

[Federal Register: April 26, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 80)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 24590-24596]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26ap06-11]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0267; FRL-7772-6]

 
Pantoea Agglomerans Strain C9-1; Exemption from the Requirement 
of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement 
of a tolerance for residues of the Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 on 
pears and apples when applied or used as a microbial pesticide. Nufarm, 
Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 
1996 (FQPA), requesting an exemption from the requirement of a 
tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum 
permissible level

[[Page 24591]]

for residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1.

DATES: This regulation is effective April 26, 2006. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 26, 2006.

ADDRESSES:  To submit a written objection or hearing request follow the 
detailed instructions as provided in Unit X. of the  SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION. EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket 
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0267. All documents in the 
docket are listed on the regulations.gov website. (EDOCKET, EPA's 
electronic public docket and comment system was replaced on November 
25, 2005, by an enhanced federal-wide electronic docket management and 
comment system located at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the on-

line instructions). Although listed in the index, some information is 
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure 
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available 
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the 
Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, 
Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St., 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.
     Important Note: OPP will be moving to a new location the 
first week of May 2006. As a result, from Friday, April 28 to Friday, 
May 5, 2006, the OPP Regulatory Public Docket will NOT be accepting any 
deliveries at the Crystal Mall 2 address and this facility 
will be closed to the public. Beginning on May 8, 2006, the OPP 
Regulatory Public Docket will reopen at 8:30 a.m. and deliveries will 
be accepted in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. 
Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202. The mail code for the mailing 
address will change to (7502P), but will otherwise remain the same. The 
OPP Regulatory Public Docket telephone number and hours of operation 
will remain the same after the move.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Leonard Cole, Biopesticides and 
Pollution Prevention Division (7511C), Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone 
number: (703) 305-5412; e-mail address: cole.leonard@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 code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 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 Access Electronic Copies of this Document and Other 
Related Information?

    In addition to using EDOCKET (http://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may 

access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA 
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
 A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 

is available at E-CFR Beta Site Two at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/. 

To access the OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines referenced in this document, 
go directly to the guidelines at http://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm
.


II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the  Federal Register of June, 13, 1997 (62 FR 32331) (FRL-5721-
6), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of the FFDCA, 21 
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance 
petition (PP 7F4817) by Nufarm, Inc., (formerly Plant Health 
Technologies), 1333 Burr Ridge Parkway, Suite 125A, Burr Ridge, IL 
60527. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by 
establishing a temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance 
for residues of Pantoea agglomerans (P. agglomerans) strain C9-1. This 
notice included a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner, 
Nufarm, Inc. There were no comments received in response to the notice 
of filing.
    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish an 
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a 
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that 
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FFDCA 
defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no 
harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical 
residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other 
exposures for which there is reliable information.'' This includes 
exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does 
not include occupational exposure. Pursuant to section 408(c)(2)(B), in 
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement 
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in 
section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give special consideration 
to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue 
in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable 
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from 
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue....'' 
Additionally, section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA requires that the 
Agency consider ``available information concerning the cumulative 
effects of a particular pesticide's residues'' and ``other substances 
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from 
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the 
toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide 
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as 
a result of pesticide use in residential settings.

III. Toxicological Profile

    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA, EPA has reviewed 
the available scientific data and other relevant information in support 
of this action and considered its validity, completeness, and 
reliability, and the relationship of this information to human risk. 
EPA has also considered available information concerning the 
variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of 
consumers, including infants and children.
    Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 was originally isolated from apple 
stem tissue in an apple orchard in Michigan in 1981. Subsequently, a 
natural spontaneous mutant derived from the original strain was 
obtained which had

