DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 178/Friday, September 13, 2002

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 178/Friday, September 13, 2002 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 178 / Friday, September 13, 2002 / Notices 58041 How the Proposals Are Reviewed and SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA’s B. How Can I Get Additional Ranked progress in meeting its performance Information or Copies of Support The Selection Committee reviews measures and goals for pesticide Documents? each proposal with the following reregistration during fiscal years 2000 1. Electronically. You may obtain criteria in mind. Each area has a and 2001. The Federal Insecticide, electronic copies of this document and numerical value, with an opportunity Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) various support documents from the for a narrative response. The points of requires EPA to publish information EPA Internet website, www.epa.gov. On each reviewer for each proposal are about EPA’s annual achievements in EPA’s home page, select ‘‘Laws and totaled, comments are added, then each this area. This notice discusses the Regulations,’’ and then look up the proposal is given an average. The integration of tolerance reassessment entry for this document under ‘‘Federal Committee meets to discuss each with the reregistration process, and Register—Environmental Documents.’’ proposal and review the results of describes the status of various You can also go directly to the Federal scoring. The proposals with the highest regulatory activities associated with Register listings at www.epa.gov/ ranking, up to the estimated amount of reregistration and tolerance fedrgstr. To access information about funding, are selected. Upon approval of reassessment. The notice gives total pesticide reregistration, go to the home management, formal applications are numbers of chemicals and products page for the Office of Pesticide Programs then requested from the selected reregistered, tolerances reassessed, Data at www.epa.gov/pesticides and select applicants. Call-Ins issued, and products registered ‘‘Reregistration’’ under ‘‘Topics,’’ at the Proposal Evaluation Criteria under the ‘‘fast-track’’ provisions of top of the screen, or go directly to www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/. • 1. Does the project meet one or FIFRA. Finally, this notice contains the schedule for completion of activities for 2. In person. The official record for more of the Regional priorities? If not, this notice, as well as the public specific chemicals during fiscal years has the applicant justified the need for version, has been established under the project? 2002 and 2003. • docket ID number [OPP–2002–0121] 2. Does the project have DATES: This notice is not subject to a (including comments and data transferability to other State/Tribes/ formal comment period. Nevertheless, submitted electronically as described Local governments? • EPA welcomes input from stakeholders below). A public version of this record, 3. Did applicant follow proposal including printed, paper versions of any guidelines? Did it address all and the general public. Written comments, identified by the docket ID electronic comments, which does not components? include any information claimed as • 4. What is the applicant’s past number [OPP–2002–0121], should be Confidential Business Information (CBI), performance, if applicable? received on or before November 12, • 5. Is the budget reasonable and 2002. is available for inspection in Room 119, appropriate? Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis • 6. What are the potential ADDRESSES: Comments may be Highway, Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. environmental results? Does it result in submitted by mail, electronically, or in to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, physical, natural restoration? Are the person. Please follow the detailed excluding legal holidays. The Public environmental results immediate or instructions for each method as Information and Records Integrity long term? How many acres of wetlands provided in Unit I. of the Branch telephone number is (703) 305– are enhanced, restored, created? SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 5805. • 7. What is the outreach/educational this notice. C. How and to Whom Do I Submit value of the project? Comments? • 8. What is the likelihood of success? FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Can the project be realistically Carol P. Stangel, Special Review and You may submit comments through accomplished? Registration Division (7508C), Office of the mail, in person, or electronically: • 9. Does the project have durable Pesticide Programs, Environmental 1. By mail. Submit written comments and sustainable characteristics; in other Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania to: Public Information and Records words, will it outlive the project period? Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, Integrity Branch, Information Resources • 10. Is the project part of an telephone: (703) 308–8007, e-mail: and Services Division (7502C), Office of approved State Wetlands Conservation [email protected]. Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Plan? Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Oscar Ramirez, Jr., 2. In person. Deliver written I. Important Information Acting Director, Water Quality Protection comments to Public Information and Division. A. Does this Apply to Me? Records Integrity Branch, in Rm. 119, [FR Doc. 02–23365 Filed 9–12–02; 8:45 am] Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis BILLING CODE 6560–50–P This action is directed to the public Highway, Arlington, VA. in general. Although this action may be 3. Electronically. Submit your of particular interest to persons who are comments and/or data electronically to ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION interested in the progress and status of [email protected]. Please note that AGENCY EPA’s pesticide reregistration and you should not submit any information [OPP–2002–0121; FRL–6803-5] tolerance reassessment programs, the electronically that you consider to be Agency has not attempted to describe all CBI. Electronic comments must be Pesticide Reregistration Performance the specific entities that may be affected submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the Measures and Goals by this action. If you have any questions use of special characters and any form AGENCY: Environmental Protection regarding the information in this notice, of encryption. Comment and data will Agency (EPA). consult the person listed under FOR also be accepted on disks in Wordperfect 6.1/8.0/9.0 or ASCII file ACTION: Notice. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. format. All comments and data in VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:42 Sep 12, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM 13SEN1 58042 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 178 / Friday, September 13, 2002 / Notices electronic form must be identified by of older pesticides originally registered EPA is meeting the FFDCA’s tolerance the docket ID number [OPP–20002– before November 1, 1984. Pesticides reassessment requirements through 0121]. Electronic comments on this meeting today’s scientific and regulatory reregistration and several other program notice may also be filed online at many standards may be declared ‘‘eligible’’ for activities. In making reregistration Federal Depository Libraries. reregistration. To be eligible, an older eligibility decisions, the Agency also is pesticide must have a substantially completing much of tolerance D. How Should I Handle Information complete data base, and must not cause reassessment, within the time frames that I Believe is Confidential? unreasonable adverse effects to human mandated by the new law. EPA You may claim information that you health or the environment when used reassessed the first 33% of all food submit in response to this document as according to Agency approved label tolerances by August 3, 1999, and the confidential by marking any part or all directions and precautions. second 33% of all food tolerances by of that information as CBI. Information In addition, all pesticides with food August 3, 2002. EPA is focusing so marked will not be disclosed, except uses must meet the safety standard of particularly on priority Group 1 in accordance with procedures set forth section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, pesticides, those identified as posing the in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) 21 U.S.C. greatest potential risks. Over half of the comment that does not contain CBI 346a, as amended by the Food Quality universe of tolerances to be reassessed must be submitted for inclusion in the Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996. Under are included in this category, including public record. Information not marked FFDCA, EPA must make a tolerances for the organophosphate (OP) confidential will be included in the determination that pesticide residues pesticides, the Agency’s highest priority public docket by EPA without prior remaining in or on food are ‘‘safe’’; that for review. Carbamate, organochlorine, notice. is, ‘‘that there is reasonable certainty and B2 (probable human) carcinogen II. Background that no harm will result from aggregate pesticides also are included in priority exposure to the pesticide chemical Group 1. Although EPA is directing EPA must establish and publish in the residue’’ from dietary and other sources. most of its resources toward this group, Federal Register its annual performance In determining allowable levels of a number of Group 1 pesticides will measures and goals for pesticide pesticide residues in food, EPA must nevertheless be reassessed in the third reregistration, tolerance reassessment, perform a more comprehensive 33% owing to the challenging issues and expedited registration, under assessment of each pesticide’s
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Historical Perspectives on Apple Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Insecticidal Chemistries
