will
not
edit
your
comment,
and
any
identifying
or
contact
information
provided
in
the
body
of
a
comment
will
be
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
and
cannot
contact
you
for
clarification,
EPA
may
not
be
able
to
consider
your
comment.
i.
EPA
Dockets.
Your
use
of
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
to
submit
comments
to
EPA
electronically
is
EPA's
preferred
method
for
receiving
comments.
Go
directly
to
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket,
and
follow
the
online
instructions
for
submitting
comments.
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search,''
and
then
key
in
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0100.
The
system
is
an
``
anonymous
access''
system,
which
means
EPA
will
not
know
your
identity,
e­
mail
address,
or
other
contact
information
unless
you
provide
it
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
ii.
E­
mail.
Comments
may
be
sent
by
e­
mail
to
opp­
docket@
epa.
gov,
Attention:
Docket
ID
Number
OPP
 
2003
 
0100.
In
contrast
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
is
not
an
``
anonymous
access''
system.
If
you
send
an
e­
mail
comment
directly
to
the
docket
without
going
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
automatically
captures
your
e­
mail
address.
E­
mail
addresses
that
are
automatically
captured
by
EPA's
e­
mail
system
are
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
iii.
Disk
or
CD
ROM.
You
may
submit
comments
on
a
disk
or
CD
ROM
that
you
mail
to
the
mailing
address
identified
in
Unit
I.
C.
2.
These
electronic
submissions
will
be
accepted
in
WordPerfect
or
ASCII
file
format.
Avoid
the
use
of
special
characters
and
any
form
of
encryption.
2.
By
mail.
Send
your
comments
to:
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch
(
PIRIB)
(
7502C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs
(
OPP),
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001,
Attention:
Docket
ID
Number
OPP
 
2003
 
0100.
3.
By
hand
delivery
or
courier.
Deliver
your
comments
to:
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch
(
PIRIB),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs
(
OPP),
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Rm.
119,
Crystal
Mall
#
2,
1921
Jefferson
Davis
Hwy.,
Arlington,
VA,
Attention:
Docket
ID
Number
OPP
 
2003
 
0100.
Such
deliveries
are
only
accepted
during
the
docket's
normal
hours
of
operation
as
identified
in
Unit
I.
B.
1.

D.
How
Should
I
Submit
CBI
to
the
Agency?

Do
not
submit
information
that
you
consider
to
be
CBI
electronically
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
or
by
e­
mail.
You
may
claim
information
that
you
submit
to
EPA
as
CBI
by
marking
any
part
or
all
of
that
information
as
CBI
(
if
you
submit
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,
mark
the
outside
of
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
as
CBI
and
then
identify
electronically
within
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
the
specific
information
that
is
CBI).
Information
so
marked
will
not
be
disclosed
except
in
accordance
with
procedures
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
2.
In
addition
to
one
complete
version
of
the
comment
that
includes
any
information
claimed
as
CBI,
a
copy
of
the
comment
that
does
not
contain
the
information
claimed
as
CBI
must
be
submitted
for
inclusion
in
the
public
docket
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
you
submit
the
copy
that
does
not
contain
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,
mark
the
outside
of
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
clearly
that
it
does
not
contain
CBI.
Information
not
marked
as
CBI
will
be
included
in
the
public
docket
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
without
prior
notice.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
CBI
or
the
procedures
for
claiming
CBI,
please
consult
the
person
listed
under
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT.

E.
What
Should
I
Consider
as
I
Prepare
My
Comments
for
EPA?

You
may
find
the
following
suggestions
helpful
for
preparing
your
comments:
1.
Explain
your
views
as
clearly
as
possible.
2.
Describe
any
assumptions
that
you
used.
3.
Provide
copies
of
any
technical
information
and/
or
data
you
used
that
support
your
views.
4.
If
you
estimate
potential
burden
or
costs,
explain
how
you
arrived
at
the
estimate
that
you
provide.
5.
Provide
specific
examples
to
illustrate
your
concerns.
6.
Offer
alternative
ways
to
improve
the
registration
activity.
7.
Make
sure
to
submit
your
comments
by
the
deadline
in
this
notice.
8.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
be
sure
to
identify
the
docket
ID
number
assigned
to
this
action
in
the
subject
line
on
the
first
page
of
your
response.
You
may
also
provide
the
name,
date,
and
Federal
Register
citation.

II.
Registration
Applications
EPA
received
an
application
as
follows
to
register
a
pesticide
product
containing
a
new
active
ingredient
not
included
in
any
previously
registered
product
pursuant
to
the
provision
of
section
3(
c)(
4)
of
FIFRA.
Notice
of
receipt
of
this
application
does
not
imply
a
decision
by
the
Agency
on
the
application.

Product
Containing
an
Active
Ingredient
Not
Included
in
Any
Previously
Registered
Product
1.
File
Symbol:
67979
 
U.
Applicant:
Syngenta
Seeds,
3054
Cornwallis
Road,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27709.
Product
name:
VIP3A.
Type
of
product:
Plant­
incorporated
protect.
Active
ingredient:
Bacillus
thuringiensis
VIP3A
control
protein
as
expressed
in
Event
COT102
cotton
plants.
Proposed
classification/
Use:
None.
For
insect
control
on
plants.

List
of
Subjects
Environmental
protection,
Pesticides
and
pest.

Dated:
May
29,
2003.
Janet
L.
Andersen,
Director,
Biopesticides
and
Pollution
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs.

