96-31303. Merck Co., Inc.; Notice of Pesticide Petition Filing  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 10, 1996)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 65043-65047]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-31303]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    [PF-676; FRL-5575-8]
    
    
    Merck Co., Inc.; Notice of Pesticide Petition Filing
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Notice of Filing.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This notice announces the filing of a pesticide petition 
    proposing the renewal/reissuance of regulations establishing tolerances 
    for residues of the pesticide chemical abamectin (avermectin B1) 
    in or on various agricultural commodities. This notice includes a 
    summary of the petition that was prepared by the petitioner, Merck Co., 
    Inc.
    DATES: Comments, identified by the docket number PF-676, must be 
    received on or before January 9, 1997.
    
    ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written comments to: Public Response and 
    Program Resources Branch, Field Operations Division (7506C), Office of 
    Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., 
    Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring comments to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 
    1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202.
        Comments and data may also be submitted electronically by sending 
    electronic mail (e-mail) to: opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic 
    comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special 
    characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data will also be 
    accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1 file format or ASCII file 
    format. All comments and data in electronic form must be identified by 
    the docket number PF-676. No Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
    should be submitted through e-mail. Electronic comments on this 
    proposed rule may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries. 
    Additional information on electronic submissions can be found in Unit 
    II of this document.
        Information submitted as a comment concerning this notice may be 
    claimed
    
    [[Page 65044]]
    
    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. No CBI should be submitted 
    through e-mail. A copy of the comment that does not contain CBI must be 
    submitted for inclusion in the public record. Information not marked 
    confidential may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George LaRocca (PM-13), Rm. 204, 
    Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202. Mail 
    address: Registration Division (7505C), Environmental Protection 
    Agency, Washington, DC 20460. Telephone (703) 305-6100; e-mail 
    larocca.george@epamail.epa.gov.
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has received a pesticide petition from 
    Merck Co., Inc., Agricultural Research and Development, Hillsborough 
    Rd., Three Bridges, NJ 08487. The petition proposes amending 40 CFR 
    180.449 to renew/reissue the regulations that established tolerances 
    for the insecticide abamectin (avermectin B1) and its delta-8,9-
    isomer in or on cottonseed at 0.005 parts per million (ppm); citrus, 
    whole fruit, at 0.02 ppm; citrus oil, at 0.1 ppm; citrus dried pulp, at 
    0.1 ppm; cattle, meat, at 0.02 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts, at 0.02 
    ppm; cattle, fat, at 0.015 ppm; milk, at 0.005 ppm; and hops, dried, at 
    0.5 ppm. These tolerances were originally established in response to 
    pesticide petitions 7F3500, 8F3592, 4E04419, and food additive petition 
    8H5550. The petition also proposes to establish a tolerance in or on 
    the raw agricultural commodity potatoes at 0.005 ppm. As required by 
    section 408(d) of FFDCA, as recently amended by the Food Quality 
    Protection Act, Merck included in the petition a summary of the 
    petition and authorization for the summary to be published in the 
    Federal Register in a notice of receipt of the petition. The summary 
    represents the views of Merck; EPA is in the process of evaluating the 
    petition. As required by section 408 (d)(3) EPA is including the 
    summary as a part of this notice of filing. EPA has made minor edits to 
    the summary for the purpose of clarity.
    
    I. Merck Co., Inc.'s Petition Summary
    
        This is a petition by Merck Co., Inc. (Merck), under section 408 of 
    the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as most recently 
    amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), asking that the 
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issue permanent tolerances 
    without time limits for pesticide chemical residues consisting of the 
    insecticide abamectin (avermectin B1) and or its delta 8,9-isomer 
    in or on the following food items: cottonseed; citrus, whole fruit; 
    citrus, oil; citrus, dried citrus pulp; hops, dried; milk; cattle, 
    meat; cattle, meat byproducts; cattle, fat; and potatoes. These 
    tolerances were originally requested in petitions 7F3500, 8F3592, 
    4E04419, and 5F04508, and food additive petition 8H5550.
        On April 30, 1996, the time-limited tolerances for abamectin use on 
    cottonseed, citrus food and feed items, milk, and cattle food items 
    expired. A proposal by EPA to extend the tolerances was published in 
    the Federal Register; no public comments were received in response. 
    However, the Agency did not publish a final rule prior to the enactment 
    of FQPA. On October 21, 1996, in response to procedural guidance from 
    EPA, Merck submitted to EPA a request for reissuance of the tolerances. 
    With one exception (potatoes), the requested tolerances would replace 
    the time-limited abamectin tolerances that have been issued in the past 
    by EPA and that recently expired or will soon expire. Merck requested 
    that EPA issue permanent tolerances for these commodities, saying that 
    the time limitations associated with these earlier tolerances were a 
    result of aquatic exposure issues, and that it understood that the 
    Agency no longer imposes time limitations on tolerances because of non-
    dietary issues.
    
