UNEP-POPS-COP.5-INF-12
Contents
1. 4 Actualmente el Endosulfan sigue siendo utilizado en el cultivo de hortalizas y existe pr cticas inadecuadas de manejo por parte de los usuarios lo que demuestra que es imperativo sensibilizar a los productores y consumidores sobre los riesgos asociados al Endosulfan 5 En la actualidad se ha descontinuado el uso del Endosulfan en el control de la broca del fruto del caf y se est n empleando los controles culturales biol gicos microbiol gicos y etol gicos lo que demuestra que existen alternativas viables y eficaces 6 Seg n registro en SENASA SAG existen otros ingredientes activos que representan alternativas quimicas al Endosulfan que demuestran controlar las mismas plagas En virtud de lo antes descrito sobre la inclusi n del Endosultan en el anexo A del Convenio de Estocolmo se puede concluir lo siguiente Preliminarmente se puede inferir que la prohibici n no causaria impactos significativos a excepci n del sector horticola y bananero del cual desconocemos actualmente las implicaciones sociales y econ micas pertinentes esto permite inferir que se deben realizar gestiones a nivel nacional para conocer ampliamente los patrones culturales y agricolas en torno al Endosutfan Por lo anterior solicito que se tome en consideraci n lo aqui planteado y se reconozca ante la Conferencia de las Partes COP 5 que lomar lugar en Ginebra Suiza en el mes de abril que es necesario para la Rep blica de Honduras abordar2. 2002 0262 0181 on http www regulations gov With regard to the commenters concern for endceulfan contamination of subsistence foods the Agency s human health risk assessment has determined that there are no dietary risks of concern resulting fom endosulfan use for all populations including indigenous people in the Arctic Because of the ectensive additional mitigation required for many endosultan uses for the duration of the phase out period in combination with the benefits afforded by and or limited alternatives for certain uses of endosulfan the Agency has decided not to alter the phase out schedule requested by the endosultan registrants and detailed in the endosulfan MO A IV Cancellation Order Pursuant to FIFRA section amp fl hereby approves the requested cancellations of registrations identified in Table 1 of Unit IL and hereby orders hat All endosulfan product registrations identified in Table 1 of Unit II are canceled for uses listed in List 1 of Unit VL as of November 10 2010 All endosulfan product registrations identified in Table 1 of Unit II are canceled for uses listed in List 2 of Unit VL as of March 31 2012 All endosulfan product registrations identified in Table 1 of Unit II are canceled for uses listed in List 3 of Unit VL as of March 31 2013 All endosulfan product registrations identified in Table 1 of Unit II are canceled for uses listed in Lis
3. Article 8 Listing of chemicals in Annexes A B and C A Party may submit a proposal to the Secretariat for listing a chemical in Annexes A B Paragraph 1 and or C The proposal shall contain the information specified in Annex D In developing a proposal a Party may be assisted by other Parties and or by the Secretariat The Secretariat shall verify whether the proposal contains the information specified in Paragraph 2 Annex D If the Secretariat is satisfied that the proposal contains the information so specified it shall forward the proposal to the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee The Committee shall examine the proposal and apply the screening criteria specified in Paragraph 3 Annex D in a flexible and transparent way taking all information provided into account in an integrative and balanced manner If the Committee decides that Paragraph 4 a It is satisfied that the screening criteria have been fulfilled it shall through the Secretariat make the proposal and the evaluation of the Committee available to all Parties and observers and invite them to submit the information specified in Annex E or It is not satisfied that the screening criteria have been fulfilled it shall through the Paragraph 4 b Secretariat inform all Parties and observers and make the proposal and evaluation of the Committee available to all Parties and the proposal shall be set aside Submission of a Proposal by a Party Paragraphl of Article 8
4. the notifying party should not be unilaterally pushing its proposal through various levels of decision making by POPRC Conclusion In view of aforesaid procedural breaches and not so subtle deviations from norms India suggests that decisions made by POPRC 3 and POPRC 4 on EU proposal concerning Endosulfan be disapproved and set aside India is firmly of the opinion that decisions in Stockholm Convention should be made in strict accordance with the text of the Convention and approved Rules and Procedures COP 4 may also suggest ways as to how to prevent and correct such breaches in future Stockholm Convention is an important Multilateral Environment Agreement MEA India is committed to ensure that its implementation does not by design or default deviate from the text of the Convention OOOO OOOO OO E K K E K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K KK K K 11 UNEP POPS COP S INF 12 12 Dissent note by Dr G K Pandey POPRC Member from India at the session of POPRCC 5 12 Oct 17 Oct 2009 Background Information At the POPRC 5 At the fourth meeting of the Conference of Parties COP 4 held in May 2009 India had submitted a Conference Room Paper UNEP POPs COP 4 CRP 4 strongly questioning the procedural and technical validity of POPRC 4 decision on Endosulfan proposal Referring to the contentions raised by India at the the final report of COP 4 reads as follows Para 106 n the context of whether decisions
5. uses will end on July 31 2016 EPA expects growers currently using endosulfan to successfully transition to lower risk pest control strategies The endosulfan phase out schedule helps facilitate this transition by providing ae time to research and adopt ower risk alternatives Recognizing that endosulfan affords benefits in producing certain individual crops the phase out schedule allows a longer phase out where EPA determined there are enefits of endosulfan use and ar fewer available alternatives to endosulfan With regard to the commenters concern about farmworker and environmental risks EPA is requiring new mitigation measures for many crops during the endosulfan phase out in addition to mitigation requirements placed on endosulfan labels in previous years Although these additional mitigation measures are designed to reduce worker risks restricting and Phasing out all uses of endosultan will also address risks to wildlife and the environment Additional mitigation required during the phase out varies by crop and includes measures such as Canceling aerial use and specifyi other pulita methods ae Extending Restricted Entry Intervals REIS Extending Pre harvest Intervals PHIs Reducing maximum single and or seasonal application rates Detailed information about the additional mitigation measures is provided in the Appendices to the endosulfan MOA which can be found at docket number
6. POPRC 3 itself It should not have been given lease of life from POPRC 3 to POPRC 4 At the end of the examination of the amended EU proposal opinion of POPRC 4 remained divided as to whether or not it met all criteria of Annex D The Chair of POPRC 4 supported by UNEP s legal advisor chose once again to take decision by majority vote quoting Article 19 paragraph 6 c of the Convention This was in error because of the following Article 19 6 c reads The Committee shall make every effort to adopt its recommendations by consensus If all efforts at consensus have been exhausted and no consensus reached such recommendation shall as a last resort be adopted by a two thirds majority vote of the members present and voting It is clear Article 19 6 c refers to recommendation and not to decision Rule 45 of Rules of Procedure refers to decision Both rule 45 of Rules of Procedures and Article 19 6 c establish procedure that POPRC must follow Rule 45 expressly states that decision on matters of substance shall only be taken by consensus Taken together they establish that while procedural matters may be decided by a vote all substantive decisions in the UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 10 Convention must be taken by consensus POPRC s examination and subsequent decision whether or not a proposal meets Annex D criteria is not a recommendation subject Article 19 6 c It is a substantive decision A recommendation is diffe