[
FR
Doc.
03
 
14326
Filed
6
 
10
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
[
OPP
 
2003
 
0194;
FRL
 
7310
 
4]

Notice
of
Filing
a
Pesticide
Petition
to
Establish
a
Tolerance
for
a
Certain
Pesticide
Chemical
in
or
on
Food
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
This
notice
announces
the
initial
filing
of
a
pesticide
petition
proposing
the
establishment
of
regulations
for
residues
of
a
certain
pesticide
chemical
in
or
on
various
food
commodities.
DATES:
Comments,
identified
by
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0194,
must
be
received
on
or
before
July
11,
2003.
ADDRESSES:
Comments
may
be
submitted
electronically,
by
mail,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
Follow
the
detailed
instructions
as
provided
in
Unit
I.
of
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Joanne
I.
Miller,
Registration
Division
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
23:
27
Jun
10,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00053
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
11JNN1.
SGM
11JNN1
34951
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
112
/
Wednesday,
June
11,
2003
/
Notices
(
7505C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460;
telephone
number:
(
703)
305
 
6224;
and
e­
mail
address:
miller.
joanne@
epamail.
epa.
gov
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

I.
General
Information
A.
Does
this
Action
Apply
to
Me?

You
may
be
potentially
affected
by
this
action
if
you
are
an
agricultural
producer,
food
manufacturer,
or
pesticide
manufacturer.
Potentially
affected
categories
and
entities
may
include,
but
are
not
limited
to:
 
Crop
production
(
NAICS
111)
 
Animal
production
(
NAICS
112)
 
Food
manufacturing
(
NAICS
311)
 
Pesticide
manufacturing
(
NAICS
32532)
This
listing
is
not
intended
to
be
exhaustive,
but
rather
provides
a
guide
for
readers
regarding
entities
likely
to
be
affected
by
this
action.
Other
types
of
entities
not
listed
in
this
unit
could
also
be
affected.
The
North
American
Industrial
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
codes
have
been
provided
to
assist
you
and
others
in
determining
whether
this
action
might
apply
to
certain
entities.
If
you
have
any
questions
regarding
the
applicability
of
this
action
to
a
particular
entity,
consult
the
person
listed
under
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B.
How
Can
I
Get
Copies
of
this
Document
and
Other
Related
Information?

1.
EPA
Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0194.
The
official
public
docket
consists
of
the
documents
specifically
referenced
in
this
action,
any
public
comments
received,
and
other
information
related
to
this
action.
Although,
a
part
of
the
official
docket,
the
public
docket
does
not
include
Confidential
Business
Information
(
CBI)
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
The
official
public
docket
is
the
collection
of
materials
that
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch
(
PIRIB),
Rm.
119,
Crystal
Mall
#
2,
1921
Jefferson
Davis
Hwy.,
Arlington,
VA.
This
docket
facility
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
docket
telephone
number
is
(
703)
305
 
5805.
2.
Electronic
access.
You
may
access
this
Federal
Register
document
electronically
through
the
EPA
Internet
under
the
``
Federal
Register''
listings
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
fedrgstr/.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
and
comment
system,
EPA
Dockets.
You
may
use
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
official
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Although,
not
all
docket
materials
may
be
available
electronically,
you
may
still
access
any
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
the
docket
facility
identified
in
Unit
I.
B.
1.
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search,''
then
key
in
the
appropriate
docket
ID
number.
Certain
types
of
information
will
not
be
placed
in
the
EPA
dockets.
Information
claimed
as
CBI
and
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute,
which
is
not
included
in
the
official
public
docket,
will
not
be
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
EPA's
policy
is
that
copyrighted
material
will
not
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
but
will
be
available
only
in
printed,
paper
form
in
the
official
public
docket.
To
the
extent
feasible,
publicly
available
docket
materials
will
be
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
When
a
document
is
selected
from
the
index
list
in
EPA
dockets,
the
system
will
identify
whether
the
document
is
available
for
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Although,
not
all
docket
materials
may
be
available
electronically,
you
may
still
access
any
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
the
docket
facility
identified
in
Unit
I.
B.
EPA
intends
to
work
towards
providing
electronic
access
to
all
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
For
public
commenters,
it
is
important
to
note
that
EPA's
policy
is
that
public
comments,
whether
submitted
electronically
or
on
paper,
will
be
made
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
as
EPA
receives
them
and
without
change,
unless
the
comment
contains
copyrighted
material,
CBI,
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
When
EPA
identifies
a
comment
containing
copyrighted
material,
EPA
will
provide
a
reference
to
that
material
in
the
version
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
The
entire
printed
comment,
including
the
copyrighted
material,
will
be
available
in
the
public
docket.
Public
comments
submitted
on
computer
disks
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
docket
will
be
transferred
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Public
comments
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
docket
will
be
scanned
and
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Where
practical,
physical
objects
will
be
photographed,
and
the
photograph
will
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
along
with
a
brief
description
written
by
the
docket
staff.