    A. Residue Data
    
        Abamectin (also known as avermectin B1) is an effective 
    miticide/insecticide that is used on various crops at the maximum use 
    rate of 0.025 pounds active ingredient per acre. Residue data covering 
    all the uses associated with the tolerances requested by this petition 
    have been previously submitted to EPA for review and have been found by 
    EPA to support the requested tolerances and preharvest intervals. See 
    54 FR 23209, May 31, 1989 (cottonseed); 54 FR 31836, Aug. 2, 1989 
    (citrus food and feed items, cattle food items, and milk); and 60 FR 
    47529, Sept. 13, 1995 (hops). Merck has submitted practical analytical 
    methods (high density liquid chromatography--fluorescence, with crop-
    specific cleanup methods) for detecting and measuring levels of 
    abamectin and its delta 8,9-isomer in or on food with residues at or 
    above the proposed tolerance levels. EPA has provided information on 
    these methods to EPA, and the methods are available to anyone 
    interested in pesticide residue enforcement at the address listed under 
    ``FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT'' above.
    
    B. Abamectin Safety Data
    
        To date Merck has submitted approximately 78 toxicology studies, 
    including the following principal studies, to support the tolerances 
    for abamectin (studies conducted with the delta 8,9-isomer of abamectin 
    are noted):
        1. Acute studies. A rat acute oral study with a LD50 of 4.4 to 
    11.8 mg/kg (males) and 10.9 to 14.9 mg/kg (females).
        A rabbit acute dermal study with a LD50 >2,000 mg/kg. A rat 
    acute inhalation study with a LC50 >5.73 mg/L.
        A primary eye irritation study in rabbits which showed irritation.
        A primary dermal irritation study in rabbits which showed no 
    irritation.
        A primary dermal sensitization study in guinea pigs which showed no 
    skin sensitization potential.
        An acute oral toxicity study in monkeys with a no observed adverse 
    effects level (NOAEL) of 1.0 mg/kg based upon emesis at 2.0 mg/kg.
        2. Subchronic studies. A rat 8-week feeding study with a NOAEL of 
    1.4 mg/kg/day based upon tremors.
        A rat 14-week oral toxicity study with a NOAEL of 0.4 mg/kg/day, 
    the highest dose tested.
        A dog 12-week feeding study with a NOAEL of 0.5 mg/kg/day based 
    upon mydriasis.
        A dog 18-week oral study with a NOAEL of 0.25 mg/kg/day based upon 
    mortality.
        A CD-1 mouse 84-day feeding study with a NOAEL of 4 mg/kg/day based 
    upon decreased body weights.
        3. Chronic studies. A rat 53-week oncogenicity feeding study, 
    negative for oncogenicity, with a NOAEL of 1.5 mg/kg/day based upon 
    tremors.
        A CD-1 mouse 94-week oncogenicity feeding study, negative for 
    oncogenicity, with a NOAEL of 4 mg/kg/day based upon decreased body 
    weights.
        A dog 53-week chronic feeding study, with a NOAEL of 0.25 mg/kg/day 
    based upon mydriasis.
        4. Developmental toxicity studies. An oral teratology study in the 
    CF-1 mouse with a maternal NOAEL of 0.05 mg/kg/day based upon decreased 
    body weights and tremors. The fetal NOAEL was 0.20 mg/kg/day based upon 
    cleft palates.
        An oral teratology study with the delta 8,9-isomer in CF-1 mice 
    with a maternal NOAEL of 0.10 mg/kg/day based upon decreased body 
    weights. The fetal NOAEL was 0.06 mg/kg/day based upon cleft palate.
        An oral teratology study in rabbits with a maternal NOAEL of 1.0 
    mg/kg/
    