    Historical Perspectives on Apple Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Insecticidal Chemistries. Peter Jentsch Extension Associate Department of Entomology Cornell University's Hudson Valley Lab 3357 Rt. 9W; PO box 727 Highland, NY 12528 email: [email protected] Phone 845-691-7151 Mobile: 845-417-7465 http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/ent/faculty/jentsch/ 2 Historical Perspectives on Fruit Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Chemistries. by Peter Jentsch I. Historical Use of Pesticides in Apple Production Overview of Apple Production and Pest Management Prior to 1940 Synthetic Pesticide Development and Use II. Influences Changing the Pest Management Profile in Apple Production Chemical Residues in Early Insect Management Historical Chemical Regulation Recent Regulation Developments Changing Pest Management Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 The Science Behind The Methodology Pesticide Revisions – Requirements For New Registrations III. Resistance of Insect Pests to Insecticides Resistance Pest Management Strategies IV. Reduced Risk Chemistries: New Modes of Action and the Insecticide Treadmill Fermentation Microbial Products Bt’s, Abamectins, Spinosads Juvenile Hormone Analogs Formamidines, Juvenile Hormone Analogs And Mimics Insect Growth Regulators Azadirachtin, Thiadiazine Neonicotinyls Major Reduced Risk Materials: Carboxamides, Carboxylic Acid Esters, Granulosis Viruses, Diphenyloxazolines, Insecticidal Soaps, Benzoyl Urea Growth Regulators, Tetronic Acids, Oxadiazenes , Particle Films, Phenoxypyrazoles, Pyridazinones, Spinosads, Tetrazines , Organotins, Quinolines. 3 I Historical Use of Pesticides in Apple Production Overview of Apple Production and Pest Management Prior to 1940 The apple has a rather ominous origin. Its inception is framed in the biblical text regarding the genesis of mankind. The backdrop appears to be the turbulent setting of what many scholars believe to be present day Iraq.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments of Teresa Homan with Attachments
    Teresa Homan Watertown, SD 57201 I am a landowner in Deuel County, South Dakota. Our land boarders the Deuel Harvest Wind Project in Deuel county, Docket # EL 18-053. There are 112 towers cited in the project, with 9 towers within a mile of our property. We have spent over three decades developing this property to enhance wildlife and for the enjoyment of our family. Can you imagine how we felt when we found we have a population of eastern bluebirds? We have yellow warblers, which by the way feed on the web worms that form in our trees. We have orioles, cedar waxwings, brown thrashers, rose breasted grosbeaks, gold finches, purple finches, robins, blue jays, nuthatches, eastern kingbirds, bitterns, dark eyed juncos, red winged blackbirds, morning doves, owls, cow birds, northern mocking birds, grey cat birds, wood thrushes, tufted titmouse, king fishers, indigo buntings, scarlet tanagers, bobolinks, meadowlarks, many woodpeckers, turkeys, turkey vultures, even humming birds and bald eagles. There are more, just to numerous to list. Many of these birds we have seen for the first time in our lives on this property in the past 1 O years. Not only are these birds beautiful and fun to watch, they have their purpose in the ecosystem. We also see northern long eared bats, that are on the endangered list in South Dakota. These birds are making a come back after the use of insecticides that nearly wiped out many. In the 1940's the insecticide DDT was introduced for public use, it is now banned from sale. In 1976 the herbicide Roundup was introduced to the public.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Acute Noaels and Benchmark Doses for Female Brain Cholinesterase Inhibition
    Supplemental Material for: February 5-8, 2002 SAP 25 January 2002 Comparison of Acute NOAELs and Benchmark Doses for Female Brain Cholinesterase Inhibition In cumulative risk assessment, it is important to characterize both the time frame for exposure (e.g., What is the exposure duration?) and for the toxic effect (e.g., What are the time to peak effects and the time to recovery?). In the Preliminary Cumulative Risk Assessment of the Organophoshate Pesticides (OPs) relative potency factors (RPFs) for 29 chemicals and points of departure (PODs) and the index chemical were determined based on whole brain cholinesterase (ChE) data from toxicity studies of 21 days and longer. The Office of Pesticide Programs has argued that the use of steady state data for relative potency determination generates relative potency factors (RPFs) that are reproducible and reflect less variability than RPFs derived from single-dose or short-term studies where the extent of inhibition changes rapidly immediately following dosing. OPP has posed a question to the FIFRA SAP for the February 5-8, 2002 review concerning how best to evaluate risk, taking into account the temporal characteristics of the hazard endpoint (i.e., cholinesterase inhibition) and the temporal characteristics of the exposure patterns for the food, drinking water, and residential/nonoccupational pathways. In order to facilitate the panel discussion, a table listing the available single dose toxicity studies performed with OPs has been made. Most of the studies are acute neurotoxicity (ACN) studies (OPPT Guideline 870.6200, OPP Guideline 81-8) administered by gavage. Acute lethality studies were not included. Dose levels, no- observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs), and no-observed-adverse-effect levels (LOAELs) for female brain ChE are also listed in the table.