C.
How
and
to
Whom
Do
I
Submit
Comments?
You
may
submit
comments
electronically,
by
mail,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
identify
the
appropriate
docket
ID
number
in
the
subject
line
on
the
first
page
of
your
comment.
Please
ensure
that
your
comments
are
submitted
within
the
specified
comment
period.
Comments
received
after
the
close
of
the
comment
period
will
be
marked
``
late.''
EPA
is
not
required
to
consider
these
late
comments.
If
you
wish
to
submit
CBI
or
information
that
is
otherwise
protected
by
statute,
please
follow
the
instructions
in
Unit
I.
D.
Do
not
use
EPA
dockets
or
e­
mail
to
submit
CBI
or
information
protected
by
statute.
1.
Electronically.
If
you
submit
an
electronic
comment
as
prescribed
in
this
unit,
EPA
recommends
that
you
include
your
name,
mailing
address,
and
an
email
address
or
other
contact
information
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
Also,
include
this
contact
information
on
the
outside
of
any
disk
or
CD
ROM
you
submit,
and
in
any
cover
letter
accompanying
the
disk
or
CD
ROM.
This
ensures
that
you
can
be
identified
as
the
submitter
of
the
comment
and
allows
EPA
to
contact
you
in
case
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
or
needs
further
information
on
the
substance
of
your
comment.
EPA's
policy
is
that
EPA
will
not
edit
your
comment,
and
any
identifying
or
contact
information
provided
in
the
body
of
a
comment
will
be
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
and
cannot
contact
you
for
clarification,
EPA
may
not
be
able
to
consider
your
comment.
i.
EPA
Dockets.
Your
use
of
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
to
submit
comments
to
EPA
electronically
is
EPA's
preferred
method
for
receiving
comments.
Go
directly
to
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket,
and
follow
the
online
instructions
for
submitting
comments.
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search,''
and
then
key
in
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0194.
The
system
is
an
``
anonymous
access''
system,
which
means
EPA
will
not
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
23:
27
Jun
10,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00054
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
11JNN1.
SGM
11JNN1
34952
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
112
/
Wednesday,
June
11,
2003
/
Notices
know
your
identity,
e­
mail
address,
or
other
contact
information
unless
you
provide
it
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
ii.
E­
mail.
Comments
may
be
sent
by
e­
mail
to
opp­
docket@
epa.
gov,
Attention:
Docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0194.
In
contrast
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
is
not
an
``
anonymous
access''
system.
If
you
send
an
e­
mail
comment
directly
to
the
docket
without
going
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
automatically
captures
your
e­
mail
address.
E­
mail
addresses
that
are
automatically
captured
by
EPA's
e­
mail
system
are
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
iii.
Disk
or
CD
ROM.
You
may
submit
comments
on
a
disk
or
CD
ROM
that
you
mail
to
the
mailing
address
identified
in
Unit
I.
C.
2.
These
electronic
submissions
will
be
accepted
in
WordPerfect
or
ASCII
file
format.
Avoid
the
use
of
special
characters
and
any
form
of
encryption.
2.
By
mail.
Send
your
comments
to:
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch
(
PIRIB)
(
7502C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs
(
OPP),
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001,
Attention:
Docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0194.
3.
By
hand
delivery
or
courier.
Deliver
your
comments
to:
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch
(
PIRIB),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs
(
OPP),
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Rm.
119,
Crystal
Mall
#
2,
1921
Jefferson
Davis
Hwy.,
Arlington,
VA,
Attention:
Docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0194.
Such
deliveries
are
only
accepted
during
the
docket's
normal
hours
of
operation
as
identified
in
Unit
I.
B.
1.

D.
How
Should
I
Submit
CBI
to
the
Agency?
Do
not
submit
information
that
you
consider
to
be
CBI
electronically
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
or
by
e­
mail.
You
may
claim
information
that
you
submit
to
EPA
as
CBI
by
marking
any
part
or
all
of
that
information
as
CBI
(
if
you
submit
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,
mark
the
outside
of
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
as
CBI
and
then
identify
electronically
within
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
the
specific
information
that
is
CBI).
Information
so
marked
will
not
be
disclosed
except
in
accordance
with
procedures
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
2.
In
addition
to
one
complete
version
of
the
comment
that
includes
any
information
claimed
as
CBI,
a
copy
of
the
comment
that
does
not
contain
the
information
claimed
as
CBI
must
be
submitted
for
inclusion
in
the
public
docket
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
you
submit
the
copy
that
does
not
contain
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,
mark
the
outside
of
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
clearly
that
it
does
not
contain
CBI.
Information
not
marked
as
CBI
will
be
included
in
the
public
docket
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
without
prior
notice.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
CBI
or
the
procedures
for
claiming
CBI,
please
consult
the
person
listed
under
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT.

E.
What
Should
I
Consider
as
I
Prepare
My
Comments
for
EPA?

You
may
find
the
following
suggestions
helpful
for
preparing
your
comments:
1.
Explain
your
views
as
clearly
as
possible.
2.
Describe
any
assumptions
that
you
used.
3.
Provide
copies
of
any
technical
information
and/
or
data
you
used
that
support
your
views.
4.
If
you
estimate
potential
burden
or
costs,
explain
how
you
arrived
at
the
estimate
that
you
provide.
5.
Provide
specific
examples
to
illustrate
your
concerns.
6.
Make
sure
to
submit
your
comments
by
the
deadline
in
this
notice.
7.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
be
sure
to
identify
the
docket
ID
number
assigned
to
this
action
in
the
subject
line
on
the
first
page
of
your
response.
You
may
also
provide
the
name,
date,
and
Federal
Register
citation.

II.
What
Action
is
the
Agency
Taking?

EPA
has
received
a
pesticide
petition
as
follows
proposing
the
establishment
and/
or
amendment
of
regulations
for
residues
of
a
certain
pesticide
chemical
in
or
on
various
food
commodities
under
section
408
of
the
Federal
Food,
Drug,
and
Cosmetic
Act
(
FFDCA),
21
U.
S.
C.
346a.
EPA
has
determined
that
this
petition
contains
data
or
information
regarding
the
elements
set
forth
in
FFDCA
section
408(
d)(
2);
however,
EPA
has
not
fully
evaluated
the
sufficiency
of
the
submitted
data
at
this
time
or
whether
the
data
support
granting
of
the
petition.
Additional
data
may
be
needed
before
EPA
rules
on
the
petition.

List
of
Subjects
Environmental
protection,
Agricultural
commodities,
Feed
additives,
Food
additives,
Pesticides
and
pests,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.
May
28,
2003.
Debra
Edwards,
Director,
Registration
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs.

Summary
of
Petition
The
petitioner's
summary
of
the
pesticide
petition
is
printed
below
as
required
by
FFDCA
section
408(
d)(
3).
The
summary
of
the
petition
was
prepared
by
BASF
Corporation
and
represents
the
view
of
the
petitioner.
The
petition
summary
announces
the
availability
of
a
description
of
the
analytical
methods
available
to
EPA
for
the
detection
and
measurement
of
the
pesticide
chemical
residues
or
an
explanation
of
why
no
such
method
is
needed.