[[Page 24592]]

streptomycin and rifampicin resistance. This strain retained the 
designation C9-1 and was not derived through genetic engineering. When 
first isolated, this strain was identified as Erwinia herbicola based 
on GC-FAME (gas chromatography-fatty acid methyl ester) analysis and 
placed in GC subgroup B. Members of the group described as E. 
herbiocola/lathyri-Enterobacter agglomerans are found in soil, water 
and air, and are associated with plants and animals, including humans 
as commensal microbes. Following GC-FAME and substrate utilization 
analyses, and most importantly, a restructuring of the bacterial 
taxonomy of this group of microbes, this isolate is now considered a 
strain of Pantoea agglomerans. No reports of plant pathogenicity exist 
for the P. agglomerans species.
    The registrant is seeking to register Pantoea agglomerans strain 
C9-1 to control fire blight in apples and pears. Fire blight is 
considered one of the most destructive diseases of fruit trees in North 
America. It occurs sporadically and unpredictably and occasionally 
reaches epidemic levels. A severe outbreak can seriously damage or kill 
mature pear, apple, or crab apple trees in one season.
    1. Acute oral toxicity - rats (OPPTS 870.1100). Sprague-Dawley Rats 
were dosed at 5g/kg with the test substance Pantoea agglomerans strain 
C9-1 and observed for 14 days Master Record Identification Number 
((MRID) 442120-02 (Ref. 1)). All animals gained weight during the study 
and no clinical manifestations of treatment were noted. Gross necropsy 
revealed no indications of treatment-related pathology or any unusual 
findings. It is concluded that Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is not 
acutely toxic to rats following oral administration.
    2. Acute oral toxicity/pathogenicity - rat study (OPPTS 885.3050). 
Sprague-Dawley CD rats were challenged orally with Pantoea agglomerans 
C9-1 and heat killed cells (KTS) as an additional control group. Nine 
female and 9 male rats were also placed in a naive control (NC) group 
(no dosing) and 6 rats of each sex were placed into a shelf-control 
(SC) group (placed adjacent to treated animals, but not dosed) (MRID 
442120-03 (Ref.2)). Organs were sampled on days 0, 3 and 7. Since no 
bacteria were recovered from the samples, the study was terminated on 
day 10. No deaths of animals occurred during the course of this study 
and no significant clinical findings were noted. All animals gained 
weight and relative organ weights were normal with no significant 
treatment effects observed. Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 was 
considered to clear rapidly from the test animal in that it was never 
detected. Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is considered to be non-toxic 
following oral challenge.
    3. Acute pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity - rat (OPPTS 885.3150). 
Fifty rats, 25 female and 25 male) received, by intratracheal 
instillation, a dose of 9.83 x 10\7\ or 9.00 x 10\7\ colony forming 
units (cfu) of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 in a 0.1 milliliter (mL) 
volume (MRID 442120-05 (Ref.4)). No adverse clinical signs were 
recorded for any of the animals during the study. Four rats died during 
dosing and were immediately replaced. The rats were sacrificed at 7 
days and subjected to necropsy. No clinical signs related to the test 
organism or macroscopic abnormalities were observed in the rats. It can 
be concluded since no test substance was recovered from any animals 
that this organism does not appear to be toxic, infective, and/or 
pathogenic to rats at this high does level. This study is considered 
acceptable and classified as Toxicity Category IV (BPPD DER 05/17/02).
    4. Acute dermal toxicity - rabbits (OPPTS 870.2500 and OPPTS 
885.3100). Approximately 2 grams (g) of test material was applied to 
the dorsal epidermis of 10 New Zealand White Rabbits and maintained 
there for 24 hours (MIRD 442120-04 (Ref.3)). All rabbits exhibited very 
slight to well-defined erythema and three rabbits exhibited very slight 
edema. By day 10 all surviving rabbits (9 of 10) had cleared of any 
dermal irritations and remained this way throughout the end of the 
study (day 14). No edema scores greater than 1 and no erythema scores 
greater than 2 were recorded during the study. One rabbit, which died 
at day 10, revealed no gross lesions upon necropsy. This study is 
considered acceptable and classified as Toxicity Catergory IV for 
irritation and Toxicity Category III for Toxicity (BPPD DER 05/17/02)
    5. Primary eye irritation (OPPTS 870.2400). Six New Zealand White 
Rabbits were administered 0.1 g of test substance into the right eyelid 
which was washed out after 24 hours (MRID 442120-07 (Ref.5)). No 
mortality, corneal lesions or iridal effects were noted at any time 
during the study. Pantoea agglomerans C9-1 is considered to be a mild 
eye irritant. This study is considered acceptable and classified as 
Toxicity Category III (BPPD DER 05/17/02).
    6. Data waiver requests. Data waiver requests were made for the 
following requirements for the Technical Grade of the Active 
Ingredient/Manufacturing-use Product (TGAI/MP) and Experimental Product 
(EP):
    (a) Acute Inhalation (OPPTS 870.1300);
    (b) Acute Intravenous (IV), Intracerebral (IC), Intraperitoneal 
(IP) injection Toxicity/Pathogenicity (OPPTS 885.3200);
    (c) Cell Culture (OPPTS 885.3500);
    (d) Immune Response (OPPTS 880.3800);
    (e) Hypersensitivity study;
    (f) Hypersensitivity Incidents (OPPTS 885.3400).
    i. Acute inhalation toxicity/pathogenicity. The registrant cited 
the acute pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity study (see Unit III.3., 
above) to justify waiving the acute inhalation study. In the acute 
pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity study Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1, 
was not found in any organs or tissues which indicates that the active 
ingredient cleared tissues and was not toxic, infective, or pathogenic 
to rats when instilled intratracheally. Additionally, when this product 
is applied, applicators will be required to wear the necessary 
protective equipment to prevent inhalation, and this justifies granting 
this request to waive acute inhalation data requirements.
    ii. Acute IV/IP/IC study. In an acute oral toxicity/pathogenicity 
study (see Unit III.1. and 2. above), no clinical signs of toxicity 
were observed in rats and no Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 was 
recovered from organs or tissues. These data show that Pantoea 
agglomerans strain C9-1 was considered to clear rapidly from the test 
animal in that it was never detected. The active ingredient Pantoea 
agglomerans strain C9-1 is considered to be non-toxic. Based on the low 
toxicity potential indicated by these observations, the request to 
waive the acute IP study was granted.
    iii. Cell culture. This study is required for a virus and is not 
required for a bacterial active ingredient such as Pantoea agglomerans 
strain C9-1. The request to waive this data requirement was granted.
    iv. Immune response. The lack of pathogenicity seen in the acute 
oral toxicity/pathogenicity study with the active ingredient indicates 
the immune system was not adversely affected by Pantoea agglomerans 
strain C9-1. Based on these considerations, the justifications to 
support the request to waive data requirements for the immune response 
studies for the TGAI/MP are acceptable.
    v. Hypersensitivity study. No incidents of hypersensitivity have