7. a document UNEP POPS POPRC 3 INF 10 that stated that Secretariat was satisfied that EU s proposal met the requirement of Annex D The EU s proposal was listed for examination by POPRC 3 UNEP POPS POPRC 3 5 However the POPRC 3 did not examine the proposal but simply noted in its final report that vital information required for consideration of Endosulfan had not been made available to it POPRC 3 asked notifying Party EU and others including observers to supply the missing vital information before it begins to examine the EU s proposal at its next meeting POPRC 4 Article 8 of the Convention requires incomplete proposals be set aside by the POPRC It does not allow notifying party or others to amend the proposal after initial verification by the Secretariat Hence deferment of examination of the EU s proposal from POPRC 3 to POPRC 4 and allowing the EU to amend its proposal during the interim period is not as per provisions of the Convention II Decision making in POPRC The Chair of POPRC 4 chose to take decisions by majority votes instead of consensus on two occasions First it was to admit amended version of unexamined EU proposal and next was to uphold the amended EU proposal that it met all Annex D criteria This was resorted to despite objections from committee members The Convention and Rules of Procedures do not permit substantive decisions be made my majority These decisions therefore lack legitimacy und
8. all information provided into account in an integrative and balanced manner The phrase taking all information provided into account as used here refers to all information contained in the proposal forwarded to POPRC by the Secretariat The phrase all information cannot be interpreted to refer to information extraneous to the information content of the proposal under evaluation as it would then open a Pandora s Box In other words the phrase all information provided cannot be misinterpreted as information provided by all Accordingly the phrase all information UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 provided as 1t appears in paragraph 3 must be taken to mean all information provided to the Secretariat in the original proposal and duly forwarded to the POPRC Issue No 1 involving EU proposal On 26 Jul 07 European Commission EC on behalf of European Union EU submitted a detailed proposal to Stockholm Convention Secretariat proposing to list Endosulfan under the Convention On 26 Sept 07 the Convention s Secretariat published a document UNEP POPS POPRC 3 INF 10 that stated that Secretariat was satisfied that EU s proposal met the requirement of Annex D The EU s proposal was then listed for examination by POPRC 3 UNEP POPS POPRC 3 5 However the POPRC 3 did not examine the proposal allegedly at the behest of a request from a POPRC member from EU The PORPC 3 tersely noted in its final report that vital information require
9. allows a Party to submit a proposal to the Convention s Secretariat for listing a new chemical The proposal shall contain the information specified in Annex D In developing a proposal 1 e prior to its submission to the Secretariat a party may be assisted by other Parties and or by the Secretariat Submitting party or others cannot amend the proposal after its submission to the Secretariat Verification of the proposal by the Secretariat Paragraph 2 of Article 8 says that upon receipt of the proposal from a Party The Secretariat shall verify whether the proposal contains information specified in Annex D Oxford dictionary defines the term verify as to test the truth or accuracy The received proposal shall be forwarded to POPRC only after the Secretariat 1s satisfied that the proposal contains all information specified in Annex D The multiple use of term shall in this paragraph is significant It reinforces the obligatory role of the Secretariat in initial verification of the submitted proposal ahead of a detailed examination by the POPRC It also means that if the Secretariat 1s not satisfied that the proposal contains the Annex D information it shall not forward the proposal to the POPRC Examination of the proposal by the POPRC Paragraph 3 of Article 8 says that the committee shall examine the proposal as forwarded to it by the Secretariat and apply the screening criteria specified in Annex D in a flexible and transparent way taking
10. assessment titled Toxicological Review of Urea In Support of Summary Information on the Integrated Risk Information System IRIS EP AS635 R 10 005 1 The draft assessment was prepared by the National Center for Environmental Assessment NCEA within the EPA Office of Research and Development On September 28 EPA released this draft assessment 75 FR 58716 solely for the purpose of pre dissemination peer review under applicable information quality guidelines This draft assessment has not been formally disseminated by EPA It does not represent and should not be construed to represent any Agency policy or determination Versar Inc invites the public to register to attend this workshop as observers In addition Versar Inc invites the public to give brief oral comments and or provide written comments at the workshop regarding the draft assessment under review Time is limited and reservations will be accepted on a first come first served basis In preparing a final report EPA will consider Versar Inc s report of the comments and recommendations from the external peer review workshop and any written public comments that EPA receives in accordance with this notice DATES The peer review panel workshop on the draft assessment for Urea will be held via teleconference on December 13 2010 beginning at 1 p m and ending at 5 p m Eastern Standard Time ADDRESSES The draft Toxicological Review of Urea In Support of Summ
11. con detalle un analisis m s contundente sobre las implicaciones de la inclusi n del Endosulfan en el anexo A del Convenio de Estocolmo asimismo lograr el fortalecimiento de los sectores involucrados y del Punto Focal para atender salisfactoriamente los retos que se aproximan Aprovecha la oportunidad para expresarle las seguridades de mi consideraci n Director ms Centro de Estudios y Control de Contaminantes CESCCO Punto Focal del Convenio de Estocolmo para Honduras C Archivo Edificio Principal Despacho de Recursos Naturales y Ambiente 100 metros al sur del Estadio Nacional Tel fonos 232 2011 239 4298 Fax 232 6250 Apartado Postal 1389 4710 Tegucigalpa M D C Honduras C A UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 India India s position paper on consideration of EU s proposal concerning Endosulfan by POPRC India observes on the strength of valid facts and interpretations that the proposal of European Union EU concerning Endosulfan considered by both POPRC 3 and POPRC 4 suffer from several flaws as explained below in this Conference Room Paper CRP and elaborated further in Amnex l attached I Non observance of procedural due process required under Convention On 26 Jul 07 European Commission EC on behalf of European Union EU submitted a detailed proposal to Stockholm Convention s Secretariat proposing to list Endosulfan under the Convention On 26 Sept 07 the Convention s Secretariat published
12. criteria However such data seem to have been selectively ignored during early stage of decision making process by POPRC For sake of brevity reference may be made to scientific data submitted by China Indian Chemical Council and Crop Life International available from Convention s website http chm pops int Convention POPsReviewcommittee Meetings POPRC4 AnnexEinformationrequest Resp onses tabid 460 language en US Default aspx UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 Conclusion In view of above and additional information furnished in the Annex I to this Conference Room Paper India suggests that decisions made by POPRC 3 and POPRC 4 on EU proposal concerning Endosulfan be disapproved and set aside India is firmly of the opinion that all decisions in Stockholm Convention should be made in strict accordance with the text of the Convention and approved Rules of Procedures KKE K KE KE KE E K K KE K K KE K KE E K K E OOOO OO K E E K E KE K A K K E K K K K K Se K K K K K K K K Annex I to India s CRP bearing no xxxxxx Background Article 8 of Stockholm Convention specifies step by step procedure for assessing a proposed chemical for possible listing as a Persistent Organic Pollutant POP under the Convention Its initial paragraphs describe the procedure for e Submission of a proposal by a Party e Verification of the proposal by the Secretariat e Examination of the proposal by POP review committee POPRC for conformity to Annex D criteria
13. of the Committee had to be made by consensus or if all efforts to reach consensus had been exhausted could be made on the basis of a vote there was considerable discussions on the relative standings of the rules of procedure of the Convention on the one hand and the text of the Convention itself on the other Para 107 4s one representative had expressed particularly strong views on that topic the president suggested that when the Secretariat drew up draft decision on various aspects of the work of the Committee it should consult with the representative to address his concerns The UNEP Senior Legal Officer acting as the legal advisor to the Conference of the Parties and a friend of the preside iL yet to be nominated were also to be involved su India raised objections to POPRC 4 decision on E COP 4 meeting held in May 2009 Now if Committee had been drawn up and 1 therefore soup AT POPRC why the Friend of the President had 8 concerns raised by Indi in its Conference y evasive reply was given to me by the Senior 1 the oy POPRC 5 He read from para 74 of the inal re av addresses the subsequent decision of the I iid 106 amp 107 of the final report He did not even read out th POPRC 5 UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 As the Friend of the President 15 yet 10 be nominated to address the concems raised by India on Annex D evaluation of Endosulfan it is not proper and legitimate an