BASF
Corporation
PP
3F6568
EPA
has
received
a
pesticide
petition
(
PP
3F6568)
from
BASF
Corporation,
P.
O.
Box
13528,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27709
proposing,
pursuant
to
section
408(
d)
of
the
Federal
Food,
Drug,
and
Cosmetic
Act
(
FFDCA),
21
U.
S.
C.
346a(
d),
to
amend
40
CFR
part
180
by
establishing
a
tolerance
for
residues
of
(
3­(
4,5­
dihydro­
isoxazol­
3­
yl)­
4­
methanesulfonyl­
2­
methylphenyl)­
(
5­
hydroxyl­
1­
methyl­
1H­
pyrazol­
4­
yl)
methanone
in
or
on
the
raw
agricultural
commodities:
Corn,
field,
forage;
corn,
field,
grain;
corn,
field,
stover;
corn,
pop,
grain;
corn,
pop,
stover;
corn,
sweet,
forage;
corn,
sweet,
kernal
plus
cob
with
husks
removed;
corn,
sweet,
stover;
cattle,
kidney;
cattle,
liver;
goat,
kidney;
goat,
liver;
hog,
kidney;
hog,
liver;
horse,
kidney;
horse,
liver;
sheep,
kidney;
and
sheep,
liver
at
0.05;
0.01;
0.05;
0.01;
0.05;
0.05;
0.01;
0.05;
0.02;
0.70;
0.20;
0.70;
0.20;
0.70;
0.20;
0.70;
0.20;
and
0.70
parts
per
million
(
ppm),
respectively.
EPA
has
determined
that
the
petition
contains
data
or
information
regarding
the
elements
set
forth
in
section
408(
d)(
2)
of
the
FFDCA;
however,
EPA
has
not
fully
evaluated
the
sufficiency
of
the
submitted
data
at
this
time
or
whether
the
data
support
granting
of
the
petition.
Additional
data
may
be
needed
before
EPA
rules
on
the
petition.

A.
Residue
Chemistry
1.
Plant
metabolism.
The
metabolism
of
BAS
670
H
(
3­(
4,5­
dihydro­
isoxazol­
3­
yl)­
4­
methanesulfonyl­
2­
methylphenyl)­(
5­
hydroxyl­
1­
methyl­
1H­
pyrazol­
4­
yl)
methanone)
was
determined
in
corn
forage,
stover
and
grain
using
14C
labeled
materials
applied
to
young
corn
plants
at
an
exaggerated
application
rate
of
0.134
lb
active
ingredient/
acre.
BAS
670
H
and
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
23:
27
Jun
10,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00055
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
11JNN1.
SGM
11JNN1
34953
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
112
/
Wednesday,
June
11,
2003
/
Notices
one
significant
metabolite,
M670H05,
were
found
in
low
levels
in
the
plant
matrices
with
the
majority
of
the
radioactive
residues
incorporated
into
natural
products.
M670H05
resulted
from
oxidation
of
the
carbonyl
bridge
to
a
carboxylic
acid
with
concomitant
loss
and
breakdown
of
the
pyrazole
ring.
The
significant
metabolite
M670H05
was
found
in
the
rat
metabolism
study.
2.
Analytical
method.
Suitable
independently
validated
analytical
methods
(
for
crop
and
animal
matrices)
are
submitted
for
detecting
and
measuring
BAS
670
H
levels
in
or
on
food
with
a
limit
of
detection
that
is
satisfactory
for
enforcing
the
requested
tolerances.
Residues
are
first
extracted
from
the
matrices
by
aqueous
solvent
then
cleaned
up
by
acid
partitioning
into
organic
solvent,
then
base
partitioned,
and
quantified
with
application
to
high
performance
liquid
chromatography
with
dual
mass
selective
detectors
(
LC/
MS/
MS).
3.
Magnitude
of
residues.
Field
studies
were
conducted
at
30
sites
over
2
years
with
sites
selected
to
fulfill
both
EPA
and
Canadian
Pest
Management
Regulatory
Agency
(
PMRA)
requirements.
The
end
product,
BAS
670
00H,
was
applied
broadcast
over
corn
plants
in
two
applications
at
25
g
active
ingredient/
ha
(
0.022
lb
a.
i./
acre)
+
75
g
a.
i./
ha
(
0.067
lb
a.
i./
acre)
for
a
total
of
100
g
a.
i./
ha
(
0.089
lb
a.
i./
acre)
with
the
final
application
targeted
for
45
days
before
milk
stage.
Samples
of
field
corn
were
harvested
at
the
milk
stage
to
cover
sweet
corn
harvest
timing.
All
matrices
were
analyzed
for
parent
and
M670H05
with
the
limit
of
quantitation
(
LOQ)
setting
the
proposed
tolerances.
No
residues
were
detected
above
the
LOQ
in
any
of
the
corn
RAC
samples
analyzed
(
fresh
corn,
forage,
grain,
and
stover).
To
determine
the
fate
of
any
BAS
670
residues
in
processed
grain,
the
field
study
incorporated
an
exaggerated
5x
application
rate.
No
residues
above
LOQ
were
detected
in
the
5x
treated
grain
samples;
therefore,
the
analyses
of
the
grain
processed
fractions
was
not
required.
The
cow
feeding
study
at
three
dosing
levels
show
that
food
tolerances
for
parent
in
only
kidney
and
liver
matrices
are
necessary
(
and
not
for
any
other
matrices
such
as
meat,
fat,
and
milk).