    [Show full text]
  • For Methyl Parathion
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON D.C., 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES MEMORANDUM DATE: July 31, 2006 SUBJECT: Finalization of Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decisions (IREDs) and Interim Tolerance Reassessment and Risk Management Decisions (TREDs) for the Organophosphate Pesticides, and Completion of the Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration Eligibility Process for the Organophosphate Pesticides FROM: Debra Edwards, Director Special Review and Reregistration Division Office of Pesticide Programs TO: Jim Jones, Director Office of Pesticide Programs As you know, EPA has completed its assessment of the cumulative risks from the organophosphate (OP) class of pesticides as required by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. In addition, the individual OPs have also been subject to review through the individual- chemical review process. The Agency’s review of individual OPs has resulted in the issuance of Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decisions (IREDs) for 22 OPs, interim Tolerance Reassessment and Risk Management Decisions (TREDs) for 8 OPs, and a Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for one OP, malathion.1 These 31 OPs are listed in Appendix A. EPA has concluded, after completing its assessment of the cumulative risks associated with exposures to all of the OPs, that: (1) the pesticides covered by the IREDs that were pending the results of the OP cumulative assessment (listed in Attachment A) are indeed eligible for reregistration; and 1 Malathion is included in the OP cumulative assessment. However, the Agency has issued a RED for malathion, rather than an IRED, because the decision was signed on the same day as the completion of the OP cumulative assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Development and Validation of a Method for the Simultaneous
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by UGD Academic Repository American Journal of Applie d Chemistry 2014; 2(4): 46-54 Published online August 10, 2014 (http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ajac) doi: 10.11648/j.ajac.20140204.11 ISSN: 2330-8753 (Print); ISSN: 2330-8745 (Online) Development and validation of a method for the simultaneous determination of 20 organophosphorus pesticide residues in corn by accelerated solvent extraction and gas chromatography with nitrogen phosphorus detection Vesna Kostik *, Biljana Gjorgeska, Bistra Angelovska Medical Faculty, Department of Pharmacy, University “Goce Delchev”, Shtip, Republic of Macedonia Email address: [email protected] (V. Kostik), [email protected] (B. Gjorgeska), [email protected] (B. Angelovska) To cite this article: Vesna Kostik, Biljana Gjorgeska, Bistra Angelovska. Development and Validation of a Method for the Simultaneous Determination of 20 Organophosphorus Pesticide Residues in Corn by Accelerated Solvent Extraction and Gas Chromatography with Nitrogen Phosphorus Detection. American Journal of Applied Chemistry. Vol. 2, No. 4, 2014, pp. 46-54. doi: 10.11648/j.ajac.20140204.11 Abstract: The method for simultaneous determination of 20 organophosphorus pesticide residues in corn samples has been developed and validated. For the extraction of organophosporus pesticide residues from the samples, the accelerated solvent technique with the mixture of dichloromethane: acetone (1:1, V/V ) was used. Clean up was done using liquid – liquid extraction with n – hexane, followed by solid phase extraction on primary secondary amine adsorbent, and elution with the mixture of acetone: toluene (65:35). The determination of the pesticides was carried out by gas chromatography with nitrogen phosphorus detection.
    [Show full text]
  • 422 Part 180—Tolerances and Ex- Emptions for Pesticide
    Pt. 180 40 CFR Ch. I (7–1–16 Edition) at any time before the filing of the ini- 180.124 Methyl bromide; tolerances for resi- tial decision. dues. 180.127 Piperonyl butoxide; tolerances for [55 FR 50293, Dec. 5, 1990, as amended at 70 residues. FR 33360, June 8, 2005] 180.128 Pyrethrins; tolerances for residues. 180.129 o-Phenylphenol and its sodium salt; PART 180—TOLERANCES AND EX- tolerances for residues. 180.130 Hydrogen Cyanide; tolerances for EMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEM- residues. ICAL RESIDUES IN FOOD 180.132 Thiram; tolerances for residues. 180.142 2,4-D; tolerances for residues. Subpart A—Definitions and Interpretative 180.145 Fluorine compounds; tolerances for Regulations residues. 180.151 Ethylene oxide; tolerances for resi- Sec. dues. 180.1 Definitions and interpretations. 180.153 Diazinon; tolerances for residues. 180.3 Tolerances for related pesticide chemi- 180.154 Azinphos-methyl; tolerances for resi- cals. dues. 180.4 Exceptions. 180.155 1-Naphthaleneacetic acid; tolerances 180.5 Zero tolerances. for residues. 180.6 Pesticide tolerances regarding milk, 180.163 Dicofol; tolerances for residues. eggs, meat, and/or poultry; statement of 180.169 Carbaryl; tolerances for residues. policy. 180.172 Dodine; tolerances for residues. 180.175 Maleic hydrazide; tolerances for resi- Subpart B—Procedural Regulations dues. 180.176 Mancozeb; tolerances for residues. 180.7 Petitions proposing tolerances or ex- 180.178 Ethoxyquin; tolerances for residues. emptions for pesticide residues in or on 180.181 Chlorpropham; tolerances for resi- raw agricultural commodities or proc- dues. essed foods. 180.182 Endosulfan; tolerances for residues. 180.8 Withdrawal of petitions without preju- 180.183 Disulfoton; tolerances for residues.