    [[Page 65045]]
    
     day based upon decreased body weights and tremors. The fetal NOAEL was 
    1.0 mg/kg/day based upon clubbed feet.
        An oral teratology study in rats with a maternal and fetal NOAEL at 
    1.6 mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested.
        An oral teratology study with the delta 8,9-isomer with a maternal 
    NOAEL in CF-1 mice that expressed P-glycoprotein greater than 1.5 mg/
    kg/day, the highest and only dose tested. No cleft palates were 
    observed in fetuses that expressed normal levels of P-glycoprotein, but 
    fetuses with low or no levels of P-glycoprotein had increased incidence 
    of cleft palates.
        5. Reproductive effects study. A two-generation study in rats with 
    a NOAEL of 0.12 mg/kg/day in pups based upon retinal folds, decreased 
    body weight, and mortality. The NOAELs for systemic and reproductive 
    toxicity were 0.4 mg/kg/day.
        6. Mutagenicity studies. The Ames assays conducted with and without 
    metabolic activation were both negative.
        The V-79 mammalian cell mutagenesis assays conducted with and 
    without metabolic activation did not produce mutations. In an alkaline 
    elution/rat hepatocyte assay, abamectin was found to induce single 
    strand DNA breaks without significant toxicity in rat hepatocytes 
    treated in vitro at doses greater than 0.2 mM. This in vitro dose of 
    0.2 mM is biologically unobtainable in vivo, due to the toxicity of the 
    compound. However, at these potentially lethal doses, in vivo treatment 
    did not induce DNA single strand breaks in hepatocytes. In the mouse 
    bone marrow assay, abamectin was not found to induce chromosomal 
    damage. Merck has also conducted many studies and accumulated a great 
    deal of clinical and follow-up experience with regard to ivermectin, a 
    closely similar human and animal drug.
    
    C. Toxicity Issues
    
        1. Acute toxicity. Typical symptoms of classical CNS abamectin/
    ivermectin acute toxicity include mydriasis (dilated pupils, a marker 
    effect occurring at relatively low exposure levels); fatigue or 
    lethargy; and tremors. At sufficiently high exposure levels, coma and 
    sometimes death may result. Once exposure ceases, recovery in affected 
    living animals is rapid (typically within a few days).
        Some species of animals are more sensitive generally to this 
    classical pattern of abamectin toxicity than other species. In 
    particular, a subpopulation of CF-1 mice and the neonatal rat have been 
    observed to be sensitive to abamectin/ivermectin toxicity. Merck 
    research has attributed the sensitivity of the subpopulation of CF-1 
    mice to the absence of P-glycoprotein, a major component of the blood-
    brain barrier. Neonatal rat sensitivity has been attributed in part to 
    the lack of a fully developed blood-brain barrier. The neonatal blood-
    brain barrier is not complete until after 2 weeks following birth, 
    while the blood-brain barrier in humans is completed pre-natally. The 
    extensive human use of ivermectin has not identified a subpopulation of 
    humans with deficient P-glycoprotein. Furthermore, the animal and human 
    data bases do not indicate increased concerns for infants and children.
        2. Developmental effects. Tests of abamectin and ivermectin have 
    been conducted in a variety of species, and ivermectin is widely used 
    as a human and animal drug. In livestock species there is no suggestion 
    that ivermectin is a developmental toxicant. In mice and rabbits there 
    is evidence that dosing with either abamectin or ivermectin may produce 
    malformations, but only at doses that are clearly maternally toxic as 
    well. However, the delta 8,9-isomer of abamectin has been shown to 
    produce cleft palate malformations in the CF-1 mouse at dose levels 
    that are not maternally toxic and that are much lower than the dose 
    levels that show any indication of developmental toxicity in other 
    species or in other mouse strains. Merck research has shown that the 
    subpopulation of CF-1 mice with these malformations have inherited a 
    genetic deficiency that prevents or severely limits their production of 
    a P-glycoprotein which is a principal factor of the blood-brain barrier 
    and which Merck hypothesizes may perform a protective function in fetal 
    development as well, perhaps by playing a role in the blood-placenta 
    barrier. Based upon extensive use of ivermectin in humans without 
    observed adverse effects, this deficiency is not expected to occur in 
    humans.
        3. Other toxicity issues. There are no nonthreshold effects and no 
    other toxic endpoints of concern. The oncogenicity assays and chronic 
    feeding studies revealed no indication of carcinogenic potential. 
    Abamectin was found to be non-mutagenic.
    