14. possible to process your request Dated November 4 2010 Anthony F Maciorowski Deputy Director EPA Science Advisory Stam Office FR Dec 2010 20379 Filed 11 90 10 8 45 am BILLING CODE amp 56 5 P
15. than 540 chemical substances that can be used to support the first two steps hazard identification and dose response evaluation ofthe risk assessment process When supported by available data IRIS provides oral reference doses RfDs and inhalation reference concentrations RCs for chronic noncancer health effects as well as assessments of potential carcinogenic effects resulting from chronic exposure Combined with specific exposure information government and private entities use IRIS to help characterize public health risks of chemical substances in a site specific situation and thereby support risk management decisions designed to protect public health Dated November 4 2010 Darrell A Winner Acting Director National Center for Environmental Assessment FR Doc 2010 28381 Filod 11 06 10 8 45 am BILLHG CODE amp BL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EPA HO OPP 2002 0262 FRL 8852 4 Endosulfan Final Product Cancellation Order AGENCY Environmental Protection Agency ACTION Notice SUMMARY This notice announces EFA s order for the cancellations voluntarily requested by the registrants and ate eat the Agency of pesticide products containing endosulfan pursuant to section 6 fl 1 of the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act FIFR A as amended This cancellation order follows an August 18 2010 Federal Register Notice of Receipt of Requests from the endosulfan r
16. the United Arab Emirates The responses have been reproduced as received in annex I to the present note The United States of America also submitted information pertaining to endosulfan which has been reproduced as received in annex II to the present note i UNEP POPS COP 5 K1170566 230311 UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 Annex I Submissions by parties for consideration by the Conference of the Parties regarding the recommendation of the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee to list endosulfan in Annex A to the Convention Bahrain E mail communication Subject Proposal to amend Annex A to the Stockholm Convention to be discussed at the fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties This is with reference to the above mentioned subject Please be informed that as per Article 13 of the convention the developing countries parties shall be provided with financial resources to fulfill their obligation And according to the COP 4 decision no UNEP POPS COP 4 CRP 48 the COP requests the GEF to provide the necessary financial and technical assistance to developing country parties and countries with economies in transition in accordance with Articles 13 and 14 especially the least developed countries and small island developing states to help them prepare or update their NIPs and to comply with the Convention requirements Therefore in this regard we would be grateful if you could add the funding issue in the COP 5 Agenda where our s
17. 305 7 106 e mail address biscoe melaniesrepa gov SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION General Information A Does this action apply to me This action is directed to the public in general and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental human health and agricultural advocates the chemical industry pesticide users and members of the public interested in the sale distribution or use of pesticides Since others also may be interested the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action toa particular entity consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT How can I get copies of this document and other related information EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification 10 number EPA HQ OPP 2002 02 62 Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at htip www regulations gov if only available aka y at i Office of Pesticide Programs OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm 54400 One Potomac Yard South Bldg 2777 5 Crystal Dr Arlington VA The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8 30 a m to 4 p m Monday through Friday ello legal holidays The Docket Facility s telephone number is 703 305 5805 II What action is the agency taking This notice anno
18. IDAD El Ministerio del Ambiente forma parte del Comit T cnico Nacional de Plaguicidas conjuntamente con Agrocalidad y el Ministerio de Salud el cual analiza la informaci n sobre los plaguicidas que ingresan al pa s Esta cartera de Estado puso en consideraci n ante la autoridad competente el ingreso del endosulfan para su revisi n debido a los siguientes justificativos e De acuerdo a la secci n 6 3 de la Evaluaci n de Riesgo Ambiental Acu tico del Manual T cnico Andino para el Registro y Control de Plaguicidas Qu micos de Uso Agr cola en su p gina 112 especifica que Se considera inaceptable si el Factor de Bioconcentraci n BCF es mayor a 2000 y la vida media en el suelo o agua es mayor a 30 d as a 20 C e Base de datos europeas como el System Hearts de la Universidad Brit nica de Herfortshire indica que el ingrediente activo endosulfan posee un factor de bioacumulaci n igual a 2775 y un valor de persistencia en el suelo de 39 DT50 a 20 grados celcius Estos valores son mayores a aquellos mencionados en el manual t cnico e De acuerdo al documento de reevaluaci n de este ingrediente activo en la Agencia de Protecci n Ambiental de los Estados Unidos define a este ingrediente activo de la siguiente manera producto qu mico muy persistente que puede permanecer en el ambiente por largos UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 per odos de tiempo particularmente en medios cidos pueden transportarse por disoluci n en a
19. LOMBIA 17 THIONEX 35 EC ENDOPAC 10 1 5 ISRAEL ECUADOR COLOMBIA ENDOSULFAN 35 EC 10 I 15 SESAU CHINA INDIA TABLA 2 Listado de cultivos y plagas de importancia econ mica en el pa s Palma africana Elaeis guineensis Jacq Sagalasa Sagalassa valida Ma z Zea mays Cogollero Spodoptera Papa Solanum tuberosum Pulguilla Epitrix cucumeris Caf Coffe arabica Broca Hypothenemus hampei Arroz Oryza sativa Cogollero Spodoptera UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 Honduras SERNA Rep blica de Honduras o cs CESCCO 133 2010 Tegucigalpa M D C 24 de Noviembre de 2010 Se onta Kei Ohno Comit de Examen sobre los Contaminantes Organicos Persistentes Secretaria del Convenio de Estocolmo Ginebra Suiza Estimada Se orita Ohno Con fecha 13 de noviembre de 2010 se realiz la primera jomada de consulta con miembros de la Comisi n Nacional para la Gesti n Ambientalmente Racional de Productos Quimicos CNG a fin de identificar de manera conjunta las implicaciones nacionales en relaci n a la recomendaci n del Comit de Examen de los Contaminantes Org nicos Persistentes POPRC de incluir al Endosulfan y sus is meros en el Anexo A del Convenio de Estocolmo En ese sentido el Centro de Estudios y Control de Contaminantes CESCCO se reuni con autoridades competentes ONG s y representantes del sector cafetalero para establecer un diagn stico nacional de car cter preliminar de la situaci n actua
20. UNITED NATIONS SC UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 Distr General 11 February 2011 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic D Pollutants English only Conference of the Parties to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants Fifth meeting Geneva 25 29 April 2011 Item 4 e of the provisional agenda Matters related to the implementation of the Convention listing of chemicals in Annex A B or C to the Convention Compilation of comments for consideration by the Conference of the Parties on the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee s recommendation to list endosulfan in Annex A to the Convention Note by the Secretariat 1 By its decision POPRC 6 8 the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants decided to recommend to the Conference of the Parties that it should consider listing technical endosulfan its related isomers and endosulfan sulfate in Annex A to the Convention with specific exemptions in accordance with paragraph 9 of Article 8 of the Convention 2 The Secretariat notified parties on 22 October 2010 of the Committee s recommendation and invited them to inform it by 1 December 2010 of any relevant issue pertaining to the recommendation that they wished to raise at the fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties As at 10 January 2011 the Secretariat had received responses from Bahrain Ecuador Honduras India Morocco and