B.
Toxicological
Profile
1.
Acute
toxicity
 
i.
Oral
(
rat):
(
LD)
50
=
>
2,000
milligrams/
kilogram
body
weight
(
mg/
kg
bwt)
(
male/
female)
=
Category
III.
ii.
Dermal
(
rat):
(
LD)
50
=
>
2,000
mg/
kg
bwt
(
male/
female)
=
Category
III.
iii.
Inhalation
(
rat):
(
LC)
50
=
>
5.8
milligrams/
per
liter
(
mg/
L)
(
male/
female)
=
Category
IV.
iv.
Primary
eye
irritation
(
rabbit):
Slightly
irritating
=
Category
III.
v.
Primary
dermal
irritation
(
rabbit):
Slightly
irritating
=
Category
III.
vi.
Dermal
sensitization
(
guinea
pig):
Not
a
sensitizer.
vii.
Oral
neurotoxicity
(
rat):
NOAEL
=
2,000
mg/
kg
bwt
(
male/
female).
2.
Genotoxicty.
BAS
670
H
was
tested
for
its
genotoxic
potential
in
a
battery
of
five
in
vitro
or
in
vivo
studies
covering
all
required
end­
points
(
gene
mutations,
chromosomal
and
chromosome
aberrations,
and
DNA
damage
and
repair).
Several
batches
of
BAS
670
H
have
been
tested
over
the
time,
from
early
laboratory
produced
material
to
current
manufacturing
process
material.
BAS
670
H
did
not
demonstrate
any
genotoxic
effects
in
vivo.
In
vitro,
either
batches
tested
for
chromosomal
aberrations
caused
a
slight,
significant
clastogenic
effect
in
the
presence
of
S­
9
mix,
but
the
in
vivo
test
for
the
equivalent
end­
point
was
negative.
Three
of
the
four
batches
tested
in
the
bacterial
reverse
mutation
assay
were
not
mutagenic,
but,
the
batch
with
the
least
purity
displayed
a
weak
mutagenic
effect
at
the
highest
dose
in
Salmonella
typhimurium
TA98
in
the
absence
of
S­
9
mix,
most
likely
caused
by
impurities,
which
are
not
present
in
the
current
production
batch.
Overall,
the
weight
of
the
evidence
is
that
BAS
670
H
is
not
genotoxic.
3.
Reproductive
and
developmental
toxicity.
The
reproductive
and
developmental
toxicity
of
BAS
670
H
was
investigated
in
a
2­
generation
rat
reproduction
study
as
well
as
in
rat,
mouse
and
several
rabbit
teratology
studies
(
with
different
batches
of
BAS
670
H)
and
a
rat
developmental
neurotoxicity
study.
There
were
no
adverse
effects
on
fertility
of
both
genders
and
no
effect
on
the
reproductive
performance
of
males
in
the
two­
generation
study
at
any
dose
tested.
There
was,
however,
a
high
litter
loss
in
F0
and
F1
associated
with
insufficient
maternal
care
at
higher
dose
levels
with
clear
maternal
toxicity.
General
parental
toxicity
included
eye
and
kidney
effects,
caused
by
elevated
tyrosine
levels
due
to
hydroxyphenylpyruvate
dioxygenase
(
HPPD)
inhibition.
The
same
organs
were
affected
in
subchronic
and
chronic
feeding
studies
with
rats.
Pup
effects
were
observed
in
the
F1
and
F2
generation
including
perinatal
pup
mortality
and
impaired
body
weight
gain,
the
lower
body
weight
effects
were
considered
to
lead
to
brain
and
spleen
weight
changes
and
delays
in
preputial
separation.
As
observed
in
the
parental
animals,
effects
on
eyes
and
kidneys
were
observed
in
the
pups.
Renal
pelvis
dilation
was
observed
at
lower
doses,
although,
there
was
no
overt
maternal
toxicity,
significantly
elevated
tyrosine
levels
were
observed
in
the
dams
and
pups.
The
no
observed
adverse
effect
level
(
NOAEL)
for
fertility
(
F0
and
F1,
both
genders)
was
4,000
ppm
(
about
450
mg/
kg
bwt/
day);
the
NOAEL
for
reproductive
performance
was
40
ppm
(
about
4
mg/
kg
body
weight/
day)
for
the
F1
females.
The
NOAEL
for
general
toxicity
was
4
ppm
(
about
0.4
mg/
kg
bwt/
day).
The
NOAEL
for
developmental
toxicity
(
growth
and
development
of
the
offspring)
was
4
ppm
(
about
0.4
mg/
kg
body
weight/
day)
for
the
F1
pups,
but
was
lower
than
4
ppm
for
the
F2
pups
due
to
renal
pelvis
dilations
at
all
dose
levels.
Developmental
neurotoxicity
was
not
observed
at
any
dose
in
the
developmental
neurotoxicity
study.
At
all
dose
levels,
eye
effects
due
to
elevated
tyrosine
levels
were
found
in
dams
and
pups.
Additionally,
there
were
decreased
body
weights
in
the
dams
at
the
high
and
mid
dose,
but
there
were
no
indications
of
adverse
effects
on
reproductive
performance
of
the
parental
females.
In
pups
of
both
genders,
decreased
preweaning
and
postweaning
body
weight
gains
and
body
weights
were
observed
at
the
low
dose
level
and
above.
This
is
an
indicator
of
a
retardation
of
the
general
physical
development,
which
is
considered
to
be
responsible
for
a
slight
delay
of
maturation.
The
NOAEL
for
developmental
neurotoxicity
was
800
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
(
highest
dose
tested).
There
is
no
NOAEL
for
the
eye
lesions
and
reduced
body
weight
gain
of
the
pups.
NOAELs
for
these
effects
were
determined
in
prenatal
development
studies
in
rats,
rabbits
and
mice.
No
developmental
toxicity
was
noted
in
the
mouse
prenatal
development
study.
In
the
prenatal
development
study
in
rats
no
teratogenic
effect
was
observed,
but
there
was
maternal
toxicity
together
with
skeletal
variations
in
the
pups.
The
same
skeletal
variation
(
i.
e.
supernumerary
ribs)
was
also
found
in
rabbit
prenatal
development
studies.
This
effect
is
associated
with
the
family
of
HPPD
inhibiting
substances.
In
addition,
several
rabbits
had
pups
with
a
soft
tissue
malformation:
unilateral
kidney
agenesis.
The
NOAEL
for
the
skeletal
variations
and
the
kidney
agenesis
was
0.5
mg/
kg
bwt/
day,
the
NOAEL
for
overt
maternal
toxicity
was
50
mg/
kg
bwt/
day.
The
developmental
effects
in
rabbits
occurred
at
dose­
levels
below
overt
maternal
toxicity;
however,
measured
tyrosine
blood
levels
in
the
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
23:
27
Jun
10,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00056
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
11JNN1.
SGM
11JNN1
34954
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
112
/
Wednesday,
June
11,
2003
/
Notices
dams
were
substantially
elevated
at
these
dose
levels.
Elevated
tyrosine
levels
are
known
to
cause
kidney
toxicity.
4.
Subchronic
toxicity.
The
subchronic
toxicity
of
BAS
670
H
was
investigated
in
90
 