[[Page 24593]]

occurred during the research, development, or testing of Pantoea 
agglomerans strain C9-1 or the end use product, Blightban. A 
hypersensitivity study is not required at this time, but may be 
required in the future if there are reports of hypersensitivity 
incidents associated with this active ingredient used in pesticides.
    vi. Hypersensitivity incidents (OPPTS 885.3400). The registrant 
requested to waive reports of hypersensitivity incidents, because no 
incidents of hypersensitivity associated with the TGAI or the EP have 
been reported. However, the registrant agreed to report 
hypersensitivity incidents, should they occur in the future. This 
guideline requirement is satisfied at this time. In order to comply 
with FIFRA requirements under Section 6(a)(2), any incident of 
hypersensitivity associated with the use of this pesticide must be 
reported to the Agency. This data requirement has not been waived.
    7. Subchronic, chronic toxicity and oncogenicity, and residue data. 
Based on the data generated in accordance with the Tier I data 
requirements set forth in 40 CFR 158.740(c), the Tier II and Tier III 
data requirements were not triggered and, therefore, not required in 
connection with this action. In addition, because the Tier II and Tier 
III data requirements were not required, the residue data requirements 
set forth in 40 CFR 158.740(b) also were not required.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    In examining aggregate exposure, section 408 of the FFDCA directs 
EPA to consider available information concerning exposures from the 
pesticide residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures, 
including drinking water from ground water or surface water and 
exposure through pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings 
(residential and other indoor uses).