    [Show full text]
  • 2002 NRP Section 6, Tables 6.1 Through
    Table 6.1 Scoring Table for Pesticides 2002 FSIS NRP, Domestic Monitoring Plan } +1 0.05] COMPOUND/COMPOUND CLASS * ) (EPA) (EPA) (EPA) (EPA) (EPA) (FSIS) (FSIS) PSI (P) TOX.(T) L-1 HIST. VIOL. BIOCON. (B) {[( (2*R+P+B)/4]*T} REG. CON. (R) * ENDO. DISRUP. LACK INFO. (L) LACK INFO. {[ Benzimidazole Pesticides in FSIS Benzimidazole MRM (5- 131434312.1 hydroxythiabendazole, benomyl (as carbendazim), thiabendazole) Carbamates in FSIS Carbamate MRM (aldicarb, aldicarb sulfoxide, NA44234416.1 aldicarb sulfone, carbaryl, carbofuran, carbofuran 3-hydroxy) Carbamates NOT in FSIS Carbamate MRM (carbaryl 5,6-dihydroxy, chlorpropham, propham, thiobencarb, 4-chlorobenzylmethylsulfone,4- NT 4 1 3 NV 4 4 13.8 chlorobenzylmethylsulfone sulfoxide) CHC's and COP's in FSIS CHC/COP MRM (HCB, alpha-BHC, lindane, heptachlor, dieldrin, aldrin, endrin, ronnel, linuron, oxychlordane, chlorpyrifos, nonachlor, heptachlor epoxide A, heptachlor epoxide B, endosulfan I, endosulfan I sulfate, endosulfan II, trans- chlordane, cis-chlordane, chlorfenvinphos, p,p'-DDE, p, p'-TDE, o,p'- 3444NV4116.0 DDT, p,p'-DDT, carbophenothion, captan, tetrachlorvinphos [stirofos], kepone, mirex, methoxychlor, phosalone, coumaphos-O, coumaphos-S, toxaphene, famphur, PCB 1242, PCB 1248, PCB 1254, PCB 1260, dicofol*, PBBs*, polybrominated diphenyl ethers*, deltamethrin*) (*identification only) COP's and OP's NOT in FSIS CHC/COP MRM (azinphos-methyl, azinphos-methyl oxon, chlorpyrifos, coumaphos, coumaphos oxon, diazinon, diazinon oxon, diazinon met G-27550, dichlorvos, dimethoate, dimethoate
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Name Federal P Code CAS Registry Number Acutely
    Acutely / Extremely Hazardous Waste List Federal P CAS Registry Acutely / Extremely Chemical Name Code Number Hazardous 4,7-Methano-1H-indene, 1,4,5,6,7,8,8-heptachloro-3a,4,7,7a-tetrahydro- P059 76-44-8 Acutely Hazardous 6,9-Methano-2,4,3-benzodioxathiepin, 6,7,8,9,10,10- hexachloro-1,5,5a,6,9,9a-hexahydro-, 3-oxide P050 115-29-7 Acutely Hazardous Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N'-[2-methyl-4-[[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]- P197 17702-57-7 Acutely Hazardous 1-(o-Chlorophenyl)thiourea P026 5344-82-1 Acutely Hazardous 1-(o-Chlorophenyl)thiourea 5344-82-1 Extremely Hazardous 1,1,1-Trichloro-2, -bis(p-methoxyphenyl)ethane Extremely Hazardous 1,1a,2,2,3,3a,4,5,5,5a,5b,6-Dodecachlorooctahydro-1,3,4-metheno-1H-cyclobuta (cd) pentalene, Dechlorane Extremely Hazardous 1,1a,3,3a,4,5,5,5a,5b,6-Decachloro--octahydro-1,2,4-metheno-2H-cyclobuta (cd) pentalen-2- one, chlorecone Extremely Hazardous 1,1-Dimethylhydrazine 57-14-7 Extremely Hazardous 1,2,3,4,10,10-Hexachloro-6,7-epoxy-1,4,4,4a,5,6,7,8,8a-octahydro-1,4-endo-endo-5,8- dimethanonaph-thalene