day
feeding
studies
in
rats,
mice
and
dogs,
and
in
a
28
 
day
dermal
administration
study
in
rats.
Several
supplemental
short­
term
mechanistic
studies
in
rats
and
mice
were
performed
to
elucidate
the
mode
of
action.
Generally,
very
mild
toxicity
was
observed
in
mice
and
dogs
at
high
doses.
In
a
combined
neurotoxicity
90
 
day
feeding
study
in
rats,
no
signs
of
neurotoxicity
were
observed.
Effects
were
seen
in
the
pancreas,
eye,
kidney,
liver,
and
thyroid
gland.
The
target
organs
are
identical
with
those
in
the
chronic
feeding
studies
with
rats.
Two
modes
of
action
have
been
elucidated
for
BAS
670
H
by
short­
term
mechanistic
studies,
one
leading
to
effects
on
eyes,
kidney
and
liver,
and
a
second
leading
to
effects
at
the
thyroid:
BAS
670
H
causes
elevated
tyrosine
levels
by
HPPD
inhibition
accounting
for
effects
on
eye,
liver
and
kidney.
The
mouse
is
the
accepted
model
for
this
tyrosine
level
elevations,
and
a
NOAEL
of
1.2
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
was
established
for
tyrosine
elevation
in
mice.
Other
mechanistic
studies
demonstrated
an
impairment
of
pituitary­
thyroid
hormone
levels
by
enhancing
the
hepatic
clearance
of
thyroid
hormones.
The
NOAEL
for
interference
with
thyroid
hormones
was
0.4
mg/
kg
bwt/
day.
The
NOAEL
for
effects
on
the
exocrine
pancreas
in
rats
was
1.1
mg/
kg/
bwt/
day.
Similar
effects
were
seen
in
the
28
 
day
dermal
study
with
rats;
the
NOAEL
was
100
mg/
kg
bwt/
day.
5.
Chronic
toxicity.
The
chronic
toxicity
and
oncogenicity
studies
with
BAS
670
H
include
two
12
 
month
feeding
studies
with
dogs,
an
18
 
month
mouse
feeding
study,
a
12
 
month
rat
chronic
feeding
study
and
a
24
 
month
rat
oncogenicity
study.
In
the
chronic
dog
study,
mild
reductions
of
the
body
weight
were
observed
at
high
doses.
The
NOAEL
was
100
ppm
(
2.9
and
3.1
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
in
males
and
females
respectively).
In
the
18
 
month
chronic
feeding
study
in
mice,
increased
liver
weights
were
seen
at
high
doses.
The
NOAEL
was
80
ppm
(
19
and
26
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
in
males
and
females
respectively).
BAS
670
H
was
not
carcinogenic
to
mice.
In
the
chronic
feeding
studies
in
rats,
the
main
target
organs
were
eye,
liver,
kidney,
thyroid
gland,
and
pancreas.
The
same
organs
were
affected
in
the
subchronic
studies.
Short­
term
mechanistic
studies
demonstrated
that
BAS
670
H
causes
elevated
tyrosine
levels
by
HPPD
inhibition
accounting
for
effects
on
the
eye,
liver
and
kidney.
The
mouse
is
the
accepted
model
for
this
tyrosine
level
elevation,
and
a
NOAEL
of
1.2
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
was
established
for
tyrosine
elevation
in
mice.
The
NOAEL
for
effects
on
the
exocrine
pancreas
in
rats
6
ppm
in
both
genders
(
0.4
and
0.5
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
in
males
and
females
respectively).
At
the
end
of
the
24
 
month
oncogenicity
study,
there
was
a
slight
but
significant
increase
in
benign
thyroid
adenomas
in
both
genders.
The
thyroid
was
the
only
organ
affected
and
the
increase
of
the
adenomas
was
significant
only
at
the
highest
dose
tested,
while
considerable
general
toxicity
was
already
seen
at
20
 
times
lower
doses.
The
mechanism
of
thyroid
tumor
formation
by
BAS
670
H
was
thoroughly
investigated
in
shortterm
mechanistic
studies.
An
enhanced
hepatic
clearance
of
thyroid
hormones
impairs
pituitary­
thyroid
hormone
levels
leading
to
hypertrophy,
hyperplasia
and
ultimately
neoplasia.
There
is
general
agreement,
that
this
mechanism
is
well
understood
in
rodents
and
is
of
minor
relevance
to
humans.
A
clear
NOAEL
of
0.4
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
was
demonstrated
for
effects
on
thyroid
hormone
levels.
A
threshold
(
non­
linear)
cancer
assessment
is
proposed
and
a
cancer
classification
as
``
not
likely
to
be
a
human
carcinogen.''
6.
Animal
metabolism.
In
the
rat
metabolism
studies,
the
majority
of
the
residue
was
excreted
within
48
hours
from
both
males
and
females.
In
all
matrices
investigated
unchanged
parent
is
the
main
component.
Degradation
starts
with
hydroxylation
of
the
oxazole
ring.
The
identified
metabolites
from
both
pyrazole
ring
label
and
phenyl
ring
label
studies
are
reported.
Goat
and
hen
metabolism
studies
were
conducted
with
feeding
levels
of
about
10
ppm.
In
the
goat,
the
majority
of
the
applied
dose
was
excreted.
Non­
metabolized
BAS
670H
was
the
major
radioactive
residue,
and
M670H02,
formed
from
hydroxylation
at
the
4­
position
of
the
isoxazole
ring,
was
the
only
significant
metabolite
formed.
In
poultry
BAS
670
F
was
also
rapidly
excreted.
Residues
in
liver
consisted
mainly
of
BAS
670H,
and
the
only
significant
metabolite
in
poultry
was
again
M670H02.
The
significant
metabolite
M670H02
was
found
in
the
rat
metabolism
study.
7.
Metabolite
toxicology.
Toxicity
of
the
metabolites
of
BAS
670
H
with
potential
exposure
to
humans
was
concurrently
evaluated
during
toxicity
testing
of
the
parent,
because
both
plant
and
animal
metabolites
are
formed
during
the
course
of
toxicity
testing.
Both
plant
and
animal
metabolites
are
considered
not
of
toxicological
concern.
Some
testing
was
conducted
on
the
anaerobic
aquatic
metabolite,
670M10.
The
results
as
given
below
show
no
toxicological
concern:
 