A. Dietary Exposure

    Use of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is not likely to cause any 
harm via consumption of food or feed treated with the microbial 
pesticide, which is not applied directly to food as discussed below.
    1. Food. Residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 are not 
expected on treated food commodities from the proposed use patterns. 
The product, Blightban, containing Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1, is 
applied at bloom followed by a second application at first petal fall-
full bloom. After Blighban is applied, the pesticide becomes non-viable 
very rapidly, which causes the need for more than one application. The 
pesticide itself is not in direct contact with the food commodities. 
This pesticide is applied prior to fruiting. There is no post-harvest 
treatment directly to the food commodities. Furthermore, the active 
ingredient is not a systemic pesticide. Thus, detectable residues of 
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 are not expected on treated fruit trees 
or their food commodities. Furthermore, as previously stated, Pantoea 
agglomerans strain C9-1 is found in soil, water and air. Data 
submissions to the Agency show that residues of the Pantoea agglomerans 
strain C9-1 are not found on the food commodities. Finally, as 
discussed in Unit III, the acute oral tests demonstrate low toxicity 
potential via dietary exposure to this Toxicity Category IV pesticide. 
Hence, even if the pesticide was present in or on food commodities, 
exposure via the dietary route is not expected to cause any harm. 
Therefore, the Agency has decided that dietary exposure from the 
proposed uses of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is not likely to 
adversely affect the U.S. adult population, infants and children.
    2. Drinking water exposure. No drinking water exposure is 
anticipated because of the use pattern and use sites. There are no 
aquatic use sites permitted for this pesticide, so exposure to drinking 
water is not expected. Further, there is no evidence of adverse effects 
from exposure to this organism. Exposure from the proposed use of 
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is not likely to pose any incremental 
risk via consumption of drinking water to adult humans, infants and 
children.

B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure

    The proposed product is an end-use product to be commercially used 
in apple and pear orchards. No non-occupational residential, school or 
day care exposure is anticipated because of the use pattern of this 
product. The use of Panteoa agglomerans strain C9-1 should result in 
minimal to non-existent non-occupational risk. No indoor residential, 
school or daycare uses are permitted on the label of this product.
    1. Dermal exposure. The low toxicity potential observed in the 
acute dermal studies discussed above (Unit III), the low exposure 
potential based on low application rates, and the lack of persistence 
of the active ingredient, leads EPA to conclude that this pesticide 
poses minimal risk to human populations via non-occupational dermal 
exposure. Moreover, potential non-occupational dermal exposure to 
Panteoa agglomerans strain C9-1 is unlikely because the use sites are 
commercial and agricultural.
    As previously discussed in Units III and IV, a lack of 
hypersensitivity incidents indicates Panteoa agglomerans strain C9-1 
poses minimal risk to populations via non-occupational dermal exposure. 
Thus, the Agency does not expect pesticides containing Panteoa 
agglomerans strain C9-1 to pose a non-occupational dermal exposure 
risk.
    2. Inhalation exposure. Non-occupational inhalation exposure to the 
active ingredient itself is not likely to pose an inhalation risk. No 
treatment-related effects associated with the active ingredient were 
observed in the pulmonary tests reported above. Based on the low 
potential for non-occupational inhalation exposure, the Agency does not 
expect Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 to pose an inhalation risk.

V. Cumulative Effects

    The Agency has considered the potential for cumulative effects of 
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 and other substances in relation to a 
common mechanism of toxicity. These considerations include the possible 
cumulative effects of such residues on infants and children. As 
demonstrated in Unit IV.B., Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is non-
toxic and non-pathogenic to mammals. Because no mechanism of 
pathogenicity or toxicity in mammals has been identified for this 
organism, no cumulative effects from the residues of this product with 
other related microbial pesticides are anticipated.

VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, Infants and Children

    There is reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the U.S. 
population, including infants and children, from aggregate exposures to 
residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1, as a result of its 
proposed uses. This includes all anticipated dietary exposures and all 
other exposures for which there is reliable information. As discussed 
previously, there appears to be no potential for harm, from this 
bacterium in its use as a microbial pesticide in apple and pear 
orchards. Furthermore, the organism is non-toxic and non-pathogenic to 
animals and humans. The Agency has arrived at this conclusion based on 
the very low levels of mammalian toxicity for acute oral, pulmonary, 
and dermal effects with no toxicity or infectivity at the doses tested 
(see Unit III. above). Moreover, potential non-occupational inhalation 
or dermal exposure is not expected to pose any adverse effects to 
exposed populations via aggregate and cumulative exposure

[[Page 24594]]

