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?

In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal Register document through the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov , you may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's pilot eCFR site at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr .

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as amended by 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. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPAHQOPP20070010 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before April 30, 2007.

In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit your copies, identified by docket ID number EPAHQOPP20070010, by one of the following methods:

II. Background and Statutory Findings

In the Federal Register of July 27, 2005 (70 FR 43421) (FRL7727 8), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 5F 6957) by ISAGRO S.p.A., Centro Uffici S. Siro Fabbricato D ALA 3, Via Caldera, 21, 20153 Milano, Italy. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing a tolerance for residues of the herbicide orthosulfamuron in or on rice, grain and rice, straw at 0.05 ppm. That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by ISAGRO S.p.A., Centro
[[Page 8929]]
Uffici S. Siro Fabbricato D ALA 3, Via Caldera, 21, 20153 Milano, Italy, the registrant, that is included in the public docket. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.

Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of 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. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires 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....''

EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the regulatory requirements of section 408 of FFDCA and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAPEST/1997/November/Day26/p30948.htm .

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section 408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for a tolerance for residues of orthosulfamuron in or on rice, grain and rice, straw at 0.05 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerance follows. A. Toxicological Profile

EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies 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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the toxic effects caused by orthosulfamuron as well as the no observedadverseeffectlevel (NOAEL) and the lowestobservedadverse effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document 0002 (pages 3844) in docket ID number
EPAHQOPP20070010.

B. Toxicological Endpoints

For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) from the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment is used to estimate the toxicological level of concern (LOC). However, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes used for risk assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected. An uncertainty factor (UF) is applied to reflect uncertainties inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well as other unknowns.

The linear default risk methodology (Q*) is the primary method currently used by the Agency to quantify nonthreshold hazards such as cancer. The Q* approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of cancer risk, estimates risk in terms of the probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases. More information can be found on the general principles EPA uses in risk
characterization at http://docket.epa.gov/edkpub/index.jsp.

A summary of the toxicological endpoints for orthosulfamuron used for human risk assessment can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document 2 (pages 1920) in docket ID number EPAHQOPP20070010. C. Exposure Assessment

1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. Risk assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from orthosulfamuron in food as follows:

i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a fooduse pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1day or single exposure. No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for orthosulfamuron; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment was not performed.

ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEMFCID\TM\), which incorporates food consumption data as reported by respondents in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 19941996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII), and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. The chronic analysis is based on tolerance level residues and 100% of the crop treated.

iii. Cancer. Orthosulfamuron is classified as demonstrating ``suggestive evidence of carcinogenicity'' based on thyroid follicular cell adenomas observed in male rats. The Agency has concluded that quantification of human cancer risk is not warranted and the NOAEL selected for the chronic reference dose (cRfD) is protective of cancer effects.

iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information. The chronic dietary exposure analysis was based on tolerance level residues and 100 PCT assumptions.

2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for orthosulfamuron in drinking water. Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data, drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on simulation or modeling taking into account data on the physical characteristics of orthosulfamuron. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://docket.epa.gov/edkpub/index.jsp

Based on the interim rice model and screening concentration in groundwater (SCIGROW) models, the estimated environmental
concentration (EECs) of orthosulfamuron in drinking water for chronic exposures is estimated to be 40.5 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.611 ppb for groundwater.

3. From nondietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is used in this document to refer to nonoccupational, nondietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).

Orthosulfamuron is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure.

4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering whether
[[Page 8930]]
to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, 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.''

Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to orthosulfamuron and any other substances and orthosulfamuron does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that orthosulfamuron has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the policy statements released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs concerning common mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism on EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative .

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a MOE analysis or through using uncertainty (safety) factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X when reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or, if reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional safety factor value based on the use of traditional UFs and/or special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.

2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no concern for increased quantitative and/or qualitative susceptibility after exposure to orthosulfamuron in developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, or a reproduction study in rats. In the developmental studies, there was no treatmentrelated maternal or developmental toxicity observed. In the reproduction study, decreased motor activity was seen in 6week old males (F1) at 354.5 milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day). However, the offspring effects were observed in the presence of maternal toxicity (kidney lesions), seen in adult females of both generations (F0 and F1). The NOAEL (5 mg/kg/day) selected for the cRfD is lower (70X) than the dose at which the motor activity was observed and; thus, considered protective of the effects.

3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show that it would be safe for infants and children to reduce the FQPA safety factor to 1X. That decision is based on the following findings:

i. The toxicity database for orthosulfamuron is complete.

ii. There is no indication that orthosulfamuron is a neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.

iii. There is no evidence that orthosulfamuron results in increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in young rats in the 2generation reproduction study.

iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based on 100 PCT and tolerancelevel residues. Conservative groundwater and surface water modeling estimates were used. Similarly conservative. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by orthosulfamuron.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

1. Acute risk. Review of applicable toxicity studies indicated that orthosulfamuron is not expected to pose an acute risk.

2. Shortterm risk. Orthosulfamuron is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water, which do not exceed the Agency's LOC.

3. Intermediateterm risk. Intermediateterm aggregate exposure takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be background exposure level).

Orthosulfamuron is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water, which do not exceed the Agency's LOC.

4. Chronic risk. EPA considers chronic aggregate risk to consist of risks resulting from exposure to residues in food, drinking water, and residues resulting from residential applications. As there are no residential uses for orthosulfamuron, chronic aggregate risk consists of risks resulting from exposure to residues in food and drinking water alone, which do not exceed the Agency's LOC.

5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The longterm chronic risk assessment outlined in this unit is considered to be protective of cancer effects.

6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, and to infants and children from aggregate exposure to orthosulfamuron residues.
IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

An adequate high performance liquid chromatographymass spectrometry analytical method for enforcement purposes is available. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft Meade, Maryland 20755 5350. Telephone number: (410) 3052905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.

B. International Residue Limits

No Codex maximum residue limits (MRLs) have been established for residues of orthosulfamuron on any crops at this time.

V. Conclusion

Therefore, the tolerance is established for residues of orthosulfamuron, in or on rice, grain and rice, straw at 0.05 ppm. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of 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
[[Page 8931]]
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 1044). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome 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 104113, 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 FFDCA, such as the tolerance 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 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.

VII. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report 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: February 16, 2007.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.625 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 180.625 Orthosulfamuron; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of orthosulfamuron 1(4,6dimethoxypyrimidin2yl)3[2
(dimethylcarbamoyl) phenylsulfamoyl] urea) per se in or on the following commodities:
Commodity Parts per million Rice, grain.......................................... 0.05 Rice, straw.......................................... 0.05 (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect and inadvertant residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 07898 Filed 22307; 2:13 pm]
BILLING CODE 656050S

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Jim Tompkins, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 204600001; telephone number: (703) 3055697; email address: tompkins.jim@epa.gov.