    D. Exposure Analysis for Threshold Effects
    
        1. Chronic exposure assessments. EPA's chronic dietary exposure 
    assessments for abamectin currently use a reference dose (RfD) of 
    0.0004 mg/kg/day based upon a NOAEL of 0.12 mg/kg/day from effects on 
    neonatal pups in the rat multigeneration reproduction study and an 
    uncertainty factor of 300 (including an additional modifying factor of 
    3 to account for the severity of the effects).
        As noted above, this acute toxicity in rat pups results solely from 
    their exposure to abamectin in the milk they ingest. It is well 
    understood that abamectin concentrates in fat and that rat milk has 
    considerably more fat content than that of most other species 
    (including humans), so that the exposure level for the rat dams 
    considerably understates the exposure level of the affected rat pups. 
    As discussed earlier, the blood-brain barrier of the neonatal rat pup 
    is not fully formed until a week or more after birth, while in humans 
    the barrier is complete well before birth. Due to these differences 
    between rats and humans, using the neonatal rat to model risks to 
    infants arguably is inappropriate; certainly use of the 0.0004 mg/kg/
    day RfD derived from the abamectin level in the rat dams' diet 
    introduces additional conservative safety factors. Additional assurance 
    comes from the absence of adverse effects in studies using neonatal and 
    juvenile monkeys and from the absence of adverse effects in nursing 
    human infants whose mothers have been treated with ivermectin.
        Notwithstanding these issues, Merck has calculated chronic exposure 
    estimates and compared them to this RfD. Using mean anticipated 
    residues, adjusted for percent crop treated with abamectin, the chronic 
    exposure for the overall U.S. population was estimated to be 0.000005 
    mg/kg/day, which is approximately 1.4% of the RfD. For infants, 
    exposure was similarly estimated to be 0.000005 mg/kg/day (1.4% of the 
    RfD). The exposure estimates for the two most highly exposed population 
    subgroups, children 1 to 6 years old and children 7 to 12 years old, 
    were 0.000013 mg/kg/day (3.2% of the RfD) and 0.000008 mg/kg/day (2.1) 
    of the RfD), respectively.
        2. Acute exposure assessments. In evaluating the potential hazard 
    of abamectin acute exposure for women of childbearing age, EPA 
    currently uses a NOAEL of 0.05 mg/kg/day for maternotoxic effects of 
    abamectin in CF-1 mice and a NOAEL of 0.06 mg/kg/day for developmental 
    effects of the delta 8,9-isomer in CF-1 mice. To assess the potential 
    hazard of acute exposure of infants and children, EPA uses the rat 2-
    generation reproduction study NOAEL of 0.12 mg/kg/day based upon the 
    toxicity observed in the nursing pups.
        The relevance of the neonatal rat model has already been discussed. 
    As to the relevance of the CF-1 mouse studies, Merck research has shown 
    that both the induction of cleft palate in fetuses and the induction of 
    maternal
    
    [[Page 65046]]
    
