24458
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
88
/
Wednesday,
May
7,
2003
/
Notices
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
 
0161.
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
 
0161.
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
 
0161.
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
 
0161.
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
an
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
File
Symbol:
72431
 
R.
Applicant:
Jeneil
Biosurfactant
Company,
400
N.
Dekora
Woods
Boulevard,
Saukville,
WI
53080.
Product
name:
Zonix
Biofungicide.
Type
of
product:
Biochemical
fungicide.
Active
ingredient:
Rhamnolipid
biosurfactant
(
decanoic
acid,
3­[[
6­
deoxy­
2­
O­(
6­
deoxy­
alpha­
L­
mannopyranosyl)­
alpha­
L­
mannopyranosyl]
oxy]­,
1­
(
carboxymethyl)
octyl
ester,
mixture
with
1­(
carboxymethyl)
octyl
3­[(
6­
deoxy­
alpha­
Lmannopyranosyl
oxy]
decanoate).
Proposed
classification/
Use:
None.
For
horticultural
and
agricultural
use
to
control
zoosporic
plant
pathogenic
fungi.

List
of
Subjects
Environmental
protection,
Pesticides
and
pest.

Dated:
April
24,
2003.
Sheryl
K.
Reilly,
Acting
Director,
Biopesticides
and
Pollution
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs.

[
FR
Doc.
03
 
11003
Filed
5
 
6
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
[
OPP
 
2003
 
0139;
FRL
 
7303
 
7]

Thiacloprid;
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
 
0139,
must
be
received
on
or
before
June
6,
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:
Marilyn
Mautz,
Registration
Division
(
7505C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
19:
20
May
06,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00030
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
07MYN1.
SGM
07MYN1
24459
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
88
/
Wednesday,
May
7,
2003
/
Notices
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001;
telephone
number:
(
703)
305
 
6785;
e­
mail
address:
mautz.
marilyn@
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
 
0139.
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.
1.
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
in
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
 
0139.
The
system
is
an
``
anonymous
access''
system,
which
means
EPA
will
not
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
19:
20
May
06,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00031
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
07MYN1.
SGM
07MYN1
24460
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
88
/
Wednesday,
May
7,
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
 
0139.
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
 
0139.
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
 
0139.
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
(
PP)
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.
Dated:
April
22,
2003.
Debra
Edwards,
Director,
Registration
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs.

Summary
of
Petition
The
petitioner
summary
of
the
pesticide
petition
is
printed
below
as
required
by
FFDCA
section
408(
d)(
3).
The
summary
of
the
petition
was
prepared
by
the
petitioner
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.

Bayer
CropScience
and
IR­
4
PP#
9F6060
and
PP#
3E6546
EPA
has
received
PP#
9F6060
from
Bayer
CropScience
(
formerly,
Bayer
Corporation,
8400
Hawthorn
Rd.,
P.
O.
Box
4913,
Kansas
City,
MO
64120),
P.
O.
Box
12014,
2
T.
W.
Alexander
Dr.,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27709,
and
PP#
3E6546
from
Interregional
Research
Project
Number
4
(
IR­
4),
681
U.
S.
Highway
#
1
South,
North
Brunswick,
NJ
08902
proposing,
pursuant
to
section
408(
d)
of
FFDCA,
21
U.
S.
C.
346a(
d),
to
amend
40
CFR
part
180
by
establishing
a
tolerance
for
residues
of
the
insecticide
thiacloprid
([
3­[(
6­
chloro­
3­
pyridinyl)
methyl]­
2­
thiazolidinylidene]
cyanamide
(
CAS
No.
111988
 
49
 
9))
in
or
on
the
raw
agricultural
commodities:
Bayer
Petition
(
PP#
9F6060)
proposes
to
establish
tolerances
for:
Apple,
wet
pomace
at
0.6
parts
per
million
(
ppm).
Cattle,
meat
at
0.2
ppm.
Cattle,
meat
byproducts
at
0.2
ppm.
Cotton,
gin
byproducts
at
11.0
ppm.
Cotton,
undelinted
seed
at
1.0
ppm.
Fruit,
pomace,
group
11
at
0.3
ppm.
Milk
at
0.1
ppm.
IR­
4
Petition
(
PP#
3E6546)
proposes
to
establish
tolerances
for:
Fruit,
stone,
group
12
at
0.5
ppm.
EPA
has
determined
that
the
petition
contains
data
or
information
regarding
the
elements
set
forth
in
section
408(
d)(
2)
of
FFDCA;
however,
EPA
has
not
fully
evaluated
the
sufficiency
of
the
submitted
data
at
this
time
or
whether
the
data
supports
granting
of
the
petition.
Additional
data
may
be
needed
before
EPA
rules
on
the
petition.