21. a public face to face meeting will be limited to five minutes with no more than a total of one hour for all speakers Each person making an oral statement should panas rU written comments as as their oral statement so that the points presented orally can be expanded upon in writing Interested parties should contact Mr Aaron Yeow DFO in writing preferably via email at the contact information noted above by November 29 2010 for the face to face meeting to be placed on the list of public speakers Whrittes Statements Written statements should be supplied to the DFO via e mail at the contact information noted above by November 20 2010 for the face to face meeting so that the information may be made available to the Panel members for their consideration Written statements should be supplied in one of the following electronic formats Adobe Acrobat PDF MS Word MS PowerPoint or Rich Text files in PC Windows a8 2000 XP format Submitters are requested to provide versions of signed documents submitted with and without signatures because the SAB Staff Office does not publish documents with signatures on its Web sitos Accessibility For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities please contact Mr Aaron Yeow at 202 564 2050 or yeow aaron en a To request accommodation of a disability please contact Mr Yeow preferably at least ten davs prior to each meeting to give EPA as much time as
22. admitted to have done so It is rather strange to permit the notifying party to submit a self review of its own proposal and subsequent self claim that it passes Annex D review for acceptance by POPRC Stockholm Convention can not allow this During the deliberations India repeatedly pointed out that the data presented in EU proposal fails to consider the data generated from environment other than EU such as tropical region countries including India Therefore the Annex D evaluation was not done in an integrative and transparent manner as mandated in Article 8 3 of the Convention taking into account all information India also repeatedly pointed out that Annex D criteria were not at all met by EU proposal India also protested to the chair s decision to go for voting on matter of substance nature in contravention of what is provided in the Convention and rules of procedures more specifically rule 45 of Rules of procedures to be read with article 8 of the Convention India read out relevant provisions and right interpretation of same and explained that the decisions are different from UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 recommendations under the Convention India also conveyed its reservations on the verbal legal advice given by the legal advisor of UNEP in this regard India also objected to final adoption of Annex D review report submitted by Sweden a member of EU the notifying party as though 1t was prepared by POPRC members In short I
23. ary Information on the Integrated Risk Information System IKIS is available picks via the Internet on the NCEA ome page under the Recent Additions and Publications menus at https wwnw epu gov nceda A limited number of paper copies are available from the Information Management Team Address Information Management Team National Center for Environmental Assessment Mail Code 8601F U S Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20460 telephone 703 347 8561 facsimile 703 347 8601 If you request a paper copy please provide your name mailing address and the draft assessment title The peer review meeting on the draft Urea assessment will be held via teleconference To attend the teleconterence register no later than December 6 2010 by contacting Versar Inc by e mail saundkaf versar com subject line Urea Peer Review Meeting by phone 703 750 3000 ext 545 or tall free at 1 800 2 VERSAR 1 800 283 7737 ask for Kathy Coon the Urea Peer Review Meeting Coordinator or by faxing a registration request to 703 642 6909 please reference the Urea Peer Review Meeting and include your name title affiliation full address and contact information There will be limited time at the peer review workshop for comments from the public Please inform Versar Inc if you wish to make comments during the workshop FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT For information on registratio
24. bmit information regarding the U S timetable for the phase out of endosulfan in case it would be of interest to other delegations In the United States most currently approved endosulfan crop uses will end by 31 July 2012 including over 30 crop uses plus use on ornamental trees shrubs and herbaceous plants The remaining uses will end over the following 4 years with the final endosulfan uses ending on 31 July 2016 More information can be found at the following website http www epa gov pesticides reregistration endosulfan endosulfan agreement html as well as in the attachment to this letter Federal Register Notice from 10 November 2010 75 FR 69065 69069 17 UNEP POPS COP S INF 12 Federal Register Vol 75 No 217 Wednesday November 10 2010 Notices 60065 Dated November 2 2010 Darrell A Winner Acting Director National Center for Environ menial Assessment FR Doc 2010 28982 Fiod 11 9 10 8 45 am BILUNG CODE ESBOECP ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY FAL 9224 5 Draft Toxicological Review of Urea In Support of Summary Information on the Integrated Risk Information System IRIS AGENCY Environmental Protection Agency EPA ACTION Notice of peer review meeting SUMMARY EPA is announcing that Versar Inc an EPA contractor for external scientific peer review will convene an independent panel of experts and organize and conduct an external peer review meeting to review the draft human health
25. d for consideration of Endosulfan had not been made available to it and asked notifying Party EU and others including observers to supply additional information before it begins to examine the EU s proposal at its next meeting POPRC 4 It is not known as to how POPRC 3 noticed the missing vital information in the EU proposal without even examining it The Secretariat can check voice recording of POPRC 3 proceedings and explain to COP 4 as to how missing vital information was noticed without examining the EU proposal in POPRC 3 and by whom Article 8 gives the Secretariat and POPRC distinct and complementary functions The Secretariat receives proposals and verifies whether it contains the information required by Annex D Once the Secretariat is satisfied that the proposal contains Annex D information the Secretariat forwards the proposal to POPRC to examine whether the information in the proposal as forwarded by the Secretariat fulfils Annex D criteria or not Permitting the POPRC to seek supplemental or additional information prior to examining the forwarded proposal presupposes that the PORPC can grant itself power to perform a function exclusively assigned to the Secretariat that of determining whether the proposal contains information necessary for POPRC to begin its work of examining the proposal While Article 8 3 asks POPRC to be flexible transplant these can not be read so as to permit POPRC to usurp the functions exclusively
26. d under ihe Convention to go ahead with its Annex E evaluation Here is an unprecedented situation where certain questions were raised at the COP 4 on Annex D evaluation of Endosulfan by POPRC 4 and they are yet to be addressed Under the circumstances the Annex D review decision on Endosulfan by POPRC 4 can t be considered complete and valid for progressing to ihe Annex E evaluation stage My expressed views and reservations on this important matter were not considered at the POPRC 5 Further the UNEP s legal officer present at the POPRC 5 even justified the decision by vote on substantive matters This goes against the text of the Convention more specifically Article 19 6 and rules of procedures of the Convention more specifically rule 43 therefore stated on the first day of the POPRC gt that would be participating in further deliberations concerning Endosulfan pending final decision by the COP 1 am also surprised that although India had submitted its comments on the Endosulfan s draft risk profile to the Chair of the contact group drafting Endosulfan risk profile last Tuesday 1 3h Oct the data provided by India have been summarily rejected find that there is extreme reluctance to consider and include scientific data submitted by India that would prove that Endosulfan does not persist does not bio accumulate does not undergo long range transport and does not produce significant adverse effects in remote areas far away fr
27. ed and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the cancellation action In any order issued in response to these requests for amendments to terminate uses the Agency proposes to include the following provisions for the treatment of any existing stocks ofthe products identified or referenced in Table 1 These provisions are consistent with the requests for use deletions and requests for voluntary cancellations outlined in Unit IL ofthis notice 1 For the uses in List 1 of thia unit i EPA prohibits the registrants distribution sale and reformulation of products permitting the following uses after December 31 2010 except sale or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper disposal or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA ii EPA prohibits the distribution or sale of products permitting the following uses by persons other than the registrants after May 31 2011 except sale or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper disposal or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA iii EPA prohibits registration and use of those products that show uses listed in List 1 on the label for those same uses after July 31 2012 The stop use date for the uses listed in List 1 of this unit must be reflected on amended product labeling Any use of existing stocks must be consistent with the previously approved directions for use on product lebaling List 1 Phase Out Group A Almond A