    toxicity at low dose levels result from a heritable genetic deficiency 
    that precludes some animals of that strain from producing P-
    glycoprotein. In a recent study, where dams that expressed P-
    glycoprotein were treated with the delta 8,9-isomer of abamectin and 
    mated to males with and without P-glycoprotein, every fetus that did 
    not inherit the ability to express P-glycoprotein developed cleft 
    palate while every fetus that inherited the ability to express P-
    glycoprotein fully was free of the malformation. Additionally, in the 
    dams (all of whom were chosen because they possessed the ability to 
    express the P-glycoprotein) no effects were seen at the 1.5 mg/kg/day 
    dose (the only dose tested), in contrast to the much lower 
    maternotoxicity NOAELs (as low as 0.05 mg/kg/day) seen in comparable 
    studies using abamectin or its delta 8,9-isomer in CF-1 mice that had 
    not been tested for ability to express P-glycoprotein. Epidemiological 
    studies of humans treated with ivermectin, as well as breeding-animal 
    studies on ivermectin conducted to obtain its approval as animal drug 
    and surveys of adverse reaction reports (billions of treatments have 
    been administered to animals) all indicate a lack of a human population 
    susceptible to the induction of birth defects by ivermectin or 
    abamectin. Accordingly, the CF-1 mouse is not an appropriate model to 
    assess the toxicity of the avermectins.
        Despite these issues, Merck has incorporated these toxicity 
    endpoints from the CF-1 mouse into acute exposure assessments. (For 
    purposes of simplification, Merck has used the NOAEL of 0.05 mg/kg/day 
    for acute exposure assessments for the overall U.S. population and also 
    for women of childbearing age.) These assessments show that the margins 
    of exposure (MOEs) at the 95th percentile of exposure (using a Monte 
    Carlo analysis conducted in accordance with Tier 3 of EPA' June 1996 
    ``Acute Dietary Exposure Assessment''guidance document) are 
    significantly greater than the EPA standard of 100 for all 
    subpopulations. The 95th percentile of exposure for the overall U.S. 
    population was estimated to be 0.000023 mg/kg/day (MOE of 2,146), while 
    that for women greater than 13 years of age was 0.000017 mg/kg/day (MOE 
    of 2,970). For children 1 to 6 years old, the 95th percentile of 
    exposure was estimated to be 0.000042 mg/kg/day (MOE of 2,863), while 
    that for children 7 to 12 years old was 0.000030 mg/kg/day (MOE of 
    3,965). For infants, the 95th percentile of exposure was estimated to 
    be 0.0028 mg/kg/day (MOE of 4,244).
    
    E. Aggregate Exposure
    
        The dietary assessments (both acute and chronic) accounts for all 
    anticipated dietary exposure for tolerances that are subject to this 
    request (citrus and derivatives, cottonseed, meat, meat byproducts, 
    milk, and hops), and all other active and pending tolerances for 
    abamectin. The other active tolerances are for tomatoes, strawberries, 
    celery, lettuce, cucurbits, peppers, apples, pears, almonds, and 
    walnuts. The tolerance petition for potatoes is pending. The 
    assessments also take into account the use on grapes under an emergency 
    exemption.
        Additional uses of abamectin include a bait for fire ants, an 
    indoor crack and crevice treatment, and a roach bait; however, 
    significant exposure from these products is not likely. The fire ant 
    bait contains approximately 0.011% abamectin and is used primarily in 
    the southern portion of the United States, where the fire ant is most 
    prevalent. Post application exposure resulting from mound-directed 
    treatment is considered unlikely, and significant exposure from the 
    broadcast treatment is also unlikely since the treatment rate is very 
    low (1.0 lb of bait, containing only 50 mg of abamectin, per acre). In 
    a recent exposure study using the crack and crevice treatment, no 
    measurable air or surface residues were detected. Significant exposure 
    is not expected from the roach bait because of the child resistant 
    safety packaging and the essentially non-existent vapor pressure of 
    abamectin.
        Based upon the available studies of abamectin's fate in the 
    environment, there is no reason to expect human exposure to residues of 
    abamectin in drinking water. It has been clearly demonstrated that 
    abamectin does not leach.
        The typical therapeutic dose of ivermectin as a human drug is 200 
    g/kg (0.2 mg/kg). Merck is in the process of quantitatively 
    assessing the total dietary exposure resulting from abamectin and 
    ivermectin uses. Generally, use of ivermectin in food-producing animals 
    is only once per year and the ivermectin residues in most treated 
    animals are below the level of detection.
    
    F. Endocrine Effects
    
        There is no evidence that abamectin is an endocrine disrupter. 
    Evaluation of the rat multigenerational study demonstrated no effect on 
    the time to mating or on the mating and fertility indices, suggesting 
    no effects on the estrous cycle, on mating behavior, or on male or 
    female fertility at doses up to 0.4 mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested. 
    Furthermore, the range finding study demonstrated no adverse effect on 
    female fertility at doses up to 1.5 mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested. 
    Similarly, chronic and subchronic toxicity studies in mice, rats, and 
    dogs did not demonstrate any evidence of toxicity to the male or female 
    reproductive tract, or to the thyroid or pituitary (based upon organ 
    weights and gross and histopathologic examination). In the 
    developmental studies, the pattern of toxicity observed does not seem 
    suggestive of any endocrine effect. Finally, experience with ivermectin 
    in breeding animals, including sperm evaluations in multiple species, 
    shows no adverse effects suggestive of endocrine disruption.
    