A.
Residue
Chemistry
1.
Plant
metabolism.
In
plants,
the
metabolism
of
thiacloprid
is
adequately
understood
for
the
purposes
of
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
19:
20
May
06,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00032
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
07MYN1.
SGM
07MYN1
24461
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
88
/
Wednesday,
May
7,
2003
/
Notices
establishing
these
proposed
tolerances.
Unchanged
parent
thiacloprid
accounted
for
70%
or
greater
of
the
residues
in
all
plant
metabolism
studies
(
cotton,
tomato,
and
apple),
with
the
exception
of
the
material
identified
in
cotton
seed.
In
cotton
seed,
the
main
component
was
the
6­
chloronicotinic
acid
metabolite,
accounting
for
45.8%.
All
residues
contained
the
6­
chloropyridinyl
moiety.
In
animals,
parent
thiacloprid
was
the
major
component
in
all
edible
tissues,
milk,
and
eggs.
All
residues
and
metabolites
in
the
animal
tissues
contained
the
6­
chloro­
pyridinyl
moiety,
same
as
in
the
plant
tissues.
Therefore,
the
residues
of
concern
are
the
combined
residues
of
thiacloprid
and
its
metabolites
containing
the
6­
chloro­
pyridinyl
moiety,
all
calculated
as
thiacloprid.
2.
Analytical
method.
The
analytical
method
for
determining
residues
in
pome
fruit
and
cotton
samples
is
a
common
moiety
method
for
thiacloprid
and
its
metabolites
containing
the
6­
chloro­
pyridinyl
moiety.
This
method
utilizes
oxidation,
derivatization,
and
analysis
by
capillary
gas
chromatography
with
a
mass­
selective
(
MS)
detector.
There
is
a
confirmatory
method
specific
for
thiacloprid
and
several
metabolites
utilizing
high
performance
liquid
chromatography
(
HPLC)
with
Electrospray
MS/
MSdetection
This
HPLC/
MS­
MS
method
was
used
for
analysis
of
the
stone
fruit
samples.
Thiacloprid
and
its
metabolites
are
stable
in
cotton
and
pome
fruit
commodities
for
at
least
24
months
and
in
stone
fruit
commodities
for
at
least
10
months
when
the
commodities
are
frozen.
3.
Magnitude
of
residues
 
Cotton
 
Field
trials
were
conducted
with
cotton
in
12
different
locations,
representing
6
different
EPA
regions.
Three
foliar
applications
were
made
to
mature
cotton
plants
at
a
rate
of
0.1
lb
active
ingredient/
acre
(
a.
i./
A)
with
3
to
11
days
between
applications.
The
pre­
harvest
interval
(
PHI)
ranged
from
12
to
20
days.
The
highest
average
field
trial
was
0.73
ppm
in
undelinted
cotton
seed.
For
gin
trash,
the
HAFT
residue
was
10.10
ppm.
The
processing
study,
conducted
with
cottonseed,
indicated
no
concentration
in
any
cottonseed
processed
commodities.
Pome
fruit
(
apple/
pear)
 
A
total
of
18
field
trials
(
12
apple
and
6
pear)
were
conducted
in
6
different
EPA
regions.
Applications
were
made
as
groundbased
foliar
sprays
at
0.25
lb
ai/
A
with
6­
to
8­
day
intervals.
The
highest
residue
at
30­
day
PHI
was
0.277
ppm,
in
apples.
The
highest
residue
at
a
45­
day
PHI
was
0.258
ppm,
occurring
in
pears.
Although
residues
in
pome
fruit
did
not
consistently
decline
in
relation
to
sampling
intervals,
residues
were
generally
lower
at
the
longer
PHI
(
45
days)
in
harvest
experiments.
In
the
apple
processing
study,
residues
concentrated
in
the
wet
pomace
(
1.8X)
but
did
not
concentrate
in
the
apple
juice.
A
home
processing
study
indicated
significant
reduction
in
residues.
Stone
fruits
(
sweet
cherry/
peach/
plum)
 