28. egistrants to voluntarily cancel their product registrations In the August 18 2010 notice EPA indicated that it 60066 UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 Federal Register Vol 75 No 217 Wednesday November 10 2010 Notices would grant the request and issue a cancellation order unless the Agency received substantive comments within the 30 day comment period that would merit its further review of these requests or unless the registrants withdrew their requests within this period The Agency received three comments on the notice in support of the cancellations of all endosulfan which included signatures from over 53 000 individuals Upon review af these comments EP A determined that the Agency should nonetheless grant the registrants cancellation requests The registrants did not withdraw their requests Accordingly EPA hereby issues in this notice a cancellation order granting the requested cancellations Any FIFRA section 3 24 c registration distribution sale or use of endosul fan products subject to this cancellation order is permitted only in accordance with the terms of this order DATES The use deletions and cancellations in this order are effective as provided in Unit IV FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Melanie Biscoe Pesticide Re evaluation Division Office of Pesticide Programs 7508P Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington DC 20460 0001 telephone number 703
29. eived three comments on the notice published on August 18 2010 that announced receipt of the requests for voluntary cancellation and opened a 30 day public comment period that ended on September 17 2010 These comments were received from Pesticide Action Network North America PANM AI and over 3 000 supporters Defenders of Wildlife and over 50 000 supporters and a private citizen All comments support cancellation of all ls pesticide products in the United States The comments fom PANNA Defenders of Wildlife and by extension the supporters of those organizations request that EPA shorten the phase out schedule for endosulfan referring in general terms to a concern over continued risks to farmworkers wildlife and the environment and indigenous 19 UNEP POPS COP S INF 12 20 Federal Register Vol 75 No 217 Wednesday November 10 2010 Notices 614657 peoples in the Arctic as well as each organization s assertion that alternatives to endosulfan are available The Agency appreciates the comments submitted by the public Pursuant to the cancellation request made as part of the endosulfan Memorandum of Agreement MOA with endosulfan registrants most currently approved endosulfan crop uses will end in Z years including over 30 crop uses plus use on ornamental trees shrubs and herbaceous plants The remaining 12 crop uses will end over the following 4 years Of these remaining uses the last four endosul tan
30. er the Convention They must be reversed III Principle of Transparency On the final day of POPRC 4 India s member to POPRC submitted a dissent note The note described the reasons for his dissent with a specific request that the note be made a part of POPRC 4s final report Full text of the dissent note is in the Annex I attached But the Secretariat has not yet made this public This goes against the principles of transparency built in the Convention IV Conflict of interest It is an obligatory duty of POPRC to prepare Draft Risk Profile for chemicals under Annex E of the Convention This cannot be delegated or assigned to an external agency or third party In case of Endosulfan the First Draft Risk Profile under Annex E was prepared by the European Commission under a contract with a private firm called Green Planet Research head quartered in Madrid Spain in which an ex POPRC member from EU holds a supervisory advisory position Stockholm Convention does not allow the notifying party the EU the privilege of preparing the risk profile as well Besides India is deeply concerned with apparent conflict of interest in this questionable episode V Lack of Scientific merit of the EU proposal As comprehensively described in India s conference room paper UNEP POPS POPRC 4 CRP 9 submitted during POPRC 4 there are numerous validated data especially from tropical regions of the world that clearly show that Endosulfan does not meet the Annex D
31. eveloping Lead Dust Hazard Standards for Public and Commercial Buildings The SAB was established pursuant to 42 U S C 4365 to vide independent scientific and advice to the Administrator on the technical basis for Agency positions and regulations The SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under FACA The SAB will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies Background Human exposure to lead may cause a variety of adverse health effects particularly in children EPA s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics OPPT regulates toxic substances such as lead through the Toxic Substances Control Act TSCAI In 2001 EPA established standards for lead based paint hazards which include lead in residential dust OPPT is considering possible revision of the residential lead based paint dust hazard standards and the of lead based paint dust hazard standards for public and commercial buildings As part of this effort OPPT has developed two draft documents Approach for Developing Lead Dust Standards for Residences and Approach for Developing Lead Dust Standards for Public and Commercial Buildings OPPT sought consultative advice from the SAB Lead Review Panel on early drafts of the documents on July 6 7 2010 Federal Register Notice dated June 3 2010 75 FR 31433 3 1434 EPA has considered the advice provided by individual members of the SAB Lead Review Panel in rev
32. gua adsorci n a las part culas del suelo erosi n vaporizaci n y o adsorci n a part culas de polvo transporte a reo Posee adem s un potencial relativamente alto para bioacumularse en peces teniendo coeficientes de partici n octanol agua que oscilan entre 55500 y 61400 Estudios sugieren que los valores del Factor de Bivacumulaci n BCF en peces para endosulfan van desde 2400 hasta 11000 Endosulfan es un producto qu mico para el cual se est n preparando los documentos de orientaci n de decisi n dentro del Convenio de Rotterdam Finalmente es importante se alar que el uso de este ingrediente activo ha sido prohibido alrededor de sesenta pa ses incluyendo la Uni n Europea y Colombia dentro de la Comunidad Andina de Naciones CAN Con estos antecedentes Ecuador respalda la inclusi n del endosulfan para el anexo A del convenio de Estocolmo ANEXOS TABLA 1 Listado de productos cuyo ingrediente activo es Endosulf n registrados en el pa s con norma nacional NOMBRE COMERCIAL REGISTRO PA S DE ORIGEN 1 10 1 THIODAN 35 COLOMBIA ALEMANIA GUATEMALA 2 ENDOSULFAN TECNICO 10 I 17 SESAU INDIA CRYSULFAN ENDOPAC 350 EC 6 ENDOSULFANEQ 10 1 14 SESAU__ SINGAPUR ______ 8 FLAVYLAN I0 III SESAU BELGICA 9 GALGOFAN I0 IIZSESAU ARGENTINA 14 ENDOSULFAN 34 1 EC 10 13 USA INDIA PALMATHION ENDOFAN 35 EC 10 110 SESAU INDIA CHINA ND SULF AGROSULFAN 10 121 SESAU CHINA CO
33. ising the two documents that will be peer reviewed by the SAB Lead Review Panel on December 6 7 2010 For this peer review EPA has requested that the SAB panel provide recommendations on The technical approaches for developing the hazard empirical blood lead modeling analysis of variability and uncertainty and biokinetic blood lead modeling A vailabil ity of Meeting Materials Agendas and materials in support of this meeting will be placed on the EPA Web site at htip www epa gov sab in advance ofthe meeting For technical questions and information concerning EPA s documents please contact Dr Jennifer Seed at 202 564 7634 or seed jenniferi bena gov Procedures for Providing Public Input Public comment for consideration by EPA s federal advisory committees and panels has a different purpose from public comment provided to EPA popan offices Therefore the process or submitting comments to a federal advisory committes is different from the process used to submit comments to an EPA program office Federal advisory committees and panels including scientific advisory committees provide independent advice to EPA Members of the public can submit comments for a federal advisory committes to consider as it devel advice for should send adr comments eral the Designated Federal Officer for the relevant advisory committee Oral Statements In general individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation at