    G. International Tolerances
    
        The U.S. tolerances for pears and citrus are greater than the Codex 
    proposals, reflecting the differences in how the United States and 
    Codex CCPR treat the highest residue values from field studies. The 
    differences in tolerances for cottonseed and milk are the result of 
    differences in the limits of detection of the analytical methods 
    accepted by the two organizations. Assuming label directions are 
    followed, actual anticipated residues in foods in commerce should not 
    be affected by the different tolerances, since the same residue 
    database has been used to set both the Codex and U.S. tolerances.
    
    H. Safety to Infants and Children
    
        Merck's petition notes that EPA has evaluated abamectin repeatedly 
    since its introduction in 1985 and has found repeatedly that the level 
    of dietary exposure is sufficiently low to provide ample margins of 
    safety to guard against any potential adverse effects of abamectin. The 
    FQPA authorizes the employment of an additional safety factor of up to 
    10X to guard against the possibility of prenatal or postnatal toxicity, 
    or to account for an incomplete database on toxicity or exposure. Merck 
    states that the database for abamectin is complete and argues that 
    there is no need for an additional safety factor because of the 
    conservatism in the end points selected for risk assessment. 
    Additionally, there is much more information regarding human risk 
    potential than is the case with most pesticides, because of the 
    widespread animal-drug and human-drug uses of ivermectin, the closely 
    related analog of abamectin.
        It is the opinion of Merck that the use of an additional safety 
    factor to address
    
    [[Page 65047]]
    
    risks to infants and children is not necessary. The established 
    endpoints for abamectin in the CF-1 mouse and the neonatal rat have 
    been shown by Merck to be overly conservative. Similar endpoints for 
    ivermectin are not used by the Food and Drug Administration to support 
    the allowable daily intake for ivermectin residues in food from treated 
    animals.
        No evidence of toxicity was observed in neonatal rhesus monkeys 
    after 14 days of repeated administration of 0.1 mg/kg/day (highest dose 
    tested) and in juvenile rhesus monkeys after repeated administration of 
    1.0 mg/kg/day (highest dose tested). The comparative data on abamectin 
    and ivermectin in primates also clearly demonstrate the dose response 
    for exposure to either compound is much less steep than that seen in 
    the neonatal rat. Single doses as high as 24 mg/kg of either abamectin 
    or ivermectin in rhesus monkeys did not result in mortality; however, 
    this dose was more than two times the LD50 in the adult rat and 
    more than 20 times the LD50 in the neonatal rat. The absence of a 
    steep dose-response curve in primates provides a further margin of 
    safety regarding the probability of toxicity occurring in infants or 
    children exposed to avermectin compounds. The significant human 
    clinical experience and widespread animal drug uses of ivermectin 
    without systemically toxic, developmental, or postnatal effects 
    supports the safety of abamectin to infants and children.''
    
    II. Administrative Matters
    
         A record has been established for this notice of filing under 
    docket number PF-677 (including comments and data submitted 
    electronically as described below). A public version of this record, 
    including printed, paper versions of electronic comments, which does 
    not include any information claimed as CBI, is available for inspection 
    from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal 
    holidays. The public record is located in Room 1132 of the Public 
    Response and Program Resources Branch, Field Operations Division 
    (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 
    Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA.
        Electronic comments can be sent directly to EPA at:
        opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov
    
    
        Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the 
    use of special characters and any form of encryption.
        The official record for this notice of filing, as well as the 
    public version, as described above will be kept in paper form. 
    Accordingly, EPA will transfer all comments received electronically 
    into printed, paper form as they are received and will place the paper 
    copies in the official record which will also include all comments 
    submitted directly in writing. The official record is the paper record 
    maintained at the address in ``ADDRESSES'' at the beginning of this 
    document.
    
    List of Subjects
    
        Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and 
    pests, Reporting and recordkeeping.
    
        Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136a.
    
        Dated: December 3, 1996.
    
    Stephen L. Johnson,
    Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    
    [FR Doc. 96-31303 Filed 12-09-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
12/10/1996
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Notice of Filing.
Document Number:
96-31303
Dates:
Comments, identified by the docket number PF-676, must be received on or before January 9, 1997.
Pages:
65043-65047 (5 pages)
Docket Numbers:
PF-676, FRL-5575-8
PDF File:
96-31303.pdf