A
total
of
24
field
trials
(
7
sweet
cherry,
11
peach,
and
6
plum)
were
conducted
in
different
EPA
regions
(
3
for
sweet
cherry,
7
for
peach,
and
3
for
plum).
Applications
were
made
as
ground­
based
foliar
sprays
at
0.25
lb
ai/
A
with
6­
to
8­
day
intervals.
The
highest
residue
at
the
14­
day
PHI
was
0.423
ppm,
in
peaches.
The
highest
residue
at
a
28­
day
PHI
was
0.359
ppm,
occurring
in
peaches.
Residues
in
stone
fruit
raw
agricultural
commodities
(
RACs)
consistently
declined
in
relation
to
sampling
intervals,
with
lower
residues
at
the
longer
PHI
(
28
days).

B.
Toxicological
Profile
1.
Acute
toxicity.
The
acute
oral
LD50
values
for
thiacloprid
technical
ranged
from
444
(
female)
to
836
(
male)
milligram/
kilogram
(
mg/
kg)
in
the
rat.
The
acute
dermal
LD50
was
greater
than
2,000
mg/
kg
in
rats.
The
4­
hour
rat
inhalation
LD50
ranged
from
1,223
(
female)
to
>
2,535
(
male)
mg/
meter
cubed
(
m3)
air
(
aerosol).
Thiacloprid
was
not
irritating
to
rabbit
skin
or
eyes.
Thiacloprid
did
not
cause
skin
sensitization
in
guinea
pigs.
2.
Genotoxicty.
Extensive
mutagenicity
studies
conducted
to
investigate
point
and
gene
mutations,
DNA
damage
and
chromosomal
aberration
show
thiacloprid
to
be
nongenotoxic
3.
Reproductive
and
developmental
toxicity.
In
a
2­
generation
reproduction
study,
Sprague­
Dawley
rats
were
administered
dietary
levels
of
thiacloprid
at
levels
of
0,
50,
300,
and
600
ppm.
The
no­
observed­
adverseeffect
levels
(
NOAELs)
for
reproductive
parameters
was
established
at
50
ppm,
based
on
increased
liver
and
thyroid
weight
gains
in
the
parental
and
F1
generations.
A
developmental
toxicity
study
was
conducted
with
Wistar
rats
gavaged
at
0,
2,
10,
and
50
mg/
kg.
The
following
NOAELs
were
determined:
Maternal
toxicity,
10
mg/
kg/
day
and
developmental
toxicity,
10
mg/
kg/
day.
A
developmental
toxicity
study
was
conducted
with
rabbits
treated
orally
by
gavage
at
0,
2,
10,
and
45
mg/
kg.
The
following
NOAELs
were
determined:
Maternal
toxicity,
2
mg/
kg/
body
weight
(
bwt)/
day
and
developmental
toxicity,
2
mg/
kg/
day.
From
the
developmental
toxicity
studies
in
rats
and
rabbits,
no
primary
developmental
toxic
potential
could
be
derived.
Additionally,
a
developmental
neurotoxicity
study
was
conducted
at
dietary
doses
of
0,
50,
300,
or
500
ppm
in
the
female
Sprague­
Dawley
rat.
The
targeted
concentration
of
50
ppm
was
considered
a
NOAEL
for
maternal
toxicity
and
the
F1
offspring.
No
specific
neurobehavioral
effects
in
the
offspring
were
identified
up
to
and
including
the
highest
dose
tested
of
500
ppm.
4.
Subchronic
toxicity.
90­
day
feeding
studies
were
conducted
in
rats,
mice,
and
dogs.
In
the
subchronic
rat
and
dog
studies,
the
demonstrated
NOAELs
were
25
ppm
and
1,000
ppm,
respectively.
The
subchronic
mouse
study
did
not
demonstrate