34. istrants distribution sale and reformulation of products permitting the following uses after March 31 2015 except sale or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper disposal or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA ii EPA prohibits the distribution or sale of products permitting the following uses by persons other than the registrants after May 31 2015 except sale or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper disposal or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA iii EPA prohibits registration and use of those products that show uses listed in List 5 on the label for these same uses after July 31 2015 The stop use date for the uses listed in List 5 of this unit must he reflected on amended product labeling Any use of existing stocks sus be consistent with the previously approved directions for use on product labeling List 5 Phase Cut Group E Apple Blueberry Peppers Potatoes Pumpkins Sweet corn Tomato Winter squash B For the uses in List 6 of thia unit i EPA prohibits the registrants distribution sale and reformulation of products oermitting the following uses after 31 2016 except sale or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper disposal or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA ii EPA prohibits the distribution or sale of products permitting the Following uses by persons ather than the registrants after May 31 2016 except sa
35. ituation regarding the POPs is unknown and there an urgent need to conduct an inventory to prepare our NIP because the list of POPs increased to 21 and may more POPs will add in the next COP Thanks with appreciation Best Regards Mirza salman Khalaf Deputy Director Environmental Control Directorate SC SAICM amp E Waste NFP Kingdom of Bahrain UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 Ecuador La Misi n del Ecuador ante la Oficina de las Naciones Unidas y otros Organismos Internacionales con sede en Ginebra saluda muy atentamente a la Secretar a del Convenio de Estocolmo sobre Contaminantes Org nicos Persistentes y tiene a honra remitir adjunto el informe t cnico preparado por el Ministerio del Ambiente del Ecuador sobre las condiciones legales y t cnicas para el uso del endosulf n en Ecuador a fin de que dicha informaci n pueda ser considerada en la V Conferencia de las Partes a celebrarse en Ginebra entre el 25 y 29 de abril de 2011 La Misi n del Ecuador ante la Oficina de las Naciones Unidas y otros Organismos Internacionales con sede en Ginebra hace propicia la ocasi n para reiterar a la Secretar a del Convenio de Estocolmo sobre Contaminantes Org nicos Persistentes las seguridades de su m s alta y distinguida consideraci n Ginebra 13 de diciembre de 2010 INFORME TECNICO El endosulf n es un insecticida y acaricida organoclorado qu micamente similar a aldrina clordano y heptacloro que actualmente se encuentran prohibidos ba
36. jo el Convenio de Estocolmo Es un disruptor endocrino y es altamente t xico en forma aguda Actualmente el endosulf n se encuentra registrado en Agrocalidad bajo LEY DE COMERCIALIZACION Y EMPLEO DE PLAGUICIDAS con registro oficial 315 del 16 de abril del 2004 existen diez y ocho productos con registro y que se encuentran en uso actualmente ANEXO 1 A partir del a o 2005 el Ecuador se acoge a la Decisi n 436 Norma Andina para el Registro y Control de Plaguicidas Qu micos de Uso Agr cola cuyo objetivo principal es Establecer requisitos y procedimientos armonizados para el registro y control de plaguicidas qu micos de uso agr cola orientar su uso y manejo correctos para prevenir y minimizar da os a la salud y el ambiente en las condiciones autorizadas y facilitar su comercio en la Subregi n Bajo esta legislaci n que incluye aspectos agron micos de salud y ambiente no existen actualmente registros ante la Autoridad Nacional Competente AGROCALIDAD para el endosulfan y sus is meros El Endosulfan en nuestro pa s es utilizado principalmente para el control de plagas en varios cultivos de importancia econ mica ANEXO 2 En el mercado ecuatoriano existen alternativas al uso del endosulfan en muchos de los casos a precios m s asequibles que el producto en menci n La primera alternativa consiste en productos cuyos ingredientes activos corresponde al grupo de los piretroides que actualmente se encuentran registrados ante AGROCAL
37. l del uso de este producto en Honduras Es importante mencionar que los sectores expusieron su planteamiento de acuerdo a su competencia y de forma conjunta los representantes de la CNG aportan lo siguiente 1 Existen resoluciones emitidas por las instancias competentes que han regulado al Endosulfan por ejemplo la Secretar a de Recursos Naturales actualmente Secretaria Agricullura y Ganaderla SAG Inicialmente el uso del Endosulfan se limit al combate de la broca del fruto del caf sin embargo se ha permitido su uso para otros cultivos principalmente horto fruticolas 2 Considerando las propiedades de persistencia y de transporte a larga distancia que posee el Endosulfan existe preocupaci n ya que hay limitada vigilancia nacional de los niveles permisibles en productos de consumo derivados de hortalizas principalmente 3 Actualmente existe registro vigente de 7 marcas comerciales con Endosulfan como ingrediente activo recientemente un titular del registro ha solicitado la cancelaci n voluntaria de dos marcas comerciales conteniendo este producto La anterior demuestra que aun est disponible en el mercado nacional la comercializaci n del Endosulfan Edificio Principal Despacho de Recursos Naturales y Ambiente 100 metros al sur del Estadio Nacional Tel fonos 232 2011 239 4298 Fax 232 6250 Apartado Postal 1389 4710 Tegucigalpa M D C Honduras C A UNEP POPS COP S INF 12 Rep blica de Honduras RT RALER
38. le or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper disposal or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA iii EPA prohibits registration and use of those products that show uses listed in List 6 on the label for those same uses after July 31 2016 The stop use date for the uses listed in List 6 of this unit must he reflected on amended product labeling Any use of existing stocks must be consistent with the previously approved directions for use on product labeling List amp Phase Cut Group Livestock ear tags Pineapple Strawberry perennial biennial Vegetable crops for seed alfalfa broccoli Brussels sprouts cab cauliflower Chinese cabbage collard greens kale kohlrabi mustard greens radish rutabaga turnip List of Subjects Environmental protection Pesticides and pests 21 UNEP POPS COP S INF 12 Federal Register Vol 75 No 217 Wednesday November 10 2010 Notices 60064 Dated October 28 2010 Richard P Keigwin Jr Director Pesticide Reevaluation Division Office of Pesticide Programs FR Doc 2010 28128 Filod 11 9 10 8 45 am BILLING CODE amp E amp DCEC F ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY FAL 9224 8 Science Advisory Board Staff Office Notification of a Public Meeting of the SAB Lead Review Panel AGENCY Environmental Protection Agency EPA ACTION Notice SUMMARY The EPA Science Advisory Board SAB Staff Office announces a public meeting of
39. ly inconsistent with the Conventions text The voting decision by the Chair of POPRC 4 on the EU proposal was invalid and so was the decision POPRC 4 5 Issue No 3 involving EU Notification On the last day of POPRC 4 Dr G K Pandey POPRC member from India submitted a dissent note the full text of the same is reproduced below Note from Dr G K Pandey POPRC member from India to The Rapporteur Please include the following in the main report of POPRC 4 final report or as annexure to the same the first day of POPRC 4 China India submitted a Conference Room Paper explaining why the EU proposal on Endosulfan was procedurally unacceptable for consideration by POPRC 4 under ref UNEP POPS POPRC 4 CRP 3 A copy of the same is to be annexed to POPRC 4 final report India also submitted another CRP UNEP POPS POPRC 4 CRP 9 bringing out deficiencies and inadequacies in the EC s proposal on Endosulfan explaining why and how it fails to meet Annex D criteria The same may be annexed to the final report of POPRC 4 During the deliberations India objected to the unfair practice of allowing notifying party EC EU to also submit a pre drafted review of its own proposal to POPRC to guide the discussions on a preconceived path India pointed out that such a practice 15 both unfair and unlawful in a multilateral convention as it goes against the principle of equity and justice The EU member that submitted the pre drafted review
40. n Ercklsulfan SEC ANCOR Thionex SES Endosulfan NVospDO1 Thionex SEC Endosulfan ORC3DO07 Thionex SES Endosulfan ORO30010 Thionex SEC Endosulfan ORAC30012 Thionex SOW Endesulfan ORO30013 Thionex SEC Endosulfan TABLE 1 ENDOSULFAN PRODUCTS SUBJECT TO THIS CANCELLATION ORDER Continued Regstra Chemical tion Mo name OROXx e4 Thionex SES Endosulfan LITOS00RS Thionex SEC Endosulfan WAOS H3 Thionex SEC Endosulfan WAOCSX YM7 Thionex SOW Endosulfan WAOSXH8 Thionex SEC Endosulfan WAWE Thionex SEC Endosulfan WAOSX 7 Thionex SEC Endosulfan Wasi 2 Drexel Endosulfan Encdoaulfan SEC Table 2 of this unit includes the names and addresses of record in sequence by EPA company number for all registrants of the products in Table 1 of this unit TABLE 2 REGISTRANTS OF CANCELED PRODUCTS EPA company Company name amd eckiress 11678 Makhteshim Chemical Works Lid 4515 Falls of Meuse Rd Suite 300 Raleigh NC 276089 18743 Drexel Chemical Company 1700 Channel Avenue P O Box 13327 Memphis TM 38113 0327 61483 KMG Bemuth Inc 8555 W Sam Houston Pkwey South Suite 600 Houston TX 77009 66222 Makhteshim amp gan of Morth Arner ica Inc 4515 Falla of Meuse Rd Suite 300 Raleigh MG 27600 III Summary of Public Comments Received and Agency Response to Comments The Agency rec