(see Units IV. and V.). FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) provides that EPA 
shall apply an additional ten-fold margin of exposure (safety) for 
infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for 
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the data base 
on toxicity and exposure, unless EPA determines that a different margin 
of exposure (safety) will be safe for infants and children. Margins of 
exposure (safety), which are often referred to as uncertainty factors, 
are incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly, or through 
the use of a margin of exposure analysis, or by using uncertainty 
(safety) factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable 
risk. In this instance, based on all the available information (as 
discussed in detail above), the Agency concludes that the bacterium, 
Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1, is non-toxic to mammals, including 
infants and children. Because there are no threshold effects of concern 
to infants, children and adults when Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 is 
used as labeled, the Agency has determined that the additional margin 
of safety is not necessary to protect infants and children, and that 
not adding any additional margin of safety will be safe for infants and 
children.

VII. Other Considerations

A. Endocrine Disruptors

    EPA is required under section 408(p) of the FFDCA, as amended by 
FQPA, to develop a screening program to determine whether certain 
substances (including all pesticide active and other ingredients) ``may 
have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by a 
naturally-occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine effects as the 
Administrator may designate.'' Following the recommendations of its 
Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC), 
EPA determined that there was scientific basis for including, as part 
of the program, the androgen and thyroid systems, in addition to the 
estrogen hormone system. EPA also adopted EDSTAC's recommendation that 
the program include evaluations of potential effects in wildlife. For 
pesticide chemicals, EPA will use FIFRA and, to the extent that effects 
in wildlife may help determine whether a substance may have an effect 
in humans, FFDCA authority, to require the wildlife evaluations. As the 
science develops and resources allow, screening of additional hormone 
systems may be added to the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program 
(EDSP).
    The Agency is not requiring information on the endocrine effects of 
this active ingredient at this time. The Agency has considered, among 
other relevant factors, available information concerning whether the 
microorganism may have an effect in humans similar to an effect 
produced by a naturally occurring estrogen or other endocrine effects. 
There is no known metabolite produced by this bacterium that acts as an 
endocrine disruptor. The submitted and cited toxicity/pathogenicity 
studies in rodents indicate that following injection and pulmonary 
routes of exposure, no test substance was found in organs or tissues of 
test animals. This indicates that the body is able to process and clear 
the active ingredient. The Agency concludes that there will be no 
incremental adverse effects to the endocrine system.

B. Analytical Method(s)

    The acute oral studies discussed above demonstrate that the active 
ingredient, Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 does not pose a dietary 
risk. In addition, the active ingredient is not likely to come into 
contact with food commodities. Since residues are not expected on 
treated commodities, the Agency has concluded that an analytical method 
to detect residues of this pesticide on treated food commodities for 
enforcement purposes is not needed. Nevertheless, the Agency has 
concluded that for analysis of the pesticide itself, microbiological 
and biochemical methods exist and are acceptable for enforcement 
purposes for product identity of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1. Other 
appropriate methods are required for quality control to assure that 
product characterization, the control of human pathogens and other 
unintentional metabolites or ingredients are within regulatory limits, 
and to ascertain storage stability and viability of the pesticidal 
active ingredient.

C. Codex Maximum Residue Level

    There is no Codex maximum residue level for residues of Pantoea 
agglomerans strain C9-1

VIII. Conclusions

    The results of the studies discussed above are sufficient to comply 
with the requirements of the FQPA. They support an exemption from the 
requirement of a tolerance for residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain 
C9-1 on apples and pears. In addition, the Agency is of the opinion 
that, if the microbial active ingredient is used as labeled, aggregate 
and cumulative exposures are not likely to pose any undue risk. 
Submitted and cited data show that Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 do 
not pose an incremental dietary and non-dietary risk to the adult human 
U.S. population, children and infants. Therefore, an exemption from 
tolerance is granted in response to pesticide petition 7F4817.

IX. MRID Citation References

    1. 442120-02. Johnson, W.D. Acute Oral Toxicity Study of Erwinia 
herbicola Strain C9-1 in Rats (Limit Test).
    2. 442120-03. Mega. W.M. Toxicity/Paathogenicity Testing of Erwinia 
herbicola Strain C9-1 Following Acute Oral Challenge in Rats
    3. 442120-04. Johnson, W.D. Acute Dermal Toxicity/Irritation Study 
of Erwinia herbicola Strain C9-1 in Rabbits
    4. 442120-05. Mega, W.M. Toxicity/Pathogenicity Testing of Erwinia 
herbicola Strain C9-1 Following Acute Intratracheal Challenge in Rats.
    5. 442120-07. Johnson, W.D. Primary Eye Irritation of Erwinia 
herbicola Strain C9-1 in Rabbits.