a
NOAEL
at
the
lowest
level
(
50
ppm)
tested.
5.
Chronic
toxicity.
A
2­
year
rat
chronic
toxicity/
oncogenicity
study
demonstrated
a
NOAEL
of
25
ppm.
Liver
enzyme
induction
occurred
at
doses
of
>
50
ppm.
A
2­
year
mice
oncogenicity
demonstrated
a
NOAEL
at
the
lowest
dose
of
30
ppm.
A
1­
year
chronic
toxicity
study
in
dogs
demonstrated
a
NOAEL
of
250
ppm,
with
slight
prostatic
weight
increases
in
some
of
the
1,000
ppm
animals
(
possibly
due
to
different
maturation
in
the
animals)
being
the
only
treatmentrelated
findings.
There
is
significant
evidence
that
thiacloprid
is
not
acting
through
a
genetic
mechanism
(
all
genotoxicity
studies
are
negative).
Thiacloprid
should
be
managed
using
a
margin­
of­
exposure
extrapolation.
The
dose
response
to
thiacloprid
shows
the
following
pattern:
First,
at
lower
dose
levels,
thiacloprid
induces
liver
enzymes.
At
moderate
dose
levels
in
animals,
it
increases
liver
enzymes
and
aromatase
is
induced.
At
the
highest
dose
levels,
repeated
administration
of
thiacloprid
induces
liver
enzymes,
including
aromatase,
which
leads
to
hormonal
effects
such
as
elevated
estrogen
levels,
which
indirectly
cause
uterine
tumors
in
rats
and
ovarian
luteomas
in
mice.
High­
dose
thyroid
tumors
seen
in
the
chronic
rat
study
were
determined
to
be
related
to
thyroid
hormone
imbalance
and
not
a
direct
effect
of
thiacloprid.
6.
Animal
metabolism.
In
animals,
parent
thiacloprid
was
the
major
component
in
all
edible
tissues,
milk,
and
eggs.
All
residues
and
metabolites
in
the
animal
tissues
contained
the
6­
chloro­
pyridinyl
moiety,
same
as
in
the
plant
tissues.
Therefore,
the
residues
of
concern
are
the
combined
residues
of
thiacloprid
and
its
metabolites
containing
the
6­
chloro­
pyridinyl
moiety,
all
calculated
as
thiacloprid.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
19:
20
May
06,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00033
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
07MYN1.
SGM
07MYN1
24462
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
88
/
Wednesday,
May
7,
2003
/
Notices
7.
Metabolite
toxicology.
Two
specific
metabolites,
KKO
2254
and
WAK
6999,
were
examined
toxicologically.
In
addition
to
negative
Ames
tests,
the
acute
toxicological
potential
for
both
sexes,
as
measured
by
LD50,
was
determined
to
be
>
2,000
mg/
kg
for
both
metabolites.
In
light
of
these
findings
no
special
toxicological
concerns,
exceeding
that
of
thiacloprid,
would
be
expected
from
the
metabolites
of
the
parent
compound
8.
Endocrine
disruption.
The
toxicology
database
for
thiacloprid
is
current
and
complete.
Studies
in
this
database
include
evaluation
of
the
potential
effects
on
reproduction
and
development
and
an
evaluation
of
the
pathology
of
the
endocrine
organs
following
short­
or
long­
term
exposure.