Extremely Hazardous 1,2,3-Propanetriol, trinitrate P081 55-63-0 Acutely Hazardous 1,2,3-Propanetriol, trinitrate 55-63-0 Extremely Hazardous 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,8-Octachloro-4,7-methano-3a,4,7,7a-tetra- hydro- indane Extremely Hazardous 1,2-Benzenediol, 4-[1-hydroxy-2-(methylamino)ethyl]- 51-43-4 Extremely Hazardous 1,2-Benzenediol, 4-[1-hydroxy-2-(methylamino)ethyl]-, P042 51-43-4 Acutely Hazardous 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 Extremely Hazardous 1,2-Propylenimine P067 75-55-8 Acutely Hazardous 1,2-Propylenimine 75-55-8 Extremely Hazardous 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,8-Octachloro-1,3,3a,4,7,7a-hexahydro-4,7-methanoisobenzofuran Extremely Hazardous 1,3-Dithiolane-2-carboxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-, O- [(methylamino)-carbonyl]oxime 26419-73-8 Extremely Hazardous 1,3-Dithiolane-2-carboxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-, O- [(methylamino)-carbonyl]oxime.
    [Show full text]
  • Lifetime Organophosphorous Insecticide Use Among Private Pesticide Applicators in the Agricultural Health Study
    Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (2012) 22, 584 -- 592 & 2012 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved 1559-0631/12 www.nature.com/jes ORIGINAL ARTICLE Lifetime organophosphorous insecticide use among private pesticide applicators in the Agricultural Health Study Jane A. Hoppin1, Stuart Long2, David M. Umbach3, Jay H. Lubin4, Sarah E. Starks5, Fred Gerr5, Kent Thomas6, Cynthia J. Hines7, Scott Weichenthal8, Freya Kamel1, Stella Koutros9, Michael Alavanja9, Laura E. Beane Freeman9 and Dale P. Sandler1 Organophosphorous insecticides (OPs) are the most commonly used insecticides in US agriculture, but little information is available regarding specific OP use by individual farmers. We describe OP use for licensed private pesticide applicators from Iowa and North Carolina in the Agricultural Health Study (AHS) using lifetime pesticide use data from 701 randomly selected male participants collected at three time periods. Of 27 OPs studied, 20 were used by 41%. Overall, 95% had ever applied at least one OP. The median number of different OPs used was 4 (maximum ¼ 13). Malathion was the most commonly used OP (74%) followed by chlorpyrifos (54%). OP use declined over time. At the first interview (1993--1997), 68% of participants had applied OPs in the past year; by the last interview (2005--2007), only 42% had. Similarly, median annual application days of OPs declined from 13.5 to 6 days. Although OP use was common, the specific OPs used varied by state, time period, and individual. Much of the variability in OP use was associated with the choice of OP, rather than the frequency or duration of application.