Bacterial
reverse
mutation
test
(
Ames):
No
effect
=
negative.
 
Mammalian
somatic
cell
gene
mutation
test
(
MNT):
No
effect
=
negative.
 
Cytogenetic
study
in
vivo
(
mouse
HPRT):
No
effect
=
negative.
 
28
 
Day
feeding
study
(
rat):
NOAEL
1,197
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
and
1,304
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
(
male
and
female,
respectively).
8.
Endocrine
disruption.
BAS
670
H
has
been
shown
to
alter
thyroid
hormone
levels
in
rats
as
also
observed
with
other
4­
hydroxyphenylpyruvate
dioxygenase
enzyme
inhibitor
active
ingredients.
However,
there
have
been
no
effects
noted
on
sexual
or
other
hormones
in
numerous
subchronic
and
chronic
toxicity
studies
with
multiple
species.

C.
Aggregate
Exposure
1.
Dietary
exposure.
A
chronic
population
adjusted
dose
(
cPAD)
of
0.00044
mg/
kg/
day
is
proposed.
This
cPAD
is
based
on
a
lowest
observed
adverse
effect
level
(
LOAEL)
of
0.4
mg/
kg/
day
for
pup
renal
pelvis
dilation
in
the
2­
generation
rat
reproduction
study
with
an
extra
3X
uncertainty
factor
for
using
the
LOAEL
(
rather
than
a
NOAEL)
plus
a
3X
Food
Quality
Protection
Act
(
FQPA)
factor
on
top
of
the
standard
100X
uncertainty
factor.
So
the
total
uncertainty
factor
is
900
(
3
x
3
x
100),
and
the
cPAD
is
calculated
as
0.4/
900
=
0.00044.
An
acute
dietary
population
adjusted
dose
(
aPAD)
is
proposed
as
0.0013
mg/
kg/
day.
This
aPAD
is
based
upon
a
NOAEL
of
0.4
mg/
kg/
day
obtained
in
the
rat
thyroid
hormone
study
and
a
3X
FQPA
uncertainty
factor
on
top
of
the
standard
100
(
0.4/
300
=
0.0013).
BAS
670
H
has
been
shown
to
be
noncarcinogenic
in
mice,
but
was
associated
with
an
increase
in
thyroid
follicular
cell
tumors
at
high
doses
in
the
rat.
These
tumors
have
been
shown
to
develop
by
a
non­
genotoxic
mode
of
action,
in
fact
they
were
the
consequence
of
induced
changes
of
thyroid
hormone
levels.
Therefore
BAS
670
H
should
be
classified
as
``
not
likely
to
be
a
human
carcinogen.''
i.
Food.
Exposure
estimates
were
compared
against
the
cPAD
and
aPAD
of
0.0013
mg/
kg
bwt/
day
and
0.004
mg/
kg
bwt/
day,
respectively.
Results
of
the
chronic
dietary
exposure
assessments
demonstrated
that
even
with
the
worstcase
assumptions
(
residues
at
tolerance
level
and
100%
crop
treated),
the
estimated
chronic
dietary
exposure
was
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
23:
27
Jun
10,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00057
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
11JNN1.
SGM
11JNN1
34955
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
112
/
Wednesday,
June
11,
2003
/
Notices
less
than
12.5%
of
the
cPAD
for
the
total
U.
S.
population
and
all
the
subpopulations.
The
greatest
exposure
occurred
in
infants
and
children.
Exposure
estimates
for
the
acute
dietary
assessment
were
well
under
100%
of
the
acute
population
adjusted
dose
(
aPAD)
at
the
99th
percentile.
The
overall
U.
S.
population
and
the
highest
exposed
subpopulation
(
infants
<
1
year)
utilized
only
5.3%
and
less
than
21%,
respectively.
ii.
Drinking
water.
There
are
no
established
maximum
contaminant
levels
or
health
advisory
levels
for
residues
of
BAS
670
H
or
its
metabolites
in
drinking
water.
A
tier
1
drinking
water
modeling
assessment
for
BAS
670
H
using
the
FIRST
model
(
for
surface
water)
and
SCI­
GROW
(
for
ground
water)
produced
estimated
maximum
concentrations
of
0.22
parts
per
billion
(
ppb)
(
chronic)
for
surface
water
and
0.20
ppb
for
ground
water.
These
estimated
concentrations
are
less
than
a
worst
case
calculated
acceptable
level
of
3.95
ppb
children
chronic
drinking
water
levels
of
concern
(
DWLOC)
for
residues
in
drinking
water
based
on
chronic
aggregate
exposure.
Therefore,
taking
into
account
all
uses
and
exposures
one
concludes,
with
reasonable
certainty
that
residues
of
BAS
670
H
in
drinking
water
will
not
result
in
unacceptable
levels
of
aggregate
human
health
risk
at
this
time.
2.
Non­
dietary
exposure.
There
are
no
registered
or
proposed
residential
uses
for
BAS
670
H.