41. n access or services for individuals with disabilities or logistics for the external peer review workshop please contact Versar Inc at 6850 Versar Center Springfield VA 22151 by e mail saundkat veraar com subject line Urea Peer Review Meeting by phone 703 750 3000 ext 545 or toll free at 1 800 2 VERSAR 1 800 283 77 27 ask for Kathy Coon the Urea Peer Review Meeting Coordinator or by faxing a registration request to 703 642 6809 please reference the Urea Peer Review Meeting and include your name title affiliation full address and contact information For information on the draft assessment please contact Amanda Persad National Center for Environmental Assessment Mail Code B 243 01 U S Environmental Protection Agency National Center for Environmental Assessment Office of Research and Development U S Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park NC 27711 telephone 919 541 9781 facsimile 910 541 2985 or e mail FAN Questions epa gor SUPPLEMENTARY IHFORMATION I Information About IRIS EPA s IRIS is a human health assessment program that evaluates quantitative and qualitative risk information on effects that may result from exposure to chemical substances found in the environment Through the IRIS Program EPA provides the highest quality science based human health assessments to support the Agency s regulatory activities The IRIS database contains information for more
42. ndia would like to reiterate that the decision taken on EC s proposal regarding Endosulfan suffers from series of procedural technical legal and ethical improprieties India strongly protests this and would like to request COP 4 to comprehensively examine the above before deciding to accept or reject the recommendation of POPRC 4 in this regard Dr G K Pandey 17 10 08 Geneva India regrets to have to observe that this dissent note has not been made public yet Dissent notes form an integral and perhaps inevitable part of pluralistic discussions in multilateral forums Dissent notes must be made public in the interest of transparency and good governance Besides paragraph 33 of COP s decision SC 1 7 Terms of reference to Persistent organic pollutants Review Committee stipulates that recommendation from the Committee shall provide reasons as well as any dissenting views and relevant supporting documents to COP India urges that this dissent note be circulated and made available to all at COP 4 Issue No 5 with EU Notification Available documents and information show that European Union notifying party was allowed to defer and amend its initial proposal between POPRC 3 and POPRC 4 pre draft Annex D evaluation and supply to POPRC 4 prepare Annex E risk profile for and on behalf of POPRC 4 Text of the Convention and its rules of procedures would allow none of these privileges to the notifying party Ideally
43. o move the proposal to Annex F therefore submit this dissent note It is requested that this note be attached to the final report of POPRC 5 and also be brought to the kind notice of COP 5 VL SER Dr G K Pandey 16 Oct 09 14 UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 Morocco pr yy e in iu ym THEN S ete a pe um X d EX M y at JL epum a Poiana eat aii ae are d mins we I ire 1 ic X ilis ax i dos di da de l Eau at de FEnvironnemient charg de Eau et de nibntsetinetit 1 0549 ATEN ae nni tenen A DE 05 JAN 208 61 Monsieur le Secr taire Ex cutif de la Convention de Stockholm Objet Proposition d amendement de l annexe A de ia Convention de Stockholm Suite la proposition d amendement de l annexe A de la Convention de Stockholm formul e par le comit d tude des polluants organiques persistants sa 6 session j ai l honneur de vous informer que le Royaume du Maroc n a pas d objection quant l inscription de lEndosulfan et de ses composantes l annexe A de ladite convention Par ailleurs il est pr ciser que le Gouvernement du Mares decide de proc der au retrait des homologations des pesticides base de l endosulfan En restant votre disposition pour toute information suppl mentaire vous prie d agr er Monsieur le secr taire Ex cutif l expression de ma consid ration dis
44. om its sources of release Only such scientific data that suits the notifying party the notifying party have been included 1 formally complained against similar practice during Annex D review too India also reiterated this complaint in its Conference Room Paper UNEP POPs COP 4 CRP 4 dated 3 09 submitted at the COP 4 But all these seem to be an exercise in vain and futility The whole set of data included in the draft risk profile is very narrow selective cherry picked and show a strong scientific bias against the product under review The Endosulfan draft risk profile was prepared by the European Commission and supplied to POPRC for its use At the POPRC 5 member from the European Union played the lead role in preparing final draft risk profile for Endosulfan There is a strong element af conflict of interest involved in this as the European Union is the notifying pans This was earlier protested by India in its CRP submitted at COP 4 Finally against the provisions of the text of the Convention and Rule of Procedures the Chair of the POPRC 5 went in for voting on the final day to move the incomplete and questionable Annex E review of Endosulfan to Annex F though the long range environmental transport leading to significant adverse human health and or 13 UNEP POPS COP S INF 12 environmental effects were not established at due to data gaps An irrelevant precedence involving Chlordecone was quoted by the Chair in this regard t
45. pricot Broccoli Brussels sprouts Carrots Cauliflower Celery non A Z Citrus non bearingl Collard greens Dry beans Dry peas Egg t Filbert Kale Eohlrabi Macadamia Mustard greens Nectarine only Plum amp prune 60064 UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 Federal Register Vol 75 No 217 Wednesday November 10 2010 Notices Poplars crown for pulp and timber ia PEERS Sweat potato Tart cherry Turnip Walnut Ornamental trees shrubs and herbaceous plants includes hoxelder dogwood lilac Douglas fir crown for ornamentals nursery stock or Christmas trees Pacific Northwest only elms leatherleaf fern pines Austrian jack red scotch white shade trees le birch shrubs spruce New England area only taxus orchids poplars Christmas trees Other uses that may appear on section 3 registration labels or on a 24 c registration and are not listed above or on Lists 2 3 4 5 or 6 of this unit 2 For the uses in List 2 of this unit i EPA prohibits the registrants distribution sale and reformulation of products permitting the following uses after March 31 2012 except sale or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper dispu or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA ii EPA prohibits the distribution or sale of products permitting the following uses by persons other than the iR aie after May 31 2012 ex or distribution of such producta for the p
46. rent from substantive decision A substantive decision is one that is decided following a detailed hearing debate discussion wherein facts are contested POPRC is a body of experts Decision made by POPRC involving comprehensive examination of a proposal is therefore substantive decision Recommendation is different from decision Whereas recommendation is something suggested as a course of action decision is a determination arrived after debate discussion hearing Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969 provides authoritative guidance for interpreting the text of international treaties such as the POPs Convention Article 31 of this Convention requires that treaties be interpreted in accordance with the ordinary meaning of their terms Accordingly the term recommendation in Stockholm Convention cannot be confused with the term decision Both are different It must also be noted here that Article 8 of the Convention refers to terms decide decision and recommend recommendation separately The term recommend recommendation is seen only towards the end of Article 8 in paragraph 9 But the term decide or decision appear several times in preceding paragraphs Decision by POPRC on a proposal whether or not it meets Annex D criteria is substantive in nature Such substantive decisions can only be arrived by consensus as per rule 45 of Rule of Procedure Taking decision on substantive matters by vote is clear