C.
Aggregate
Exposure
1.
Dietary
exposure.
Acute
and
chronic
dietary
analyses
were
conducted
to
estimate
exposure
to
potential
thiacloprid
residues
in/
on
the
following
crops:
Fruit,
pome,
group;
fruit,
stone,
group;
and
cotton
using
the
DEEMT
software
(
Version
7.76)
from
Exponent,
Inc.
The
94
 
94,98
CSFII
consumption
database
was
used
along
with
anticipated
residues
and
processing
factors
where
available.
Projected
percent
crop
treated
values
were
incorporated
into
both
the
acute
and
chronic
dietary
exposure
analyses
at
20%,
10%,
and
5%
for
pome
fruit,
stone
fruit,
and
cotton,
respectively.
Exposure
estimates
to
water
were
made
based
upon
modeling.
The
acute
reference
dose
(
aRfD)
(
aRfD
=
0.031
mg/
kg/
bwt/
day)
was
based
upon
an
acute
NOEL
of
3.1
mg/
kg/
bwt/
day
from
the
acute
oral
neurotoxicity
study
in
rats
and
an
uncertainty
factor
of
100.
The
chronic
reference
dose
(
cRfd)
(
cRfD
=
0.012
mg/
kg/
bwt/
day)
was
based
upon
a
chronic
NOEL
of
1.2
mg/
kg/
bwt/
day
and
an
uncertainty
factor
of
100.
i.
Food.
The
acute
dietary
exposure
estimates
at
the
99.9th
percentile
for
the
U.
S.
population
was
calculated
to
be
approximately
7%
of
the
aRfD.
The
population
subgroup
with
the
highest
exposure
was
non­
nursing
infants
(<
1year
old)
at
approximately
15%
of
the
aRfD.
Chronic
dietary
exposure
estimates
from
residues
of
thiacloprid
for
the
U.
S.
population
was
0.2%
of
the
cRfD.
The
population
subgroup
with
the
highest
exposure
was
non­
nursing
infants
with
1%
of
the
cRfD
utilized.
ii.
Drinking
water.
EPA's
Standard
Operating
Procedure
(
SOP)
for
Drinking
Water
Exposure
and
Risk
Assessments
was
used
to
perform
the
drinking
water
analysis
for
thiacloprid.
This
SOP
utilizes
a
variety
of
tools
to
conduct
drinking
water
assessment.
These
tools
include
water
models
such
as
SCIGROW
FIRST,
GENEEC,
PRZM/
EXAMS,
and
monitoring
data.
If
monitoring
data
are
not
available
then
the
models
are
used
to
predict
potential
residues
in
surface
water
and
ground
water.
In
the
case
of
thiacloprid,
monitoring
data
do
not
exist,
therefore,
FIRST
and
SCIGROW
models
were
used
to
estimate
a
water
residue.
The
calculated
drinking
water
levels
of
comparison
(
DWLOC)
for
acute
and
chronic
exposures
for
all
adults
and
children
greatly
exceed
the
modeled
thiacloprid
drinking
water
estimated
concentrations
(
DWEC).
The
acute
DWLOC
values
are
1013
parts
per
billion
(
ppb)
for
adults
(
U.
S.
population)
and
267
ppb
for
children.
The
worst
case
DWEC
for
acute
scenarios
is
calculated
to
be
10.95
ppb
using
the
FIRST
surface
water
model.
The
chronic
DWLOC
values
are
430
ppb
for
adults
and
122
ppb
for
children.
The
DWEC
for
the
worst
case
chronic
scenario
is
0.62
ppb
(
FIRST).
2.
Non­
dietary
exposure.
There
are
no
current
plans
to
support
thiacloprid
uses
on
turf
or
ornamental
plants,
including
homeowner
uses.

D.
Cumulative
Effects
Thiacloprid
is
thought
to
be
part
of
a
class
of
chemistry
called
the
chloronicotinyls
For
this
class
of
chemistry
and
it's
registered
compounds
EPA
has
not
yet
conducted
a
detailed
review
of
common
mechanisms
to
determine
whether
it
is
appropriate,
or
how
to
include
these
chemicals
in
a
cumulative
risk
assessment.
Unlike
other
pesticides
for
which
EPA
has
followed
a
cumulative
risk
approach
based
on
a
common
mechanism
of
toxicity,
thiacloprid
does
not
appear
to
produce
a
toxic
metabolite
produced
by
other
substances.
For
the
purposes
of
these
tolerance
actions;
therefore,
EPA
has
not
assumed
that
thiacloprid
has
a
common
mechanism
of
toxicity
with
other
substances.