D.
Cumulative
Effects
At
this
time,
there
is
no
available
information
to
indicate
that
BAS
670
H
or
its
metabolites
have
a
common
mechanism
of
toxicity
with
other
substances.
Therefore,
there
is
no
reason
to
include
this
pesticide
or
its
metabolites
in
a
cumulative
risk
assessment.
For
the
purposes
of
this
tolerance
action,
EPA
has
not
assumed
that
BAS
670
H
and
its
metabolites
have
a
common
mechanism
of
toxicity
with
other
substances.

E.
Safety
Determination
1.
U.
S.
population.
Aggregate
exposure
to
the
overall
U.
S.
population
utilized
only
8.7%
of
the
aPAD
and
12.7%
of
the
cPAD,
respectively.
Therefore,
no
harm
to
the
overall
U.
S.
population
would
result
from
the
use
of
BAS
670
H
on
field,
sweet,
or
pop
corn.
2.
Infants
and
children.
There
is
a
complete
toxicity
base
for
BAS
670
H
and
exposure
data
are
complete
or
are
estimated
based
on
data
that
reasonably
accounts
for
potential
exposures.
Taking
into
account
the
completeness
of
the
data
base,
BASF
Corporation
concludes
that
the
FQPA
safety
factor
should
be
retained
but
reduced
to
3X.
This
is
based
on
the
occurrence
of
kidney
malformations
in
rabbits
and
skeletal
variations
in
rabbits
and
rats,
all
occurring
at
doses,
which
caused
either
maternal
tyrosine
elevations
or
other
evidence
of
maternal
toxicity.
The
full
toxicological
data
base
that
has
been
developed
for
BAS
670
H
includes
many
additional
mechanistic
studies,
revealing
consistency
and
the
mode
of
action
of
these
effects.
The
kidney
was
a
target
organ
in
all
repeated
dose
studies
and
these
effects
were
caused
by
elevated
tyrosine
levels
due
to
inhibition
of
the
HPPD
enzyme.
Using
the
standard
worst
case
exposure
assumptions
(
residues
at
tolerance
level
and
100%
crop
treated),
aggregate
exposure
to
BAS
670
H
from
food
and
water
will
utilize
33%
and
less
than
24%
of
the
aPAD
and
cPAD,
respectively
for
infants
and
children.
EPA
generally
has
no
concern
for
exposures
below
100%
of
the
PAD
because
it
represents
the
level
at
or
below
which
daily
aggregate
exposure
over
a
lifetime
will
not
pose
appreciable
risks
to
human
health.
BASF
Corporation
concludes
that
there
is
a
reasonable
certainty
that
no
harm
will
result
to
infants
or
children
from
aggregate
exposure
to
BAS
670
H
residues
with
the
approval
of
this
tolerance
petition.

F.
International
Tolerances
No
maximum
residue
levels
(
MRLs)
have
been
established
for
BAS
670
H
by
the
CODEX
Alimentarius
Commission
or
in
Mexico.
[
FR
Doc.
03
 
14328
Filed
6
 
10
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
[
OPP
 
2003
 
0177;
FRL
 
7308
 
7]

Acetic
Acid;
Notice
of
Filing
a
Pesticide
Petition
to
Establish
an
Exemption
from
the
Requirements
of
a
Tolerance
for
a
Certain
Pesticide
Chemical
in
or
on
Food
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
This
notice
announces
the
initial
filing
of
a
pesticide
petition
proposing
the
establishment
of
regulations
for
residues
of
a
certain
pesticide
chemical
in
or
on
various
food
commodities.
DATES:
Comments,
identified
by
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0177,
must
be
received
on
or
before
July
11,
2003.
ADDRESSES:
Comments
may
be
submitted
electronically,
by
mail,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
Follow
the
detailed
instructions
as
provided
in
Unit
I.
of
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Driss
Benmhend,
Biopesticides
and
Pollution
Prevention
Division
(
7511C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001;
telephone
number:
(
703)
308
 
9525;
e­
mail
address:
benmhend.
driss@
epa.
gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

I.
General
Information
A.
Does
this
Action
Apply
to
Me?
You
may
be
potentially
affected
by
this
action
if
you
are
an
agricultural
producer,
food
manufacturer,
or
pesticide
manufacturer.
Potentially
affected
entities
may
include,
but
are
not
limited
to:
 
Crop
production
(
NAICS
111)
 
Animal
production
(
NAICS
112)
 
Food
manufacturing
(
NAICS
311)
 
Pesticide
manufacturing
(
NAICS
32532)
This
listing
is
not
intended
to
be
exhaustive,
but
rather
provides
a
guide
for
readers
regarding
entities
likely
to
be
affected
by
this
action.
Other
types
of
entities
not
listed
in
this
unit
could
also
be
affected.
The
North
American
Industrial
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
codes
have
been
provided
to
assist
you
and
others
in
determining
whether
this
action
might
apply
to
certain
entities.
If
you
have
any
questions
regarding
the
applicability
of
this
action
to
a
particular
entity,
consult
the
person
listed
under
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B.
How
Can
I
Get
Copies
of
this
Document
and
Other
Related
Information?
1.
Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
docket
identification
(
ID)
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0177.
The
official
public
docket
consists
of
the
documents
specifically
referenced
in
this
action,
any
public
comments
received,
and
other
information
related
to
this
action.
Although
a
part
of
the
official
docket,
the
public
docket
does
not
include
Confidential
Business
Information
(
CBI)
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
The
official
public
docket
is
the
collection
of
materials
that
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch
(
PIRIB),
Rm.
119,
Crystal
Mall
#
2,
1921
Jefferson
Davis
Hwy.,
Arlington,
VA.
This
docket
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
23:
27
Jun
10,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00058
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
11JNN1.
SGM
11JNN1