47. reserved for the Secretariat Article 8 does not permit the POPRC to seek additional vital information before or during its examination evaluation of the proposal Article 8 allows POPRC to take into account any relevant additional information only after successfully progressing beyond Annex D and while proceeding to next level that of Annex E evaluation Therefore the decision of POPRC 3 to seek missing vital information before examining evaluating the EU s proposal is clearly inconsistent with Paragraphs 3 4 amp 6 of Article 8 of the Convention If the EU proposal was not found to be containing vital information POPRC 3 should have set it aside in accordance with paragraph 4 b of article 8 Issue No 2 involving EU proposal When the Secretariat listed on the agenda an amended version of EU s proposal for examination by POPRC 4 China and India submitted a Conference Room Paper UNEP POPS POPRC 4 CRP 3 arguing against admissibility of the amended proposal quoting Article 8 of the Convention particularly 4 a and 4 b of Article 8 Nevertheless the Chair of POPRC 4 allowed examination of amended version of the EU s proposal by an unprecedented and unavailable voting option There is nothing in the Convention that allows POPRC to decide by vote to accept examining an amended proposal whose original version was found to be lacking vital information The original incomplete proposal of the EU should have been set aside at
48. ses listed in List 3 of this unit must be reflected on amended product labeling Any use of existing stocks mi consistent with the previously oved directions for use on product eling List 3 Phase Out Group C Pear 4 For the uses in List 4 of this unit i EPA prohibits the registrants distribution sale and reformulation of oducts permitting the following uses in the vei of Florida atter Se 30 2014 except sale or distribution at such products for the purposes of proper disposal or export consistent ith section 17 of FIFRA ii EPA prohibits the distribution or sale in the state of Florida of products permitting the following uses by persons other than the registrants after October 31 2014 except sale or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper disposal or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA iii EPA prohibits registration and use of those products that show uses listed in List 4 on the label for those same uses in the state of Florida after December 31 2014 The stop use date for the uses listed in List 4 of this unit must be reflected on amended product labeling Any use of existing stocks must be consistent with the previously approved directions for use on product labeling List 4 Phase Cut Group D All Florida uses of Apple Blu RT Pumpkins Sweet corn Tomato Winter squash For the uses in List 5 of this unit i EPA prohibits the reg
49. t 4 of Unit VI as of September 1 E 2014 All endosulfan product registrations identified in Table 1 of Unit II are canceled for uses listed in List 5 of Unit VI as of March 31 2015 All endosulfan product registrations identified in Table 1 of Unit II are canceled for uses listed in List 6 of Unit VI as of March 31 2016 EPA further orders that effective July 31 2016 all section 3 registrations of endosulfan are canceled The effective date of canceled section 3 registrations will therefore correspond with end use dates established in this order Asa matter of clarification all FIFRA 24 c Special Local Need registrations may remain in effect until their respective expiration dates which will STU a with end use dates established in this order V What is the agency s authority for taking this action Section 6 f 1 of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations be canceled or amended to terminate one or more uses FIFRA further provides that before acting on the request EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request inthe Federal Register Thereafter following the public comment period the Administrator may approve such a request VI Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products that are currently in the United States and that were packaged label
50. the SAB Lead Review Panel to peer review two draft EPA documents entitled Approach for Developing Lead Dust Hazard Standands for Residences and Approach for Developing Lead Dust Hazard Standards for Public and Commercial Buildings DATES There will be a public meeting held on December 6 2010 from 9 a m 5 p m Eastern Time and December 7 2010 from 4 30 a m to 12 30 p m Eastern Time ADDRESSES The face to face meeting on December 6 7 2010 will be held at the Madison Hotel 1177 15th Street MWI Washington DC 20005 telephone 202 6862 1600 FOR FURTHER IHFORMATION CONTACT ANY member of the public wishing to obtain information concerning the public meeting may contact Mr Aaron Teow Designated Federal Officer DFO EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office 1400R U S Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20460 by telephone voice mail at 202 564 2050 at yeow aaron epa gov General information about the SAB as well as any updates concerning the meeting announced in this notice may be found on the EPA Web site at itp weep cow sab SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act FACA 5 L 8 C App 2 notice is hereby given that the SAB Lead Review Panel will hold a public face to face meeting to peer review two draft EPA documents entitled Approach for Developing Lead Dust Hazard Standards for Residences and Approach for D
51. ting Le Secr a du D partemani i 5 neral Environnement MAKE OU Jamal 15 UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 United Arab Emirates E mail communication Subject Proposal to amend Annex A to the Stockholm Convention to be discussed at the fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties Dear Sir The Department of Chemical of Hazardous Waste in the Ministry of Environment and Water UAE has reviewed the proposal We believe that the chemicals mentioned in the proposal can be added to Annex A Exemption to some countries should be provided if needed Best Regards Muna Al Falasi 16 UNEP POPS COP 5 INF 12 Annex II Submission by the United States of America E mail communication Subject Proposal to amend Annex A to the Stockholm Convention to be discussed at the fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties Thank you for your letter dated 22 October 2010 regarding the proposal to amend Annex A to the Stockholm Convention to be discussed at the fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties COP 5 That letter indicated that Parties to the Convention are invited to notify the Secretariat by 1 December 2010 of any relevant issue or issues that they may wish to raise at the fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties The United States is not a Party to the Stockholm Convention and is not proposing to raise a particular issue regarding endosulfan at COP 5 We would like to take this opportunity however to su
52. unces the cancellations as requested by registrants of all endosulfan products registered under sections 3 and 24 c of FIFRA These registrations are listed in sequence by registration number in Table 1 of this unit Note that the product names of several registration numbers were corrected in this table subsequent to the August 18 2010 Federal Register Notice of Receipt of Requests 75 FR 51049 FRL 824 1 5 from the endosulfan registrants to voluntarily cancel their product registrations However the registration numbers listed in the August 18 2010 Federal Register Notice were correct and did not need to be amended in this notice TABLE 1 ENDOSULFAN PRODUCTS SUBJECT TO THIS CANCELLATION ORDER jatra Chemical 11678 5 Thionex Endosulfan Erckssulfan Techrical 197158 Drexel Endosulfan Ercklsulfan ZEG 18713 310 Drexel Endosulfan Erckssulfan Techrical 19743 5399 Drexel Endosulfan Ercksulfan SEC 61485655 Endalfh Inseo Endosulfan tickle Cattle Ear Tag 6622252 Thionex SOW Endesulfan 6622263 Thionex SES Endosulfan 6622284 Thionex Tech Endosulfan nical AZOGOODA Thionex SEC Endesulfan AzZSGOaDOO0A4 Drexel Endosulfan Erckssulfan SEC HIO SCC Thionex SOW Endesulfan HIM Thionex SES Endesulfan HITOS Thionex SES Endosulfan 1003089002 Thionex SES Endesulfan 100030004 Thionex SES Endosulfan Drexel Endosulfa
53. urposes of proper disposal or export consistent with section 17 af FIFRA iii EPA prohibits registration and use of those products that show uses listed inList 2 on the label for those same uses after July 31 2012 The stop use date for the uses listed in List 2 ofthis unit must he reflected on amended product labeling Any use of existing stocks must be consistent with the previously approved directions for use on product labeling List 2 Phase Out Group B Cabbag pu AZ only Cotton Cucumbers Lettuce Stone fruits not listed in List 1 ofthis unit including nectarine non C A peaches and sweet cherry Summer melons cantaloupe honeydew watermelon Summer squash Tobacco 3 For the uses in List 3 of this unit i EPA prohibits the registrants distribution sale and reformulation of products permitting the following uses Pier Marek 31 2013 except sale or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper depor or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA ii EPA prohibits the distribution or sale of products permitting the following uses by persons other than the mi caper after May 31 2013 except sale or distribution of such products for the purposes of proper disposal or export consistent with section 17 of FIFRA iii EPA prohibits registration and use of those products that show uses listed in List 3 on the label for those same uses after July 31 2013 The stop use date for the u
Download Pdf Manuals
Related Search
UNEP POPS COP.5 INF 12 unep/pops/poprc.19/inf/9 unep/pp/inc.1/14