E.
Safety
Determination
1.
U.
S.
population.
Using
the
conservative
exposure
assumptions
described
in
Unit
C.
of
this
petition
and
based
on
the
completeness
of
the
toxicity
data,
it
can
be
concluded
that
acute
dietary
exposure
to
residues
of
thiacloprid
from
all
proposed
uses
will
utilize
less
than
7%
of
the
aRfD
for
the
U.
S.
population
and
15%
of
the
aRfD
for
the
most
highly
exposed
subpopulation
(
non­
nursing
infants).
EPA
generally
has
no
concerns
for
exposures
below
100%
of
the
reference
dose
(
RfD),
because
the
RfD
represents
the
level
at
or
below
which
exposure
will
not
pose
any
appreciable
risk
to
human
health.
Additionally,
the
acute
DWLOC
was
calculated
to
be
nearly
100
time
greater
than
thiacloprid
residues
in
water
predicted
by
conservative
models.
The
chronic
dietary
exposure
occupies
0.2%
of
the
cRfD
for
the
U.
S.
population
and
1%
of
the
cRfD
for
the
most
highly
exposed
subpopulation
(
non­
nursing
infants).
EPA
generally
has
no
concerns
for
exposures
below
100%
of
the
RfD,
because
the
RfD
represents
the
level
at
or
below
which
daily
aggregate
exposure
over
a
lifetime
will
not
pose
appreciable
risks
to
human
health.
The
chronic
DWLOC
was
calculated
to
be
nearly
700
and
200
times
greater
than
the
thiacloprid
residues
in
water
predicted
by
conservative
models.
Therefore,
there
is
a
reasonable
certainty
that
no
harm
will
result
to
the
general
U.
S.
population
from
aggregate
acute
or
chronic
exposure
to
thiacloprid
residues
from
proposed
uses.
2.
Infants
and
children.
In
assessing
the
potential
for
additional
sensitivity
of
infants
and
children
to
residues
of
thiacloprid,
the
data
from
developmental
studies
in
both
rat
and
rabbit
and
a
2­
generation
reproduction
study
in
rats
have
been
considered.
The
developmental
toxicity
studies
evaluate
potential
adverse
effects
on
the
developing
animal
resulting
from
pesticide
exposure
of
the
mother
during
prenatal
development.
The
reproduction
study
evaluates
effects
from
exposure
to
the
pesticide
on
the
reproductive
capability
of
mating
animals
through
2
generations,
as
well
as
any
observed
systemic
toxicity.
FFDCA
section
408
provides
that
EPA
may
apply
an
additional
safety
factor
for
infants
and
children
in
the
case
of
threshold
effects
to
account
for
pre­
and
post­
natal
effects
and
the
completeness
of
the
toxicity
database.
Based
on
current
toxicological
data
requirements,
the
toxicology
database
for
thiacloprid
relative
to
pre­
and
post­
natal
effects
is
complete.
Further
for
thiacloprid,
the
NOEL
of
1.2
mg/
kg/
bwt/
day
from
the
2­
year
chronic
toxicity/
carcinogenicity
study,
which
was
used
to
calculate
the
cRfD
(
discussed
in
Unit
C.
1.
of
this
petition),
is
already
lower
than
the
NOELs
from
the
developmental
studies
in
rats
(
10
mg/
kg/
bwt/
day)
and
rabbits
(
2
mg/
kg/
bwt/
day)
and
lower
than
the
NOEL
from
the
2­
year
reproductive
toxicity
study
in
rats
(
50
mg/
kg/
bwt/
day).
Since
a
100­
fold
uncertainty
factor
is
already
used
to
calculate
the
RfD,
an
additional
safety
factor
for
infants
and
children
is
not
warranted.
Using
the
conservative
exposure
assumptions
described
in
Unit
C.
of
this
petition,
Bayer
CropScience
has
concluded
that
the
total
aggregate
exposure
to
thiacloprid
from
all
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
19:
20
May
06,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00034
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
07MYN1.
SGM
07MYN1
24463
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
88
/
Wednesday,
May
7,
2003
/
Notices
proposed
uses
will
utilize
at
most
15%
of
the
aRfD
and
1%
of
the
cRfD
even
for
the
most
highly
exposed
population
subgroups
(
non­
nursing
infants).
Therefore,
there
is
a
reasonable
certainty
that
no
harm
will
result
to
infants
and
children
from
the
currently
proposed
uses
of
thiacloprid.

F.
International
Tolerances
No
CODEX
Maximum
Residue
Levels
(
MRL's)
have
been
established
for
residues
of
thiacloprid
on
any
crops
at
this
time.

[
FR
Doc.
03
 
11200
Filed
5
 
6
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
[
OPP
 
2003
 
0156;
FRL
 
7305
 
7]

Cyazofamid;
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
 
0156,
must
be
received
on
or
before
June
6,
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:
Dennis
McNeilly,
Registration
Division
(
7505C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001;
telephone
number:
(
703)
308
 
6742];
e­
mail
address:
mcneilly.
dennis@
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.
EPA
Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0156.
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
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
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
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
19:
20
May
06,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00035
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
07MYN1.
SGM
07MYN1