    [Show full text]
  • The List of Extremely Hazardous Substances)
    APPENDIX A (THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES) THRESHOLD REPORTABLE INVENTORY RELEASE QUANTITY QUANTITY CAS NUMBER CHEMICAL NAME (POUNDS) (POUNDS) 75-86-5 ACETONE CYANOHYDRIN 500 10 1752-30-3 ACETONE THIOSEMICARBAZIDE 500/500 1,000 107-02-8 ACROLEIN 500 1 79-06-1 ACRYLAMIDE 500/500 5,000 107-13-1 ACRYLONITRILE 500 100 814-68-6 ACRYLYL CHLORIDE 100 100 111-69-3 ADIPONITRILE 500 1,000 116-06-3 ALDICARB 100/500 1 309-00-2 ALDRIN 500/500 1 107-18-6 ALLYL ALCOHOL 500 100 107-11-9 ALLYLAMINE 500 500 20859-73-8 ALUMINUM PHOSPHIDE 500 100 54-62-6 AMINOPTERIN 500/500 500 78-53-5 AMITON 500 500 3734-97-2 AMITON OXALATE 100/500 100 7664-41-7 AMMONIA 500 100 300-62-9 AMPHETAMINE 500 1,000 62-53-3 ANILINE 500 5,000 88-05-1 ANILINE,2,4,6-TRIMETHYL- 500 500 7783-70-2 ANTIMONY PENTAFLUORIDE 500 500 1397-94-0 ANTIMYCIN A 500/500 1,000 86-88-4 ANTU 500/500 100 1303-28-2 ARSENIC PENTOXIDE 100/500 1 THRESHOLD REPORTABLE INVENTORY RELEASE QUANTITY QUANTITY CAS NUMBER CHEMICAL NAME (POUNDS) (POUNDS) 1327-53-3 ARSENOUS OXIDE 100/500 1 7784-34-1 ARSENOUS TRICHLORIDE 500 1 7784-42-1 ARSINE 100 100 2642-71-9 AZINPHOS-ETHYL 100/500 100 86-50-0 AZINPHOS-METHYL 10/500 1 98-87-3 BENZAL CHLORIDE 500 5,000 98-16-8 BENZENAMINE, 3-(TRIFLUOROMETHYL)- 500 500 100-14-1 BENZENE, 1-(CHLOROMETHYL)-4-NITRO- 500/500 500 98-05-5 BENZENEARSONIC ACID 10/500 10 3615-21-2 BENZIMIDAZOLE, 4,5-DICHLORO-2-(TRI- 500/500 500 FLUOROMETHYL)- 98-07-7 BENZOTRICHLORIDE 100 10 100-44-7 BENZYL CHLORIDE 500 100 140-29-4 BENZYL CYANIDE 500 500 15271-41-7 BICYCLO[2.2.1]HEPTANE-2-CARBONITRILE,5-
    [Show full text]
  • Malathion Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report
    SERA TR-052-02-02c Malathion Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report Submitted to: Paul Mistretta, COR USDA/Forest Service, Southern Region 1720 Peachtree RD, NW Atlanta, Georgia 30309 USDA Forest Service Contract: AG-3187-C-06-0010 USDA Forest Order Number: AG-43ZP-D-06-0012 SERA Internal Task No. 52-02 Submitted by: Patrick R. Durkin Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. 5100 Highbridge St., 42C Fayetteville, New York 13066-0950 Fax: (315) 637-0445 E-Mail: [email protected] Home Page: www.sera-inc.com May 12, 2008 Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................ ii List of Figures................................................................................................................................. v List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi List of Appendices ......................................................................................................................... vi List of Attachments........................................................................................................................ vi ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS ............................................................... vii COMMON UNIT CONVERSIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS.................................................... x CONVERSION OF SCIENTIFIC NOTATION ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Table II. EPCRA Section 313 Chemical List for Reporting Year 2017 (Including Toxic Chemical Categories)
    Table II. EPCRA Section 313 Chemical List For Reporting Year 2017 (including Toxic Chemical Categories) Individually listed EPCRA Section 313 chemicals with CAS numbers are arranged alphabetically starting on page II-3. Following the alphabetical list, the EPCRA Section 313 chemicals are arranged in CAS number order. Covered chemical categories follow. Note: Chemicals may be added to or deleted from the list. The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Call Center or the TRI-Listed Chemicals website will provide up-to-date information on the status of these changes. See section B.3.c of the instructions for more information on the de minimis % limits listed below. There are no de minimis levels for PBT chemicals since the de minimis exemption is not available for these chemicals (an asterisk appears where a de minimis limit would otherwise appear in Table II). However, for purposes of the supplier notification requirement only, such limits are provided in Appendix C. Chemical Qualifiers Certain EPCRA Section 313 chemicals listed in Table II have parenthetic “qualifiers.” These qualifiers indicate that these EPCRA Section 313 chemicals are subject to the section 313 reporting requirements if manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in a specific form or when a certain activity is performed. An EPCRA Section 313 chemical that is listed without a qualifier is subject to reporting in all forms in which it is manufactured, processed, and otherwise used. The following chemicals are reportable only if they are manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in the specific form(s) listed below: Chemical/ Chemical Category CAS Number Qualifier Aluminum (fume or dust) 7429-90-5 Only if it is a fume or dust form.
    [Show full text]