X. Objections and Hearing Requests

    Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any 
person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may 
also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural 
regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for 
hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. Although the procedures in those 
regulations require some modification to reflect the amendments made to 
the FFDCA by the FQPA, EPA will continue to use those procedures, with 
appropriate adjustments, until the necessary modifications can be made. 
The new section 408(g) of the FFDCA provides essentially the same 
process for persons to ``object'' to a regulation for an exemption from 
the requirement of a tolerance issued by EPA under new section 408(d) 
of the FFDCA, as was provided in the old sections 408 and 409 of the 
FFDCA. However, the period for filing objections is now 60 days, rather 
than 30 days.

A. What Do I Need to Do to File an Objection or Request a Hearing?

    You must file your objection or request a hearing on this 
regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in this unit 
and in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must 
identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0267 in the subject line on 
the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and 
must be mailed or

[[Page 24595]]

delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before June 26, 2006.
    1. Filing the request. Your objection must specify the specific 
provisions in the regulation that you object to, and the grounds for 
the objections (40 CFR 178.25). If a hearing is requested, the 
objections must include a statement of the factual issues on which a 
hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions on such issues, and a 
summary of any evidence relied upon by the objector (40 CFR 178.27). 
Information submitted in connection with an objection or hearing 
request may be claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that 
information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except 
in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the 
information 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.
    Mail your written request to: Office of the Hearing Clerk (1900L), 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20460-0001. You may also deliver your request to the 
Office of the Hearing Clerk in Suite 350, 1099 14th St., NW., 
Washington, DC 20005. The Office of the Hearing Clerk is open from 8 
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 
telephone number for the Office of the Hearing Clerk is (202) 564-6255.
    2. Copies for the Docket. In addition to filing an objection or 
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit IX.A.1., 
you should also send a copy of your request to the PIRIB for its 
inclusion in the official record that is described in ADDRESSES. Mail 
your copies, identified by docket ID number OPP-2006-0267, to: Public 
Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Technology and 
Resources Management Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20460-0001. In person or by courier, bring a copy to the 
location of the PIRIB described in ADDRESSES. You may also send an 
electronic copy of your request via e-mail to: opp-docket@epa.gov. 
Please use an ASCII file format and avoid the use of special characters 
and any form of encryption. Copies of electronic objections and hearing 
requests will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII 
file format. Do not include any CBI in your electronic copy. You may 
also submit an electronic copy of your request at many Federal 
Depository Libraries.

B. When Will the Agency Grant a Request for a Hearing?

    A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator 
determines that the material submitted shows the following: There is a 
genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable 
possibility that available evidence identified by the requestor would, 
if established resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the 
requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts to the 
contrary; and resolution of the factual issues in the manner sought by 
the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested (40 CFR 
178.32).

XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes an exemption from the tolerance 
requirement under section 408(d) of the FFDCA in response to a petition 
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 
12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 
1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive 
Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject 
to Executive Order 13211,  Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, 
May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information 
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or 
contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor 
does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, 
entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); 
or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, 
entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and 
Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not 
involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration 
of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 
Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since 
tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a 
petition under section 408(d) of the FFDCA, such as the exemption in 
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the 
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.) do not apply. In addition, the Agency has determined that this 
action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism 
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to 
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input 
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food 
processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action 
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and 
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions 
of section 408(n)(4) of the FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency 
has determined that this rule does not have any ``tribal implications'' 
as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6, 
2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable 
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in 
the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' 
``Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive 
order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' 
This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal 
governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to 
this rule.

[[Page 24596]]

XII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final 
rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 7, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. Section 180.1267 is added to subpart D to read as follows:


Sec.  180.1267  Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1; exemption from the 
requirement of a tolerance.

    An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established for 
residues of Pantoea agglomerans strain C9-1 when used on apples and 
pears.

[FR Doc. 06-3856 Filed 4-25-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S
